CurtisFleming 86 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 For a paper that are the clubs mouthpiece they aren't doing very well......half the writers are banned News just in: Circumstances can change. Link to post Share on other sites
Borodane 6,301 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 If there is stuff you don't want out then don't tell anyone. And I don't think the gazette was first to write about britts salary. Think it was actually the Nottingham post. Link to post Share on other sites
richmfc 41 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 For a paper that are the clubs mouthpiece they aren't doing very well......half the writers are banned News just in: Circumstances can change. Passed that degree in stating the bleeding obvious then :) Link to post Share on other sites
wilsoncgp 9,283 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 If there is stuff you don't want out then don't tell anyone. And I don't think the gazette was first to write about britts salary. Think it was actually the Nottingham post. Perhaps the Post got that info from the Gazette? Vickers mentioned to me on Twitter the other day that they do all work together to provide information on transfers, they have mutual agreements between most the local papers to get the exclusives. So bad info at the Gazette would mean bad info at the Post and it would still come from this end despite who goes to print first. Link to post Share on other sites
Uwe 3,545 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Who was the gazette guy that "accidentally " mentioned Britt in a tweet the deleted it?? That would've really peeved off the Boro hierarchy Link to post Share on other sites
Snowblind 1,734 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Tallentire. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Changing Times Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Why would it have peeved them? It was already all over the place that we were in for him. Link to post Share on other sites
Brunners 7,982 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Why would it have peeved them? It was already all over the place that we were in for him. Yeah but Tallentires tweet was a "he's signed" style tweet while at the time we were still in the chase. I could see why it might peeve them, I guess. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Changing Times Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 I still don't understand why? According to the Mail we're set to sign Randolph. Are we banning them now if the deal isn't actually done? It's got nothing to do with a tweet like that and there is no justification for it in any case. Link to post Share on other sites
Brunners 7,982 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 I still don't understand why? According to the Mail we're set to sign Randolph. Are we banning them now if the deal isn't actually done? It's got nothing to do with a tweet like that and there is no justification for it in any case. Nope I agree. I also don't think it's transfer related, Shaw hasn't been allowed in as far back as Monks unveiling, which suggests it's more further back Link to post Share on other sites
Jamie-H 1,322 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Forest were saying for a week through their own understanding, Taylor who is their version of Vickers on Forest, it was 14 million financial package structured in a way that was very attractive to them and we were 'doubling Britt wage' so work back from that info on his wages at Forest and you'll get your answer on the deals financials I don't see why he'd be wrong. This feels like something that's happened pre Assambalonga I just can't figure out a flashpoint besides the daggers that came out for Karanka/Orta. Even in defeats last season the Gazette rarely dug out the team or individuals they seemed loyal to a fault so whatever the individuals involved have done must be heretic or treasonous in some way or at least perceived that way by higher ups. Link to post Share on other sites
richmfc 41 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 If it really is because the gazette are releasing info they shouldn't then al, the club have to do is not tell the gazette Link to post Share on other sites
Smogzilla 7,484 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Hope the club releases a statement on this. The silence on this only leaves an empty space for speculation to fill. Link to post Share on other sites
Humpty 3,261 Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 It would appear the Gazette released a story they were asked not too. There's a slight discrepancy on what i've been told regarding the journalists that have been banned and the article that was written though, so still digging. Following said article though, The Gazette were excluded from an interview Gibson did at the back end of last season. http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/inside-story-victor-orta-how-13090744 Link to post Share on other sites
Brunners 7,982 Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 So Humpty that's the article that mfc didn't like? Let me know what you find out I'm very interested. Because if it is I don't get why vickers is still allowed in when shaw and Taylor aren't. I can see why mfc didn't like the article but holy crap have they overreacted why couldn't they have a word with the gazette behind closed doors if they're that unhappy? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now