FAO Jayson Blair (and anyone else interested, of course...)

Re: the thread below. No, Balls isn't everyone's cup of tea - and he does tend to write pieces criticising things most of the time. But in case you hadn't noticed, things have been pretty crap for quite some time now - so do you REALLY think it isn't in his remit to say so?

So what if he 'never liked Worthington'? Many of us had trouble being convinced given his poorish record with Blackpool, continually awful away record with us (never mind his final 2 seasons: it was a pattern throughout most of his time in charge), and the overriding sense that his appointment represented yet another deeply conservative easy option on the part of the board. Sure, over his first three years, he proved people wrong, and good for him in doing so - but that didn't render some of our concerns expressed during that time obsolete, and it CERTAINLY didn't make him off-limits when things began to go wrong either.

You've also mentioned Balls criticising our displays against Ipswich and Gillingham in the title-winning year: sorry, but they WERE poor performances - weren't you there? Balls hardly suggested the wheels were about to come off: he was well within his rights to criticise the performances though. A lot better was needed to get us over the line - and was forthcoming, to the delight of all of us.

I've also glanced at a few of your older posts. One minute you're arguing, early in '06, that we should cash in on Ashton, and were pretty close to being in contention anyway (REALLY? Were you at the Preston or Watford games around that time?). The next you're slagging off the fans for protesting (after all, how dare they demand that their club do something instead of maintain its collective and - as we can all see now - disastrous paralysis? HOW DARE THEY?). Oh, and that's only just after you tried getting one up on the Worthy Outers by acting as though our form in Dec '05 made them look stupid (still think that, do you?)

If you have a record like this, I'm not sure if I need to go any further. And above all, what I can't understand is this: of course the club deserved much praise for its achievements earlier in the decade. But things have gone horribly and dramatically wrong over the past couple of years, on AND off the field: our fall from grace has been stark indeed. What on earth is the problem with those who care passionately about the club saying so, whether as fans, citizen journalists or whatever? Or does the privileged access Mr Waghorn enjoys mean only he has the right to comment on things too?

You, and Rick, should actually be glad: thanks to the internet, those writers with a talent for the job will go forth and prosper. Even better: writing about the club isn't solely the domain of those whose cherished connections inevitably compromise their objectivity, and what we as fans are told as a result. So what's the problem? Scared others might end up taking his (or your, for all I know) place, or something?

Posted By: thebigfeller, Jan 25, 11:41:25