Chronicle Questions

[JH]

That'll be the Ronny Gill banned from SJP, then!

 

They've done it quite cleverly actually.

 

The questions everyone wants them to ask, but they can blame the fans for asking them.

[midds]

Their answers are meaningless. Their actions, or rather the lack of them, give a truer reflection about the levels of investment and ambition than Llambias' drivel will. 

[Cajun]

Some of those are pretty much duplicates which is a shame but still some good questions in there that will be fobbed off.

[Guest Rainforest]

It is accusations indeed, but as long as they are served on a sheet of paper through the mail there will be no fun in reading the replies. No doubt will these questions be shipped off to the Public relations people who - over a cuppa coffee - will grind out some vague general replies to everything which say nothing.

 

If it were to be of any interest you`d have to fucking corner Mike with these questions in a revolver-style interrogation.

[binnsy]

Didn't the Chronicle originally say that they were sending the questions to Llambias when they first asked for the questions to be submitted,  now i see its the board that will answer them.  I can see Derek dumping these questions on Lee Charnley's desk and say go on Lee answer them for me please.

[JH]

Some of those are pretty much duplicates which is a shame but still some good questions in there that will be fobbed off.

 

Aye, I was thinking that

 

1. Why didn't you spend the money you c***?

2. Why didn't you spend the money you c***?

3. Why didn't you spend the money you c***?

....

[midds]

Should get Paxman to ask them.

[Cajun]

Should get Paxman to ask them.

Some of those are pretty much duplicates which is a shame but still some good questions in there that will be fobbed off.

 

Aye, I was thinking that

 

1. Why didn't you spend the money you c***?

2. Why didn't you spend the money you c***?

3. Why didn't you spend the money you c***?

....

 

1. Something about a forward.

2. Something about a forward, same answer.

3. See above..

 

They really could have probed for more tbh.

[Dell Boi]

They will respond with generic positive things, example;

 

14. Many fans now consider us to be a "selling club" after the departures of Nolan, Enrique, Carroll and Barton. How do you respond to this?

 

We feel we have brought in players who represent tremendous potential and value for money. Players at the football club with always come and go, but we are always striving to build a promising young team the fans can be proud of and will continue to do so in the next transfer window.

 

zzZzzz.

[adam1]

Llambias will sit with a lawyer one night and draft answers that are airtight but tell us absolutely fuck all. Like someone's just said, expect nowt but generic positive statements which dont give us anything near a satisfactory answer.

[Colocho]

No doubt these will be answered by Simon Esland or Wendy Taylor...

[Lenny]

Llambias will sit with a lawyer one night and draft answers that are airtight but tell us absolutely fuck all. Like someone's just said, expect nowt but generic positive statements which dont give us anything near a satisfactory answer.

 

Just out of interest, what would actually be a satisfactory answer to these questions? Would it change anything if their response was "Yeah we fucked up, sorry about that..."

 

And say their answer to "Is the club up for sale" question was "It's not up for sale but the moment a decent offer comes in I'll bite their hands off and be out of here in a flash", could you imagine the shit storm that would follow in the media?

 

All of these questions are pointless because no matter what the answer, we aren't going to be satisfied. As far as club image goes, it's probably actually for the best that their answers are positive, airtight, vague stuff.

 

It's a pointless exercise tbh.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Llambias will sit with a lawyer one night and draft answers that are airtight but tell us absolutely fuck all. Like someone's just said, expect nowt but generic positive statements which dont give us anything near a satisfactory answer.

 

Just out of interest, what would actually be a satisfactory answer to these questions? Would it change anything if their response was "Yeah we fucked up, sorry about that..."

 

And say their answer to "Is the club up for sale" question was "It's not up for sale but the moment a decent offer comes in I'll bite their hands off and be out of here in a flash", could you imagine the shit storm that would follow in the media?

 

All of these questions are pointless because no matter what the answer, we aren't going to be satisfied. As far as club image goes, it's probably actually for the best that their answers are positive, airtight, vague stuff.

 

It's a pointless exercise tbh.

 

Spot on, this discussion about club communication is the biggest waste of bandwidth since ITVplayer.

 

They can't reveal what we want them to, and to expect it is stupid. I know why people are pissed off the club, but this criticism isn't a valid one IMO.

[BlueStar]

Well that's what comes from being incompetent, isn't it?  If they tell the truth about what they've done or what they plan to do they'll be shouted down for being morons, if they lie about it then they're liers.  That's not the fault of the people asking the questions, but those answering them.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Well that's what comes from being incompetent, isn't it?  If they tell the truth about what they've done or what they plan to do they'll be shouted down for being morons, if they lie about it then they're liers.  That's not the fault of the people asking the questions, but those answering them.

 

Fair point, you're right to a degree.

 

But even things that they're doing right, like restricting the amount they'll pay transfer fees, they can't actually come out and say because it will influence future deals. And things like the fact that Ashley would sell up to any decent buyer, they can't say because it will only cause more instability.

 

Right or wrong, there are a lot of things that it would be very unwise to comment publicly about.

[Lotus]

Well that's what comes from being incompetent, isn't it?  If they tell the truth about what they've done or what they plan to do they'll be shouted down for being morons, if they lie about it then they're liers.  That's not the fault of the people asking the questions, but those answering them.

 

Fair point, you're right to a degree.

 

But even things that they're doing right, like restricting the amount they'll pay transfer fees, they can't actually come out and say because it will influence future deals. And things like the fact that Ashley would sell up to any decent buyer, they can't say because it will only cause more instability.

 

Right or wrong, there are a lot of things that it would be very unwise to comment publicly about.

 

Well, if the club make a point of saying that ALL the Carroll money will go back into the club and then 8 months later have a net transfer spend of about £500k i think there are some questions that are fair to ask.

 

There's something strange about your defending of them on really quite minor points.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Well that's what comes from being incompetent, isn't it?  If they tell the truth about what they've done or what they plan to do they'll be shouted down for being morons, if they lie about it then they're liers.  That's not the fault of the people asking the questions, but those answering them.

 

Fair point, you're right to a degree.

 

But even things that they're doing right, like restricting the amount they'll pay transfer fees, they can't actually come out and say because it will influence future deals. And things like the fact that Ashley would sell up to any decent buyer, they can't say because it will only cause more instability.

 

Right or wrong, there are a lot of things that it would be very unwise to comment publicly about.

 

Well, if the club make a point of saying that ALL the Carroll money will go back into the club and then 8 months later have a net transfer spend of about £500k i think there are some questions that are fair to ask.

 

There's something strange about your defending of them on really quite minor points.

 

I don't defend that promise about the Carroll money, I've always said they were wrong to promise it would all go on the team.

 

This communication thing isn't a minor point, it's a discussion that's been going on for months over a number of threads. All I'm saying is that in principle I think it's pointless to criticise them for not answering things like these Chronicle questions... it's stupid to expect that they would, in other than very broad general terms.

 

And FFS, can anyone not just respond to my arguments without adding on a little dig at the end? It's getting boring.

[Spider Jerusalem]

This is just an exercise for the Chron to 'prove' that it's standing up to the current regime after the failings in the transfer window and the anger being targetted at them for writing nothing but powderpuff articles.

 

As Bluestar said earlier in the thread, has there been any indication from the club that they are expecting this list of questions, whether they'll actually answer them or just file them under bin?

[Lenny]

Well that's what comes from being incompetent, isn't it?  If they tell the truth about what they've done or what they plan to do they'll be shouted down for being morons, if they lie about it then they're liers.  That's not the fault of the people asking the questions, but those answering them.

 

You are right, but to be honest, that's a further point to my point if anything. There's no fault in people wanting to ask the questions, but that doesn't particularly mean that it's worth asking them because as you say, they'll be shouted down for being morons or called liars.

[Lotus]

Well that's what comes from being incompetent, isn't it?  If they tell the truth about what they've done or what they plan to do they'll be shouted down for being morons, if they lie about it then they're liers.  That's not the fault of the people asking the questions, but those answering them.

 

Fair point, you're right to a degree.

 

But even things that they're doing right, like restricting the amount they'll pay transfer fees, they can't actually come out and say because it will influence future deals. And things like the fact that Ashley would sell up to any decent buyer, they can't say because it will only cause more instability.

 

Right or wrong, there are a lot of things that it would be very unwise to comment publicly about.

 

Well, if the club make a point of saying that ALL the Carroll money will go back into the club and then 8 months later have a net transfer spend of about £500k i think there are some questions that are fair to ask.

 

There's something strange about your defending of them on really quite minor points.

 

I don't defend that promise about the Carroll money, I've always said they were wrong to promise it would all go on the team.

 

This communication thing isn't a minor point, it's a discussion that's been going on for months over a number of threads. All I'm saying is that in principle I think it's pointless to criticise them for not answering things like these Chronicle questions... it's stupid to expect that they would, in other than very broad general terms.

 

And FFS, can anyone not just respond to my arguments without adding on a little dig at the end? It's getting boring.

 

The communication is only percieved as an issue because:

 

a) Their actions contradict what little they do say,

 

b) They've not run the 'football side' of things very successfully.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Fair enough, I understand what leads people to look for reasons to criticise. I just don't think this particular one is worth spending any time or worry on.

[Guest sydneycove]

 

The communication is only percieved as an issue because:

 

a) Their actions contradict what little they do say,

 

b) They've not run the 'football side' of things very successfully.

 

On b) to be fair to MA his tenure has seen a significant improvement in the quality of players at the club.

[Lotus]

 

The communication is only percieved as an issue because:

 

a) Their actions contradict what little they do say,

 

b) They've not run the 'football side' of things very successfully.

 

On b) to be fair to MA his tenure has seen a significant improvement in the quality of players at the club.

 

Wtf???

 

We were relegated!

 

I mean, wtf???

 

The football's been onward and upward since he arrived?

 

 

[Lenny]

 

The communication is only percieved as an issue because:

 

a) Their actions contradict what little they do say,

 

b) They've not run the 'football side' of things very successfully.

 

On b) to be fair to MA his tenure has seen a significant improvement in the quality of players at the club.

 

Well that very much remains to be seen. We finished in a position last season that we were finishing in before Ashley took over and it's taken what, 4/5 years to achieve that, with a relegation in there. Hardly implies a significant improvement.

[Benwell Lad]

I know this is probably an unpopular opinion, but I don't see why DL or Lee Charnley should answer some of those questions. As much as I think they need to communicate more, I'd be surprised if you could find a chairman / club secretary in the country who would be willing to answer questions about club finances or whether they have or have not lied.

 

Let's face it, no matter what answers they come up (whether they are true or not), no ones going to believe them anyway so what's the point.

 

Absolutely correct. A ridiculous futile exercise.

Predictable questions, predictable answers and most predictable of all will be the totally negative reaction to whatever is said.

We need better and regular communication, but this is just a joke.