For years, ever since 2004 when Panaorma ran a series in which it tarnished Jason, Fergie Jr. with using his fathers reputation to get transfer deals, Sir Alex Ferguson has very cleverly boycotted BBC. He used to send Quieroz or Phelan lately to BBC while the juice would go to Sky which Fergie preferred. However, with the new set of Premier League it now becomes mandatory for Fergie to give his interview as the manager of the club to all the media rights holders and that means both BBC and Sky. While, it appears great news for media transparency and equal celebration of media rights, there is a bigger murkier picture that is getting painted alongwith.Now while none of us have yet had access to the actual Premier league rules, however, considering Telegraph’s as a true account of the situation, it would mean the following basic changes:
- Players can be interviewed immediately after a match. Ironically that means, players of winning teams only. If the match ends in a draw players of both teams can be interviewed right on the pitch once the whistle blows. Now that would be a bonanza!
- Managers are required to talk to ‘media rights holders’ — Sky and the BBC MotD
- It is also mandatory for the manager or a senior member of the coaching staff to give a press conference.
While Fergie can look on to escaping the Press conference, I am not sure if the same can be done about the post match interview. At the same time let me point the other side of the coin that Red Ranter from Redrants.com has brought to our discussion table.
The problem however is it opens up players and managers to more vulnerability in saying things in the heat of the moment, and perhaps higher chances of saying stuff they would normally not say.
Indeed that is a very obvious possibility of the setup. Also with the match interviewers so bent upon making the interviewee speak their own tone and literally choking the words into their mouth, it would lead to more match controversies with players and managers often ending up saying something they would normally not say in a controlled situation. We know the mere presence of camera made Wazza say “12 men”, so what with a reporter ready to make sure you say something stupid?
It is something the rule makers need to think about and do something about. If the whole point is transparency, then I doubt the effort would end up doing a great deal.
