In reply to southward

I understand your position , and I see nothing wrong in you witholding judgement on the matter.

In reply to HumbleCalf



Did you have this opinion before or after he likened Ryan's investigative reporting to that of the national enquirer because Ryan (as most reporters do in these kinds of situation) did not reveal his sources? Did that sound to you like a man who had an opened mind or did that sound more like a man with an axe to grind?

In reply to Zikdaman

Before - not sure what your point is, it is common in my world to see "according to reliable sources" or "sources close to" blah blah blah. Obviously, when you see that you understand that the author does not have confirmation but the author is satisfied enough regarding accuracy to print it. It is completely reasonable in general for person "A" to swallow it hook line and sinker and for person "B" to be skeptical. Based on Southie's history here which includes excellent, thoughtful, provocative and absolutely brilliant contributions so far, he is one who is likely to be skeptical unless you give him solid proof.

In this case we are talking about the WICB so most people will accept they are in the wrong because of their reputation .....most people ....not all.

In reply to HumbleCalf



Dat is my point...it is a common practice used by just about every journalist worth his salt if he's reporting on information that is not supposed to be privy to the public.

Now let's move on...what do you think about the skuntishness of the WICB.

Sources say Ryan Patrick did confirm all the contentious issues with sources within the WICB who sources say are actually involved in the negotiations.

_r

In reply to Zikdaman
The mistakes repeated time and again by the WICB is incomprehensible to me. How is it possible that every series is preceeded by some WICB v Players wrangling?

And look here now. The biggest event in the history of the Caribbean - one where they got the governments to spend a shite load of money that they cannot afford and still they open themselves and the region to major league embarrassment. Could anyone blame the players if they reach the finals and strike unless the issue is resolved?

I look on in disbelief, shake my head and ask where are we going wrong. And, I silently laugh at the posturing of Jamaica, Guyana, Trinidad etc producing so many brilliant people ........ how can that be when we cannot run a patty shop?

The inability of our leaders to command respect through leading by example is the single most reason for the wide spread break down we have in our region ......... I done preach today.

In reply to sabina

That southward is just an ass in a lion skin, if you ask me.

I don't usually take he on...is just that he call my name in vain.

missah calf...yer check is in the post. i appreciate the kind words!

i'm not going to waste time and get involved in a futile slanging match with the various parties on this thread. neither am i going to waste time with zik's rationlization of what has transpired save to say that i am entirely beyond the scope of zik's imagination or experience and that aint his fault.

the main issue speaks directly to the way our societies have evolved. the quote below illustrates:

Leadership of the party was first contested by Bustamante and St William Grant. Grant was essentially a Garveyite. Bustamante is more difficult to categorize. His rallying slogan perhaps speaks loudest…“My people, you don’t have to think, I will think for you Followed by the “The Chief! We will follow Bustamante till we die!”

this is really about the way we think and loyalty. to critique the chief is viewed as disloyal and therefore the criticizer must have an agenda-an axe to grind.

but there is so much more beyond that. on the specific article...i am asking that the writer steers clear of anything that might be interpreted as inuendo or anything that is akin to gutter press reporting. i am not suggesting that it is deliberate, i am not saying there is any fabrication what i am saying is that it is too loose for thinking people to take it seriously. there is evidence:

there are two articles on this subject both penned by cc. in the first on march 15 (which is much better imo) there are some things which have been adjusted in the second:

a. the figure quoted on march 15 was $11m-this figure became $11.5m on the 19th.

b. writing on the 15th cc say that contracts had not been provided for the players. in the later piece contracts were said to have been provided on the 14th.

c. in the earlier piece the reduction in the $11m figure was clearly stated to have been a reduction perpetuated by the icc. in the later piece it reads as if it is the wicb that was trying to reduce the figure (it certainly suggested that for poor sabina as u can see by his reaction above).

i could go on but i wont. the thing is that the errors/inconsistencies etc come from sources who apparently later correct these errors.

ccc is an opinion former, it is so by its stature and all i am asking/suggesting is that the bar be raised in order that its utterances be taken to be more credible by a thinking audience. nothing wrong with that....unless people want to imitate busta and his followers.

u come and go too quickly mon ami!