News Luke Beveridge meltdown in post game press conference, launches an extraordinary tirade at Tom Morris, apologises

[BringOn2017]

Why is it anyone's business why Hunter wasn't in the side? That's between the player, the playing group and the coach. None of it is to do with some rubbish journalist that likes his two bobs in the media

So questioning coaches about the side they picked…. by a sports journalists…. At a post game media conference is morally wrong ?

I get coaches need to create the ‘us v the world’ scenario and always be seen to be ‘sticking up for the boys’, but just fix your leaks and don’t take out frustrations on a journalist writing a story about something as boring as team selection.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

His job is to find out news and report it.

He doesn't work for the Bulldogs and has no obligation to call them and ask if it is okay if he reports a story about a player being dropped.

No, His job is to find out and report verified/confirmed news. Above that he has an obligation to confirm/notify clubs of running with leaked news.

He doesn't have too, but this is what happens when you don't.

Reporters need to manage their relationship with clubs. There are ethics involved in journalism.

he should at a minimum at least told the dogs he was doing it, so they were aware. Especially after what happened last year.

 

[Bostonian]

The irony of moralising about mental health while he bullies and humiliates someone for doing their job.

There's no irony.

Some people have trash jobs that deserve push back.

That is not the issue, the issue is clearly the conduct and behaviour of Beveridge.

I don’t think Morris got put in his place at all, he stuck up for himself and tried to respond, but like a petulant child who doesn’t get his own way Beveridge wouldn’t even allow him to speak and then storms out, it was pathetic.

Morris and his shit "journalism" created this situation.

Don't paint him as some kind of mature victim.

The issue is shit journos who are more interested in muck racking than actually reporting on the game itself.

 

[Hawker55]

He clearly didn't "do his job" well if he did not notify the club that he was running with leaked info that was not confirmed by the club, or in any case not at least notified prior.

"doing your Job" is not some cover all umbrella excuse for being a campaigner

bevo certainly went over the top, but Tom deserved the wack if what bevo said was true.

This has come up a few times - I work in the media and have done all the scurrilous stuff mentioned at various points. So just to be clear

1. If you get leaked information and choose to run it, you usually don't rely on just one source. You would check through other channels and have at least a good feel if the info is accurate. I know the Age used to have a two sources policy for any news unless it was from the horses mouth. At no point is there a requirement to check with the person adversely affected - see point 2.
2. Under absolutely NO circumstance are you obligated or would you go to the organisation and say "hey I have this info could you confirm please" because you are throwing your source under a bus (by letting the organisation know someone is leaking) and also what are they going to say? They'll just deny it and move on.
3. Why on earth is a journo required to notify the club? Here's what happens - the club then changes its plans knowing its about to get hit with a negative story and the journo has not only burned a source, he doesn't get a story and noone ever leaks to him again knowing that they don't get their info out.

The bigger issue for the Dogs is that more than one person with knowledge of team selection is talking to the media knowing it pisses the Head Coach off this much.

 

[Boppo]

Bevo def needs to develop a thicker skin. And another decent tall in the back six.

If people are somewhat defined by their careers, being a sports journo who hangs their hat on breaking a bit of gossip about a game minutes before another journo does..jeez not exactly inspiration to for the grandkids.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

This has come up a few times - I work in the media and have done all the scurrilous stuff mentioned at various points. So just to be clear

1. If you get leaked information and choose to run it, you usually don't rely on just one source. You would check through other channels and have at least a good feel if the info is accurate. I know the Age used to have a two sources policy for any news unless it was from the horses mouth. At no point is there a requirement to check with the person adversely affected - see point 2.
2. Under absolutely NO circumstance are you obligated or would you go to the organisation and say "hey I have this info could you confirm please" because you are throwing your source under a bus (by letting the organisation know someone is leaking) and also what are they going to say? They'll just deny it and move on.
3. Why on earth is a journo required to notify the club? Here's what happens - the club then changes its plans knowing its about to get hit with a negative story and the journo has not only burned a source, he doesn't get a story and noone ever leaks to him again knowing that they don't get their info out.

What you are saying is certainly not what Bevo said has been done in the past with similar situations.

Being so id take his experience over yours, no offence

Tom didn't have to name his source, but at a minimum he should be calling the club and say he's running with a story that isn't confirmed. he doesn't have to get their approval. Gerard Whatley confirmed this on SEN this morning as proper ethical process.

 

[kreglze]

This has come up a few times - I work in the media and have done all the scurrilous stuff mentioned at various points. So just to be clear

1. If you get leaked information and choose to run it, you usually don't rely on just one source. You would check through other channels and have at least a good feel if the info is accurate. I know the Age used to have a two sources policy for any news unless it was from the horses mouth. At no point is there a requirement to check with the person adversely affected - see point 2.
2. Under absolutely NO circumstance are you obligated or would you go to the organisation and say "hey I have this info could you confirm please" because you are throwing your source under a bus (by letting the organisation know someone is leaking) and also what are they going to say? They'll just deny it and move on.
3. Why on earth is a journo required to notify the club? Here's what happens - the club then changes its plans knowing its about to get hit with a negative story and the journo has not only burned a source, he doesn't get a story and noone ever leaks to him again knowing that they don't get their info out.

The bigger issue for the Dogs is that more than one person with knowledge of team selection is talking to the media knowing it pisses the Head Coach off this much.

Great post! I was wondering this myself whether it was common practice, or if it is just something that 'Bevo' wanted to happen? Seems the latter.

 

[kreglze]

What you are saying is certainly not what Bevo said has been done in the past with similar situations.

Being so id take his experience over yours, no offence

Tom didn't have to name his source, but at a minimum he should be saying he's running with a story that isn't confirmed. he doesn't have to get their approval. Gerard Whatley confirmed this on SEN this morning as proper ethical process.

When did Like start moonlighting as a journalist and know how the process works?

 

[HirdsTheWord]

When did Like start moonlighting as a journalist and know how the process works?

he has been a coach for numerous years and he would know the process/obligations/ethics in regards to media leaks.

Again, not saying he handled it well but TB is not innocent at all.

Like i said, Gerard Whateley confirmed on SEN this morning that TB should have called the club and at least notified them he was going to leak info. So again, if you dont take Bevos word surely yo agree wit gerard.

 

[NZ_Tiger]

Luke explained the rules that journalist have abided by in the past to avoid this issue and avoid acting like a Woman's Day journalist

Simply give the club a call

Like it or not, journalists have to work with stakeholders

I wouldn’t take Bevo’s view of the journalistic world to be fact. There is clearly journalists in every news room who will run a story without asking/telling the club especially if the story doesn’t need it, which a selection story doesn’t.

Often a story is enhanced by asking the club for comment as “no comment” is often pretty informative. But to suggest every journalist reaches out to the club is a nonsense. Those with good club connections I’m sure do, but the “outsiders” like Barret, Browne, Morris, Hutchison have always just publish.

It’s no coincidence that each news room has a “Tom Morris”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HTPunter]

I struggle to see how "health and wellbeing" comes into it. Seems like a huge cop-out to go with that as a defence.

If any players health and wellbeing is affected by selection committee news, they need some time away from the game altogether. There's also something to be said for having a degree of resilience.

Also not sure how the soft cap got brought into it.

Each time a new point is raised by commentators re this presser, it just shows the ridiculousness of the melt. "All we're doing is planning for a football game" and all Morris did is report on the planning of a football game? Why would that impact someone's health and wellbeing apart from Bevos anger issues?

 

[dmc333]

Anyone think Bevo would have won this one if he hadn't gone down the "you're a Melbourne supporter route?"

Made him look like a simpleton.

 

[Hawker55]

What you are saying is certainly not what Bevo said has been done in the past with similar situations.

Being so id take his experience over yours, no offence

Tom didn't have to name his source, but at a minimum he should be calling the club and say he's running with a story that isn't confirmed. he doesn't have to get their approval. Gerard Whatley confirmed this on SEN this morning as proper ethical process.

A good journo tends to give a media manager a heads up "Something" is coming sure - but you wouldn't give chapter and verse unless it's a truly terrible story (ie de Goey in the US, Jake Carlisle etc). But those have possible legal implications so you want the club to have a chance to respond and the player isn't completely blindsided but this is such a minor thing and one the Club could stop by changing selection I doubt you would.

Unless there's something not being reported around Hunter it's such a small story that Bevo's reaction is ridiculous.

 

[HTPunter]

I think that’s the issue. And I think the same occurred for Ryan Gardner in the grand final.

Yep, and the fault of this squarely sits on the Dogs shoulders. Clean up in house, that's where the issue is.

 

[NZ_Tiger]

That's one way of looking at it. The other way is to say.............he is sorting his house out by putting a line in the sand. He is saying to the journo's, call me before you report like Woman's Day.

If this was a public company on the ASX, you would demand the same.

I work at a public company and the first indication of a story breaking is usually when you pick up the paper or in our case when your see the trailer for tonight’s 60 minutes.

Bevo is living Lala land. Which seems true if Tom Morris leaking selection can “totally destabilise” them or cause people to be in “turmoil”. Mentally weak club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HirdsTheWord]

A good journo tends to give a media manager a heads up "Something" is coming sure - but you wouldn't give chapter and verse unless it's a truly terrible story (ie de Goey in the US, Jake Carlisle etc). But those have possible legal implications so you want the club to have a chance to respond and the player isn't completely blindsided but this is such a minor thing and one the Club could stop by changing selection I doubt you would.

Unless there's something not being reported around Hunter it's such a small story that Bevo's reaction is ridiculous.

Id suspect and the word on the street is that hunter didn't know he was being dropped until this was leaked.

Regardless again I don't disagree Bevos actions were over the top. I'm simply saying Morris next time should notify the club he is going with a leaked story so they aren't caught blindsided by it, had he done so I doubt there would have been this type of reaction and morris still would have got the story out.

The fact Gerard Whatley who I think we can all agree is a pretty respected seasoned journo said TB should have notified the club shows that he isn't an innocent in this.

 

[Halftimehero]

There's no irony.

Some people have trash jobs that deserve push back.


Morris and his sh*t "journalism" created this situation.

Don't paint him as some kind of mature victim.

The issue is sh*t journos who are more interested in muck racking than actually reporting on the game itself.

How is the reporting of an established senior player not being picked in the 22 “shit journalism”.
Every journo if armed with that info is running that story.

 

[Dez!]

lol

this isn't true at all.

bevo certainly went over the top but Tom is not innocent in this, if what bevo said is true.

If what Bevo said was true?

You think Tom Morris is out to destroy the Bulldogs?

Instead of going after the reporter how about he concerns himself with finding out the person who leaks information to the reporter?

 

[HTPunter]

Why is it anyone's business why Hunter wasn't in the side? That's between the player, the playing group and the coach. None of it is to do with some rubbish journalist that likes his two bobs in the media

Lol what? Since when is it bad to ask why a player isn't in a side? You know this is the type of thing all sports journalists report on, right? I think reporting on a previous VC making a side isn't exactly thrilling news, I don't think it's a huge deal to drop him, but it still is selection news, especially when it's leading into the first game of the year.

 

[Mofra]

If any players health and wellbeing is affected by selection committee news, they need some time away from the game altogether. There's also something to be said for having a degree of resilience.

Ryan Gardner learning he won't play in the GF via media rather than the club is probably a fair example of how it can impact a player.
No doubt Gard's took that hard, as I expect any player would

 

[Some Idiot]

His job is to find out news and report it.

He doesn't work for the Bulldogs and has no obligation to call them and ask if it is okay if he reports a story about a player being dropped.

Journalists don't have free rein to find stories by any means necessary. They have a code of conduct to follow like everyone else - they can be sacked or suffer legal consequences for breaching it. Whether he has done this remains to be seen - Bevo clearly thinks he has breached it.

 

[Bostonian]

Anyone think Bevo would have won this one if he hadn't gone down the "you're a Melbourne supporter route?"

Made him look like a simpleton.

Modern day journos are this pathetic and biased.

We aren't dealing with journos of the past here.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

That's one way of looking at it. The other way is to say.............he is sorting his house out by putting a line in the sand. He is saying to the journo's, call me before you report like Woman's Day.

If this was a public company on the ASX, you would demand the same.

But it's not a public company on the ASX.

It's a footy club that is in the entertainment industry. You could also argue that it's a club in the gambling industry.

The customers that pay the bills, have every right to know heaps of shit. It's not up to the clubs to decide what journalists print, and what we get told.

 

[adogsfan5]

Yep, and the fault of this squarely sits on the Dogs shoulders. Clean up in house, that's where the issue is.

Yep not wrong!

 

[Chadwiko]

I like coaches standing up for the club.

So do I.

And for the record, I don't like Tom Morris.

That doesn't excuse Luke Beveridge here. He was unprofessional, simple as that.
To try and tie it into player health and wellbeing was disgraceful.

Let's look at the facts as we understand them to be here;

• Morris has gotten advance/inside word of a team selection plan.
• Morris has reported said team selection plan, as literally all journalists would.
• Beverdige has exploded at Morris over this.

Beveridge is kidding himself if he thinks journalists would call a head coach and tell them they've got a leak. That's a great way to ensure no sources ever leak anything to you as a journalist ever again.

Once again - I find Morris to be a pretty shit journalist. But in this specific instance, he's done nothing wrong and Beveridge has embarrassed himself.