In Defence Of Garry Cook
Wswilly3 sent us the following...
As we are all aware, reporters employed by the British press were once universally admired for their objectivity and restraint. However, over the last ten years things have changed dramatically and British reporters have become synonymous with a total lack of any form of moral behaviour.
It started with a few working for what was aptly called the 'gutter press' but regrettably their success in increasing circulation encouraged our newspaper owners to employ and reward reporters who dealt in sensationalism and in lurid headlines rather than in accuracy or the truth. Now the total name of the game is to weave a couple of facts into a salacious story and to ignore facts that get in the way of eye catching headlines. Regrettably the British public continues to be seduced by such an approach and so we have a vicious circle.
When you additionally add to this the fact that many of our sports reporters are avid football supporters themselves and often for teams like Manchester United and Chelsea you have an even more explosive situation when a 'rich new kid on the block' appears to threaten these teams monopoly of the top 4.
All of the above is a prelude to say that we cannot take at face value what we read and we must not be seduced by newspaper articles that paint lurid tales about their latest 'bete noir'. A perfect example of this is the way that all the sports reporters of the British press have chosen to distort the truth and conveniently forget to communicate the whole story relating to Gary Cook.
It really concerns me when I even read in Vital Manchester City vitriol against these two from our own supporters. I can only believe it is fuelled by the half truths and constant derogatory comments made by out 'Fourth Estate'. Please guys examine the actual facts before being seduced by Goebells like propaganda aimed at causing dissent and anger in our own ranks, which is one of the whole aims of their attack.
So let us examine the facts.
There are four charges against Gary Cook that I know off and they all add up to tidily squat unless you embellish them out of all proportion. Firstly he made a comment about our former chairman being someone good to play golf with. What he was saying was the guy was not a barbaric ogre to deal with, as the press were portraying him to be at the time. Compare that comment to some of the ones made by Ferguson and Wenger and one can see how minor and trivial it was, unless one wants to blow it up as a major issue to cause acrimony. Cook then made a genuine mistake when inducting Uwe Rosler into the Hall of Fame, but hey, anybody can get their words mixed up - remember a certain President Bush...it is called being human and certainly isn't a hanging offence, unless you want to build it up as a major story. He made a comment about Milan 'bottling it' and again so what. Why is this such a crime and again what has our wonderful Sir Alex had to say about Real Madrid and the BBC without the kind of press negativity that Cook is subjected to.
His next crime was in being the fall guy for the sacking of Mark Hughes, which the press pilloried him about. This was the very press that until the dismissal were questioning whether Mark Hughes was the right man for the job and being highly critical of his signings, his tactics and the run of only winning two out of the last eleven matches. Hypocritical hacks - perish the thought!
One would almost think that many of them were ardent Manchester United or Arsenal supporters and those they were trying to de-stabilise Manchester City and their wonderful owners. I mean if you have the type of owners that Manchester United are lumbered with and their level of debt one can better appreciate their desperation. So what were the facts.
* The owners of Manchester City football club, after having pumped in well over £250 million decided that the level of results were disappointing and began to lose faith with the current manager. This is their perfect right, as it would be for any owner of any business or sporting concern. Did the press make this point...no!!
* As experienced business people the people who run City decided that it would be amateurish to sack a person in a key role without having a contingency plan in place. This is a course of action taken by any judicious business trying to protect its assets including National newspapers when they sack their editors. Can you imagine the outcry of our 'hypocritical hacks' if City had not done this? They would have been condemned for not being able to organise a festivity in a brewery.
* Two meetings with Mancini took place. One to assess if there was a mutual match (after the Hull drawn match) and one to discuss actual terms, once the decisions had been taken to dismiss Hughes and to recruit Mancini (after the Tottenham defeat). Again this is normal business practice but the press chose not to make this point but to try and confuse the general public by inferring that Mancini had been offered the job at the first meeting, which clearly was not the case.
In fairness it probably was not smart to allow Mark Hughes to stay in position for the Sunderland match once the decision to dismiss him and to recruit Mancini had been made. However the reaction of the British press was hysterical, over exaggerated and economic with the truth, all to achieve as sensational a story as was possible; irrespective of all the facts. Interestingly they have since gone quieter on the subject as to date Mancini has shown his class, which I suppose was unfortunate for them.
The final crime of Gary Cook is to tell the New York based City supporters club that we were going to the greatest football club in the world and beat United in what was supposed to be a closed meeting. I have read the blog of the leader of that supporters club (see Manchester Evening News article and blog) and he makes the point that Cook was an excellent ambassador at the meeting and that the information hashed out by our press was distorted. However when he tried to put the facts to them, they to a man completely ignores his quotes, avoided putting his side of the story and only wanted to produce an edited version that sensationalised the whole event.
All of the above adds up to minor rubbish and is nothing in the same league of the Rags chairman having a fetish with women in the Ladies lavatory - can you imagine if that had been City and not United?
On the plus side...
Gary Cook is doing a great job of modernising City into a great club behind the scenes as well as hopefully on the pitch. The name of the game now in football is to become a global brand and in Cook we have an expert in achieving this. Our opponents know this and will try and undermine him by exaggerating and distorting his actions however trivial the supposed gaffes are. They are jealous and scared of our ultimate likely level of success and all I ask is that City fans think twice before joining them in trying to weaken us.
As far as I am concerned I totally support Manchester City and I totally support Gary Cook in his aim of making us the best football club in the world. Amen.