which we keep feeding!
frick them I'd rather not have our CEO on the tV every other day regurgitating the same old cr4p and answering "scandal" questions that other codes don't get flung at them. Tell them to frick off unless they want to discuss the broader context and include other codes. Fire only exists if you give it oxygen. Our media advisor at the NRL wants a kick in the backside if they are advising Gallop to keep fronting the media to answer the same old biased BS questioning.
Being open and honest is one thing, allowing media to destroy your brand and reputation by giving them the media time to do it is quite another.
But how can u not keep confronting the media. That would be weak, that would be saying something is wrong.
To his credit, and this is what some may not see, GALLOP WAS NOT seeking her approval. He did not over justify rugby league's actions or incidents. He did not take a backward step.
I can see what you are saying, its just that this fire would exist anyway. The media on some levels (sensationalism, exaggeration of cause and effect) is not reality.
Its the old forumla for sweet treats....refine until you are left with the sweet stuff. Serve that up, because the brain sucks it up so easily. And it sells.
LOL he did not destroy anything! omg. Perth Red, where are you coming from?
He was as weak as water.
1. Failed to correct the interviewer re- Costello article.
2. Failed to refer to number of AFL incidents.
3. Suggested pool of players exposed to media glare in rugby league is only 500 (Toyota Cup gets included by the media - hence closer to 800).
etc.
To your perceptive eye perhaps. But I can tell you, one thing he was not my friend, was confrontational. Where would that get him in an interview? omg. No, HAD YOU DONE the interview I dread to think what would have happened. And no offence, its just that, one: you dont want to be confrontational or too edgy, and two: to discuss what you mentioned would have bogged the interview down. And lets face it, scoring points on your suggestions would mean little to the flow of his message and little to 95% of the viewership.
It may be the article in question was a mistake, but do you think Gallop has read and remembered every single article. Fair call to you, but still harsh overall to consider it a blight that destroyed the entire interview.
What he did with AFL was drag them down (in a normal and subtle way that was not confrontational) into the pool with all the other sports. Seems that the whole idea is that League is out in the spotlight by itself, and he is making the assertion that hold on, everyone else is out there as well. This "shift" in thinking is an important one and I am glad he foreshadowed whats to come (fairer treatment of league) and foreshadowed such concepts in a public forum
AH, so while not much seemed to be going on to many of you, a lot was. He nailed his target audience quite well. Who do you think watches the 7.30 report? He has acess to media advisors and trainers. He's done enough interviews. He was talking to his target audience. I'd suggest a lot of over 30's watch the 7.30 report, and plenty of 50+ older people. You gotta talk to your audience, so no he's not going to come out aggressive and say "Hold on, lady, watch your tone, you dont know sh*t, woman!" And stuff on the other end of the scale and words to that effect.
Once again, glad no one here is doing the interviews themselves. But yes, your point is valid, but no the way you encourage to go about it was not....and FYI, he actually addressed your end concerns anyway.
If you keep getting bad publicity then the media is going to keep lapping it up. Agenda? More like our own problems putting the spotlight on us. Blame everyone else, but don't blame ourselves...
As mentioned I think he did a great job of leveling the field in regards to that. And he did it without looking like he was running an agenda, or being confrontational. Neither did he have poor arguments or unreasonable thought processes.
I can't believe the mole had the nerve to as Gallop twice about Costello's comments even though they were in regard to the AFL hence the term "girls" in the quote in reference to the St. Kilda school girl...
Oh, reporters, always pushing. Looking for the juice. That it was let slide missed 98% of the audience. People can only think about one thing at a time. The points were fleeting, the success of the entire interview did not hinge on that outcome. Gallops message was strong.
I thought Gallop was OK, but he could have done a lot better. I dont mind if Rugby League is exposed if our players have done the wrong thing, but to talk about the effect from off field problems and mention a disgraceful AFL problem that was written about by Peter Costello and generalise it as a football problem without mentioning is an AFL problem is low interviewing. Rugby League gets it all the time. When ever a problem happens in Union or AFL, it becomes a football problem. If its a Rugby League problem there is no blame shared across the codes. The question about match fixing should have been pulled up straight away and identified more forcefully at spot fixing. I know Gallop gave the analogy of no balls in cricket, but he should have said there are no problems of match fixing in rugby league. Gallop should have defended the rugby league community more forcefully. I couldnt Andrew Demetriou putting up with that line of questioning,
I dont disagree. However, given the nature of the questioning, I lift his OK to a very good.
If any of you think this makes league look bad think again.
What he has done is once again: NOT seeking her approval. He did not over justify rugby league's actions or incidents. He did not take a backward step.
In a way that would be weird to you all to even grasp, he has re-framed the perception of rugby league, planted some seeds if you will. He has both embraced and shunned the actions of the players. He has accepted it, and basically said that the NRL is continuing to try, but by the same token, young boys will be young boys.
The NFL and NBA have largely accepted the flamboyance and criminality of their players, while not condoning it, because lets face it, heroes can have shades of villian in them. Not everyone is a shining white knight.
As for the betting scandal, same thing. I grade the interview very good. It may not give the closure and outcome that some of you so yearn for, but how can any interview on these matters, as they are on-going. Your NRL CEO did well. The journalist even complimented him. Open your eyes people.
