Marinakis no longer in charge of Forest

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Lol. You might find it superficially amusing, GP, as might I, but it’s a ridiculous precedent and all too typical (over) reaction, imo, to ban a pundit because you don’ t like their criticism.

Almost guarantees a home draw for Forest against Salford in one of next season’s cup competitions.;)

---

Really? Derby county have done it before to a commentator. MUFC under Ferguson banned the BBC for ages.
Neville is supposed to commentate on the football, not go on live tv telling a manager to resign. He's as bad as Lineker with his opinions and expects no come back. He got one and didn't like it. Karma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Why would making life for Sky subscribers be a plus? Isn't the money from Sky thats inflated footballers wages and resulted n games being arranged for Sky Tv's convenience and scheduling rather than fans a negative?

As RA rightly points out, banning journalists or media from anywhere on the basis of you don't like them or what they say (echoes of Trump here) then that's a negative for free speech and a dangerous precedent.

I thought you were making the argument on here that all views should be heard and not cancelled?

---

As said to RA, it wasn't just a view, he spat something out he had no right in saying.
Referees and the league/FA don't like an opinion either

Ironically you compare it to Trump. BUT OUR OWN PM HAS DONE MORE TO STOP OPINIONS THAN ANYONE . The police themselves are waging a free speech campaign of silencing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Really? Derby county have done it before to a commentator. MUFC under Ferguson banned the BBC for ages.
Neville is supposed to commentate on the football, not go on live tv telling a manager to resign. He's as bad as Lineker with his opinions and expects no come back. He got one and didn't like it. Karma

---

Ah, yes. Graham Richards banned because he gave out the Daily Mirror phone number so fans could phone up to ask why Maxwell wasn't putting money into the club. That kept the Mirror phone lines tied up and Maxwell couldn't get through (he was in the US aboard his Lady Ghislaine yacht) to ask about the next day's issue.

One of my lessons from history: Derby were one of, in fact possibly the, earliest to ?ban? to pundits from the ground - Jan 5th 1972, Hugh Johns, Billy Wright et al, in fact the whole ITV ?Star Soccer? ensemble, were ?banned? from the BBG for the FA Cup fourth round visit of Notts County because BC decided Derby were on TV too much. I don?t recall any goals but I joined 39449 other souls at a damp, misty BBG to witness a Durban hat trick in a 6-0 win.

Sorry February. We?d been televised in the 3rd round

Andy wrote 'a damp, misty BBG', ah happy memories!
Good old Leys Malleable Castings!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macstheman

Andy wrote 'a damp, misty BBG', ah happy memories!
Good old Leys Malleable Castings!

---

Not to mention The Ewart Chainbelt Co and 1,000 gallons of green paint

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Really? Derby county have done it before to a commentator. MUFC under Ferguson banned the BBC for ages.
Neville is supposed to commentate on the football, not go on live tv telling a manager to resign. He's as bad as Lineker with his opinions and expects no come back. He got one and didn't like it. Karma

---

What Derby and MUFC did years ago isn’t really relevant. I didn’t say it hadn’t happened before or that Neville was right (or wrong) in what he said. Neither do his actions and those of Gary Lineker have much in common.
It’s just my opinion that it’s a bit OTT to ban a pundit - and he’s more of a summariser than a ‘commentator’ anyway - because you don’t like what he said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

What Derby and MUFC did years ago isn’t really relevant. I didn’t say it hadn’t happened before or that Neville was right (or wrong) in what he said. Neither do his actions and those of Gary Lineker have much in common.
It’s just my opinion that it’s a bit OTT to ban a pundit - and he’s more of a summariser than a ‘commentator’ anyway - because you don’t like what he said.

---

Hang on, lets rewind a bit shall we. It doesn't matter what I think does it?

Lets take the Ramanag household. Mr Neville has been to your house before. He then compares it to a mafia run house, and tells Mrs Ramanag to piss off and leave you. Now would you ignore that and have him back for Sunday tea. Or would you be a bit pissed off and tell him not to bother?

It's his house. He can ban who he likes, as other clubs, including yours have done in the past.

He also banned Bonnie blue, That's 2 complete cock gobblers in one week. Result

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds

Hang on, lets rewind a bit shall we. It doesn't matter what I think does it?

Lets take the Ramanag household. Mr Neville has been to your house before. He then compares it to a mafia run house, and tells Mrs Ramanag to piss off and leave you. Now would you ignore that and have him back for Sunday tea. Or would you be a bit pissed off and tell him not to bother?

It's his house. He can ban who he likes, as other clubs, including yours have done in the past.

He also banned Bonnie blue, That's 2 complete cock gobblers in one week. Result

---

Apologies, the ‘you’ was meant to refer to your owner…not you personally.
Beyond that, a private house is hardly comparable to a football club is it?
Fact is that loads of clubs have to provide hospitality each week to pundits who are critical of them. I don’t know whether Neville was right or wrong in this particular criticism however he is known for being an outspoken critic of many clubs including his beloved Man. Utd. and, as far as I know, no other club has banned him and prevented him from doing his job.