Stuart Linnell should be sacked (2 Viewers)

[Colin1883]

I have never disagreed more with a post. Other than those by Grendel.

Thats ok mate... Your entitled to disagree with it..

 

---

[James Smith]

Surely he couldn't physically host 2 things at the same game / time?

I would think that he stopped the CCFC corporate work when he got the BBC gig but maybe Stuart would like to clarify that for me - I wouldn't want to be wrong. That would also explain why it no longer appears on his website.

 

[Grendel]

Surely he couldn't physically host 2 things at the same game / time?

I didn't listen to Cwr wish I had. Linnell gave up the corporate stuff when he came back to Cwr. He used to do the team announcement stuff. Corporate his hosted by a variety of ex players who don't I believe get paid,

 

[usskyblue]

In my opinion; anyone that places the blame solely on one party in this whole situation is a bit deluded.

 

[coundonskyblue]

The guy is mostly ok... How do you know everyone on sbt is a city fan? Maybe he is proSisu, but that's ok, yes he shouldn't air his personal views on the radio, but these are tense times for all city fans and we all have our views on the situation.

Maybe your point would be more valid if your didn't call people names and go in for character assassination just because someone dose not agree with your point of view.

It's sisu for crippling the club(with the help of previous regimes) ... ACL for robbing us of the chance of getting into the playoffs...

Is the guy taking the flack because he is the only person you can attack, I mean you can't get at Joyce seppala and even if you could she wouldn't give a damn.
Maybe you should organise a survey for the next home game to find out if the majority of fans who attend games really want sisu out ... Then you could deliver it to him

I don't actually have a problem with him airing his personal views, what I do have a problem with is his dismissive approach to anyone who questions Sisu. Also then to state that I'm 'ill informed' because of my opinion, and to tell me I'm in a minority is wrong.

 

[Nick]

Still nothing from pgsm1 so to be fair i dont agree with a lot stuart linell says but he looks to have made you look a tool as it stands!

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Say what you will about the quality of Linnell's broadcasting, but this 'SISU puppet' stuff is just more paranoid horseshit from the usual suspects.

I didn't see such accusations being lobbed around when he was crucifying callers & texters who wanted Thorn out ...

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Say what you will about the quality of Linnell's broadcasting, but this 'SISU puppet' stuff is just more paranoid horseshit from the usual suspects.

I didn't see such accusations being lobbed around when he was crucifying callers & texters who wanted Thorn out ...

I've made that point above! He quietly re-alligned himself after his fave had been sacked, now he basically argues their point. He's absolutely atrocious at his job.

 

[Grendel]

Reminds me of when a real city legend John Sillett dared to say something the mob didn't like.

He was labelled a sisu puppet as well wasn't he?

 

[Colin1883]

I don't actually have a problem with him airing his personal views, what I do have a problem with is his dismissive approach to anyone who questions Sisu. Also then to state that I'm 'ill informed' because of my opinion, and to tell me I'm in a minority is wrong.

Err... Your right... Everybody is entitled to their view

 

[Nick]

Reminds me of when a real city legend John Sillett dared to say something the mob didn't like.

He was labelled a sisu puppet as well wasn't he?

All this puppet, pro, anti, gelling is giving me a headache

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Reminds me of when a real city legend John Sillett dared to say something the mob didn't like.

He was labelled a sisu puppet as well wasn't he?

He was labelled as senile sounding and out of touch.


And is Sillett and Linnell a valid comparison? Not really a City legend, is he?

 

[James Smith]

BBC Editorial Guidelines

I don't actually have a problem with him airing his personal views, what I do have a problem with is his dismissive approach to anyone who questions Sisu. Also then to state that I'm 'ill informed' because of my opinion, and to tell me I'm in a minority is wrong.

Some of the relevant BBC Editorial Guidelines - there is a section on personal views/comments.

4.2.1
We must do all we can to ensure that 'controversial subjects' are treated with due impartiality in all our output.

4.2.2
News in whatever form must be treated with due impartiality, giving due weight to events, opinion and main strands of argument.

4.2.3
We seek to provide a broad range of subject matter and perspectives over an appropriate timeframe across our output as a whole.

4.2.4
We are committed to reflecting a wide range of opinion across our output as a whole and over an appropriate timeframe so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or under-represented.

4.2.5
We exercise our editorial freedom to produce content about any subject, at any point on the spectrum of debate, as long as there are good editorial reasons for doing so.


4.4.5
We must apply due impartiality to all our subject matter. However, there are particular requirements for 'controversial subjects', whenever they occur in any output, including drama, entertainment and sport.

A 'controversial subject' may be a matter of public policy or political or industrial controversy. It may also be a controversy within religion, science, finance, culture, ethics and other matters entirely.

4.4.6
In determining whether subjects are controversial, we should take account of:
the level of public and political contention and debate
how topical the subjects are
sensitivity in terms of relevant audiences' beliefs and culture
whether the subjects are matters of intense debate or importance in a particular nation, region or discrete area likely to comprise at least a significant part of the audience
a reasonable view on whether the subjects are serious
the distinction between matters grounded in fact and those which are a matter of opinion.

Advice on whether subjects are 'controversial' is available from Editorial Policy.

4.4.7
When dealing with 'controversial subjects', we must ensure a wide range of significant views and perspectives are given due weight and prominence, particularly when the controversy is active. Opinion should be clearly distinguished from fact.
(See Section 4 Impartiality:4.4.2)

4.4.8
Due impartiality normally allows for programmes and other output to explore or report on a specific aspect of an issue or provide an opportunity for a single view to be expressed. When dealing with 'controversial subjects' this should be clearly signposted, should acknowledge that a range of views exists and the weight of those views, and should not misrepresent them.

Consideration should be given to the appropriate timeframe for reflecting other perspectives and whether or not they need to be included in connected and signposted output.

If such output contains serious allegations, a right of reply may be required, either as part of the same output, or in a connected and clearly signposted alternative.

4.4.29

The BBC has a tradition of allowing a wide range of individuals, groups or organisations to offer a personal view or opinion, express a belief, or advance a contentious argument in its output. This can range from the outright expression of highly partial views by a campaigner, to the opinion of a specialist or professional including an academic or scientist, to views expressed through contributions from our audiences. All of these can add to the public understanding and debate, especially when they allow our audience to hear fresh and original perspectives on familiar issues.

Such personal view content must be clearly signposted to audiences in advance.

4.4.30
Additionally, when personal view programmes and websites (for example, blogs) cover 'controversial subjects', especially those concerning matters of public policy or political or industrial controversy, we should:
retain a respect for factual accuracy
fairly represent opposing viewpoints when included
provide an opportunity to respond when appropriate, for example in a pre-arranged discussion programme
(See Section 6 Fairness, Contributors and Consent: 6.4.25 - 6.4.27)
ensure that a sufficiently broad range of views and perspectives is included in output of a similar type and weight and in an appropriate timeframe.

4.4.31
BBC staff and regular BBC presenters or reporters associated with news or public policy-related output may offer professional judgements rooted in evidence. However, it is not normally appropriate for them to present or write personal view programmes and content on public policy, on matters of political or industrial controversy, or on 'controversial subjects' in any area.

Make your own minds up on Stuart after reading that.

The entire lot can be found here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines

 

[Colonel Mustard]

I've made that point above! He quietly re-alligned himself after his fave had been sacked, now he basically argues their point. He's absolutely atrocious at his job.

I don't know about re-alignment. He just strikes me as an opinionated, Daily Mail sort.

I've got no issue with any BBC broadcaster playing devil's advocate - and thus they should be defending SISU more often than not. It's just the quiet insults that won't do and betray a lack of impartiality ("if you don't think AT is a good manager then you know nothing about football")

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Posting the BBC guidelines is all well and good, but what has he said about SISU or to the callers that breaks those guidelines? Not saying he hasn't ... would just like to see it in print.

 

[Grendel]

I don't know about re-alignment. He just strikes me as an opinionated, Daily Mail sort.

I've got no issue with any BBC broadcaster playing devil's advocate - and thus they should be defending SISU more often than not. It's just the quiet insults that won't do and betray a lack of impartiality ("if you think AT is a good manager then you know nothing about football")

Non league of course agrees with linell about thorn.

 

[Colin1883]

I don't actually have a problem with him airing his personal views, what I do have a problem with is his dismissive approach to anyone who questions Sisu. Also then to state that I'm 'ill informed' because of my opinion, and to tell me I'm in a minority is wrong.

This is why someone should organise s survey of fans at the next home game... Just because the majority of people on this site hate sisu doesn't mean it will be the same on the terraces... I personally think 80pc of fans want them gone and banned from being associated with another sports team

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Non league of course agrees with linell about thorn.

That he was shafted by SISU, absolutely I think he was. What I'm highlighting here is how disingenuous and hypocritical of him it is to be their number one cheer-leader (after you, natch) now having blamed them for relegation and said Thorn's sacking was unjustified. And you think all of Thorn's signings were crap, whereas today shows that many were totally under/mis-used..

 

[James Smith]

Posting the BBC guidelines is all well and good, but what has he said about SISU or to the callers that breaks those guidelines? Not saying he hasn't ... would just like to see it in print.

Didn't hear everything on the phone in and don't have time to listen again just yet, which I why I said people who did hear everything should make their minds up. Basically if he wasn't giving an equal standing to both sides, the pro and anti SISU groups then he may well have broken something. The impression I get from reading these posts is that if you were anti SISU you were given less airtime, I don't know if that is correct though.

 

[Grendel]

That he was shafted by SISU, absolutely I think he was. What I'm highlighting here is how disingenuous and hypocritical of him it is to be their number one cheer-leader (after you, natch) now having blamed them for relegation and said Thorn's sacking was unjustified. And you think all of Thorn's signings were crap, whereas today shows that many were totally under/mis-used..

Most of his signings were crap and so was he. What are you on about? If you want to ruin any diminishing credibility you have feel free to continue this debate

 

[CJparker]

Who cares either way? I never listen to his show - not out of any strong feeling, more apathy....couldn't care less

 

[Flying Fokker]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/p0166qdt

Some good stuff before 28mins but after that is when Stuart Linnell makes his comments.

 

[Nick]

Shit lets not get it round to thorn, i thought we were past that now!

 

[Grendel]

Shit lets not get it round to thorn, i thought we were past that now!

Fortunately we are past the useless blubbering piece of lard. However isn't it interesting that the majority of those who craved administration also worshipped the ground thorn walked on. What does that say?

 

[rob9872]

I bet he has a username on here or at least lurks/reads. Who do we think most suits his profile? (Just for fun)

 

[coundonskyblue]

Fortunately we are past the useless blubbering piece of lard. However isn't it interesting that the majority of those who craved administration also worshipped the ground thorn walked on. What does that say?

To quote Linnell, I don't think that is the majority view.

You know my opinions on Sisu, they are pretty similar to my views of Thorn.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Who cares either way? I never listen to his show - not out of any strong feeling, more apathy....couldn't care less

You just read threads about him ... and post in them ... not caring less?

 

[Grendel]

I bet he has a username on here or at least lurks/reads. Who do we think most suits his profile? (Just for fun)

He's probably psgm1

 

[coundonskyblue]

I bet he has a username on here or at least lurks/reads. Who do we think most suits his profile? (Just for fun)

stupot07 I think.

 

[Nick]

He's probably psgm1

That would be pr genius!

 

[rupert_bear]

If Stuart Linnell is on the payroll of sisu i hope he got it in advance

 

[Flying Fokker]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/p0166qdt

Some good stuff before 28mins but after that is when Stuart Linnell makes his comments.

43:40 ................

 

[Grendel]

That would be pr genius!

I think he's Leamington Boot Boy

 

[skybluehugh]

Lets be careful - as it appears Mr Linnell is in a litigious mood.

TODAY I attempted to contact your radio show @ 17:51 29/03/13 - NO one picked up the phone!

I GENUINELY believed that you were paid by SISU for the after match experience in corporate section. I believed thism because I saw on your webpage (before you re-vamped) that what you said you did (as part of your self promotion). If I was wrong - I am wrong and have no probs retrtacting errors!

But Will YOU retract what you said when you called ANYONE who thought Andy Thorn should be sacked an idiot? The BBC staff noted at the time you did say that, it was unusual. Do you still believe they are idiots?

Also what do you mean by real sky blue fans? Because some don't follow the club in PRECISELY the same way as you does that make them false fans? Are people in the armed forces not real fans if they don't go to every game?

Will you retract that statement?

To be honest I have wasted far more effort on this guy than it is worth. I certainly don't hev to justify myself to this guy!

Believe he gets paid to go to the matches ( If I am wrong I retract it right now, so please don't get your lawyers involved) while we pay, think that makes US the real fans and him a paid guest.

 

[ccfc1973]

linnell is just a clown he says hes impartial but yet shouts down and cuts off any callers that say a bad word about sisu and yet if someone rings up and is pro sisu they are allowed to talk unchallenged and he makes out that they are sensible and the sisu haters are idiots and a minority.....:jerkit::jerkit::jerkit: bore off stuart you are a dinosaur