Where has King Beefs report from the photoshoot gone ?

[Evil Monkey 52]

On reflection it is a tricky one - where do we draw the line between conversation and interview.  Surely if the club employees are talking to a member of the public, they should be more vigilant than to suggest something.  But at the same time, Roeder has given those kind of quotes to the press before - "keep an eye on the official site for 48 hours" or whatever.  When and where do such comments become "official" and "unofficial"?  Maybe Roeder himself asked that the comments were removed once he''d realised he''d made a mistake in talking so freely? It happens...Ferrari is doing his job well, which has unfortunately meant we''re left a little more in the dark and (hopefully not) a young lad who was simply passing on the experience he had on his birthday has seemingly been banned for a time.  It maintains the club''s media blackout though, which seems to be their priority at this time.  I would imagine tomorrow''s presumably scheduled pre-match press conference will be very interesting...

[iluveadie 0]

Can someone please tell me briefly what KB said in the post? I haven''t been on here all day and I''m dying to know what all the fuss was about?!

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="tribes"][quote user="Chrisr"]A £200 cake! Now that I would like a slice of.....[/quote]...and lots of  jellys and custard.[/quote]I knew some players posted on this board.  Evening Matty!

[Mello Yello 2,282]

[quote user="iluveadie"]

Can someone please tell me briefly what KB said in the post? I haven''t been on here all day and I''m dying to know what all the fuss was about?!

[/quote]

KB said to Roeder, "is Matty Patty Hartson''s mini-me?" to which  Goldmember Glenn replied "No, Hartson''s Matty Patty''s FAHZA.....now, do you want a schmoke an a pancake?"

Or something like that......

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="The Butler"]

It just sounded like a guy having a great 18th birthday present.

Talking to GR (that''s all part of the £200+ for the event, and GR responding to a obviuosly excited FAN.

The club seem to have taken a very harsh line. KB did not seem to be reporting this to "big himself up" just as a finale to his good day.

The club seem to be getting very picky at the moment is someone not pleased with us "best in the world" fans?

[/quote]

I don''t think the Club have any issue with the fans...just where the rumours are posted.

[AndyJR 0]

[quote user="iluveadie"]

Can someone please tell me briefly what KB said in the post? I haven''t been on here all day and I''m dying to know what all the fuss was about?!

[/quote]Have PM''d you the transcript.

[canary cherub 1]

It may be me, but there seems to be far less preseason buildup in the local press than there usually is.  If that''s the case, there could be a number of reasons for it, for instance that they''ve decided to do things differently this year, or have cut back on staff in these challenging economic times. 

But may I ask a straight question?  Has there been a problem with the club ever since they published the Cullum story, and they are short of material as a consequence? 

I''ve posted on this before and it was deleted very quickly indeed.  That made me think there could be some truth in it, when in fact there may not be.  Can we please clear this up once and for all.

 

[Syteanric 1]

[quote]

At the end of the day each of us have conversations in every walk of life about all sorts of things.  If we are not prepared for it to be repeated then we don''t say it.

Come on if Glenn said it to someone he had just met, then it was not secret.

If he didn''t say it then KB was in the wrong, if he did then leave it for the world to see.

For goodness sake, Glenn can come on here and put his version it''s a free world!

[/quote]

spot on David! (used the checkout behind you in Tescos the other day BTW!)

 if the club are so worried about what fans might or might not say then these "experiances" are a bad idear, why offer them then? So the club want the money but wont allow fans to talk? it will be "confidentiality agreements" next!

jas :)

[iluveadie 0]

Thanks for the transcript AndyJR

[tribes 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="tribes"][quote user="Chrisr"]A £200 cake! Now that I would like a slice of.....[/quote]...and lots of  jellys and custard.[/quote]

I knew some players posted on this board.  Evening Matty!

[/quote]Good evening.

[Mark Smith 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]On reflection it is a tricky one - where do we draw the line between conversation and interview.  Surely if the club employees are talking to a member of the public, they should be more vigilant than to suggest something.  But at the same time, Roeder has given those kind of quotes to the press before - "keep an eye on the official site for 48 hours" or whatever.  When and where do such comments become "official" and "unofficial"?  Maybe Roeder himself asked that the comments were removed once he''d realised he''d made a mistake in talking so freely? It happens...

Ferrari is doing his job well, which has unfortunately meant we''re left a little more in the dark and (hopefully not) a young lad who was simply passing on the experience he had on his birthday has seemingly been banned for a time.  It maintains the club''s media blackout though, which seems to be their priority at this time. 

I would imagine tomorrow''s presumably scheduled pre-match press conference will be very interesting...
[/quote]

He hasn''t been banned though. He''s been quite freely posting on threads today, after the post was removed. Just not this one. What that tells you about the validity of his questions to Roeder I wouldn''t want to speculate on...

[Barclay_Boy 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]We were informed that the conversation never happened.[/quote]

was this the same KB who claimed to have had a conversation with Doncaster at which the Donk was supposed to have revealed details of Bell''s medical and that we were supposed to be getting Shola on loan? And then he bumped into Delia and co and listened in on their conversation? I seem to recall posting that he had made it all up and seems he might have done it again here. Don''t want to be smug and say I told you so, whoops too late.

 

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Lord Snooty"][quote user="Binky"]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]We were informed that the conversation never happened.[/quote]

Reassuring to see that this message board is moderated after all Pete! Hope this hasn''t spolt your birthday KB

[/quote]

Truth is that this message board has always been moderated even if only on a sporadic basis on occasions. The problem I have with moderation is quite simply the subjective and often "better play safe" attitude of the moderators. The term moderator implies supervision by some more knowledgeable and superior being which patently isn''t the case. Reassuring ? Not at all. Curtailment of freedom of speech ? Of course. Arbitrary and often subjective censorship ? Definitely.

 

[/quote]

That''s not really fair Your Lordship.

Archant are legally liable for comments made on this board just as individual posters are legally liable if challenged.  They have no defence because it is their board and "Sorry, we didn''t see it" is not a defence - in fact you''d be up the Wensum without a paddle if you even attempted such a defence. (Elderly Judge raises eyebrows and says: "What is Norwich City PLC?"  "May it please Your Honour, it is a club formed for the purposes of playing Association Football."  His Honour Mr Justice Binner: "I am obliged to Counsel, please continue.")

By whatever route Archant are informed by the Norwich City media bod that the conversation did not take place.  Whether or not it did they have no means of verifying it aside from the person who posted it.

If it had been their reporter you can come back at the Press Office and say: "The reporter has a shorthand note of what he said and we will stand by that." (Under those circumstances I would have said it rather more abruptly but this is a family message board)."

They can''t do that because they don''t have anything to substantiate the quotes published on here.  It''s not to say those quotes are not absolutely right but Archant do not know they are absolutely right and have no way of proving it.

So, on a message board, you have to pull it.

[WeAreYellows49 0]

My question would be, if there is nothing to hide why try and sweep it under the carpet?

They have created even more fuss by making a fuss about a conversation than if they had said nothing and let the thread run it''s course.

[As my login causes problems [ :o) ] 0]

Very well articulated Camul, you should take up writing !

So the defence is always for the Club to challenge, firstly removing any views at variance to the official line and secondly frustrating competition for their own message board.

Sounds like if they do it too often we need to ensure that we as posters have collaborating evidence and then help Archant to stitch them up!

So folks press the speed dial on your mobile and broadcast to the world next time you''re in a compromising situation with Delia or any of her merry men.

 

[Camuldonum 0]

In very simplistic terms the club are saying that Mr Roeder did not say what was attributed to him.

Archant cannot dispute that and neither can I.

[ron obvious 1,501]

Found it on WOTB. I''m afraid I don''t believe a word of it. It reads like a person of tender years imagining how somebody important would reply when being interviewed by an eager young reporter. Just my opinion.

[Barossa 0]

I think we can file KB in the rather bulging envelope marked “Sad Fantasist”

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Fat Strawberry"]

It may be me, but there seems to be far less preseason buildup in the local press than there usually is.  If that''s the case, there could be a number of reasons for it, for instance that they''ve decided to do things differently this year, or have cut back on staff in these challenging economic times. 

But may I ask a straight question?  Has there been a problem with the club ever since they published the Cullum story, and they are short of material as a consequence? 

I''ve posted on this before and it was deleted very quickly indeed.  That made me think there could be some truth in it, when in fact there may not be.  Can we please clear this up once and for all.

 

[/quote]

If there were any probs between Archant and City it would fly like the speed of light between all of us.  It''s a very small world.  I do not think there are any and if there were they''d be coming on to get it from the rest of us which they have not. If they did we would likely oblige aside from the best lines[:#]

But they''d still have a story.

 

.

No escape, sorry.

[Camuldonum 0]

Or they could ring PA, explain the situation, and possibly Big Brian might turn up. 

There is usually more than one way to skin whatever it is you are trying to skin.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]On reflection it is a tricky one - where do we draw the line between conversation and interview.  Surely if the club employees are talking to a member of the public, they should be more vigilant than to suggest something.  But at the same time, Roeder has given those kind of quotes to the press before - "keep an eye on the official site for 48 hours" or whatever.  When and where do such comments become "official" and "unofficial"?  Maybe Roeder himself asked that the comments were removed once he''d realised he''d made a mistake in talking so freely? It happens...

Ferrari is doing his job well, which has unfortunately meant we''re left a little more in the dark and (hopefully not) a young lad who was simply passing on the experience he had on his birthday has seemingly been banned for a time.  It maintains the club''s media blackout though, which seems to be their priority at this time. 

I would imagine tomorrow''s presumably scheduled pre-match press conference will be very interesting...
[/quote]

I have no line between conversation and interview.  If it is something you can sell, we''ll try to sell it.  Not bothered about the circumstances, personally.  Maybe they shouldn''t have said it? Not our problem!

 

[Dions Lightsaber 0]

Just read the ''interview'' on WOTB and I cannot believe what the fuss is about...  What a bland, anodyne conversation!  There is nothing there that hasn''t been posted on here and in EDP a hundred times.

For the Head of Media (or whatever Jo Maserati does) to concern himself with it is staggering.  They have lost all credibility in my eyes by getting involved.  ''Choose your battles'' should be their maxim with this kind of issue - if it is something worth censoring then come out and put a halt to it - some kid on his birthday quoting some Roy of the Rovers bullsh1t is not worth their time.

This issue of it being ''quotes'' makes no difference - and I dont mean legally - I mean in terms of them choosing to get involved in something so inconsequential.