taken from today:

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/Po ... 4430578.jp

this bit is possibly the most childish newspaper report I've ever seen



Not only for the "try and" comedy of English but for the puerile tit for tat number giving.

Frank Reid wont be at matches then?

Shame.

If anything my main worry about this is the light in which it shows the attitudes at HUFC.

As I understand it; the Mail was asked to agree to a new contract not long after the old one was agreed and signed. When they refused rattle were thrown and they were banned from the ground. This bit definitely sounds somewhat childish to me and another example of the closed shop that is Hartlepool United.

Now lets say that they owned the ground and took that attitude against the fans................................

I've certainly had second thoughs on that subject.

Perhaps Pools could respond and give the other side of the story.

We have a long-standing tradition of bringing fans and our readers the best possible coverage of matches from the "Town's Club" - the words which are Pools' motto.

Er....not anymore, we've adapted our crest.....and anyway "Never Say Die" is surely our motto !!!!!!!

very worrying to me.as Mr I says it shows the club in a very poor light.
Didn't Gary Gibson do a similair thing back in the dark days? I remember going to one of his"forum" q+a things and him kicking the press out.
I'd be happy if they kicked loughlin off there websites footy league cos he's above me.
mind there are always two sides to a story,it's just a shame that the club will be unlikely to tell their side.

Apparently the Echo are 'denied press access' too, for supporting the Mail and supplying photos to them.
As a result Loughlin and Paul Fraser have bought their own tickets for the last 2 matches, and have printed quite a good cartoon to-day, in place of the photos they weren't allowed to take.

As regards the Club giving their own side of the story, they've been contacted 2ce by the Echo editor who wants to discuss the matter, but no-one has replied to either of his approaches.

On the plus side hopefully sales of the Mail will dwindle even more and it can go out of business and we wont have to put up with such utter crap.

And hopefully your pc will blow up and we wont have to see any more of your negative rants

Personally I'd much prefer it of Mr Kent's pc blew up.

hasn't he already had a warning which he's totally ignored?

Jesus H Christ, I might as well sit in the shed, might'n I, it's like Nazi Germany on this forum sometimes, members of family died for freedom for this country and what do I get, nothing but abuse back !!!!

yes

That's charming, that is. Real charming.

It's warmed my heart n won me over

Can't we sit down and have a conversation like civilised people do together ?

Bunker is going rapidly down hill with this retard posting all his crap.



Il save you all a job....

"its going rapidly down hill with you posting you mean" etc etc

For Christ's sake, come on, let's stop this ill feeling now !!!!!

Now unless someone actually bans me from this Bunker, of which there is no credible reason why on earth, I should be banned, I will continue to post on this.

What, Ladies and Gentlemen do you say to that ?

you are all w@nkers , so there!!!

Have you seen me w*nk?

If so, you'll have to pay, like the rest of them!

See, I think this post proves that we can be w**kers together - that's important, you know !!!!!

See, we are now laughing through are differences together !!!!!

nobody from this board is gonna 'fluff' me like, unless its one of those 'women' things i hear so much about

The Mail thing is absolutely pathetic it gets worse every time i re-read it! its childish and pathetic of the Fail!

Both sides seem as bad as each other here. Either way, both arguments mean that the fans are losing out, and that's the only audience that matters. It's not as if the Mail's stoicism is going to win over new subscribers and it's certainly not like Pools themselves are doing themselves any favours by muddying what should have been a well-celebrated win - it just turned into another platform for a petty argument.

And Oi, You! Kent - as much as what you say can be true of the Bunker, you're really not doing yourself any favours...

Surely if the mail had signed like they were asked to all this would be non-existent???

Guess so, but they say they were asked to sign something unacceptable.

Wasnt it said to be a copywrite thingy?

I'm not sure..but it doesn't sound like it, because the Echo fell into bad odour for passing on photos to the Mail (ie it was OK for the Echo to have them).
Who knows? It's just another of the silly stories the Club gets embroiled in from time to time, apparently totally unnecessarily

Does anyone know if I was on Radio Tees at about 4pm? They rang me up for an opinion on it but I don't know if it went out on the show or not.

i heard you at 6pm

so unacceptable that the echo and national press must have signed it?

bunch of clowns down that place, and their england proves it!

Careful Catweasle wont be happy as we are not allowed to slag the Mail off.




Despite it being ran by morons.

I don't know the details so aren't gonna comment on it in that way.

All I will say is that if this was happening with the loids we'd be pissing ourselves and calling them Mickey Mouse.

Now ey!

I've no more idea than anyone else what the Mail refused to sign, but it would be pretty odd if the Echo DID sign and then went on to support the Mail for not signing.
But, the idea of private individuals or companies trying to control the press in ANY way is a bit dodgy in itself, isn't it?

Lets calm down a bit, this isn't Watergate!

The club produce a contract that substantially increase the cost to the Mail, a short time after a lesser contract was agreed and they also add a clause which states that the club have total access and free use of any images. The Mail refuse to sign it and the club ban them. It starts and finishes there. Trouble is; you now have one very determined man on one side of the table and a paper who would look very silly if they went back on their stand. I don't envisage and end to this enpasse anytime soon.

Of course it isn't Watergate.
OK, so it's commercial rather than 'information control'. But it sounds (as usual) so confrontational, and the sum involved can't amount to anything sufficient (in IOR terms) to take a stand over.
Perhaps I'm over-sensitised to people in authority exerting pressure just for the sake of it and because they can, but that's because I've had a lot of experience

That's too sensible, John. The interesting question is why is no-one with your outlook is ever employed by the Club?
And the answer is because they prefer a culture of ....erm...what would you call it?

(those who didn't get it please move on to the next post )

Sure ain't journalism...

If I run a business of any kind I want the newspapers on my back all the time, and they can do it for free! There's no such thing as bad publicity (unless you really deserve it).

[[/quote]


Now ey![/quote][/quote]

what i forgot to add was that the adverts for the sales and wants bit is one of the best in the country!