Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:57 am  

Kenny Dalglish MBE. Ian Rush MBE. Steven Gerrard MBE. Bob Paisley OBE. Bill Shankly OBE.

Sir Matt Busby. Sir Alex Ferguson. Ryan Giggs OBE. David Beckham OBE.

Do you get the feeling that either there are some Man United supporters in the machinery that gives out honours, or are Man United simply better at asking for them?

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:44 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Kenny Dalglish MBE. Ian Rush MBE. Steven Gerrard MBE. Bob Paisley OBE. Bill Shankly OBE.

Sir Matt Busby. Sir Alex Ferguson. Ryan Giggs OBE. David Beckham OBE.

Do you get the feeling that either there are some Man United supporters in the machinery that gives out honours, or are Man United simply better at asking for them?

Or is it that the attitude to handing out honours for sporting achievements is different now than it was previously and that, whether we like it or not, coincides with a different era in terms of footballing success?

The one United honour you've cited from an earlier era is Busby, who was knighted after the European Cup win that was after Munich – a link, not least in terms of popular emotion.

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 11:04 am  

Rock God X wrote:

I don't agree with the honours system (as it stands) at all, so I wouldn't call anyone 'Sir xxx' whether I was meeting them for the first time or not. Incidentally, I wouldn't call my bird's dad 'Mr xxx' either. One can be polite without being deferential.

Except that you don't explain how, in your example, you achieve this "polite without deferential" trick. How would that first conversation go, then, so as not to offend your personal rules against deference"? Let's call her dad Wayne Smith, but all his mates call him Wazza, and she calls him "dad". What is your opening line, then?

I think the concept of being deferential is one which has been largely lost as politeness becomes increasingly a thing of the past, and selfishness and thoughtlessness increase. One well-known example of this is younger people simply not understanding how bloody rude and offensive it can be for, say, a nurse in hospital to address an eldery patient she has never met before by his or her first name. The elderly patient is from a different era, may be quite upset and feel disrespected by being called "Elsie" or whatever by someone they don't know. As ever, it just needs a little thought and consideration for the person you're talking to's feelings, and a little less on your personal "principles".

The pretty easy answer is to be polite and use the formal title before you find out what they prefer you to use, and I see nothing problematic about doing that.

Rock God X wrote:

I'd say that would depend on what the protocol is for reporters interviewing football managers. If it would be acceptable for him to call David Moyes 'David' or Steve Bruce 'Steve', then there's no reason he shouldn't call Alex Ferguson 'Alex'. No person suddenly becomes more deserving of respect than another because they've been handed some arbitrary title by the government/head of state.

"acceptable" to whom? This is a thing just between the two individuals. Disagree that the relevant thing is "protocol", this is all about personal relationships which have to be built. If you were a newbie reporter not personally known to these managers then IMHO pitching in calling them by first names makes you a plank, and comes across as a desperate effort to imply they are your mates, and big yourself up to the audience. Protocol would be more applicable to formal situations, like standing in a line to meet the Queen, when clearly you're never likely to become bessie mates and probably will never speak again.

You are also introducing "more deserving" of respect, which I'm not sure was the discussion. But in terms of respect, certainly not every person on the planet is equally deserving of my "respect", in the sense under discussion. It also seems obvious to me that Sir Alex Ferguson (or whoever) does not suddenly become "more" deserving of respect the second he is knighted, that person has earned the level of respect you afford them, assuming of course you knew who they were in the first place. It's not the paper title, it's the things achieved, for which it was awarded.

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:19 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Except that you don't explain how, in your example, you achieve this "polite without deferential" trick. How would that first conversation go, then, so as not to offend your personal rules against deference"? Let's call her dad Wayne Smith, but all his mates call him Wazza, and she calls him "dad". What is your opening line, then?

For a start, I assume that my girlfriend would introduce him along the lines of:

"This is my dad, Wayne."

Even if that wasn't the case and she omitted his name, I would smile (not in an "I'm fucklng your daughter" sort of way), extend my hand and say,

"Hello, Wayne, nice to meet you."

If you think that is impolite, then we'll just have to agree to disagree, because I don't see how it could be further away from impolite.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I think the concept of being deferential is one which has been largely lost as politeness becomes increasingly a thing of the past, and selfishness and thoughtlessness increase. One well-known example of this is younger people simply not understanding how bloody rude and offensive it can be for, say, a nurse in hospital to address an eldery patient she has never met before by his or her first name. The elderly patient is from a different era, may be quite upset and feel disrespected by being called "Elsie" or whatever by someone they don't know. As ever, it just needs a little thought and consideration for the person you're talking to's feelings, and a little less on your personal "principles".

The pretty easy answer is to be polite and use the formal title before you find out what they prefer you to use, and I see nothing problematic about doing that.

Well, for a start, there's a big difference between a work and a social setting. I would call any client (or patient, if I was in that profession), regardless of age, Mr or Mrs whatever until invited to do otherwise. But in a social setting, I'd be more likely to behave in the manner I have described above.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

"acceptable" to whom? This is a thing just between the two individuals. Disagree that the relevant thing is "protocol", this is all about personal relationships which have to be built.

At a press conference, do the reporters say 'David' or 'Steve' when they're asking a question, or do they say 'Mr Moyes' and 'Mr Bruce'? If it's the former (I genuinely don't know), then there's no reason on Earth for them to have to call Fergie 'Sir Alex'.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

If you were a newbie reporter not personally known to these managers then IMHO pitching in calling them by first names makes you a plank, and comes across as a desperate effort to imply they are your mates, and big yourself up to the audience.

I don't think so, if everyone else in the press conference is using first names. It's not like they'd be calling him 'Dave' or 'Moyesey' (or whatever). You'd come across as a bigger plank not following what everyone else was doing. The other issue is that respect should be afforded both ways. If David Moyes can expect a 'Mr Moyes' until he says otherwise, then Bob Carolgees of the Salford Echo can expect a 'Mr Carolgees'.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

You are also introducing "more deserving" of respect, which I'm not sure was the discussion. But in terms of respect, certainly not every person on the planet is equally deserving of my "respect", in the sense under discussion. It also seems obvious to me that Sir Alex Ferguson (or whoever) does not suddenly become "more" deserving of respect the second he is knighted, that person has earned the level of respect you afford them, assuming of course you knew who they were in the first place. It's not the paper title, it's the things achieved, for which it was awarded.

But there are people out there who have achieved just as much in their particular field (which is probably a lot less glamorous) who don't have the prestige of an inflated title. Why should a man who has made a career out of shltty electronics get a 'Sir Alan', whilst the nurse who has provided palliative care to countless patients gets a plain old 'Ethel'?

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:40 pm  

Even worse, he's Lord Sugar now.

Don't get me started on Lord Archer, how on earth did he a) deserve a knighthood, b) deserve ennoblement and c) keep his title despite his despicable acts?

The French sorted a lot of the politeness bit of titles back in the revolution, when Monsieur (my lord) became the default title for all men.

Would I greet a bishop as "Your Grace"?
Nope.

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:06 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Even worse, he's Lord Sugar now.

He's a Baron.

I think it was a mix up. The Govt were on a health kick, suggested a Bar on Sugar and somehow that got messed up in a Governmental edition of Chinese whispers and Sugar ended up in the House of Lords as a result.

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:34 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Or is it that the attitude to handing out honours for sporting achievements is different now than it was previously and that, whether we like it or not, coincides with a different era in terms of footballing success?

The one United honour you've cited from an earlier era is Busby, who was knighted after the European Cup win that was after Munich – a link, not least in terms of popular emotion.

Alf Ramsey wins the World Cup in 66. Gets knighted in 66.
Jock Stein wins the European Cup in 1967. Gets a CBE in 1970
Matt Busby wins the EC in 68. Gets Knighted in 68

John Barnes wins the league with Liverpool in 1998. Gets an MBE in 1998.
Bryan Robson gets the OBE in 1990 when he had 2 FA Cups in his cabinet.

There just seems to be a disparity with the honours that are quickly thrown out to Manchester United managers when they win the European Cup which other managers haven't even received after winning the EC two or three times.

Personally I think the honours system is a load of BS anyway. I think both Busby and Fergie deserve their knighthoods (although I disagree strongly with Fergie getting it straight away in 99). But seeing lightweights like Brooking and Bobby Robson receive knighthoods when giants like Shankly, Paisley and Stein receive lesser awards shows what a nonsense the system is.

Paul Elliot, Ron Greenwood and Craig Brown are CBE's.

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:51 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Kenny Dalglish MBE. Ian Rush MBE. Steven Gerrard MBE. Bob Paisley OBE. Bill Shankly OBE.

Sir Matt Busby. Sir Alex Ferguson. Ryan Giggs OBE. David Beckham OBE.

Do you get the feeling that either there are some Man United supporters in the machinery that gives out honours, or are Man United simply better at asking for them?

It think you'd have better luck arguing that there was a West Ham bias...
Mind to get an honour you need to be British(ish)

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:20 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

For a start, I assume that my girlfriend would introduce him along the lines of:

"This is my dad, Wayne."

Even if that wasn't the case and she omitted his name, I would smile (not in an "I'm fucklng your daughter" sort of way),

..

but it could be hard ..

Rock God X wrote:

...extend my hand and say,

"Hello, Wayne, nice to meet you."

If you think that is impolite, then we'll just have to agree to disagree, because I don't see how it could be further away from impolite.

I think it has a fair chance of being considered impolite by Wayne, and that's my point. Wayne should be the one who gives you the nod to address him informally.

Rock God X wrote:

Well, for a start, there's a big difference between a work and a social setting. I would call any client (or patient, if I was in that profession), regardless of age, Mr or Mrs whatever until invited to do otherwise. But in a social setting, I'd be more likely to behave in the manner I have described above.

Sadly though as I mentioned many doctors, nurses etc., don't. Also, meeting Wayne isn't exactly a "social setting", it's more on the lines of a formal setting. If it was me, I'd tend to get in first with "Call me Ferocious", but if you presumed then I'd consider you presumptuous. But as you obviously wouldn't care, we'll leave that one.

Rock God X wrote:

At a press conference, do the reporters say 'David' or 'Steve' when they're asking a question, or do they say 'Mr Moyes' and 'Mr Bruce'? If it's the former (I genuinely don't know), then there's no reason on Earth for them to have to call Fergie 'Sir Alex'.

I don't think so, if everyone else in the press conference is using first names. It's not like they'd be calling him 'Dave' or 'Moyesey' (or whatever). You'd come across as a bigger plank not following what everyone else was doing. The other issue is that respect should be afforded both ways. If David Moyes can expect a 'Mr Moyes' until he says otherwise, then Bob Carolgees of the Salford Echo can expect a 'Mr Carolgees'.

No, I think I got this one 100% right. And unless Sir Alex, or whoever, actually KNEW the reporter (and they obviously get to know them) they would not be likely to use their name at all.

Rock God X wrote:

But there are people out there who have achieved just as much in their particular field (which is probably a lot less glamorous) who don't have the prestige of an inflated title. Why should a man who has made a career out of shltty electronics get a 'Sir Alan', whilst the nurse who has provided palliative care to countless patients gets a plain old 'Ethel'?

He shouldn't. Lord Sugar would be correct. "Alan" would be rude. You don't know him.

She shouldn't. It would (most likely) be "Mrs ...Whatever". Or "Nurse.. Whatever". Or just "Nurse". "Ethel" would be rude. You don't know her.

Re: Honours and gongs : Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:14 pm  

Big Graeme wrote:

It think you'd have better luck arguing that there was a West Ham bias...
Mind to get an honour you need to be British(ish)

They still give honours to foreigners. Wenger, Zola, Gerrard Houllier have received honours. Pele received a knighthood, he just cannot use the title Sir.

West Ham received an abundance of honours because of the world cup winners. Can't argue with that.

Greenwood received his because he managed England. Trevor Brooking, IMO, because he's a mediocre FA man and the FA are the main body who will advise on possible recipients.