Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ron obvious

McNally on Radio Norfolk now

Recommended Posts

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]Thanks, Woody. Having now heard that I have to say I hope that performance of McNally''s is not typical, because that is not a particularly impressive interview. And there is certainly nothing there to back up his criticism of the EDP piece.

That being said, at least he is stressing that the club intends to take a very close look at any potential investor. An absolute must.[/quote]Just curious as to why you thought McNally was unimpressive ? What would you have liked him to say? I thought he was obviously annoyed yet rational in the reasons for his annoyance. From the American''s track record, he hardly sounds like a serious contender, & the EDP chose to ignore McNally''s (much better informed) comments totally. Can''t see what more he could have done really.

[/quote]---

For these

reasons, Ron. Firstly, Bailey’s original story is a perfectly respectable,

sober, fact-laden piece of journalism. It sets out clearly who Kosich is and

what he does (with Kosich himself making fun of the Tranmere stunt).

 

It sets out

clearly the process by which potential investors contacted Kosich, and what

happened next – that he contacted the club and the club told him to contact

Deloitte’s.


And Kosich makes it quite clear that things are very much at

an early stage and, by implication, that fans should not get any hopes up

prematurely. “In my view nothing is serious until there are letters of

intention.” At no point does he remotely say or suggest that that stage has

been reached, that he has investors lined up. On the contrary he warns that

“capital is hard to find”. He also praises the process the club has set up to

find investment. “They are going about it in the right way.”

 

So what do we get from McNally? “I think that to some extent the supporters have been misled

by some sensationalist press this week.”

Well, if there are some Canary fans out there so dense they can’t understand a simple,

well-balanced story that’s not the paper’s fault. Or that of Joe Kosich.

 

Then we get this: “We have not had any American investor

contact the football club.” Er, well, you wouldn’t have had, would you? Since

you told Kosich not to pass on any names to you but to contact Deloitte’s.

 

Then we get this. “I’m staggered then to read that Joe

Kosich is waxing lyrical about all these American investors he has lined up. Well

he hasn’t brought them to the football club.”

When Kosich very clearly has done no waxing lyrical at all. On the contrary he has

made it clear all he has had are preliminary expressions of interest that might

not lead anywhere. In other words McNally is using the old trick of setting up

a false target and attacking that. And, again, HE told Kosich not to pass on any

names to the club.

Then we get this. "I''ve had Canary fans say to me, ''what about this

American money?''." Again, we are back with supporters who can’t understand a

simple story. McNally is attacking Kosich for what some idiot fans thought he

said, not what he actually said. Not Kosich’s fault. Or that of the paper.

Then it is put to McNally that it is a legitimate piece of journalism and

should have been published. His response? “No.” In other words, Archant should

have suppressed what by any standards is a newsworthy story.

That doesn’t really do it for me. So, yes, unimpressive.---

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, PC, I put my hands up to committing the cardinal sin of not reading the article first! Having now done so, I would agree that the article is fine & that Mr. Kosich doesn''t appear to be quite the pantomime villain McNally made him out to be.I would say a couple of things in McNally''s defence, however; being familiar with the overheated reaction on here engendered by any possibility of removing the Wicked Witch, I can quite understand his overreaction as a means of knocking things on the head before they start. The other thing is that Bailey made very little of McNally''s response. It might have been useful to put some quotes in from him.So, while I agree McNally was overstating his case, I can see why, & it''s the sort of thing I''d expect ( & want, in all honesty) him to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ron obvious"]OK, PC, I put my hands up to committing the cardinal sin of not reading the article first! Having now done so, I would agree that the article is fine & that Mr. Kosich doesn''t appear to be quite the pantomime villain McNally made him out to be.I would say a couple of things in McNally''s defence, however; being familiar with the overheated reaction on here engendered by any possibility of removing the Wicked Witch, I can quite understand his overreaction as a means of knocking things on the head before they start. The other thing is that Bailey made very little of McNally''s response. It might have been useful to put some quotes in from him.So, while I agree McNally was overstating his case, I can see why, & it''s the sort of thing I''d expect ( & want, in all honesty) him to do.[/quote]Fair enough, Ron! And I take your point that McNally might be concerned about fans getting too hopeful over nothing. But he could have done that without slagging off Archant (and Kosich, by extension) for an article that they didn''t actually publish.Two more points. If Neil Doncaster had said that Archant should have suppressed a story about possible investment all h*ll would have broken loose on this site. McNally does it and no-one (apart from me!) turns a hair.Secondly, even if Kosich IS a time-waster (which is what McNally calls him) it can hardly be a bad thing that he has recommended Norwich as a good investment. It seems an odd way to treat someone who is trying to do the club a favour!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Michael Bailey - Sportsdesk"]Good debate here guys and interesting to read.PurpleCanary, I''ve borrowed your post - I hope you don''t mind.Also, here''s an answer to why there were not more quotes from David McNally. Simply put, because there were no more: www.edp24.co.uk/sportsblogAnyway, that''s me done on the subject.[/quote]Gosh, I guess this is going to have to count as my 15 minutes of fame. And there was me hoping I would get the chance to read you all some of my poetry. Hélas!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Michael Bailey - Sportsdesk"]Good debate here guys and interesting to read.PurpleCanary, I''ve borrowed your post - I hope you don''t mind.Also, here''s an answer to why there were not more quotes from David McNally. Simply put, because there were no more: www.edp24.co.uk/sportsblogAnyway, that''s me done on the subject.[/quote]Gosh, I guess this is going to have to count as my 15 minutes of fame. And there was me hoping I would get the chance to read you all some of my poetry. Hélas![/quote]You bloody Vogon supporters are all the same ......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Michael Bailey - Sportsdesk"]Good debate here guys and interesting to read.PurpleCanary, I''ve borrowed your post - I hope you don''t mind.Also, here''s an answer to why there were not more quotes from David McNally. Simply put, because there were no more: www.edp24.co.uk/sportsblogAnyway, that''s me done on the subject.[/quote]Gosh, I guess this is going to have to count as my 15 minutes of fame. And there was me hoping I would get the chance to read you all some of my poetry. Hélas![/quote]You bloody Vogon supporters are all the same ......[/quote]Ron, Vogons are much misunderstood. We''re really fun-loving,

libertarian, anti-establishment anarchists. Not for nothing is Vogon

"no gov" spelled backwards.But must dash. This Bailey character

decided my defence of his piece was so much better than anything he

could have written[;)] that he''s sub-contracted all his journalism to me.I

suspect it''s also something to do with wanting to lounge around getting

in touch with his inner self via the medium of a few dozen pan-galactic

gargle-blasters.[<:o)]But just at the moment my babel fish is

struggling with a few of your quaint Earthling phrases. "The boys done

good" and "At the end of the day it''s what you put in the onion bag

that matters" are giving it particular trouble...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="chicken"]The thing is Smudge - is that the 7 year plan was probably a conservatively based plan. No point planning for 3 or 4 years if you know that its not likely in 3.Also it probably would change depending on things like this season being so successful. At the begining of the season they (club officials) were saying we had planned and budgeted for two seasons in League 1. To me thats not that they believed we wouldn''t get promoted, just that its not a certain thing. If we go up this season then we are ahead of target.However I think our first season in the Championship will be something else altogther. Consolidation in the first season for me and then pushing on from there. [/quote]I understand exactly why McNally stated 7 years Chicken, but you seem to fail to see that many fans would be unhappy and would place McNally & Co under pressure if it did take as long as this (worst case scenario).  You seemed to miss the irony in my original response to Tangy.I think McNally knows that he has not got 7 years too don''t you?The more successful we are the more ambitious the fans become... that''s the way it works in football!  Early this season most fans would of settled for a play-off place and many would of setttled for League 1 consolidation.  How many do you think would settle for that right now???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="ron obvious"]OK, PC, I put my hands up to committing the cardinal sin of not reading the article first! Having now done so, I would agree that the article is fine & that Mr. Kosich doesn''t appear to be quite the pantomime villain McNally made him out to be.I would say a couple of things in McNally''s defence, however; being familiar with the overheated reaction on here engendered by any possibility of removing the Wicked Witch, I can quite understand his overreaction as a means of knocking things on the head before they start. The other thing is that Bailey made very little of McNally''s response. It might have been useful to put some quotes in from him.So, while I agree McNally was overstating his case, I can see why, & it''s the sort of thing I''d expect ( & want, in all honesty) him to do.[/quote]Fair enough, Ron! And I take your point that McNally might be concerned about fans getting too hopeful over nothing. But he could have done that without slagging off Archant (and Kosich, by extension) for an article that they didn''t actually publish.Two more points. If Neil Doncaster had said that Archant should have suppressed a story about possible investment all h*ll would have broken loose on this site. McNally does it and no-one (apart from me!) turns a hair.Secondly, even if Kosich IS a time-waster (which is what McNally calls him) it can hardly be a bad thing that he has recommended Norwich as a good investment. It seems an odd way to treat someone who is trying to do the club a favour![/quote]I agree with that also Purple.What is going on?  Stop it... has somebody hacked in to your account or something??? [:^)] [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the club''s fans should not hear about all interested parties wishing to invest in the club then?Whether those showing an interest are seen as good, indifferent or bad prospects for our club, then surely it is the local medias responsibility to report on any stories which it has and it is then up to the individual to make up their own mind and form an opinion on any report?  A club official such as Mr McNally then has the right to react to such debate and put his point of view across which he did on Saturday.I say a big thumbs up Michael Bailey [Y] and it just shows that it is a good bit of journalism because it has got people talking and created a debate.  So what if Mr McNally did not like your article, is NCFC a police state which has to vet every article before it goes out in front of the Norfolk public first?    All McNally had to say was that it was being dealt by Deloitte''s and that he believed that it would not come to anything, but if they felt that Kosich was worth talking to then there would be further reports on this in the future.Is it really so difficult for NCFC officials to understand why they can''t find any decent investment when this kind of mud-slinging goes on every time somebody appears to show any kind of interest?I would say the response from our CLUB OFFICAL was OVER SENSATIONALIST and the perfect example of why what should be seen as an attractive prospect for those wishing to invest in a football club hardly gets past making an initial enquiry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="ron obvious"]OK, PC, I put my hands up to committing the cardinal sin of not reading the article first! Having now done so, I would agree that the article is fine & that Mr. Kosich doesn''t appear to be quite the pantomime villain McNally made him out to be.I would say a couple of things in McNally''s defence, however; being familiar with the overheated reaction on here engendered by any possibility of removing the Wicked Witch, I can quite understand his overreaction as a means of knocking things on the head before they start. The other thing is that Bailey made very little of McNally''s response. It might have been useful to put some quotes in from him.So, while I agree McNally was overstating his case, I can see why, & it''s the sort of thing I''d expect ( & want, in all honesty) him to do.[/quote]Fair enough, Ron! And I take your point that McNally might be concerned about fans getting too hopeful over nothing. But he could have done that without slagging off Archant (and Kosich, by extension) for an article that they didn''t actually publish.Two more points. If Neil Doncaster had said that Archant should have suppressed a story about possible investment all h*ll would have broken loose on this site. McNally does it and no-one (apart from me!) turns a hair.Secondly, even if Kosich IS a time-waster (which is what McNally calls him) it can hardly be a bad thing that he has recommended Norwich as a good investment. It seems an odd way to treat someone who is trying to do the club a favour![/quote]I agree with that also Purple.What is going on?  Stop it... has somebody hacked in to your account or something??? [:^)][/quote]And there were the rest of us all thinking someone had hacked into YOUR account...[:D][;)][:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...