Nigel Pearson at it again.

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

The media smell blood and cheap copy. Pearson knows he's already gone so he don't give a shit anymore. Not so good news when it comes to his next job interview though. Should at least PRETEND to be jumping through the normal media hoops by showing grace under pressure. Makes POYET look almost sane by comparison.

 

[Triggaaar]

He's a highly paid, influential man who is in a position to bully the press. OK He's NOT a demi God if you want to be 12 about it.

He was out of order to the journalist, he apologised, and the apology was accepted. Well paid or not, I think Pearson is a million miles from being a demi-god, which is why I was surprised by your choice of phrase. Some managers, who really think they are the bees knees, probably should be put in their place. But I don't think Pearson is at that level, and I don't think Murphy did put him in his place, Murphy just tried to rile him to get another reaction and some air time. I have a low opinion of the press anyway, and don't think many of them are in a position to act all superior.

Is this what counts as an apology in the Premier League nowadays? Wow! Total la-la land

[video]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32537484[/video]

What's wrong with it? Baker said "An apology was not what I was thinking but to respond immediately on camera showed the decent side to Pearson. It was the right course of action and the 51-year-old handled himself well enough. As far as I am concerned, this is the matter closed."

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

What's wrong with it? Baker said "An apology was not what I was thinking but to respond immediately on camera showed the decent side to Pearson. It was the right course of action and the 51-year-old handled himself well enough. As far as I am concerned, this is the matter closed."

What's WRONG with it? Pearson being exactly the same arrogant dismissive git he was in the original interview is what's wrong with it.

 

[jimbob5]

He was out of order to the journalist, he apologised, and the apology was accepted. Well paid or not, I think Pearson is a million miles from being a demi-god, which is why I was surprised by your choice of phrase. Some managers, who really think they are the bees knees, probably should be put in their place. But I don't think Pearson is at that level, and I don't think Murphy did put him in his place, Murphy just tried to rile him to get another reaction and some air time. I have a low opinion of the press anyway, and don't think many of them are in a position to act all superior.

What's wrong with it? Baker said "An apology was not what I was thinking but to respond immediately on camera showed the decent side to Pearson. It was the right course of action and the 51-year-old handled himself well enough. As far as I am concerned, this is the matter closed."

I think PM showed a lot of bottle there. Sure it was uncomfortable and we'd all have rather it did not have to be said.

 

[Easy 10]

I think PM showed a lot of bottle there. Sure it was uncomfortable and we'd all have rather it did not have to be said.

I think PM was flogging a dead horse. The apology had already been made, and the apology had been fully accepted by the other journo so it totally negated the need to rake it all up again. But as Murphy had obviously been up all night preparing his case for the prosecution, he still wanted his moment to grandstand in the press conference in his new self-appointed role as Defender of the Media. SEVEN MINUTES of badgering Pearson for a reaction, which he didn't get.

Pearson was a prick on Wednesday. Murphy was the prick yesterday.

 

[Triggaaar]

I think PM showed a lot of bottle there. Sure it was uncomfortable and we'd all have rather it did not have to be said.

It didn't show any bottle at all. Pearson had already apologised, so was on the back foot when PM waded in. How was that bottle, what was he to be scared of? And nothing he said needed saying. Pearson was out of order and apologised, case closed.

 

[Triggaaar]

I think PM was flogging a dead horse. The apology had already been made, and the apology had been fully accepted by the other journo so it totally negated the need to rake it all up again. But as Murphy had obviously been up all night preparing his case for the prosecution, he still wanted his moment to grandstand in the press conference in his new self-appointed role as Defender of the Media. SEVEN MINUTES of badgering Pearson for a reaction, which he didn't get.

Pearson was a prick on Wednesday. Murphy was the prick yesterday.

Exactly.

 

[jimbob5]

It didn't show any bottle at all. Pearson had already apologised, so was on the back foot when PM waded in. How was that bottle, what was he to be scared of? And nothing he said needed saying. Pearson was out of order and apologised, case closed.

If it had been a one off incident. You would not flourish your job if you'd done and said some of the things Pearson has.

 

[Triggaaar]

If it had been a one off incident. You would not flourish your job if you'd done and said some of the things Pearson has.

I don't follow him much, but if Pearson is a bit of a cock, why don't the press just write that. They can say it as they see it. They can say what good/bad he's done with his team, and they can say what a good/bad job he's done dealing with the press, and that would be that. But there was no point on Murphy just trying to bait him, that was just pathetic. Trying to appear like the tough journalist who shouldn't be messed with, who would stick up for other journos, even after the apology had already been made and accepted. Just pathetic. How was Pearson supposed to react to his stupid questions? Either with anger, so Murphy could get another reaction to write about, or with tears and another apology?

 

[Bold Seagull]

I think PM was flogging a dead horse. The apology had already been made, and the apology had been fully accepted by the other journo so it totally negated the need to rake it all up again. But as Murphy had obviously been up all night preparing his case for the prosecution, he still wanted his moment to grandstand in the press conference in his new self-appointed role as Defender of the Media. SEVEN MINUTES of badgering Pearson for a reaction, which he didn't get.

Pearson was a prick on Wednesday. Murphy was the prick yesterday.

Don't agree. Pearson apologised for his rant, but still didn't answer the question. Pearson said his team have faced lots of undue criticism this season from the press, and the press are rightly asking 'what undue criticism?'. Most of the press about Leicester at the moment is positive, so they haven't a clue why Pearson is being hostile to them while they're talking up his team.

Pearson has dug a hole for himself as he can't answer the question about what criticism he is referring to. Rather than the press writing about the excellent form of his team, his clumsy rhetoric and media paranoia has made it all about him. Murphy was dead right in having a go because they should be talking about NP being manager of the month, not being dick of the week.

 

[Easy 10]

Don't agree. Pearson apologised for his rant, but still didn't answer the question. Pearson said his team have faced lots of undue criticism this season from the press, and the press are rightly asking 'what undue criticism?'. Most of the press about Leicester at the moment is positive, so they haven't a clue why Pearson is being hostile to them while they're talking up his team.

Pearson has dug a hole for himself as he can't answer the question about what criticism he is referring to. Rather than the press writing about the excellent form of his team, his clumsy rhetoric and media paranoia has made it all about him. Murphy was dead right in having a go because they should be talking about NP being manager of the month, not being dick of the week.

Is it really worth going into forensic detail over it though ? OK Pearson's default position in the media is defensive/abrasive, and he often comes across as brusk and dour. He quite clearly doesn't enjoy the media side of his job, but its part of his job so he has no choice but to get on with it. I'm sure if he was of a mind he could probably have gone away and come back with some examples of his team getting pelters in the press this season, but whats the point. If they have, big deal, comes with the territory when you're bottom of the league. If they haven't, then bully for Murphy pinning him down and proving him wrong.

Pearson was overly defensive and took it WAY too far on Wednesday, for which he apologised. That should be the end of it. Murphy seizing on it to grandstand for seven minutes was toe-curling, and was worse than the original rant IMO. Its not a murder trial ffs, its only bloody football.

 

[Triggaaar]

Don't agree. Pearson apologised for his rant, but still didn't answer the question.

He doesn't have to answer the question. It is Pearson's opinion that it's obvious which criticism is unfair, and he doesn't want to go over it.

Most of the press about Leicester at the moment is positive, so they haven't a clue why Pearson is being hostile to them while they're talking up his team.

At the moment it's positive because they won 4 on the bounce. It wasn't always positive and Pearson feels that some of the criticism was unfair, and he thinks it's obvious which bits, and he doesn't want to talk about it more than that.

 

[Southern Scouse]

I could imagine JT giving an answer like that if he turned his hand/mouth to management in the future.
Ha

 

[Bold Seagull]

He doesn't have to answer the question. It is Pearson's opinion that it's obvious which criticism is unfair, and he doesn't want to go over it.
At the moment it's positive because they won 4 on the bounce. It wasn't always positive and Pearson feels that some of the criticism was unfair, and he thinks it's obvious which bits, and he doesn't want to talk about it more than that.

He doesn't have to answer the question, but there wouldn't have even been a question if he hadn't bought up this criticism issue in the first place. Press are being positive and on his side right now, why bring up past criticism and expect no one to ask what he meant? They think they've been mostly fair with him and his team, so he can't just throw a hand grenade into the room and expect them all to just accept his not prepared to elaborate on his accusation - which is what it was.

 

[symyjym]

Is this what counts as an apology in the Premier League nowadays? Wow! Total la-la land

[video]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32537484[/video]

That video is nuts.

 

[Triggaaar]

He doesn't have to answer the question, but there wouldn't have even been a question if he hadn't bought up this criticism issue in the first place. Press are being positive and on his side right now, why bring up past criticism and expect no one to ask what he meant? They think they've been mostly fair with him and his team

Do they? How do you know, have you been closely following the local press regarding Leicester over the last season? Rightly or wrongly. he feels the press have been unfair, so he said so. The press asked what was unfair, he thinks it's obvious and so doesn't want to discuss it. That's it. He doesn't have to answer, and the press can print what they like.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Do they? How do you know, have you been closely following the local press regarding Leicester over the last season? Rightly or wrongly. he feels the press have been unfair, so he said so. The press asked what was unfair, he thinks it's obvious and so doesn't want to discuss it. That's it. He doesn't have to answer, and the press can print what they like.

Of course they can, and that is what he has left them now to do. All avoidable on his part.

 

[jimbob5]

Hats off to Pearson today. Let's try and move on eh? All this fighting! Bickerwing!