Sir Alex Ferguson's TV silence after loss to Liverpool insults paying public

[MrsB]

Kevin Eason, 17 March 2009
The Times

We shall never know whether the only sounds over the breakfast table yesterday morning were the clink of teacups and the gentle crunching of toast.

Sir Alex Ferguson's answer to trouble appears similar to the average 13-year-old girl who has been given a rollicking by her parents. He runs to his room, slams the door behind him and refuses to speak a word.

So perhaps Lady Cathy, his wife, also got a dose of the silent treatment after Manchester United's humiliating 4-1 defeat at home to Liverpool on Saturday. For he is not talking to anyone else as his relationship with the press and television reaches a nadir.

Ferguson refused to speak to Sky Sports after the match, blaming the broadcaster for the lunchtime kick-off after United had played a Champions League fixture on Wednesday night, the day after Liverpool's victory over Real Madrid.

Perhaps it would be a good idea for Malcolm Glazer, United's owner, to remind his manager that Sky money has turned the Barclays Premier League into the richest league in the world and the nation's biggest club still needs a little financial help with outstanding debts at about £650 million. The satellite television operator, in which News Corporation, parent company of The Times, has a 39.1 per cent stake, has only just signed a new three-year contract worth £1.6 billion that will keep Fergie and his roster of multimillionaire players in baby Bentleys for some time to come.

Perhaps, too, the millions of fans around the world claimed by United might have liked to hear an explanation. The Premier League broadcasting rights deal with Sky and Setanta Sports includes a clause that demands that clubs make their “best endeavours” in providing coaching staff for comment after a match. If the detail has allowed Ferguson to give Sky a body swerve on this occasion, then the spirit of the deal is that he makes himself available to the broadcasters.

Sky Sports pointed out that the decision to hold a lunchtime kick-off was advised by Manchester Police, who wanted to prevent fans visiting pubs beforehand. It added: “We are not worried about the interview being turned down. Managers should know that they are not speaking to us but through us to the public, who have made the effort to watch them play.”

For more than four years, Ferguson has refused to speak to the BBC after a BBC3 documentary about the activities as an agent of Jason, one of his three sons. The BBC has adopted a phlegmatic attitude to being ignored but it remains to be seen whether broadcasters will be content to be fobbed off with Mike Phelan, Ferguson's assistant, if the United manager has yet another strop.

[Shaggy]

The Childish Mr Ferguson

http://timesonline.typepad.com/thega...ex-fergus.html

Sir Alex Ferguson's ungraciousness leaves him a step away from greatness

I don't think we need to read too much of Freud to understand what was going on in the mind of Sir Alex Ferguson following his team's 4-1 loss to Liverpool at Old Trafford on Saturday. In his sullen refusal to speak to the media after that defeat - including his beloved Sky TV - Ferguson only confirmed what a rank bad loser he is at times.

There are many indicators of greatness in football management and the Manchester United boss has ticked most of them over the years. But one of those boxes - denoting graciousness in defeat - has very often remained empty.

Ferguson's churlish behaviour at the weekend was all the more notable given his willingness to openly taunt Liverpool's Rafael Benitez in the build-up to Saturday's game. In saying that he would "need to read more of Freud" to understand some of the recent comments by the Liverpool manager was Ferguson's own way of faintly humiliating Benitez in public.

Well, at Old Trafford on Saturday, here was Benitez not so faintly humiliating Ferguson, and where it mattered most - on the pitch. And if the imperious Ferguson feels he can dole it out quite a bit, shouldn't he also just occasionally be able to take it? The word on this last Saturday was, apparently not.

Indeed, Ferguson's initial silence on the loss to Liverpool and then his mumblings about the unfair nature of Saturday's lunchtime kick-off served only to make his embittered state more obvious. The Scot's main charge was that his United team had been unfairly disadvantaged because, having played Inter Milan at Old Trafford three days earlier, Liverpool were given the upper hand, having played their Champions League fixture against Real Madrid on the Tuesday.

I must admit, I have always been mystified by this Wednesday-Saturday conspiracy theory among certain managers. Those of us who love football - and that includes Ferguson - grew up on a routine of big European nights on Wednesdays, followed by league business three days later. It has been a staple diet of football and Ferguson has known it for nearly 30 years, since his early Continental forays with Aberdeen.

Yet at some point in the early-to-mid 1990s managers began to grumble about this three-day pressure on their players. "It's very unfair," some started to claim, especially if playing more humble opponents who hadn't experienced a midweek European match, "my players are exhausted." And this, despite sports science and rest and recuperation being more advanced and knowledgeable than ever.

Liverpool may have had a very slight advantage over United but it seems a flimsy line to peddle. With Ferguson, in truth, it smacked of a sore, bitter loser after Saturday's defeat. How big of him it would have been - a real measure of his humanity - had he come out and, instead of simpering, congratulated or even acknowledged Liverpool and Benitez on their remarkable win.

Graciousness in defeat is one of the hallmarks of greatness in football - embodied in such men as Pele and Sir Bobby Charlton - but it is something that appears to have eluded the Manchester United manager.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle5920885.ece

Sir Alex Ferguson's TV silence after loss to Liverpool insults paying public

Kevin Eason, Sports news correspondent

We shall never know whether the only sounds over the breakfast table yesterday morning were the clink of teacups and the gentle crunching of toast.

Sir Alex Ferguson's answer to trouble appears similar to the average 13-year-old girl who has been given a rollicking by her parents. He runs to his room, slams the door behind him and refuses to speak a word.

So perhaps Lady Cathy, his wife, also got a dose of the silent treatment after Manchester United's humiliating 4-1 defeat at home to Liverpool on Saturday. For he is not talking to anyone else as his relationship with the press and television reaches a nadir.

Ferguson refused to speak to Sky Sports after the match, blaming the broadcaster for the lunchtime kick-off after United had played a Champions League fixture on Wednesday night, the day after Liverpool's victory over Real Madrid.

Perhaps it would be a good idea for Malcolm Glazer, United's owner, to remind his manager that Sky money has turned the Barclays Premier League into the richest league in the world and the nation's biggest club still needs a little financial help with outstanding debts at about £650 million. The satellite television operator, in which News Corporation, parent company of The Times, has a 39.1 per cent stake, has only just signed a new three-year contract worth £1.6 billion that will keep Fergie and his roster of multimillionaire players in baby Bentleys for some time to come.

Perhaps, too, the millions of fans around the world claimed by United might have liked to hear an explanation. The Premier League broadcasting rights deal with Sky and Setanta Sports includes a clause that demands that clubs make their “best endeavours” in providing coaching staff for comment after a match. If the detail has allowed Ferguson to give Sky a body swerve on this occasion, then the spirit of the deal is that he makes himself available to the broadcasters.

Sky Sports pointed out that the decision to hold a lunchtime kick-off was advised by Manchester Police, who wanted to prevent fans visiting pubs beforehand. It added: “We are not worried about the interview being turned down. Managers should know that they are not speaking to us but through us to the public, who have made the effort to watch them play.”

For more than four years, Ferguson has refused to speak to the BBC after a BBC3 documentary about the activities as an agent of Jason, one of his three sons. The BBC has adopted a phlegmatic attitude to being ignored but it remains to be seen whether broadcasters will be content to be fobbed off with Mike Phelan, Ferguson's assistant, if the United manager has yet another strop.

"Talk when your winning! You only talk when your winning!"

Stuart, Gravesend, England

Finally somebody has the guts to say something. Too long they think they are above everyelse. Do you think other managers would get away with it. Doubt it.

Obi, Middlesbrough,

Fine Alex and the club. Sky pays his wages with the money they pump into football. The least he can do is turn up to a post-match interview.

AB, London, UK

Classic SAF- you really are tempted to believe that he does it deliberately to take the heat off his players from the media. That aside however it is a fact of life that the most prolific winners are often the most sour and bitter losers. Am sure no one at OT is too upset by his behaviour!!

ENR, London,

I think it insults " insults paying public" making us suffer post match, and player and manager interviews.
I loved it when Redknapp, Allerdyce et al refused to speak to the Beeb.
It's either anodyne tosh or moaning at refs/governing bodies/other managers etc

Give me silence any day

Tanya, Truro,

Don't say it loudly because we are not allowed to critisise Saint Fergie.Because of his managerial record and his regular petty,vindictive outbursts at officials,journalists,opposing managers and the media , we must all fall to our knees in his presence.The latest strop is
is par for the course.

chris dee, london,

Surely he's been around long enough just to dust himself/ the team off and get on with the next game?

Raoul, London, UK

The weekend before the champions league games,Manchester United played lunchtime v Fulham on the saturday, therefore giving them an extra day to prepare for their trip, unlike Arsenal who played on the following day giving them one day less to prepare. M. Wenger bought this up only to be told 'tuff!

Richard Torres, London, England

[Leyton388]

**** him couldn't care less what he does! Just as well the likes of shanks and Clough are not alive and managing today as they would bitch slap this wannabe every week lol

[Vermilion]

Sir Alex Ferguson's answer to trouble appears similar to the average 13-year-old girl who has been given a rollicking by her parents. He runs to his room, slams the door behind him and refuses to speak a word.

That article makes for great reading.

[Neil Young]

It's funny how The Times is only talking about this now when his childish strops and bullying of the media have been going on for years.

I note that The Times and Sky Sports are controlled by the same person.

He's made a misjudgement in not talking to Sky. I expect Sky Sports or a Murdoch title to get exclusive access to him or Man United very soon. They'll kiss and make up and then it'll be back to business as usual for the rest - toe the Ferguson line or be denied access.

[Guest]

It's funny how The Times is only talking about this now when his childish strops and bullying of the media have been going on for years.

I note that The Times and Sky Sports are controlled by the same person.

He's made a misjudgement in not talking to Sky. I expect Sky Sports or a Murdoch title to get exclusive access to him or Man United very soon. They'll kiss and make up and then it'll be back to business as usual for the rest - toe the Ferguson line or be denied access.

[Shaggy]

http://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=59340

[dww]

http://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=59340

Consider the threads merged.

[Guest]

Consider the threads merged.

Mrs. B doesn't do her job properly.

[Neil Young]

When I look at the forum list, this thread is titled...

Sir Alex Ferguson's TV...

In place of the ellipse my mind keeps adding 'Burp' to the end.

[Craig_H]

Is the penny finally dropping?

Sir Alex Ferguson has carried out so many boycotts down the years we should stop calling him Alex and start calling him Geoffrey instead. Sky Sports was the latest organisation to feel the frostiness of the Ferguson cold shoulder, the Manchester United manager refusing to take part in the customary post-match interview after Saturday's game against Liverpool, thus depriving more than a million subscribers a valued part of their viewing experience.

Why was Ferguson so miffed with the company that has bankrolled football (and helped to pay his salary) for the better part of two decades? Because Sky had scheduled the match on Saturday lunchtime, giving United less time to recover from their Wednesday-night exertions (Liverpool played the second leg of their Champions League first knockout round tie on Tuesday).

Never mind that the match was scheduled almost two months ago or that the timing had been requested by the police. Rational arguments (facts, as Rafael Benítez might call them) mean little to a man in a state of such advanced paranoia that he alleged in January that the entire Barclays Premier League fixture list had been part of an elaborate conspiracy against United.

The great mistake was in not confronting Ferguson earlier. By indulging his tendency to petulance and megalomania, the Premier League has only itself to blame for the shameful situation in which its most high-profile manager flouts his responsibilities to broadcasters and fans as a matter of course.

It is not just Sky - News Corporation, parent company of The Times has a 39.1 per cent stake in BSkyB - of course. The BBC, which pays almost £60 million a year on behalf of licence-fee payers for Premier League highlights, has not had access to Ferguson since 2004, ever since it aired a BBC Three documentary about his dealings with his son Jason, a football agent at the time. It is understood that Ferguson's boycott of our national broadcaster will never be rescinded.

This is nothing less than scandalous, not least when you consider that United have a contractual obligation to put up a senior management figure for interview, as well as a moral responsibility to the millions of fans who tune in on Saturday and Sunday evenings hoping to hear the views of the single most important and knowledgeable person in English football.

In the absence of any noticeable condemnation from the very organisations that exist to rein in errant behaviour - not least the United board - is it any wonder that Ferguson is so dangerously out of control? That he runs United like his own personal fiefdom? That he has routinely snubbed post-match press conferences (another part of a manager's duties) for more than seven years? That he bawls out journalists who ask awkward questions as a matter of course? That he has banned so many scribes that his own press office finds it difficult to keep track of who's in and who's out?

Give it time and Ferguson will think nothing of banning opposition managers from Old Trafford on the ground that they dared suggest they might beat United.

Most sensible Manchester United fans agree that Ferguson's behaviour is less than reasonable, but they do so with a shrug of the shoulders and with the sentiment that this is a price English football must pay for having such a rare talent in its midst. But this simply will not do.

That Ferguson is one of the football's most brilliant managers does not excuse him from the duties that the majority of his counterparts discharge with such diligence and, quite often, humour and aplomb. If anything, his unique status gives him an elevated responsibility to the millions of fans whose cash is the lifeblood of our national sport.

Ferguson will change only if confronted. That is why Sky Sports should give him a taste of his own medicine by “boycotting” payment of United's share of the television rights income, estimated at a total of about £50 million. That is the only thing that might persuade the United board to bring into line a manager whose behaviour - and I choose my words carefully - shames English football.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/article5926790.ece

Not before time, but the media are finally calling a spade a spade, with regards to that sore losing, pisshead ****.

[Tee]

Spot on.

[red g]

Rafa has opened a can of worms!

[Joe King]

Unfortunately, Sky could never boycott their dearest club.

[Craig_H]

Yeah, boycotting United wouldnt be an option, there'd only be one loser there.