Wilder Vs Mike McCarthy

[Flo-rider]

Anyone know why Wilder hates talking to BBC radio Sheffield's Mike McCarthy? It's quite obvious and doesn't make for great interviews, Wilder finds fault in every question and disagrees with him constantly. Just wondered if there was bad blood between them or a specific a reason?

 

[Harry's Game]

He hates people with alliterative names. Wednesday Wankers and Barnsley Bastards and such.

 

[Flo-rider]

Sorry, just seen this issue is being picked up in another thread. Glad it's not just me that thinks it.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Sorry, just seen this issue is being picked up in another thread. Glad it's not just me that thinks it.

Not just you, Mike McCarthy has just realised he's out of his depth as well.

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

Mike is God awful.

 

[Eric Cartman]

Feel sorry for Mike. It’s not his fault he’s shite.

He’s less annoying to listen to than Buchan and that cunt with the short tongue who covers Chezzy.

 

[SUFC Guy]

 

[Pinchy]

Dear Amateur Radio Presenters,

The starting point is to realise that being a local radio presenter does not give you any special insight into the game, neither does it invest your opinions with any weight.

You remain a person of little or no consequence. Listen and learn, please.

 

[stringer]

Dear Amateur Radio Presenters,

The starting point is to realise that being a local radio presenter does not give you any special insight into the game, neither does it invest your opinions with any weight.

You remain a person of little or no consequence. Listen and learn, please.

The starting point is that their opinions and insight are of at least equal worth to every other human being in the ground. To label anyone ‘a person of little or no consequence’ is demeaning and unnecessary

 

[HydeParkBlade]

Really really don't understand the animosity towards journalists on here and twitter.

 

[Nade]

His job is to ask questions that we want to know the answers to.

 

[Sabella's Socks]

Really really don't understand the animosity towards journalists on here and twitter.

Pretty much everyone gets abuse on the internet: the abuse isn't a calculated assessment of competence, and journalists (or anyone else for that matter) are not Special Victims. It's a chimps tea party.

The difference in this case is that (for now) he's genuinely, tediously, tiresomely crap at what he's being asked to do. He just has no feel for it.

For me most of the comments, eg the Beds, Bucks, Hearts one above, are about right.

Here's hoping he improves.

 

[ChipButtyBlade]

I would hate to hear the interview after say a heavy defeat,with Posh Mike doing the questions.

Posh Mike got on the wrong side of Wilder with his very first question in the interview after yesterdays game,downward spiral from hence forth,Wilder was really mocking.

 

[Bladesman]

The starting point is that their opinions and insight are of at least equal worth to every other human being in the ground. To label anyone ‘a person of little or no consequence’ is demeaning and unnecessary

You are talking to a troll who doesn’t value anyone else’s opinion other than his own.

 

[Bergen Blade]

You are talking to a troll who doesn’t value anyone else’s opinion other than his own.

Enemies Enhance the Meaning of Life
Life isn't meaningless when you have enemies!

Decades ago, the sociologist Georg Simmel argued that nothing unites a nation, or any group of people for that matter, quite like having a common enemy. Recent research by Mark Landau (professor of psychology, University of Kansas), though not testing unity of groups, does indicate that having enemies provides some psychological benefits.

Specifically, Landau and colleagues argue that people have a basic need for coherence, or for things to make sense. Enemies provide people with this sense of coherence. If we can attribute many of the ills in our lives to our enemies, then we have a stable set of schemas and expectations. We know what to expect, even if something bad happens, and we know who to attribute it to.

Several studies support these ideas. In one study, participants who were lead to think about chaotic hazards were more likely to perceive people with different political beliefs as enemies (view them as more part of a conspiracy).

Interestingly, in another study, people who had just imagined a powerful enemy (Al-Qaeda) actually thought the world was less dangerous and chaotic.

Put differently, this research suggests that people create enemies in order to maintain a stable, coherent, clear view of the world. This is because they can attribute the negatives of the world (which are inevitable) to these enemies.

Having enemies even appears to make people feel, ironically, safer.

Now, to be clear, I am not encouraging people to have enemies. There are obvious drawbacks to having enemies too. And there are other ways to find life meaningful and coherent than to have enemies.

Do you have enemies because you have been harmed by them or vehemently disagree with them on some moral, political or religious view? Perhaps. But, you also possibly have enemies because you created them in order for your life to be more meaningful.

 

[frechyblade]

I think he started the interview on the wrong foot. His opening question seemed to be a negative one after what had been a fantastic positive win. He did the same with the first caller on p&g blade called in saying it was a great result his response was to insinuate that we were shit in the first half.
Compare the positive start that other interviewers use. Whilst I understand the need to ask probing questions, starting with them quite rightly sets the wrong tone. It’s almost like he needs to get the question in before he forgets.
UTB

 

[SwissBlade]

Anyone know why Wilder hates talking to BBC radio Sheffield's Mike McCarthy? It's quite obvious and doesn't make for great interviews, Wilder finds fault in every question and disagrees with him constantly. Just wondered if there was bad blood between them or a specific a reason?

He probably duplicates threads on United Forums. I'd hate that too

 

[Pinchy]

The starting point is that their opinions and insight are of at least equal worth to every other human being in the ground. To label anyone ‘a person of little or no consequence’ is demeaning and unnecessary

New local radio sports presenters usually begin with modesty and an awareness of their own limitations. Far too quickly they graduate into omniscient experts on the subject-matter; legends in their own postcode. It happens to them all. Piggy Staton and Schoolboy Buchan are notable recent examples.

I well remember the particularly self-important Walker, who couldn’t kick his own arse, labelling those of us who were quite rightly calling for SemiPro to get the sack, as ‘morons’. He quickly disappeared when challenged.

I simply remind them that they are not, in the context of football, imbued with special knowledge or judgement by virtue of presenting a radio programme. Of course they have inherent value as human beings. Everyone has until they disentitle themselves from such value. That’s a proposition I live and breathe every day.

You berate me out of context, I’m afraid.

Anyway, I’m reading your book at the moment. Think of the reviews...

 

[FTPE]

I think he started the interview on the wrong foot. His opening question seemed to be a negative one after what had been a fantastic positive win. He did the same with the first caller on p&g blade called in saying it was a great result his response was to insinuate that we were shit in the first half.
Compare the positive start that other interviewers use. Whilst I understand the need to ask probing questions, starting with them quite rightly sets the wrong tone. It’s almost like he needs to get the question in before he forgets.
UTB

100%
He made out that we won the kick and rush half and we were out played in the first.
I thought the first was tight (and we won it) the second we dominated.
Didn't he say the first half was like a Premier League game and the second a Championship one!?
Sometimes Wilder does get a bit defensive but he's a passionate bloke in general let alone about his team. I thought this time though he was in the right, in thought there were a few badly worded question in there, whether they were meant or not.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

New local radio sports presenters usually begin with modesty and an awareness of their own limitations. Far too quickly they graduate into omniscient experts on the subject-matter; legends in their own postcode. It happens to them all. Piggy Staton and Schoolboy Buchan are notable recent examples.

I well remember the particularly self-important Walker, who couldn’t kick his own arse, labelling those of us who were quite rightly calling for SemiPro to get the sack, as ‘morons’. He quickly disappeared when challenged.

I simply remind them that they are not, in the context of football, imbued with special knowledge or judgement by virtue of presenting a radio programme. Of course they have inherent value as human beings. Everyone has until they disentitle themselves from such value. That’s a proposition I live and breathe every day.

You berate me out of context, I’m afraid.

Anyway, I’m reading your book at the moment. Think of the reviews...

Pinchy mate have you sat on something sharp or is there another reason for your grumpiness on every thread you’ve commented on today?
Go on tell us your new year’s resolution!

 

[Pinchy]

100%
He made out that we won the kick and rush half and we were out played in the first.
I thought the first was tight (and we won it) the second we dominated.
Didn't he say the first half was like a Premier League game and the second a Championship one!?
Sometimes Wilder does get a bit defensive but he's a passionate bloke in general let alone about his team. I thought this time though he was in the right, in thought there were a few badly worded question in there, whether they were meant or not.

Let’s give him the benefit of incompetence over malice for now.

 

[Pinchy]

Pinchy mate have you sat on something sharp or is there another reason for your grumpiness on every thread you’ve commented on today?
Go on tell us your new year’s resolution!

Those three ghostly blokes who usually come to see me this time of year didn’t turn up. Tossers, all three of ‘em.

I don’t usually commit to New Year Resolutions (repeated failure diminishing enthusiasm I’m afraid, though it shouldn’t) but I’ll have a think and let you know. I can already say with absolute confidence it won’t include giving up alcohol or being more tolerant of grotesque anti-football.

 

[sufcboy95]

I’ve noticed this aswell since he started at radio Sheffield. The contrast between wilders interviews with him and Andy giddings are astonishing

 

[stringer]

New local radio sports presenters usually begin with modesty and an awareness of their own limitations. Far too quickly they graduate into omniscient experts on the subject-matter; legends in their own postcode. It happens to them all. Piggy Staton and Schoolboy Buchan are notable recent examples.

I well remember the particularly self-important Walker, who couldn’t kick his own arse, labelling those of us who were quite rightly calling for SemiPro to get the sack, as ‘morons’. He quickly disappeared when challenged.

I simply remind them that they are not, in the context of football, imbued with special knowledge or judgement by virtue of presenting a radio programme. Of course they have inherent value as human beings. Everyone has until they disentitle themselves from such value. That’s a proposition I live and breathe every day.

You berate me out of context, I’m afraid.

Anyway, I’m reading your book at the moment. Think of the reviews...

I haven’t berated anyone, m’lud - merely quoted your post word for word that MM apparently has little or no consequence as a human being. Believe he’s no cop as an interviewer or the next Paxman, no issue with that, but questioning his value as a human seems a bit much.
Hope you enjoy the book - as an intelligent man I’m sure you’ll be able to separate your thoughts on that from your thoughts on me and my worth as a human being

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

Those three ghostly blokes who usually come to see me this time of year didn’t turn up. Tossers, all three of ‘em.

I don’t usually commit to New Year Resolutions (repeated failure diminishing enthusiasm I’m afraid, though it shouldn’t) but I’ll have a think and let you know. I can already say with absolute confidence it won’t include giving up alcohol or being more tolerant of grotesque anti-football.

I should hope not!!!

 

[LenTednTony]

New local radio sports presenters usually begin with modesty and an awareness of their own limitations. Far too quickly they graduate into omniscient experts on the subject-matter; legends in their own postcode. It happens to them all. Piggy Staton and Schoolboy Buchan are notable recent examples.

I well remember the particularly self-important Walker, who couldn’t kick his own arse, labelling those of us who were quite rightly calling for SemiPro to get the sack, as ‘morons’. He quickly disappeared when challenged.

I simply remind them that they are not, in the context of football, imbued with special knowledge or judgement by virtue of presenting a radio programme. Of course they have inherent value as human beings. Everyone has until they disentitle themselves from such value. That’s a proposition I live and breathe every day.

You berate me out of context, I’m afraid.

Anyway, I’m reading your book at the moment. Think of the reviews...

However, their opinions, insight and views SHOULD count more than ours and be more incisive and accurate. They are, after all, presenting a show or interview where they should have done their homework and be fully appraised of what is and is not occurring at the club both on and off the field as well as on social media. If the presenter/interviewer doesn’t get the response from the subject, he then needs to be able to justify his comments with......wait for it.......factual evidence! That way, if the subject spits out his dummy, he can at least say he was only stating facts, to his employers. If not then he leaves himself open for doubt, ridicule and, ultimately, a change in personnel.

If his intention is/was just to piss CW off because CW always gives him a hard time then job well done. Personally if that were me, I would be wanting to buy said CW a Peroni to try and get to the bottom of it before the next interview.......maybe he will, who knows?

 

[LenTednTony]

100%
He made out that we won the kick and rush half and we were out played in the first.
I thought the first was tight (and we won it) the second we dominated.
Didn't he say the first half was like a Premier League game and the second a Championship one!?
Sometimes Wilder does get a bit defensive but he's a passionate bloke in general let alone about his team. I thought this time though he was in the right, in thought there were a few badly worded question in there, whether they were meant or not.

FTPE I fully agree with your appraisal of the game and I applaud you sir for agreeing with me on that !

 

[Pinchy]

I haven’t berated anyone, m’lud - merely quoted your post word for word that MM apparently has little or no consequence as a human being. Believe he’s no cop as an interviewer or the next Paxman, no issue with that, but questioning his value as a human seems a bit much.
Hope you enjoy the book - as an intelligent man I’m sure you’ll be able to separate your thoughts on that from your thoughts on me and my worth as a human being

I conspicuously omitted Star journalists from my tirade...

 

[Nick Jansky]

New local radio sports presenters usually begin with modesty and an awareness of their own limitations. Far too quickly they graduate into omniscient experts on the subject-matter; legends in their own postcode. It happens to them all. Piggy Staton and Schoolboy Buchan are notable recent examples.

I well remember the particularly self-important Walker, who couldn’t kick his own arse, labelling those of us who were quite rightly calling for SemiPro to get the sack, as ‘morons’. He quickly disappeared when challenged.

I simply remind them that they are not, in the context of football, imbued with special knowledge or judgement by virtue of presenting a radio programme. Of course they have inherent value as human beings. Everyone has until they disentitle themselves from such value. That’s a proposition I live and breathe every day.

You berate me out of context, I’m afraid.

Anyway, I’m reading your book at the moment. Think of the reviews...

No, he doesn’t berate you out of context, I’ve known you for years and you are a pompous arse with huge delusions of your own value, which is actually no more than any of the rest of us.

But I suppose you are our pompous arse. UTB.

 

[Harrisblade]

Enemies Enhance the Meaning of Life
Life isn't meaningless when you have enemies!

Decades ago, the sociologist Georg Simmel argued that nothing unites a nation, or any group of people for that matter, quite like having a common enemy. Recent research by Mark Landau (professor of psychology, University of Kansas), though not testing unity of groups, does indicate that having enemies provides some psychological benefits.

Specifically, Landau and colleagues argue that people have a basic need for coherence, or for things to make sense. Enemies provide people with this sense of coherence. If we can attribute many of the ills in our lives to our enemies, then we have a stable set of schemas and expectations. We know what to expect, even if something bad happens, and we know who to attribute it to.

Several studies support these ideas. In one study, participants who were lead to think about chaotic hazards were more likely to perceive people with different political beliefs as enemies (view them as more part of a conspiracy).

Interestingly, in another study, people who had just imagined a powerful enemy (Al-Qaeda) actually thought the world was less dangerous and chaotic.

Put differently, this research suggests that people create enemies in order to maintain a stable, coherent, clear view of the world. This is because they can attribute the negatives of the world (which are inevitable) to these enemies.

Having enemies even appears to make people feel, ironically, safer.

Now, to be clear, I am not encouraging people to have enemies. There are obvious drawbacks to having enemies too. And there are other ways to find life meaningful and coherent than to have enemies.

Do you have enemies because you have been harmed by them or vehemently disagree with them on some moral, political or religious view? Perhaps. But, you also possibly have enemies because you created them in order for your life to be more meaningful.

All covered in a very readable way by George Orwell's '1984' which was, incidentally, published in 1949:
Nineteen Eighty-Four, often published as 1984, is a dystopian novel published in 1949 by English author George Orwell. The novel is set in Airstrip One (formerly known as Great Britain), a province of the superstate Oceania in a world of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance, and public manipulation.