MKSC Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. What's up? Someone making the same point as me. For most people that would speak volumes about the points they tend to make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. What's up? Someone making the same point as me. We'll just have to pray it's not a trend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weezertron Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'd guess no one really cares about ethics at this point. It's us against them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Believe every word of that. You see can he's a useless c*** just glad to be earning money and getting the occasional game. It hurts to see people like him who are completely fucking talentless get games in the PL. Although if anyone surprised that it's the talentless that gets minutes that are most probably defending Pardew? Just look at this forum, Ian W, is a talentless poster and he's defending Pardew. (jokes ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Considering it's taken about a year and a half for the papers to inform people of the fact he's just a terrible manager I'm happy for us to use any dirty tactic we can to get Pardew out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. What's up? Someone making the same point as me. We'll just have to pray it's not a trend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yplasterer Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. What's up? Someone making the same point as me. We'll just have to pray it's not a trend. Sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. What's up? Someone making the same point as me. It might be the same point, but the choice of language is noticeably less ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that shit, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that shit, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... In what way? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hatem garrincha Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that s***, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... Which one ? The real one, CR7 or Ronnie ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that s***, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... In what way? Wey he's just slagged off the fans, a club legend and a team mate in public like, but failing that he's also got the athleticism of a darts player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that s***, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... Which one ? The real one, CR7 or Ronnie ? The poster. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that s***, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... In what way? You're kidding right? He's an absolute shit footballer for a start and like I said, if the story is true than he's an absolute scumbag and has acted nowhere near to how a professional should. Sure on paper he's getting paid so he's a ''professional'', but if you can't look beyond the point than you really are as ridiculous as some suggest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'm absolutely loving him getting exposed, don't feel at all bad about it Don't see what's wrong with ''exposing'' him. If he said that s***, than if he's man enough like Ronaldo he can stand for his words. Professionals should know who to speak about what with, then again he's not a real professional... In what way? You're kidding right? He's an absolute shit footballer for a start and like I said, if the story is true than he's an absolute scumbag and has acted nowhere near to how a professional should. Sure on paper he's getting paid so he's a ''professional'', but if you can't look beyond the point than you really are as ridiculous as some suggest. He's not that good, but he's a professional goalkeeper at a PL club and he seems to try fairly hard. I just thought you might know something about his off-field behaviour or something. Obviously what he said wasn't great, that's true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BottledDog Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Classic BottledDog Absolutely. Amazing how accurately any of us on here could have predicted the people who objected to this. I don't object to it at all if true. It's the kind of offensively negative shite that is an anathema to all of us. But whether or not he spouted it, that doesn't stop me feeling a touch of concern for the bloke and whatever shitstorm he's apparently offhandedly dropped himself into. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Utter piece of shit, hope he gets so much abuse during the next match. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubaricho Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. Don't think it can be justified, myself. Really makes me feel uneasy seeing stuff like this being "published" on the internet. When I call people to do interviews with them, there is a clear and defined moment when things become on the record and I cannot - and will not - use anything outside of that time-frame, even though I am rolling tape well before that moment. Really poor form to publish this conversation on the internet, especially when it has such strong opinions about the club, its employees, and its supporters. You've put an employee of the club in a very precarious position based on a conversation he had with you in a nightclub. Unjustifiable to post it on website like TrueFaith under the guise of an article. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. Don't think it can be justified, myself. Really makes me feel uneasy seeing stuff like this being "published" on the internet. When I call people to do interviews with them, there is a clear and defined moment when things become on the record and I cannot - and will not - use anything outside of that time-frame, even though I am rolling tape well before that moment. Really poor form to publish this conversation on the internet, especially when it has such strong opinions about the club, its employees, and its supporters. You've put an employee of the club in a very precarious position based on a conversation he had with you in a nightclub. Unjustifiable to post it on website like TrueFaith under the guise of an article. If this is a trap for me then I'm in, those were my feelings pretty much exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. Don't think it can be justified, myself. Really makes me feel uneasy seeing stuff like this being "published" on the internet. When I call people to do interviews with them, there is a clear and defined moment when things become on the record and I cannot - and will not - use anything outside of that time-frame, even though I am rolling tape well before that moment. Really poor form to publish this conversation on the internet, especially when it has such strong opinions about the club, its employees, and its supporters. You've put an employee of the club in a very precarious position based on a conversation he had with you in a nightclub. Unjustifiable to post it on website like TrueFaith under the guise of an article. Couldn't disagree more. Don't feel like going lengths with it now though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Utter piece of shit, hope he gets so much abuse during the next match. Most articulate post in the thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Worra kernt. I don't blame him for feeling loyal, without Pardew he won't play another minute of premier league football in his life, I expect he knows it. It makes you feel sick though, we've got this lower league player on our books and he thinks our limit is 8th or 9th. What the fuck is going on in the world Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andymc1 Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I think you could argue that it is an unethical thing to do. I would probably draw the line at writing an article based on that conversation. If it is an accurate account of the conversation though, and Elliot is given a right to reply, then I think it can be justified. There's also a fairly robust public interest defence, given the response it has generated. Oh, and Elliot shouldn't be such a big dafty. Don't think it can be justified, myself. Really makes me feel uneasy seeing stuff like this being "published" on the internet. When I call people to do interviews with them, there is a clear and defined moment when things become on the record and I cannot - and will not - use anything outside of that time-frame, even though I am rolling tape well before that moment. Really poor form to publish this conversation on the internet, especially when it has such strong opinions about the club, its employees, and its supporters. You've put an employee of the club in a very precarious position based on a conversation he had with you in a nightclub. Unjustifiable to post it on website like TrueFaith under the guise of an article. If this is a trap for me then I'm in, those were my feelings pretty much exactly. He should learn to keep his fucking mouth shut then. He's made his bed, now the cunts got to lie in it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ameritoon Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 There was no point where this was a formal interview though, there's no off the record or on the record. Elliot has to be smart enough to not say damning shit when talking to a random fan at a night club. Once he's said it it's fair game imo, he has to watch what he says where ever and whenever, which he failed to do here. The fans deserve to know if one of their players is accepting mediocrity and slagging off a club legend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 I'd like to think that the use of the word "charlatan" to describe Pardew in that article came directly from the Pardew thread. Aye it did Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now