Who did Steve Borley speak to?

I am confused by several postings on here concerning the Steve Borley "interview" in today`s Echo.

Yesterday Annis said that Steve would be giving the Echo interview (but I think that was based on what the Echo themselves were claiming). This was then categorically denied by Steve Davies , who should know as a good mate of SB.

Then today SB is again reported on here as denying he has had an interview with the Echo and to be "furious" about it.Yet the article contains a number of actual quotes of what SB has said - and they are actual quotes , not lifted from this or any other messageboard.

So if SB didn`t say these things at all , will he be suing the Echo and if he did say them to someone else , who was that person and why did that person then pass on the details of a private conversation to the Echo?

Its all a bit of a mystery.

I am confused by several postings on here concerning the Steve Borley "interview" in today`s Echo.

Yesterday Annis said that Steve would be giving the Echo interview (but I think that was based on what the Echo themselves were claiming). This was then categorically denied by Steve Davies , who should know as a good mate of SB.

Then today SB is again reported on here as denying he has had an interview with the Echo and to be "furious" about it.Yet the article contains a number of actual quotes of what SB has said - and they are actual quotes , not lifted from this or any other messageboard.

So if SB didn`t say these things at all , will he be suing the Echo and if he did say them to someone else , who was that person and why did that person then pass on the details of a private conversation to the Echo?

Its all a bit of a mystery.

keith

see my reply on the steve borley thread


regards
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16343

steve

Don't think Annis did claim Borley was being interviewed - didn't Annis state what the Echo would be *printing*, which is a different kettle of fish.

The Echo have seemingly printed a number of quotes attributed to Borley. Those comments may have been made to others, Echo merely repackaging them into their article. Those comments may have been made to Echo staff, off record. We don't know.

As for suing, I'd very much doubt there would be a winnable case. The Echo are quite clever about these things - printing Borley quotes without actually stating they interviewed him. The intimation is however clear...

EDIT:

IF Tucker has fabricated the quotes, going the legal route would merely involve time and money which benefit the lawyers. A PCC complaint can take ages to deal with. The big effect would basically be to piss CCFC off, damaging any relationship with the local media. which was hardly on good standing anyway.

I am confused by several postings on here concerning the Steve Borley "interview" in today`s Echo.

Yesterday Annis said that Steve would be giving the Echo interview (but I think that was based on what the Echo themselves were claiming). This was then categorically denied by Steve Davies , who should know as a good mate of SB.

Then today SB is again reported on here as denying he has had an interview with the Echo and to be "furious" about it.Yet the article contains a number of actual quotes of what SB has said - and they are actual quotes , not lifted from this or any other messageboard.

So if SB didn`t say these things at all , will he be suing the Echo and if he did say them to someone else , who was that person and why did that person then pass on the details of a private conversation to the Echo?

Its all a bit of a mystery.

Keith I was only saying what The Echo were advertising about their Exclusive interview in tonights Echo lol.

I am confused by several postings on here concerning the Steve Borley "interview" in today`s Echo.

Yesterday Annis said that Steve would be giving the Echo interview (but I think that was based on what the Echo themselves were claiming). This was then categorically denied by Steve Davies , who should know as a good mate of SB.

Then today SB is again reported on here as denying he has had an interview with the Echo and to be "furious" about it.Yet the article contains a number of actual quotes of what SB has said - and they are actual quotes , not lifted from this or any other messageboard.

So if SB didn`t say these things at all , will he be suing the Echo and if he did say them to someone else , who was that person and why did that person then pass on the details of a private conversation to the Echo?

Its all a bit of a mystery.

Keith I was only saying what The Echo were advertising about their Exclusive interview in tonights Echo lol.

I thought so , that`s why I suggested it in my post.

Keith

I am confused by several postings on here concerning the Steve Borley "interview" in today`s Echo.

Yesterday Annis said that Steve would be giving the Echo interview (but I think that was based on what the Echo themselves were claiming). This was then categorically denied by Steve Davies , who should know as a good mate of SB.

Then today SB is again reported on here as denying he has had an interview with the Echo and to be "furious" about it.Yet the article contains a number of actual quotes of what SB has said - and they are actual quotes , not lifted from this or any other messageboard.

So if SB didn`t say these things at all , will he be suing the Echo and if he did say them to someone else , who was that person and why did that person then pass on the details of a private conversation to the Echo?

Its all a bit of a mystery.

keith

see my reply on the steve borley thread


regards
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16343

steve

Steve - I`ve now read that thanks and it explains a lot. It still doesn`t quite explain though why there are specific quotes of Steve if he "gave them nothing"and merely referred them to Gethin Jenkins. Was Steve sort of tricked into letting slip a few quotes that Tucker was then able to use?

Keith

We have to stick to the old philosophy of believe nothing in regards to CCFC unless you can actually see it with your own eyes

[since62"]["steve davies"]since62"]I am confused by several postings on here concerning the Steve Borley "interview" in today`s Echo.

Yesterday Annis said that Steve would be giving the Echo interview (but I think that was based on what the Echo themselves were claiming). This was then categorically denied by Steve Davies , who should know as a good mate of SB.

Then today SB is again reported on here as denying he has had an interview with the Echo and to be "furious" about it.Yet the article contains a number of actual quotes of what SB has said - and they are actual quotes , not lifted from this or any other messageboard.

So if SB didn`t say these things at all , will he be suing the Echo and if he did say them to someone else , who was that person and why did that person then pass on the details of a private conversation to the Echo?

Its all a bit of a mystery.[/quote]


keith

see my reply on the steve borley thread


regards
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16343

steve[


Steve - I`ve now read that thanks and it explains a lot. It still doesn`t quite explain though why there are specific quotes of Steve if he "gave them nothing"and merely referred them to Gethin Jenkins. Was Steve sort of tricked into letting slip a few quotes that Tucker was then able to use?

Keith[/quote]


like i said keith the truth and journalists are mostly strangers if steve said never say never in football anyone can construe that to suit themselves
in this case steve tucker chose to construe the bellamy deal could still be alive.
so does anyone really consider now that a phone call to a mobile phone becomes an exclusive interview?
just a case of the echo once again making their own news and in a way we should have a certain sympathy for them because since the riddler has stopped writing their columns for them they have to learn their trades all over again

Seriously why is getting worked up about this Story? If a paper quotes someone they need the media to back it up, So what if they have quotted from twitter or other sources, I'm pretty sure the Echo will have these quotes covered. So what if they have made it out to be an "exclusive", It's exactly what I would do if i was the Journo.

like i said keith the truth and journalists are mostly strangers if steve said never say never in football anyone can construe that to suit themselves
in this case steve tucker chose to construe the bellamy deal could still be alive.
so does anyone really consider now that a phone call to a mobile phone becomes an exclusive interview?
just a case of the echo once again making their own news and in a way we should have a certain sympathy for them because since the riddler has stopped writing their columns for them they have to learn their trades all over again[/quote]



I'm a bit confused now, so Steve Tucker did speak to Steve Borley, albeit on the phone yeah?