The new podcast: Listen here: https://soundcloud.com/wise-men-say
An agenda is written every week prior to the recording of the Salut! Sunderland podcast, writes Stephen Goldsmith. It’s not a rigid structure, just something to keep the podcast on track and make it sound like it has some sort of direction to it.
There have been a few problems in acquiring the desired guests since the podcast’s launch around five weeks ago.
Considering the infancy of the project, having former players, football journalists and fanzine editors get involved makes it all feel worthwhile. We set the standards high in that aspect and are happy with the early results; next season could see things elevated even further given the chance.
I certainly didn’t think I would be an (almost) trained broadcast journalist this time last year, so why not aim high and think positive? We have witnessed gremlins in the studio in most broadcasts and even lost our Swindon fan Adam Johnson mid-conversation in this week’s offering.
The writer, editor and author Andy Dawson would have made a fine guest also but when real work came knocking, we were never likely to compete with just an offer of a post-podcast pint as payment. The fact he follows the account on Twitter and shows genuine interest in the whole thing is flattery indeed.
Regardless, Gareth Barker and I have subjects worthy of SAFC debate lodged in our brains to such an extent that we can sit and chat in the studio at ease and subsequently be prepared to offer that to anyone who’s interested in hearing it.
Not too many at present, but we’ll get there. That’s kind of where we were this week. I decided to rip up the agenda and improvise with the only possible topic available. Paulo, of course. A third guest would have helped with the fluency, as it did so well with Richard Mason and Tom Lynn in the weeks they kindly got involved. We even lost Adam mid-conversation as mentioned previously. Meh.
Politics and football mix. Or do they? It’s our business to know our new manager’s ideologies though. Or is it? He’s been shockingly misquoted anyway. Or has he? We get on to football eventually.
Get on board: https://soundcloud.com/wise-men-say
6 thoughts on “Salut! Podcast: talking Paulo Di Canio, Chelsea and… sort of, Swindon”
I think it was impossible not to talk about the things we talked about on this particular podcast.
It was still fresh in our minds and we don’t record until Thursday.
Subject has been done to death, absolutely no point in raking over old coal’s. The support needs to pull together not scratch at old sores!
Incidentally I thought M.Salut had officially declared the matter closed. I would have thought the ‘thumbs down’ and limited response was a fair indication that folk want to move on and not a criticism of your views, but rather the subject matter.
For clarification I didn’t say it could never again be mentioned, just that i was moving on and concentrating on football having had my say – and also that I was ‘encouraging’ others likewise. For example, one occasional contributor wanted to have his say, too, but when he still hadn’t sent anything by the Wednesday, I told him not to bother. The pdocat is different since it is necessarily a review of the week gone by as well as a look forward to the game to come.
Just as I thought – I’m doing better in the thumbs down prediction than the guess the score prediction!
And Goldy I wasn’t talking about the press but about people who leave comments picking and choosing their time to decide when it’s OK to play the keep politics out of football card. If people were consistent their arguments would be more valid.
Incidentally I haven’t left a comment in support of or against either JM or PDC but that won’t have stopped others deciding what my views are.
Good podcast boys – nearly forgot to watch Pointless! Well argued and sensible comments from you both. Shame you lost Adam as I was interested in hearing his thoughts.
Got me thinking but I wonder how many of those who have stated that politics should be kept out of football were vociferous in condemning James McClean for refusing to wear his poppy shirt.
Although it seems logical to me I expect a lot of thumbs down from those who can’t, or refuse to see the connection.
Works both ways that one as well – he wasn’t hounded by the press to this extent either. But, you’re right, a lot of the “politics and football don’t mix” brigade will have condemned McClean and then played the democracy card in this case. As I said though, it is true that he wasn’t the subject of blackmail from organisations poking their noses in.
Comments are closed.