Excellent read.

[Jonathan]

Does it occur to you that some of the claims made could maybe - just maybe be true?

Once upon a time I worked in Telesales - cold calling. Upon listening to my sales technique, a coach told me “if you stand there throwing shit at a wall all day, eventually it’s going to stick.” I think perhaps the same applies to the way in which Rigo chucks around allegations.

[drfchound]

Does it occur to you that some of the claims made could maybe - just maybe be true?

Once upon a time I worked in Telesales - cold calling. Upon listening to my sales technique, a coach told me “if you stand there throwing shit at a wall all day, eventually it’s going to stick.” I think perhaps the same applies to the way in which Rigo chucks around allegations.

It is true Jonathan that sometimes an untruth can become “fact” if it isn’t challenged.
We see it many times,

[BobG]

So should Fal be PDX. His posts on this thread are utterly shameful. It's either that or they illustrate, beyond any shadow of doubt, just how incapable he is of making any sensible judgement at all. Either way, his card is now marked.

BobG

[BobG]

Does it occur to you that some of the claims made could maybe - just maybe be true?

Once upon a time I worked in Telesales - cold calling. Upon listening to my sales technique, a coach told me “if you stand there throwing shit at a wall all day, eventually it’s going to stick.” I think perhaps the same applies to the way in which Rigo chucks around allegations.

It is true Jonathan that sometimes an untruth can become “fact” if it isn’t challenged.
We see it many times,

Hear hear Hound! As the greatest propagandist of all time once remarked; "You can persuade some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time". The distinction between the two, and its cause, is highly instructive in this current discussion!

Cheers chaps!

BobG

[Fal]

So should Fal be PDX. His posts on this thread are utterly shameful. It's either that or they illustrate, beyond any shadow of doubt, just how incapable he is of making any sensible judgement at all. Either way, his card is now marked.

BobG

Cards have been marked? How old are you like 12?

Seriously can people not have a discussion on a forum about a subject whether they agree or not?

I have my opinion, you have yours. You clearly don’t understand people are allowed differing opinions to yours whether right or wrong.

Whether the post was a attack on RW or not, all I pointed out that there just maybe some truth to the matter. However, just because it was Rigo who posted it, it immediately got shot down because of your own feelings towards him.

[ravenrover]

Does it occur to you that some of the claims made could maybe - just maybe be true?

Once upon a time I worked in Telesales - cold calling. Upon listening to my sales technique, a coach told me “if you stand there throwing shit at a wall all day, eventually it’s going to stick.” I think perhaps the same applies to the way in which Rigo chucks around allegations.

It is true Jonathan that sometimes an untruth can become “fact” if it isn’t challenged.
We see it many times,

Hear hear Hound! As the greatest propagandist of all time once remarked; "You can persuade some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time". The distinction between the two, and its cause, is highly instructive in this current discussion!

Cheers chaps!

BobG

Judge Douglas cannot fool the people: you may fool people for a time; you can fool a part of the people all the time; but you can’t fool all the people all the time.” Abraham Lincoln

[pib]

So should Fal be PDX. His posts on this thread are utterly shameful. It's either that or they illustrate, beyond any shadow of doubt, just how incapable he is of making any sensible judgement at all. Either way, his card is now marked.

BobG

Cards have been marked? How old are you like 12?

Seriously can people not have a discussion on a forum about a subject whether they agree or not?

I have my opinion, you have yours. You clearly don’t understand people are allowed differing opinions to yours whether right or wrong.

Whether the post was a attack on RW or not, all I pointed out that there just maybe some truth to the matter. However, just because it was Rigo who posted it, it immediately got shot down because of your own feelings towards him.

I think there may well be some nuggets of anecdotal truth in the piece, with the author being a close follower of the U18 team and moving in those circles, but I can completely understand where Bob and others are coming from, because it's something of a well-worn path with Rigo, which many of us have become quite familiar with down the years. When you're reading something and trying to evaluate whether you buy it or not, provenance is a perfectly valid factor to bear in mind.

I don't have any personal axe to grind with Rigo. I've never properly got to know him but my general thoughts are that I don't mind the guy at all. If you've been part of the Rovers fanbase for the past 20 years though, it's difficult to deny that he frequently courts controversy and rubs people up the wrong way, and the views he puts out are generally at one extreme or another. All the while professing to be neutral, above it all, and not caring what people think (you only have to disagree with his opinion, even politely, on Twitter to find out the truth on that). People remember those things and will bear them in mind when they decide whether to give the story any credence. Just as you would if you're reading a particular newspaper and think about who owns it, edits it, funds it, etc.

Coming from somebody who attempts to call out others on their impartiality and journalistic ethics, the blog post is completely one-sided and can only be viewed as an attack. The language throughout is aggressive, insulting, belittling, and all the rest. It's been quite clear recently that Rigo didn't like Wellens' management style and didn't agree with the way he handled certain situations, which is fine, but the tone with which this is written is so personal and imbalanced that it's hard to take seriously. Maybe some of it is true. I don't doubt that Richie Wellens had his shortcomings. But it's perfectly valid and reasonable to look at the source of this (and how it's written) and come to the conclusion that there's going to be a fair amount of bias, sensationalism, and subjectivity in there.

[ravenrover]

Regarding Twitter I dared to disagree with him on one point regarding VSC and got a hostile dm back from him accusing me of knowing his true identity. I have never corresponded with him previously on Twitter and had no idea of his identity, he responded almost to the point of calling me a liar and making disparaging remarks about posters on VSC, no names by the way.

[BobG]

It's a real shame for someone who had his potential....

BobG

[silent majority]

Regarding Twitter I dared to disagree with him on one point regarding VSC and got a hostile dm back from him accusing me of knowing his true identity. I have never corresponded with him previously on Twitter and had no idea of his identity, he responded almost to the point of calling me a liar and making disparaging remarks about posters on VSC, no names by the way.

He did a whole blog piece on me and why I should step down from the VSC. Of course what he based his whole argument on has proven to be false and not worthy of comment.

That and the fact I was stepping down anyway.

[vaya]

So should Fal be PDX. His posts on this thread are utterly shameful. It's either that or they illustrate, beyond any shadow of doubt, just how incapable he is of making any sensible judgement at all. Either way, his card is now marked.

BobG

Cards have been marked? How old are you like 12?

Seriously can people not have a discussion on a forum about a subject whether they agree or not?

I have my opinion, you have yours. You clearly don’t understand people are allowed differing opinions to yours whether right or wrong.

Whether the post was a attack on RW or not, all I pointed out that there just maybe some truth to the matter. However, just because it was Rigo who posted it, it immediately got shot down because of your own feelings towards him.

I think there may well be some nuggets of anecdotal truth in the piece, with the author being a close follower of the U18 team and moving in those circles, but I can completely understand where Bob and others are coming from, because it's something of a well-worn path with Rigo, which many of us have become quite familiar with down the years. When you're reading something and trying to evaluate whether you buy it or not, provenance is a perfectly valid factor to bear in mind.

I don't have any personal axe to grind with Rigo. I've never properly got to know him but my general thoughts are that I don't mind the guy at all. If you've been part of the Rovers fanbase for the past 20 years though, it's difficult to deny that he frequently courts controversy and rubs people up the wrong way, and the views he puts out are generally at one extreme or another. All the while professing to be neutral, above it all, and not caring what people think (you only have to disagree with his opinion, even politely, on Twitter to find out the truth on that). People remember those things and will bear them in mind when they decide whether to give the story any credence. Just as you would if you're reading a particular newspaper and think about who owns it, edits it, funds it, etc.

Coming from somebody who attempts to call out others on their impartiality and journalistic ethics, the blog post is completely one-sided and can only be viewed as an attack. The language throughout is aggressive, insulting, belittling, and all the rest. It's been quite clear recently that Rigo didn't like Wellens' management style and didn't agree with the way he handled certain situations, which is fine, but the tone with which this is written is so personal and imbalanced that it's hard to take seriously. Maybe some of it is true. I don't doubt that Richie Wellens had his shortcomings. But it's perfectly valid and reasonable to look at the source of this (and how it's written) and come to the conclusion that there's going to be a fair amount of bias, sensationalism, and subjectivity in there.

I'm inclined to agree with this.

Any valid points that may or may not be in there are totally lost as it's written in the same tone of vengeful triumphalism usually reserved for North Korean state media celebrating their latest missile launch.