Will Ian Hart apologise on air to Dick Knight...

[Titanic]

for his unfounded accusation that DK's claim about negotiations with 5 players were a knee-jerk reaction to the criticism he was receiving on the phone-in and by inference was not necessarily true.

This was subsequently and childishly reinforced by the 'Famous Fives' jibes and music that was used the following week.

I hope Ian will acknowledge that this reaction was unhelpful and only served to increase the speculation and sense of frustration among phone-in listeners and supporters - and increase unnecessarily the pressure on the club management at a time when it was most unwelcome.

 

[Chicken Run]

for his unfounded accusation that DK's claim about negotiations with 5 players were a knee-jerk reaction to the criticism he was receiving on the phone-in and by inference was not necessarily true.

This was subsequently and childishly reinforced by the 'Famous Fives' jibes and music that was used the following week.

I hope Ian will acknowledge that this reaction was unhelpful and only served to increase the speculation and sense of frustration among phone-in listeners and supporters - and increase unnecessarily the pressure on the club management at a time when it was most unwelcome.

No and why should he?

 

[Titanic]

No and why should he?

because if you make an accusation, especially in public, that proves unfounded, it is common courtesy to acknowledge that and apologise.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Why on EARTH should he?

Harty does a great job.

 

[Titanic]

Why on EARTH should he?

Harty does a great job.

If shit-stirring against the chairman is a 'great job' then fair enough. In my book that was a pretty cheap shot.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

If shit-stirring against the chairman is a 'great job' then fair enough. In my book that was a pretty cheap shot.

Perhaps it was Ian's personal opinion, or something he put out for debate?

Surely that is the point of punditry?

 

[Titanic]

Perhaps it was Ian's personal opinion, or something he put out for debate?

Surely that is the point of punditry?

I guess our politicians never apologise... so why should phone-in hosts ?

Does that make Harty the Peter Hain of broadcasting ?

 

[Withdean Wanderer]

Why should he?

We've signed TWO of the 5, and got Richards in. Early days yet...and nobody on here had ever heard of either of them. They could be shocking for all we know

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I fail to see why?

Its not like 90% of the listeners didnt want him to say it or ask

 

[Moshe Gariani]

Why should he?

We've signed TWO of the 5, and got Richards in. Early days yet...and nobody on here had ever heard of either of them. They could be shocking for all we know

good point... new signings to cash-strapped Third Division clubs only "count" if they are already established household names...

 

[Jim D]

The guy that came on and told Knight point blank that he wouldn't sign anyone 'and we all knew it' should come back on and apologise.

 

[Jeep]

If the newcomers have a good game it is fair to expect a love in on the phone in.

 

[Withdean Wanderer]

good point... new signings to cash-strapped Third Division clubs only "count" if they are already established household names...

No, but it's hardly worth apologising for.

Dick Knight might have signed YOU for all we kno!

 

[Adam Virgo's Shirt]

Harty voiced the opinions of many on here, is everyone who shared his opinion going to apologise to DK? I doubt it, so why should Harty?

 

[227 BHA]

And the prize for the most ridiculous thread/comment this week goes to..............................Titanic

 

[bullshit detector]

And the prize for the most ridiculous thread/comment this week goes to..............................Titanic

idiot.
Don't bother, Titanic. they're not worth it.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Harty doesn't have to apologise for saying what he thought, thats his job as the presenter of the phone in, and it helps to create a debate which is another part of his job. The childish famous five jibes and music were a bit uncalled for though.

Harty is a fan of the club and I am sure the 3 signings we've made have gone someway to prove him wrong on the "knee jerkness" of Knights reaction and is delighted that he has been (partly) proven wrong in this case as its the team who has benefited.

 

[Mr Banana]

There's stuff Ian should really think about almost every week, none of which he has ever apologised for. The most obvious that springs to mind is letting FG on and treating him with reverance despite his repeated racist comments on here. His comment about Joleon Lescott being "a good looking boy" last week (Lescott was hit by a car when he was five years old) was so ignorant I felt embarrassed for him.

 

[keaton]

Harty voiced the opinions of many on here, is everyone who shared his opinion going to apologise to DK? I doubt it, so why should Harty?

Isn't he in a power or position and responsibility though? He could probably get done fro defamation but DK wouldn't do it because it merely be bad publicity

 

[Knotty]

I did not agree with Harty's comments but I don't think he should apologise. It is often part of a journalist's job to be controversial and provoke debate. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt here.

I'd like to think that DK has far more important things to occupy him than worrying about an apology from Harty.

Incidentally, did Dick ever say he was looking to sign five players? He said the club was in negotiations with five but, for all we know, two or three of those might be for one position. We need a striker but if we only negotiate with one and it falls through, we have to start again. If we are negotiating with three at the same time, and get one, mission accomplished.

Just a thought...