Foster, Robertson etc
-
I find that media statement ridiculous. I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds. But claiming mental health is BS. That would be yet another reason to stand down and seek help (councillor, psychotherapist etc).
-
@voodoo yep. They are the Storm, Collingwood, Celtics, Liverpool - can’t stand them. My old man taught me from a young age that the Boks were dirty, cheating, gold watch giving, neanderthals
Love Sth Africa and the people are kind and very hospitable, but their rugby team - there is no love, nope, nada, zilch.
@ACT-Crusader said in Foster must go:
@voodoo yep. They are the Storm, Collingwood, Celtics, Liverpool - can’t stand them. My old man taught me from a young age that the Boks were dirty, cheating, gold watch giving, neanderthals
Love Sth Africa and the people are kind and very hospitable, but their rugby team - there is no love, nope, nada, zilch.
Exactly how I was raised. Kiwis are awesome but the ABs are are the Aliens in Space Jam, the Wardens in the Longest Yard, the Ring Wraiths, T2000 and the Golden Horde.
But that’s why I’d rather lose to you than those other pretenders, filler villains the lot of em. They think they’re the Joker but they’re really just the 80s cartoon Riddler. It’s just embarrassing when our inner demons let them get a temporary upper hand.
Sort your shit out. The forces of light, truth and Justice need a worthy nemesis.
-
I find that media statement ridiculous. I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds. But claiming mental health is BS. That would be yet another reason to stand down and seek help (councillor, psychotherapist etc).
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
-
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
-
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
-
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
Why?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
Why?
@Bones said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
Why?
The dog-whistle implication that the coaching staff are racist for a start.
Comes across as a bloke who was denied the chance of a rant at the expected presser.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
-
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
Guy is English nevertheless. And we all know he’s a clueless troll.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
Guy is English nevertheless. And we all know he’s a clueless troll.
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
Worse than anything you get in the UK - and that's saying something.
Guy is English nevertheless. And we all know he’s a clueless troll.
His dad was an even bigger dick.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
It’s a red warning for me when you need media minders. There’s a thin line between that and propaganda control, censors etc. You’re getting into FIFA, Russia, China territory.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
It’s a red warning for me when you need media minders. There’s a thin line between that and propaganda control, censors etc. You’re getting into FIFA, Russia, China territory.
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
It’s a red warning for me when you need media minders. There’s a thin line between that and propaganda control, censors etc. You’re getting into FIFA, Russia, China territory.
Hate to tell you yhis Billy, but every sports ream in world have them, there has been a media manager with ABs, Wallabies, Irish, Boks , Olympic teams etc etc forever and a day!
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
It’s a red warning for me when you need media minders. There’s a thin line between that and propaganda control, censors etc. You’re getting into FIFA, Russia, China territory.
Hate to tell you yhis Billy, but every sports ream in world have them, there has been a media manager with ABs, Wallabies, Irish, Boks , Olympic teams etc etc forever and a day!
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds
You obviously haven't been reading the Fern or social media....
I think they erred on the side of caution and actually did the right thing, even though it looks a bit OTT. Though Foster seemed OK with the idea of a presser, though we don't know about Cane. NZR were putting their employees first when they were under pressure and that's no bad thing.
(Cue umpteen posts arguing Foster isn't an employee, but is a contractor...)
I disagree. The could have given journalists a code of contact with an emphasis that no personal attacks would be tolerated. But there are hard Qs to be asked...Ian, in the first test the ABs tried out wide passes from Aaron Smith. In the 2nd test, Ireland adjusted and this tactic was utterly nullified. Why didn't you adjust again for the 3rd test? Or, the ABs put up a lot of non-contestable midfield bombs in good attacking positions, which gave away hard-earned possession for no gain. Could you explain the reasoning behind this approach?
Is this type of Q "being mean" or "character assassination"??
Nah. You don't take the risk if you are concerned about your people. You err on the side of caution. It's a game of rugby FFS, not a life-changing event.
We’re obviously not going to agree but if the guy can’t handle a press conference he’s not going to handle a RWC.
It's got bugger all to do with Foster handling a presser or not.. It's about an NZR employee making a call on employee welfare which you disagree with. I'd suggest they were in a better position to make that call than you or I were.
It’s a red warning for me when you need media minders. There’s a thin line between that and propaganda control, censors etc. You’re getting into FIFA, Russia, China territory.
Hate to tell you yhis Billy, but every sports ream in world have them, there has been a media manager with ABs, Wallabies, Irish, Boks , Olympic teams etc etc forever and a day!
I’m fully aware. But they don’t usually cancel PC. I don’t see why a code of conduct etc wouldn’t suffice.
-
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
@BerniesCorner said in Foster must go:
Over at Stuff
"Mark Reason: The fishheads who are stinking out the All Blacks"
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300640271/mark-reason-the-fishheads-who-are-stinking-out-the-all-blacksAnyone else find this type of journalism totally unacceptable
I’ve sent off my email complaint to stuff as I agree this kind of “journalism” has no place.
-
I find that media statement ridiculous. I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds. But claiming mental health is BS. That would be yet another reason to stand down and seek help (councillor, psychotherapist etc).
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I find that media statement ridiculous. I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds. But claiming mental health is BS. That would be yet another reason to stand down and seek help (councillor, psychotherapist etc).
You obviously weren't watching presser after the game, there was almost no questions on tactics etc (as you said would be good questions to ask) but just became about Foster etc, .
-
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I find that media statement ridiculous. I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds. But claiming mental health is BS. That would be yet another reason to stand down and seek help (councillor, psychotherapist etc).
You obviously weren't watching presser after the game, there was almost no questions on tactics etc (as you said would be good questions to ask) but just became about Foster etc, .
@Dan54 said in Foster must go:
@Billy-Tell said in Foster must go:
I find that media statement ridiculous. I don’t think anyone is out to shred foster the man to shreds. But claiming mental health is BS. That would be yet another reason to stand down and seek help (councillor, psychotherapist etc).
You obviously weren't watching presser after the game, there was almost no questions on tactics etc (as you said would be good questions to ask) but just became about Foster etc, .
TBh I never watch pC as nz journalists are hopeless at asking interesting Qs.
