The Guardian Hit Back

The Guardian through an article by David Conn have hit back at Forest this week. With an ongoing spat between the club and the Newspaper, following Daniel Taylors supposed incorrect use of press passes, the Guardian were banned from the City Ground. Taylor followed this with a piece that largely pointed the finger of blame at Jim Price.

Well now the Guardian has now followed up by basically suggesting that Jim Price, who is rapidly becoming the infamous Jim Price, would not pass the fit an able person test to be a director of a club. This is following his suspension from law following the collapse of the Scottish law Firm Ross Harper.Now that’s as maybe, by the letter of the law then therefore he wouldn’t be allowed to be a director that much is apparent. But the thing is he is not a director but an advisor. Now this is possibly a mere technicality of his job title, but the fact remains he is not a director.

Therefore it doesn’t directly apply to him.

Now maybe the lines blur and there are a great many shades of grey here, the role he plays s very much a middle man between Fawaz and the various parties they negotiate with. He isn’t the money man, and it’s not as if he’s a Munto Finance esque character, or any other of the various nefarious characters to infest football in the past. He’s just a mid management guy.

He plays active roles in negotiations and has enough jurisdictions within the club to apparently have signed contracts on behalf of Nottingham Forest, but at the end of the day what does it matter?

Ok people will point out the Ross Harper's demise and suspension as being factors which should have us worried. The practices that allegedly occurred there aren’t really directly related to his Forest role. The main element of this report just seems to be muck raking by (much respected) reporters and a Newspaper reacting to its slight.

Which is laughable. We aren’t going to sell a lot of papers for the Guardian. We aren’t big news. The world cares about the Premier League and the Championship is pretty much a side show, so why the Guardian should be doing this? Well for one maybe they do actually have grievances and want to bring up that that all isn’t glorious at the head of Forest. Coupled with the post match press conference in which Billy Davies alluded to and was angry with the “carry on Kuwait” headlines and wouldn’t answer some questions, one asks why the club would put this out on their official YouTube channel. Well probably because it can and does now, as practice, but also in part so fans can see that post match the journo’s all wanted to ask off the pitch questions. The "Carry On Kuwait" thing of course refers back to a sub heading that came from Daniel Taylor in an Observer column where he was pretty much suggested the whole Fawaz – Billy thing was doomed, Davies was a “belligerent” presence and that we should watch this one closely”. Essentially it’s this kind of thing that is being punished by Forest and now the Guardian are playing a tit for tat game of trying to point out why they are in the right.

Again neither side is looking exceptionally good in all of this, but with Forest beating Derby on Sunday and potentially with another win tonight’s it’s just badly timed as Forest look set to be flying high again.
Maybe it has been said, but watch this one closely.