I'd had a few tbf - still doesn't take away from the fact that I believe his article is mis-leading. Perhaps he should question why he's had to spend all day asking questions from (most likely good-natured) concerned fans. We are trying to protect Birmingham and football from crooks like Southall, and it genuinely pains me to think back at what he did to our club, and the lack of any 'justice' he received thereafter. He should be no where near a business, let alone a championship football club.
Hi mate.
I’m the person from the Dossier team that Matt Slater mentions in his reply to you, and basically I am here to support his defence. A few points.
1. News Journalism now is required to move at an unbelievably fast rate, yet still somehow stay within the bounds of legality.
2. If you look carefully, you will see that Slater does not specifically write “Southall said…” . That’s because Slater allowed him to speak off the record, so as to give Mouthall a free rein to talk absolute bollocks. Slater warned him that if he does get appointed – and I remind you that so far that has not actually happened – he will face on the record questions. At the Dossier we are now working hard to give Slater the ammunition with which to shoot down some of the things that Southall has claimed. Any help that we can receive in this will be put to good use.
3. Southall said more than what is suggested there, and some of it could land him in a lot of trouble - if it can be disproved. That means informed sources ready to tell Slater what really happened. The best one would be Thomas Sandgaard himself, but if he is ready to do that at all, it doesn’t happen in the short time that Slater has to get the article past the in-house lawyer and on the site.
Overall we all tend to fall into the trap of being incredibly focused on our club, and very frustrated when the media do not give it the attention we think it deserves. In this case Matt Slater is quite right to point out to you that his article had to cover far more than Southall, and certainly in the context of Birmingham and not Charlton. More widely if you look at the incredibly wide range of football topics the Athletic covers, I think it’s a miracle that they manage to cover issues like ours at all. He is right to claim that they have covered the issues at smaller clubs like ours more consistently than any other outlet I can think of. Rochdale would agree. My main criticism would be that sometimes a junior reporter takes over a given story and appears not to have checked back on what has already been covered and established by more senior people like Matt; but again I put that down to the sheer speed at which they have to operate nowadays.
It’s worth remembering that the overall state of affairs in current journalism has been created by us. It is we who gleefully seized upon the opportunity provided by Google in particular to read for free stuff we used to have to pay for. That put incredible pressure on journalists who used to have the time to dig a bit. Now they don’t. Of course the Athletic is trying to make people pay for content, but as I said their model requires them to go very wide in their coverage . You cannot go wide and deep, unless you have unlimited money to pay the wage bills. Actually the Dossier website is all about doing the background legwork that journos have to do themselves if they want to get into a difficult and legally hazardous story. Matt Slater is quite right, probably more than anyone else, the insights he was prepared to give me about how they actually have to work nowadays was the inspiration for putting all our stuff on a website. Overall he has been the journalist most receptive to our story (along with Kieran Maguire, who would not describe himself as a journalist). He is a Southend fan, and far from being a “Client journalist” for Premier League clubs – although sadly the Athletic’s business model of assigning journals to individual bigger clubs can produce such journalism. And he is prepared to go on the comments section, using his identity and entering into dialogue with the readers who – in most cases - help to pay his salary.
Overall therefore the criticisms of his article are unfair, and I'm confident he will not let Southall get away with his claims - if Southall actually becomes Birmingham CEO. If he doesn't then for the moment, Southall isn't News any more. That's just the way it works.
tbf what else could Matt Slater do? Seems like a pretty wise response. Everyone wants their justice now at a click of a button and a send of a tweet, but newspapers and publications can't suddenly start publishing things about people without giving them the right to respond and put their side of the story. If slater had gone in studs up first time, when it all eventually goes tits up he won't be able to grab an interview with southall afterwards, take him to task and then publish the car crash interview - exposing southall for what he really is.
I don't actually disagree with the points Slater is making, I can see how he would be in an awkward position - I just think the overall tone and attitude of the reply is way off.
The attitude of some of the Brum fans almost makes me think let Southall at them and they can reap what they sow. That's overriden though by my dream to see Southall and his plasticine dream of a missus completely potless or banged up.
If Brum fans really don't mind him having some control at their club then so be it. Perhaps when the shit inevitably hits the fan then they might be the sort of fanbase that will dish out the kind of justice that Southall really deserves.
I don't actually disagree with the points Slater is making, I can see how he would be in an awkward position - I just think the overall tone and attitude of the reply is way off.
I've forgiven Mr Slater, it sounds like he'd had it all day. The tone I used was a bit much, reading it back sober at 5am this morning, so I understand his response. I have since apologised.
However I can't help the fact that any mention of Matt S makes my blood boil. I HATE the bloke, and its fair to say reading those two paragraphs in the article after a few pints last night made me react perhaps a bit too brashly.
I’ve been a subscriber of The Athletic for some time.
There’s no doubt they cover a lot of detail in their stories, but I’ve often sensed that tone of “we’re right, you’re wrong, thank you very much” from them.
He has every right to defend his position on an article, but the tone of that message to someone who I assume is a subscriber is poor.
I'd had a few tbf - still doesn't take away from the fact that I believe his article is mis-leading. Perhaps he should question why he's had to spend all day asking questions from (most likely good-natured) concerned fans. We are trying to protect Birmingham and football from crooks like Southall, and it genuinely pains me to think back at what he did to our club, and the lack of any 'justice' he received thereafter. He should be no where near a business, let alone a championship football club.
Hi mate.
I’m the person from the Dossier team that Matt Slater mentions in his reply to you, and basically I am here to support his defence. A few points.
1. News Journalism now is required to move at an unbelievably fast rate, yet still somehow stay within the bounds of legality.
2. If you look carefully, you will see that Slater does not specifically write “Southall said…” . That’s because Slater allowed him to speak off the record, so as to give Mouthall a free rein to talk absolute bollocks. Slater warned him that if he does get appointed – and I remind you that so far that has not actually happened – he will face on the record questions. At the Dossier we are now working hard to give Slater the ammunition with which to shoot down some of the things that Southall has claimed. Any help that we can receive in this will be put to good use.
3. Southall said more than what is suggested there, and some of it could land him in a lot of trouble - if it can be disproved. That means informed sources ready to tell Slater what really happened. The best one would be Thomas Sandgaard himself, but if he is ready to do that at all, it doesn’t happen in the short time that Slater has to get the article past the in-house lawyer and on the site.
Overall we all tend to fall into the trap of being incredibly focused on our club, and very frustrated when the media do not give it the attention we think it deserves. In this case Matt Slater is quite right to point out to you that his article had to cover far more than Southall, and certainly in the context of Birmingham and not Charlton. More widely if you look at the incredibly wide range of football topics the Athletic covers, I think it’s a miracle that they manage to cover issues like ours at all. He is right to claim that they have covered the issues at smaller clubs like ours more consistently than any other outlet I can think of. Rochdale would agree. My main criticism would be that sometimes a junior reporter takes over a given story and appears not to have checked back on what has already been covered and established by more senior people like Matt; but again I put that down to the sheer speed at which they have to operate nowadays.
It’s worth remembering that the overall state of affairs in current journalism has been created by us. It is we who gleefully seized upon the opportunity provided by Google in particular to read for free stuff we used to have to pay for. That put incredible pressure on journalists who used to have the time to dig a bit. Now they don’t. Of course the Athletic is trying to make people pay for content, but as I said their model requires them to go very wide in their coverage . You cannot go wide and deep, unless you have unlimited money to pay the wage bills. Actually the Dossier website is all about doing the background legwork that journos have to do themselves if they want to get into a difficult and legally hazardous story. Matt Slater is quite right, probably more than anyone else, the insights he was prepared to give me about how they actually have to work nowadays was the inspiration for putting all our stuff on a website. Overall he has been the journalist most receptive to our story (along with Kieran Maguire, who would not describe himself as a journalist). He is a Southend fan, and far from being a “Client journalist” for Premier League clubs – although sadly the Athletic’s business model of assigning journals to individual bigger clubs can produce such journalism. And he is prepared to go on the comments section, using his identity and entering into dialogue with the readers who – in most cases - help to pay his salary.
Overall therefore the criticisms of his article are unfair, and I'm confident he will not let Southall get away with his claims - if Southall actually becomes Birmingham CEO. If he doesn't then for the moment, Southall isn't News any more. That's just the way it works.
Understood Prague, thanks for this. It's fair to say that I over-reacted having read those two paragraphs (out of context) after a Thursday post-work pub trip. I'm sure you can understand that I had good intentions, in the sense that I thought someone had fallen for his lies and was ignoring his past crimes (at CAFC - I believe they were). I have since apologised to Mr Slater and have wished him the best in any future article that might be required in taking MS down.
I'd had a few tbf - still doesn't take away from the fact that I believe his article is mis-leading. Perhaps he should question why he's had to spend all day asking questions from (most likely good-natured) concerned fans. We are trying to protect Birmingham and football from crooks like Southall, and it genuinely pains me to think back at what he did to our club, and the lack of any 'justice' he received thereafter. He should be no where near a business, let alone a championship football club.
Hi mate.
I’m the person from the Dossier team that Matt Slater mentions in his reply to you, and basically I am here to support his defence. A few points.
1. News Journalism now is required to move at an unbelievably fast rate, yet still somehow stay within the bounds of legality.
2. If you look carefully, you will see that Slater does not specifically write “Southall said…” . That’s because Slater allowed him to speak off the record, so as to give Mouthall a free rein to talk absolute bollocks. Slater warned him that if he does get appointed – and I remind you that so far that has not actually happened – he will face on the record questions. At the Dossier we are now working hard to give Slater the ammunition with which to shoot down some of the things that Southall has claimed. Any help that we can receive in this will be put to good use.
3. Southall said more than what is suggested there, and some of it could land him in a lot of trouble - if it can be disproved. That means informed sources ready to tell Slater what really happened. The best one would be Thomas Sandgaard himself, but if he is ready to do that at all, it doesn’t happen in the short time that Slater has to get the article past the in-house lawyer and on the site.
Overall we all tend to fall into the trap of being incredibly focused on our club, and very frustrated when the media do not give it the attention we think it deserves. In this case Matt Slater is quite right to point out to you that his article had to cover far more than Southall, and certainly in the context of Birmingham and not Charlton. More widely if you look at the incredibly wide range of football topics the Athletic covers, I think it’s a miracle that they manage to cover issues like ours at all. He is right to claim that they have covered the issues at smaller clubs like ours more consistently than any other outlet I can think of. Rochdale would agree. My main criticism would be that sometimes a junior reporter takes over a given story and appears not to have checked back on what has already been covered and established by more senior people like Matt; but again I put that down to the sheer speed at which they have to operate nowadays.
It’s worth remembering that the overall state of affairs in current journalism has been created by us. It is we who gleefully seized upon the opportunity provided by Google in particular to read for free stuff we used to have to pay for. That put incredible pressure on journalists who used to have the time to dig a bit. Now they don’t. Of course the Athletic is trying to make people pay for content, but as I said their model requires them to go very wide in their coverage . You cannot go wide and deep, unless you have unlimited money to pay the wage bills. Actually the Dossier website is all about doing the background legwork that journos have to do themselves if they want to get into a difficult and legally hazardous story. Matt Slater is quite right, probably more than anyone else, the insights he was prepared to give me about how they actually have to work nowadays was the inspiration for putting all our stuff on a website. Overall he has been the journalist most receptive to our story (along with Kieran Maguire, who would not describe himself as a journalist). He is a Southend fan, and far from being a “Client journalist” for Premier League clubs – although sadly the Athletic’s business model of assigning journals to individual bigger clubs can produce such journalism. And he is prepared to go on the comments section, using his identity and entering into dialogue with the readers who – in most cases - help to pay his salary.
Overall therefore the criticisms of his article are unfair, and I'm confident he will not let Southall get away with his claims - if Southall actually becomes Birmingham CEO. If he doesn't then for the moment, Southall isn't News any more. That's just the way it works.
Understood Prague, thanks for this. It's fair to say that I over-reacted having read those two paragraphs (out of context) after a Thursday post-work pub trip. I'm sure you can understand that I had good intentions, in the sense that I thought someone had fallen for his lies and was ignoring his past crimes (at CAFC - I believe they were). I have since apologised to Mr Slater and have wished him the best in any future article that might be required in taking MS down.
Sure, I have not yet met Matt Slater face to face but I believe he will have greatly appreciated your apology and also probably now feels he over-reacted. As far as I can tell he is somebody who believes in things- unlike some journos -, but his professional work sometimes requires him to compromise. So his frustration might spill over. In that sense I really empathise with him because that is my weakness too, x100.
Personally I think they should not reply so much to readers but thats the Athletic’s policy it seems. American thing. I always thought TS engaging with random fans on social was ill advised too.
He spent 50 minutes talking to Southall about Charlton and Rochdale. 50 minutes of primary Southall con the journalist time, by flooding with disinformation that takes ages to unravel I hope he researched the answers and ended up with the absolute pube-transplanted truth. Right now it doesn’t look like it. Perhaps he could start with the falsification of information at Companies House, and then ask himself how much of the 50 minutes would also be falsification.
Media lawyers are very cautious - libel law does not favour journalists - and it looks like The Athletic’s are no exception. Hopefully they’ll turn on Southall when the time is right.
Media lawyers are very cautious - libel law does not favour journalists - and it looks like The Athletic’s are no exception. Hopefully they’ll turn on Southall when the time is right.
Indeed, and there is always an element of self-censorship because libel actions are expensive to defend even when you are in the right. However I would say there are plenty of easily verifiable facts about Southall that paint a damning picture - his history at Companies House, for example, or from the court cases. His departure from The Valley under police observation - that aren’t up for debate.
I would also say that there are some people whose views you don’t report out of professionalism because you know they are likely to be lying.
It is a sad fact that people like him get away with what they pull because fans are desperate to believe the sh*t he spouts. Clubs that have previous experience can only give out warnings but there is no point on trying to argue the point beyond that. Time will tell what happens at Brum, we should just keep thanking our lucky stars we survived beyond his antics.
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
Can you divulge one whopper he came out with?
Probably be easier to divulge something he said that was the truth
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
Can you divulge one whopper he came out with?
Probably be easier to divulge something he said that was the truth
During the transfer embargo / deadline day guff when Southall got the fizzy drinks and crisps did we end up signing David Davis from Birmingham on loan (waste of time) … was that during the bullshit period or a different window …. If it was he’d maybe use that to support his bullshit to Brum fans
During the transfer embargo / deadline day guff when Southall got the fizzy drinks and crisps did we end up signing David Davis from Birmingham on loan (waste of time) … was that during the bullshit period or a different window …. If it was he’d maybe use that to support his bullshit to Brum fans
yeah we signed David Davis, Aidan McGeady and the original Matt Smith on deadline day
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
Can you divulge one whopper he came out with?
Yes. He offered to upgrade the Player of the Year Dinner into a bigger, more prestigious event and pointed out that Manchester United hold their Dinner at the Northern equivalent of the Cafe Royal, where he thought ours should be. I calmed him down and said that the Fans Bar at the Valley worked well so we would stay there for now but could look at upgrading for the following year. He asked whether an extra £10,000 income would be helpful and when I gave a positive response, he said that he would organise this through a sponsorship deal. I am still waiting.
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
Can you divulge one whopper he came out with?
Yes. He offered to upgrade the Player of the Year Dinner into a bigger, more prestigious event and pointed out that Manchester United hold their Dinner at the Northern equivalent of the Cafe Royal, where he thought ours should be. I calmed him down and said that the Fans Bar at the Valley worked well so we would stay there for now but could look at upgrading for the following year. He asked whether an extra £10,000 income would be helpful and when I gave a positive response, he said that he would organise this through a sponsorship deal. I am still waiting.
He probably got that 10k in and then gave it to his mrs.
Just thought I might add that over the last year or so I have spoken to a couple of people (one a woman as a matter of fact), who said that if the situation was right and the moment presented itself, that they will happily splosh Southall in the chops. They aren’t actually going out of their way to track him down or anything like that but if they just happened to be in his vicinity then they’ll let him have it. I have no doubt ‘whatsoever’ they mean it too.
I don't actually disagree with the points Slater is making, I can see how he would be in an awkward position - I just think the overall tone and attitude of the reply is way off.
I've forgiven Mr Slater, it sounds like he'd had it all day. The tone I used was a bit much, reading it back sober at 5am this morning, so I understand his response. I have since apologised.
However I can't help the fact that any mention of Matt S makes my blood boil. I HATE the bloke, and its fair to say reading those two paragraphs in the article after a few pints last night made me react perhaps a bit too brashly.
I still think Mr Slater toned it wrong and was too kind to Southall. However, I can't think of anything more draining or infuriating than that deluded con man on the phone for 50 minutes trying to justify himself and likely using the term, 'you know' about two hundred times in that 50 minutes.
I had a one to one meeting with Southall in the Valley Boardroom during his short period in charge. It lasted for 45 minutes and he made such extraordinary statements that he is clearly on a different planet from the rest of us. Obviously, none of his promises or plans ever came true, but if like me, you prefer to believe what people tell you unless and until proved otherwise, I can only say that he came across as plausible, at least at first. After 45 minutes, I concluded that he had lost his marbles. Good luck Birmingham. You are going to need it.
Can you divulge one whopper he came out with?
Yes. He offered to upgrade the Player of the Year Dinner into a bigger, more prestigious event and pointed out that Manchester United hold their Dinner at the Northern equivalent of the Cafe Royal, where he thought ours should be. I calmed him down and said that the Fans Bar at the Valley worked well so we would stay there for now but could look at upgrading for the following year. He asked whether an extra £10,000 income would be helpful and when I gave a positive response, he said that he would organise this through a sponsorship deal. I am still waiting.
Just thought I might add that over the last year or so I have spoken to a couple of people (one a woman as a matter of fact), who said that if the situation was right and the moment presented itself, that they will happily splosh Southall in the chops. They aren’t actually going out of their way to track him down or anything like that but if they just happened to be in his vicinity then they’ll let him have it. I have no doubt ‘whatsoever’ they mean it too.
Just thought I might add that over the last year or so I have spoken to a couple of people (one a woman as a matter of fact), who said that if the situation was right and the moment presented itself, that they will happily splosh Southall in the chops. They aren’t actually going out of their way to track him down or anything like that but if they just happened to be in his vicinity then they’ll let him have it. I have no doubt ‘whatsoever’ they mean it too.
Really hope it doesn't happen.
It’s very unlikely to…..but stranger things do happen.
The proposed takeover of Birmingham City by local businessman Paul Richardson and former Barcelonastriker Maxi Lopez is being held up by the club’s failure to provide the English Football League with information about their current ownership structure, The Athletic understands.
Comments
1. News Journalism now is required to move at an unbelievably fast rate, yet still somehow stay within the bounds of legality.
Overall we all tend to fall into the trap of being incredibly focused on our club, and very frustrated when the media do not give it the attention we think it deserves. In this case Matt Slater is quite right to point out to you that his article had to cover far more than Southall, and certainly in the context of Birmingham and not Charlton. More widely if you look at the incredibly wide range of football topics the Athletic covers, I think it’s a miracle that they manage to cover issues like ours at all. He is right to claim that they have covered the issues at smaller clubs like ours more consistently than any other outlet I can think of. Rochdale would agree. My main criticism would be that sometimes a junior reporter takes over a given story and appears not to have checked back on what has already been covered and established by more senior people like Matt; but again I put that down to the sheer speed at which they have to operate nowadays.
Overall therefore the criticisms of his article are unfair, and I'm confident he will not let Southall get away with his claims - if Southall actually becomes Birmingham CEO. If he doesn't then for the moment, Southall isn't News any more. That's just the way it works.
Perhaps when the shit inevitably hits the fan then they might be the sort of fanbase that will dish out the kind of justice that Southall really deserves.
Ner.
The proposed takeover of Birmingham City by local businessman Paul Richardson and former Barcelonastriker Maxi Lopez is being held up by the club’s failure to provide the English Football League with information about their current ownership structure, The Athletic understands.