Donald and podcasts

[MackeminGlasgow]

You really weren't, sorry. That wasn't anywhere near 'tough' - not one of them.

It's not fair of me or anyone to have a go at you, given that you're doing this for free, and the content goes out for free too. And I feel bad about it - you come across as a nice lad. But the fact that you are a nice lad gets in the way of your interviewing technique. You clearly don't want to offend or upset anyone, and you're far too agreeable. The number of times you said "I couldn't agree more" during the CM interview was outrageous, and he rolled you over on every point he wanted to.

He's media trained, and you're not, and it really showed.

It's all about the prep. You need to have your questions ready, written down, and you need to make notes - fuck loads of them - on each one, ready to follow up. Dates, names, fees, quotes in bold text. Be ready. The follow question is often more important than the question. Your questions are too long - you ramble, when you need to get to the point. Let him do all the talking, not you. Leave the space there for him to fill.

I think if you listened back to the CM interview with someone else from RR, and made notes on what went wrong it would help. CM was making some wild claims that you weren't picking up on - no way should he have been able to say some of the stuff and get away with it.

Had that been a good interview, the others wouldn't have looked as bad, but collectively it gives off the opinion that it's a soft ride, the easy option. And the fact that Donald is now saying he wants to do RR and not others, shows he thinks that too.

I hope you read this as constructive criticism and not me having a go, or being a dick, as that's not my intention at all.

For the record, I also had the opposite opinion from some that I was far too tough on the first pod. Difficult to take all the feedback and implement it when it's all so opposite and different, but I appreciate your reasoned reply, it's taken in the way you intended, I promise. Thanks.

 

[Mackemansj1]

Sunderland, our owners and Podcasts - the ramblings of a Podcast editor/mad-man

Roker Rapport Podcast editor Sean Brown attempts to clear up a number of things around the subject of Sunderland’s ownership and subsequent podcast appearances - a subject which has been roundly discussed by the fanbase in recent days.

rokerreport.sbnation.com

The lad who edits the pod for RR has wrote this to try and give people some sort of idea of how this whole RR/owner relationship began and what the intentions of it were. Might be of interest to folk on this thread.

Good read and as many feared the owners are in way above their heads. Just confirms people’s fears.

 

[RTG]

Sean Brown Roker Rapport Podcast editor Sean Brown attempts to clear up a number of things around the subject of Sunderland’s ownership and subsequent podcast appearances - a subject which has been roundly discussed by the fanbase in recent days. Prior to the arrival of Stewart Donald, Sunderland was in freefall under an absent owner who had...

More at Roker Report...

 

[Super Mario]

It’s almost like the opinions vary across multiple people and over time can change, isn’t it?

RR negotiated any potential deals with the owner? Regarding a podcast? Do you think we just published those tweets without speaking them? We drafted the tweets, showed them to Gav and got his okay before putting anything out.

Our output has been negative because things are negative at the moment. He didn’t have a clue Chris was involved with us. Chris stated I believe that the club were saying their spending would be restricted due to league rules, something along those lines, which was not the case. You’d have to challenge Chris on that though as I can’t speak for him.

You’re basically advocating preferred media partners for people who want to have their voice heard without scrutiny. I believe RR don’t want to do that either and neither would we.

You’ve analysed our views and presented a view on OUR view on the club. What is your opinion on the way the club is being ran and how we’re doing on the pitch? If you’re expecting people to be anything other than negative at the moment then you’re incredibly naive.

Myself and Stephen have never got personal with Donald. He was happy to chat with me at length last week and complimented our reasoned approach. He was happy to have questions put to him by listeners and then his answers read out on the show.

I agree things are crap, that however doesn't mean you have to infer that Stewart Donald is a crook.
We are after all in league because of the actions of Ellis short not anyone else, and I still don't think you've really answered my question about what you as a group see as the priority? Do you want a long term vision or do you just want to get out of this league at any cost and worry about the other stuff after that.

All I've actually done is point out that as a group you lurch from just wanting to win games to wanting to know the exact financial details of the club to then wanting to know the exact scouting and analytics set up the club has, at the minute things appear a bit muddy on your part and on Stewart Donald's to be fair, it's not an issue with your questioning of the owner more of what appears to be a default position of negativity without really being clear as to why, if it's because we're losing games then that's fair but it sounds more like a bit of a conspiracy to do with our owners talking lies, which again of you have reason to think that is also fair.

 

[GarethQ]

I agree things are crap, that however doesn't mean you have to infer that Stewart Donald is a crook.
We are after all in league because of the actions of Ellis short not anyone else, and I still don't think you've really answered my question about what you as a group see as the priority? Do you want a long term vision or do you just want to get out of this league at any cost and worry about the other stuff after that.

All I've actually done is point out that as a group you lurch from just wanting to win games to wanting to know the exact financial details of the club to then wanting to know the exact scouting and analytics set up the club has, at the minute things appear a bit muddy on your part and on Stewart Donald's to be fair, it's not an issue with your questioning of the owner more of what appears to be a default position of negativity without really being clear as to why, if it's because we're losing games then that's fair but it sounds more like a bit of a conspiracy to do with our owners talking lies, which again of you have reason to think that is also fair.

I haven’t inferred Donald is a crook.

We don’t lurch from one thing to another. There are multiple people involved and football is not linear. I can’t answer ‘as a group’ because it’s not a hive mind committee where we come to agree on an end goal. It’s some people talking about football. I’d argue that we’ve been pretty balanced generally but if you don’t agree then that’s your opinion.

If we were top of the league there wouldn’t be criticism. We are not, so there is. And the expectations were set high by the owners. That is on them. It’s perfectly clear as to why criticism is levelled at the ownership. Just read the vast majority of what Sunderland fans are saying across multiple platforms.

No conspiracy theories have been presented.

What I do find interesting about these sorts of conversations. The level of scrutiny you’re putting on WMS regarding your view of our supposed adopted position on the club currently, is that greater than the scrutiny you’re putting the club under?

Donald critics always have to justify their position yet anything Donald says has to be taken at face value.

 

[Father Jack Hackett]

I agree things are crap, that however doesn't mean you have to infer that Stewart Donald is a crook.
We are after all in league because of the actions of Ellis short not anyone else, and I still don't think you've really answered my question about what you as a group see as the priority? Do you want a long term vision or do you just want to get out of this league at any cost and worry about the other stuff after that.

All I've actually done is point out that as a group you lurch from just wanting to win games to wanting to know the exact financial details of the club to then wanting to know the exact scouting and analytics set up the club has, at the minute things appear a bit muddy on your part and on Stewart Donald's to be fair, it's not an issue with your questioning of the owner more of what appears to be a default position of negativity without really being clear as to why, if it's because we're losing games then that's fair but it sounds more like a bit of a conspiracy to do with our owners talking lies, which again of you have reason to think that is also fair.

With regard to the last paragraph, Charlie Methven said Stewart Donald had withdrawn from public duties due to death threats. Stewart Donald, a matter of days later was broadcast saying it was a family bereavement. Now, as far as I can see, someone is telling mistruths, do you agree?

 

[Alfa]

It's a fascinating debate.

I think the podcasts were started with genuine sincerity on both sides but the owners were then in a position where they were surrounded by nothing but goodwill.

Things were always going to be far more difficult in more turbulent times.

The straw that broke the camels back was not only the downturn in form of the team but also the attempts by Methven in particular of pulling the wool over peoples eyes with contradicting versions of certain information.

I feel for Methven in particular he attempted to talk from a position of knowledge and authority on a subject which was always only one of a number of projects that held his interest whereas he was addressing (and on occasion patronising) people for whom the club is the major interest and one which has been a huge part of their life for years.

I think the owners would have retained people's respect if they had been open and honest, even if the message was a painful one, rather than either providing contradictory messages or just going into hiding when things took a turn for the worse.

 

[Super Mario]

I haven’t inferred Donald is a crook.

We don’t lurch from one thing to another. There are multiple people involved and football is not linear. I can’t answer ‘as a group’ because it’s not a hive mind committee where we come to agree on an end goal. It’s some people talking about football. I’d argue that we’ve been pretty balanced generally but if you don’t agree then that’s your opinion.

If we were top of the league there wouldn’t be criticism. We are not, so there is. And the expectations were set high by the owners. That is on them. It’s perfectly clear as to why criticism is levelled at the ownership. Just read the vast majority of what Sunderland fans are saying across multiple platforms.

No conspiracy theories have been presented.

What I do find interesting about these sorts of conversations. The level of scrutiny you’re putting on WMS regarding your view of our supposed adopted position on the club currently, is that greater than the scrutiny you’re putting the club under?

Donald critics always have to justify their position yet anything Donald says has to be taken at face value.

I don't think that's really true is it, you're clearly unhappy with my opinion which is fine but it should give you a little bit of perspective with the way you and the people you do the podcast with try to approach Donald for podcasts, I mean it's possible that Donald is trying to manipulate you and the media but it's also possible that him sacking you off is also down to you and others who go onto the podcast, maybe instead of viewing what I'm saying as an attack take it as constructive criticism and learn from it, you obviously don't have to do that you could just assume I'm wrong and you're right and you won't have the change or do anything any different but I think you'd agree it's unlikely that everything you or anyone does and says is perfect and we can all learn and change from feedback we get.

 

[Super Mario]

And in certainly not suggesting we stop criticism of Stewart Donald far from it, but owning a football club is very very difficult.

Just to clarify at this stage then, no one at wise men say believes that Stewart Donald is taking money out of the club or anything dodgy??

 

[pwsafc]

The U23s got to a European final a couple of years before he came in. That's a quick downward spiral

Yes a couple of years before he came in, the downward spiral began before they came in. Yes they got to a final in a cup competition, they weren’t that good in the league. The obsession on here with finances and reserve teams is stupid really , nobody gave a shit about finances when we were massively over spending in the premier league

 

[Deleted member 26022]

Sunderland, our owners and Podcasts - the ramblings of a Podcast editor/mad-man

Roker Rapport Podcast editor Sean Brown attempts to clear up a number of things around the subject of Sunderland’s ownership and subsequent podcast appearances - a subject which has been roundly discussed by the fanbase in recent days.

rokerreport.sbnation.com

The lad who edits the pod for RR has wrote this to try and give people some sort of idea of how this whole RR/owner relationship began and what the intentions of it were. Might be of interest to folk on this thread.

Great Read well done.

 

[Father Jack Hackett]

Yes a couple of years before he came in, the downward spiral began before they came in. Yes they got to a final in a cup competition, they weren’t that good in the league. The obsession on here with finances and reserve teams is stupid really , nobody gave a shit about finances when we were massively over spending in the premier league

and there you have it. We are 13th in the third division.
The 2 years prior to Donald and co coming in the u18s finished mid-table/top half.
They are presently bottom without a point.

 

[pwsafc]

and there you have it. We are 13th in the third division.
The 2 years prior to Donald and co coming in the u18s finished mid-table/top half.
They are presently bottom without a point.

And, it’s pretty much the same players, last time I checked the owner didn’t manage the under 18,s

 

[Father Jack Hackett]

And, it’s pretty much the same players, last time I checked the owner didn’t manage the under 18,s

Of course it isn't, those players are either u23 level or gone. Must be pure coincidence that it's gone to utter shit and they have 1 point between them this season since Donald and his merry band of non-leaguers came in then eh?

 

[GarethQ]

And in certainly not suggesting we stop criticism of Stewart Donald far from it, but owning a football club is very very difficult.

Just to clarify at this stage then, no one at wise men say believes that Stewart Donald is taking money out of the club or anything dodgy??

Why do we/I need to clarify this? You’ve insinuated our position on this is clear already? Personally I think the situation in how he acquired the club, amongst other things, lack clarity.

 

[pwsafc]

Of course it isn't, those players are either u23 level or gone. Must be pure coincidence that it's gone to utter shit and they have 1 point between them this season since Donald and his merry band of non-leaguers came in then eh?

Right I forgot that every thing is Donald’s fault at the min, there’s always someone to blame. There were seasons while we were on the premier league that the under 18,s and 23,s were at the bottom of there leagues but nobody cared then because we were in the premier league. Now everyone is bothered by there results and also financial experts

 

[Mackemansj1]

Why do we/I need to clarify this? You’ve insinuated our position on this is clear already? Personally I think the situation in how he acquired the club, amongst other things, lack clarity.

I brought that up when the first podcasts dropped, it wasn’t clear at all how the club was bought, infact I’m still not 100% sure on it.

 

[GarethQ]

I don't think that's really true is it, you're clearly unhappy with my opinion which is fine but it should give you a little bit of perspective with the way you and the people you do the podcast with try to approach Donald for podcasts, I mean it's possible that Donald is trying to manipulate you and the media but it's also possible that him sacking you off is also down to you and others who go onto the podcast, maybe instead of viewing what I'm saying as an attack take it as constructive criticism and learn from it, you obviously don't have to do that you could just assume I'm wrong and you're right and you won't have the change or do anything any different but I think you'd agree it's unlikely that everything you or anyone does and says is perfect and we can all learn and change from feedback we get.

How do you know how we approached him? You’ve got no idea. And I can state in absolute fact that SD told me he didn’t want to do any more speaking through fan outlets apart from RAWA, and rejected the opportunity to come on the show before he was aware that Chris was even involved with WMS in any capacity whatsoever. I have this in email and then in text.

 

[Father Jack Hackett]

Right I forgot that every thing is Donald’s fault at the min, there’s always someone to blame. There were seasons while we were on the premier league that the under 18,s and 23,s were at the bottom of there leagues but nobody cared then because we were in the premier league. Now everyone is bothered by there results and also financial experts

He appointed the people to run the fucker on a part-time basis man. Said people with credentials from Whitehawk and Eastleigh.
I'll tell you why I'm bothered mate, because we're League One, skint and our Cat 1 academy should be what we are relying on, not being essentially neglected.
But aye, you're right, the man at the top of a business whose sole product is football has no culpability when said product goes to shit throughout every level of the business.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

I brought that up when the first podcasts dropped, it wasn’t clear at all how the club was bought, infact I’m still not 100% sure on it.

In the very first podcast they said the following word for word:

Ellis short is enabling us to pay for the club over a period of time. If we had to pay him the full 40 million up front and then have to cover everything in the mean time then not any people would be able to do that. When somebody is owed that sort of money then they need to take some sort of security to cover the eventuality we turn around one day and say we are not going to pay you, and the thing that is most easy to put that security against is the parachute payments. So it's security for Ellis to make sure he does get paid out his 40 million but it's not like he's going to b here and the day the paracbute payment arrives with a big sack over his shoulder. That's not the way it's going to be.


They specifically state the parachute payments were security only, in case they themselves or unable to repay the agreed purchase price of the club. They don't say the parachute payments will be used to pay the purchase price of the club.

They've since gone on to contradict themselves everytime they've spoke about it, becoming so frustrated with them raising more questions - rather than answer them - each time, they ended up insulting us by calling 'so called fans' a cabal, and then suggested all Northerners know nothing about business.