TIL 1010 4,737 Posted October 21, 2011 The Club spat with BBC East looks as though it is still rumbling on and on.Tonight on Look East they showed part of an interview with Kenny Dalgleish talking about tomorrows game but the presenter then said that the Club refused to let them interview Paul Lambert.Personally i think the longer this situation goes on it is the Club that appears to be acting like a spoilt child. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted October 21, 2011 Everyone is being refused interviews with Paul Lambert. All he will do is the pre and post match press conferences. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,557 Posted October 21, 2011 [quote user="TIL 1010"]The Club spat with BBC East looks as though it is still rumbling on and on.Tonight on Look East they showed part of an interview with Kenny Dalgleish talking about tomorrows game but the presenter then said that the Club refused to let them interview Paul Lambert.Personally i think the longer this situation goes on it is the Club that appears to be acting like a spoilt child.[/quote] If, as apparently is the case, the club wants the BBC to reveal its source for the Mackail-Smith story, then there has always been an obvious solution that would settle the matter. One way or another. And that is for the club to go to court to try to force the BBC to cough up the name. Not sure why the club hasn''t gone down this road, unless it thinks there might be a downside that I can''t imagine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
curly_whirly_tipz 0 Posted October 22, 2011 Fair encough if Paul Lambert only does the pre match press conference but I do think it''s silly that BBC arent allowed to speak to NCFC. A silly thing that should be resolved. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dhickl 0 Posted October 22, 2011 [quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="TIL 1010"]The Club spat with BBC East looks as though it is still rumbling on and on.Tonight on Look East they showed part of an interview with Kenny Dalgleish talking about tomorrows game but the presenter then said that the Club refused to let them interview Paul Lambert.Personally i think the longer this situation goes on it is the Club that appears to be acting like a spoilt child.[/quote] If, as apparently is the case, the club wants the BBC to reveal its source for the Mackail-Smith story, then there has always been an obvious solution that would settle the matter. One way or another. And that is for the club to go to court to try to force the BBC to cough up the name. Not sure why the club hasn''t gone down this road, unless it thinks there might be a downside that I can''t imagine.[/quote]What right have they got to have the name? My understanding is the journalists can only be forced to give up their source if it is part of a criminal investigation, even then there are some exceptions. Taking them to court would be a waste of time & money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted October 22, 2011 [quote user="dhickl"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="TIL 1010"]The Club spat with BBC East looks as though it is still rumbling on and on.Tonight on Look East they showed part of an interview with Kenny Dalgleish talking about tomorrows game but the presenter then said that the Club refused to let them interview Paul Lambert.Personally i think the longer this situation goes on it is the Club that appears to be acting like a spoilt child.[/quote] If, as apparently is the case, the club wants the BBC to reveal its source for the Mackail-Smith story, then there has always been an obvious solution that would settle the matter. One way or another. And that is for the club to go to court to try to force the BBC to cough up the name. Not sure why the club hasn''t gone down this road, unless it thinks there might be a downside that I can''t imagine.[/quote]What right have they got to have the name? My understanding is the journalists can only be forced to give up their source if it is part of a criminal investigation, even then there are some exceptions. Taking them to court would be a waste of time & money.[/quote]A waste of time? Not so sure about that, the British (and European) justice system is full of loopholes and backdoors that a clever legal bod could exploit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,557 Posted October 22, 2011 [quote user="dhickl"][quote user="PurpleCanary"] [quote user="TIL 1010"]The Club spat with BBC East looks as though it is still rumbling on and on.Tonight on Look East they showed part of an interview with Kenny Dalgleish talking about tomorrows game but the presenter then said that the Club refused to let them interview Paul Lambert.Personally i think the longer this situation goes on it is the Club that appears to be acting like a spoilt child.[/quote] If, as apparently is the case, the club wants the BBC to reveal its source for the Mackail-Smith story, then there has always been an obvious solution that would settle the matter. One way or another. And that is for the club to go to court to try to force the BBC to cough up the name. Not sure why the club hasn''t gone down this road, unless it thinks there might be a downside that I can''t imagine.[/quote]What right have they got to have the name? My understanding is the journalists can only be forced to give up their source if it is part of a criminal investigation, even then there are some exceptions. Taking them to court would be a waste of time & money.[/quote] You have misunderstood my post, I think. I didn''t say the club had a right to finding out the name. Far from it. I believe the opposite, and in the BBC''s position I would strongly oppose any such move by the club. My point was that since the BBC seems - quite rightly - unwilling to cave in and cough up the name, and since the club is apparently deteremined still to get it, then going to court is the obvious option. Nothing else seems to have worked. Any negotiations presumably have got nowhere. There is an impasse and the only way I can see forward is for the club to go to court. It probably wouldn''t work (and I hope it wouldn''t) but it appears now to be the only option. It might well be a waste of time and money - and would turn this from a local story into a national one, with all the attendant publicity - but I assume the club feels there either is a principle here or just that it is so much in the right it needs that acknowledged. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jarroldstander 0 Posted October 22, 2011 If this is indeed still rumbling on between NCFC and BBC Look East it seems to me to be a pointless spat in which the club can’t win and shouldn’t get involved with. I don''t think it''s very clever to get heavy handed with the BBC, a huge organisation with a great deal of influence and far bigger than NCFC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Branston Pickle 3,654 Posted October 22, 2011 That said, the club clearly doesn''t have an issue with the BBC per se, otherwise how did football focus come from FCR last week (and there have been numerous extra features on NCFC), and there''s always full coverage on local/national BBC radio. If there is a ''dispute'' it is clearly very localised. When all is said and done, you could argue that it is BBC East who is losing out the most right now, but there might be a time when friendly local media is needed for the club so it does seem daft not to sort things out.Incidentally, I believe there are several local disputes dotted about which we don''t hear about, so it is unlikely to escalate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paul moy 235 Posted October 22, 2011 [quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]Everyone is being refused interviews with Paul Lambert. All he will do is the pre and post match press conferences.[/quote]Not true. He was interviewed on Talksport yesterday. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smooth 114 Posted October 22, 2011 Who honestly watches local tv Look East or Anglia to get updates on Norwich City.They give you a one line sentence each night if anything happens.People can get there information from the paper or online. I have not bothered watching local news for sport since those ridiculous days of having to wait to see the golas of games the sunday evening after the saturday game.But also to add to this is Paul Lambert obviously keeps what goes on at the club under wraps and hence very few distractions for players or by him by being media friendly. I like it, I have no problem we are going about our business on the pitch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted October 22, 2011 [quote user="paul moy"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]Everyone is being refused interviews with Paul Lambert. All he will do is the pre and post match press conferences.[/quote]Not true. He was interviewed on Talksport yesterday. [/quote]If you mean this interview that is just taken from the pre-match press conference - which is a requirement under Premier League rules. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted October 22, 2011 he still does his after game interview with Radio Norfolk so it isnt a BBC blackout.. just a look east one...as for who leaked the name for Mickail-smith.. who cares! we don''t need him anyway and have got much better players now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Norfolk Mustard 94 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="jas the barclay king"]he still does his after game interview with Radio Norfolk so it isnt a BBC blackout.. just a look east one...as for who leaked the name for Mickail-smith.. who cares! we don''t need him anyway and have got much better players now.[/quote] Not so sure about that Jas; only last week my hairdresser was saying he thought Holt would be on his way in January and we should have gone for CMS as he''s full of running and doing it for Brighton. No-one in the busy salon offered a contra-argument - and I didn''t fancy challenging him as he was in possession of the scissors!We look good at the moment, but as we all know a lot can change... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Norfolk Mustard 94 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="jas the barclay king"]he still does his after game interview with Radio Norfolk so it isnt a BBC blackout.. just a look east one...as for who leaked the name for Mickail-smith.. who cares! we don''t need him anyway and have got much better players now.[/quote] Not so sure about that Jas; only last week my hairdresser was saying he thought Holt would be on his way in January and we should have gone for CMS as he''s full of running and doing it for Brighton. No-one in the busy salon offered a contra-argument - and I didn''t fancy challenging him as he was in possession of the scissors!We look good at the moment, but as we all know a lot can change... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Norfolk Mustard 94 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="jas the barclay king"]he still does his after game interview with Radio Norfolk so it isnt a BBC blackout.. just a look east one...as for who leaked the name for Mickail-smith.. who cares! we don''t need him anyway and have got much better players now.[/quote] Not so sure about that Jas; only last week my hairdresser was saying he thought Holt would be on his way in January and we should have gone for CMS as he''s full of running and doing it for Brighton. No-one in the busy salon offered a contra-argument - and I didn''t fancy challenging him as he was in possession of the scissors!We look good at the moment, but as we all know a lot can change... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Norfolk Mustard 94 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="jas the barclay king"]he still does his after game interview with Radio Norfolk so it isnt a BBC blackout.. just a look east one...as for who leaked the name for Mickail-smith.. who cares! we don''t need him anyway and have got much better players now.[/quote] Not so sure about that Jas; only last week my hairdresser was saying he thought Holt would be on his way in January and we should have gone for CMS as he''s full of running and doing it for Brighton. No-one in the busy salon offered a contra-argument - and I didn''t fancy challenging him as he was in possession of the scissors!We look good at the moment, but as we all know a lot can change... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Norfolk Mustard 94 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="jas the barclay king"]he still does his after game interview with Radio Norfolk so it isnt a BBC blackout.. just a look east one...as for who leaked the name for Mickail-smith.. who cares! we don''t need him anyway and have got much better players now.[/quote] Not so sure about that Jas; only last week my hairdresser was saying he thought Holt would be on his way in January and we should have gone for CMS as he''s full of running and doing it for Brighton. No-one in the busy salon offered a contra-argument - and I didn''t fancy challenging him as he was in possession of the scissors!We look good at the moment, but as we all know a lot can change... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="dhickl"][quote user="PurpleCanary"] [quote user="TIL 1010"]The Club spat with BBC East looks as though it is still rumbling on and on.Tonight on Look East they showed part of an interview with Kenny Dalgleish talking about tomorrows game but the presenter then said that the Club refused to let them interview Paul Lambert.Personally i think the longer this situation goes on it is the Club that appears to be acting like a spoilt child.[/quote] If, as apparently is the case, the club wants the BBC to reveal its source for the Mackail-Smith story, then there has always been an obvious solution that would settle the matter. One way or another. And that is for the club to go to court to try to force the BBC to cough up the name. Not sure why the club hasn''t gone down this road, unless it thinks there might be a downside that I can''t imagine.[/quote]What right have they got to have the name? My understanding is the journalists can only be forced to give up their source if it is part of a criminal investigation, even then there are some exceptions. Taking them to court would be a waste of time & money.[/quote] You have misunderstood my post, I think. I didn''t say the club had a right to finding out the name. Far from it. I believe the opposite, and in the BBC''s position I would strongly oppose any such move by the club. My point was that since the BBC seems - quite rightly - unwilling to cave in and cough up the name, and since the club is apparently deteremined still to get it, then going to court is the obvious option. Nothing else seems to have worked. Any negotiations presumably have got nowhere. There is an impasse and the only way I can see forward is for the club to go to court. It probably wouldn''t work (and I hope it wouldn''t) but it appears now to be the only option. It might well be a waste of time and money - and would turn this from a local story into a national one, with all the attendant publicity - but I assume the club feels there either is a principle here or just that it is so much in the right it needs that acknowledged.[/quote]Purple Canary,What happens if they go to court and no one can remember the name of the source? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,557 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]Purple Canary,What happens if they go to court and no one can remember the name of the source? [/quote] Tangible, perhaps it''s because it''s a balmy Sunday night[ip] but I''m not sure if this is a serious question...[:^)][8-)] Assuming it is, if you mean actually that "no-one can remember" that is unlikely. This is not something complicated like the Schleswig-Holstein Question.[8-|] This is simply remembering who told you something important. People don''t forget that kind of stuff. If you mean pretending not to remember, that wouldn''t wash with the court. But until the club decides to cut this Gordian Knot[8-|] by taking the BBC to court this is all pretty damned academic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]Purple Canary,What happens if they go to court and no one can remember the name of the source? [/quote] Tangible, perhaps it''s because it''s a balmy Sunday night[ip] but I''m not sure if this is a serious question...[:^)][8-)] Assuming it is, if you mean actually that "no-one can remember" that is unlikely. This is not something complicated like the Schleswig-Holstein Question.[8-|] This is simply remembering who told you something important. People don''t forget that kind of stuff. If you mean pretending not to remember, that wouldn''t wash with the court. But until the club decides to cut this Gordian Knot[8-|] by taking the BBC to court this is all pretty damned academic.[/quote]Hi Purple Canary,It was a serious question.I meant it in the sense that if somebody refused to say by stating they couldn''t remember, would a judge have grounds to lock them up for say contempt of court? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,557 Posted October 23, 2011 [quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]Purple Canary,What happens if they go to court and no one can remember the name of the source? [/quote] Tangible, perhaps it''s because it''s a balmy Sunday night[ip] but I''m not sure if this is a serious question...[:^)][8-)] Assuming it is, if you mean actually that "no-one can remember" that is unlikely. This is not something complicated like the Schleswig-Holstein Question.[8-|] This is simply remembering who told you something important. People don''t forget that kind of stuff. If you mean pretending not to remember, that wouldn''t wash with the court. But until the club decides to cut this Gordian Knot[8-|] by taking the BBC to court this is all pretty damned academic.[/quote]Hi Purple Canary,It was a serious question.I meant it in the sense that if somebody refused to say by stating they couldn''t remember, would a judge have grounds to lock them up for say contempt of court?[/quote] Tangible, in that case, the serious answer is that only a very stupid judge (and there are fewer of them than you might think) would believe a journalist really couldn''t remember the name of their source. It would be taken as deliberate amnesia. In that case then the journalist could well be jailed for contempt. And this has happened. Not as a result of any deliberate amnesia, which is just plain silly, but by refusing to name a source. But first, to repeat, the club would need to sue the BBC. That - for whatever reason - hasn''t happened. So this is still all academic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
