Author Topic: To John Romano re your article  (Read 13417 times)

Wombat

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2873
  • Your name tattooed to my ass!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #50 on: August 13, 2007, 10:03:17 PM »
Romano---Nicely played...

Sending the man whore over here to dumb down a thead that obviously exposes you...Now it makes sense why you guys at MD keep DA around...

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #51 on: August 13, 2007, 10:39:21 PM »

Well...looks like Romano decided to play ball, allow me to retort:





Thanks Derek!!

Uhh boy…. Look at what happens when you let Bob Chic loose on a keyboard unsupervised.

First of all, at least in this case, having Bob discuss “facts” is like having ENRON do your accounting. Why would I call or E-mail Bob when I had access to first hand info, not third party info as Bob erroneously states? I got my facts straight from the horses’ mouths. In fact, if I had bothered to contact Bob, then I really would have been relying on third party information. The day I need Bob Chic to verify a fact is the day I’ll start selling ice cubes to Eskimos.


First hand info? Thats strange...I thought I had spoken to LEE myself about what course of action we should take....don't know what  "horse" you're talking about..


However, when I’m wrong, I’ll be the first to admit it. And, in the 20 years I’ve been doing this I’ve had to do it very few times. But, hey, even Wolf Blitzer has reported on bad info. So, I’ll fall on my sword. Yes, Bob, is right, Lee’s suspension is up the day of the AC Pro, not the day after as I had reported. However, I disagree it has any importance. The fact remains that IF the IFBB wanted Lee back, a decision could have been made long ago to Let Lee compete in the AC Pro and qualify for the O. Twenty four hours before or after it doesn’t mater. The issue here is, that deal Lee rejected nine months ago is the same deal he was looking for a few weeks ago. The deal he was going to get over Jim Manion’s dead body.

Why Bob wouldn’t have known that, was a rhetorical question. I know he knew it when he publicly went to bat for Lee. My question is, why go to bat for Lee when you know it’s gong to take stepping over the Boss’ dead body? I’m not questioning Bob’s integrity, I’m telling him he’s full of shit and sold Lee out. Either that or he really doesn’t know WTF he’s talking about. Which is entirely possible.

WTF are you talking about? "Sold Lee out to who? and for what? It had nothing to do with stepping over Manions dead body as you put it, but going to bat at LEE's request, as the suspension was up the SAME DAY..."SAME DAY"....that's why it WAS relevant, wasn't the day after, or a week later....



I also find it interesting that as “Athlete Rep” that it is people such as Steve Blechman and Tom Platz who go to bat for Lee and actually get somewhere.


Really? Please tell us all where Blechman got, exactly?...he got nothing Manion wasn't willing to give. And what has Platz gotten?


 Why is Tom Platz going to bat for Lee today? Isn’t Lee still in the IFBB? He’s only suspended, not disjoined. Therefore, Lee is still availed to representation by the athletes’ representative. But, it appears that Tom is getting a lot farther than the athlete’s rep. which is good.

Once again...what has he gotten? Lee's suspension is up on the ACPro date...STILL.


Personally, I would like nothing more than for Lee Priest to be able to compete again in the IFBB. I think that under Tom’s wing Lee could retire from the IFBB in four or five years in a much better place than he is right now.

This whole thing can be summed up by the FACT that Jim Manion himself came up to me at the USA in Vegas and told me my editorial was RIGHT ON.

Editorial regarding what? If it's THIS article I'm referencing...the only thing he agreed with was your stance on Lee playing the wrong card...he knew nothing on your comments to me.

 Isn’t Jimmy Chairman (Boss) of the IFBB? So, Bob, really, who’s the jackass?

You are, as evidenced by you thinking you know whats going on....once again, leave my name out of your column in the future.


“(this wouldn't be the first time, would it?)” I think Jim Manion knows what’s going on in the IFBB, don’t you?



Alex23

  • Guest
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #52 on: August 13, 2007, 10:44:58 PM »
Bob Chicherillo '08

siouxcountry

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Team Ripitupbaby!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #53 on: August 13, 2007, 11:20:47 PM »
Bob,

Why not just come clean with your Duh Bull gimmick account?

Chick

  • The Pros
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12899
  • sometimes you get the elevator, somtimes the shaft
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #54 on: August 13, 2007, 11:28:43 PM »
this you, bro....?

why not just "come clean'?

flexingtonsteele

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5653
  • The new age pussy Punisher!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #55 on: August 13, 2007, 11:48:45 PM »
LOL Bob. SiouxCountry, is such a schmoe its not even funny.

BOB CHIC OWNING MACHINE
1st: John Romano
Then: Derek Anthony
Now: SiouxCountry

No one is safe in Bobs reign of terror!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

this you, bro....?

why not just "come clean'?

siouxcountry

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Team Ripitupbaby!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #56 on: August 13, 2007, 11:52:20 PM »
this you, bro....?

why not just "come clean'?

That's not me.

siouxcountry

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Team Ripitupbaby!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #57 on: August 13, 2007, 11:52:59 PM »
LOL Bob. SiouxCountry, is such a schmoe its not even funny.

BOB CHIC OWNING MACHINE
1st: John Romano
Then: Derek Anthony
Now: SiouxCountry

No one is safe in Bobs reign of terror!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Damn you are sensitive.

flexingtonsteele

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5653
  • The new age pussy Punisher!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #58 on: August 13, 2007, 11:58:03 PM »
damn you are pathetic!

Damn you are sensitive.

Andre Nickatina

  • Time Out
  • Getbig IV
  • *
  • Posts: 3133
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #59 on: August 14, 2007, 12:01:56 AM »
Chick took MD down. Smoked him. damn.

D.L. 5

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2022
  • WILL HARRIS: BRINGING GAY BACK!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #60 on: August 14, 2007, 12:02:20 AM »
Chick you have been retorted:

"First hand info? Thats strange...I thought I had spoken to LEE myself about what course of action we should take....don't know what "horse" you're talking about.."

Jim Manion and Steve Blechman.


"WTF are you talking about? "Sold Lee out to who? and for what? It had nothing to do with stepping over Manions dead body as you put it, but going to bat at LEE's request, as the suspension was up the SAME DAY..."SAME DAY"....that's why it WAS relevant, wasn't the day after, or a week later"

Irelevant because if Manion wanted Lee back in he would be back in - same day, next day, doesn't matter. You sold him out by trying to make yourself look good by "going to bat" for Lee when you knew there wasn't a chance in hell anything was going to happen.


"Really? Please tell us all where Blechman got, exactly?...he got nothing Manion wasn't willing to give. And what has Platz gotten?"

Of course not. But who got Manion to give it? Not you. And, if Lee gets anywhere now it will be because of Tom, not you.

"Once again...what has he gotten? Lee's suspension is up on the ACPro date...STILL."

Nothing yet. Are you the athlete's rep or the IFBB's rep?


"Editorial regarding what? If it's THIS article I'm referencing...the only thing he agreed with was your stance on Lee playing the wrong card...he knew nothing on your comments to me."

Jim is referencing the same editorial you are. He seems to disagree with you. WTF are you talking about? "he knew nothing on your comments to me." He's saying I'm right on about the same editorial you have a problem with.

"You are, as evidenced by you thinking you know whats going on....once again, leave my name out of your column in the future."

You are a public figure doing public things. I'm a reporter. Get used to it.
JAY "OLIVE OIL" CUTLER!

siouxcountry

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Team Ripitupbaby!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #61 on: August 14, 2007, 12:02:52 AM »
damn you are pathetic!


And who are you again?

flexingtonsteele

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5653
  • The new age pussy Punisher!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #62 on: August 14, 2007, 12:04:14 AM »
I bet you really want to know dont you.

But I know who you are!



And who are you again?

LatsMcGee

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7464
  • Getbig!
Re: TO JOHN ROMANO:
« Reply #63 on: August 14, 2007, 01:56:34 AM »
they all worked for the same company

silvio,kai greene,mark dugale,johnny jackson,paco bautista  go look for your self  www.muscleweb.com same shit you call me gay for !

funny thing is im straighter then a arrow i just like the gay community there nice to me ! dont mean im gay or gay for pay..............sorry to disapoint you  >:(

So you like gays but you don't like blacks?  What a guy.

bigdumbbell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17468
  • Bon Voyage !
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #64 on: August 14, 2007, 02:51:06 AM »
I bet you really want to know dont you.

But I know who you are!




which one is sue counntry... the guy with the wig or the fat guy without?

flexingtonsteele

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5653
  • The new age pussy Punisher!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #65 on: August 14, 2007, 03:55:32 AM »
the fat one without suprisingly


which one is sue counntry... the guy with the wig or the fat guy without?

just_a_pilgrim

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2455
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #66 on: August 14, 2007, 04:37:05 AM »
What's the big deal? Romano and MD just put in their magazine what the flavour of the month is and give shit to whatever the opposite is. Sure it's fair enough to do what it takes to sell magazines but who's waiting for their next 180 turn where they trash everything they stood for? I bought 1 issue after Lee left and it sucked so that was it for me. The best columns were Jay, Lee, Cormier and even Dillett and they're all gone, what's the point of reading it anymore.

davidpaul

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7585
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #67 on: August 14, 2007, 04:48:09 AM »
DP, are you saying that the "NY mafia click" are making a joke out of bodybuilding?

Indeed I am,

Bob nicely played as usual. 8)

Rampage

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #68 on: August 14, 2007, 05:04:47 AM »
John Romano - omg this guy is such a waste


The utttter desperation to do ANYTHING to make flex mag look bad is annoying ! Its pathetic romano , really


I read MD , i read it for the athletes , not for fucking john rom.This is significant statement  because it indicates what MD SHOULD be doing if it wants to be the premier mag , and thats let the quality of your content speak louder than romanos continuous flaming of EEEEEEEEEEVERYONE and any1 associated with FLEX


You are a public figure doing public things. I'm a reporter. Get used to it.

John , just like you are a reporter and can report as you choose (FACTS OR NOT) , well im a customer.....and you know how it is .......................T HE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT!

Original Sin

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1547
  • You fucking disappoint me!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #69 on: August 14, 2007, 05:52:23 AM »
This should be very interesting come next Monday on air.  200,000 People listening to PBW to hear Bob's take on this as opposed to 2 on Muscle Radio's side.
Bob grab a quick telephone interview with Lee to confirm your points.

This is the EXACT same type of hack reporting that Romano did that caused MD to have their press passes removed.  Romano had an interview with Blechman and then proceeded to write his version of what happened.  Steve Blechman later had to correct him in an open letter explaining how Romano's passion got the better of him and may have exaggerated certain points.  A nice political way to say the man screwed up.

Romano calls himself a reporter, this is laughable.  A reporter reports the facts. John changes the facts to suit his needs, this is a gossip columnist.

I will say it again

BOYCOTT MD

Just Bad Bad Blood!

D.L. 5

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2022
  • WILL HARRIS: BRINGING GAY BACK!
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #70 on: August 14, 2007, 05:57:15 AM »
why did lee stop his column was there a fall out?

also why did dillet stop?
JAY "OLIVE OIL" CUTLER!

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #71 on: August 14, 2007, 06:01:47 AM »

Why should he be any different than anyone else?  Only the young are naive enough to not understand that everyone acts primarily in their own self-interest.



On this, he's right.  Those transgendered freaks that call themselves "women" do nothing but hurt the sport.

Cicherillo should get credit for taking a pro-female stance.

Definitely.
As empty as paradise

dknole

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 593
  • Getbig!
Re: TO JOHN ROMANO:
« Reply #72 on: August 14, 2007, 06:47:44 AM »
lmao

team MD !!!!! 

MUSCULAR DEVELOPMENT RULES!! GETBIG IS A BUNCH OF BITCHES !!! TO MANY HATERS

Please learn to spell you f-cktard.

The Squadfather

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25840
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #73 on: August 14, 2007, 07:02:08 AM »
chic.....what do you think of this (taken from MD)??

I hate to say this but, despite being one of my favorite writers, John does sometimes get his statements wrong. There was once an article about the death of a bodybuilder name DJ Johns, and John reported it as JD Dawodu.

However, and I mean a big however,
Chick, has a hidden agenda of self preservation and promotion. Its his only chance to stay alive in this sport. As an athlete's rep he is suppose to have the athletes best interest at heart, but he doesn't. He has only his interest. His articles in Flex are both contradictory as well as self promoting drivel. He goes on and on about how atheletes should conduct themselves but he himself, has done many wrongs. Its much like the pot calling the kettle black.

His recent push to change some of the judging has done nothing to help out the sport and has left the athletes working harder in a much more depleted state. (coontinous callouts without changing the athletes does not improve judging).

Also Chick is underhanged, meeting with judges for dinner the night before he places 3rd at the NOC, and not to mention his win at that masters show.

He also belittles the women's side of the support suggesting the ifbb even distance themselves from the women because they drain the money from the mens side.

John may not always get his facts straight, but he is a damn good writer and far more interesting then chick will ever be.

Chick is just scum in my book. (snake in the grass).
     

hi Romano.

UK Gold

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1541
  • Riding on the Getbig wind
Re: To John Romano re your article
« Reply #74 on: August 14, 2007, 07:09:32 AM »
Chick can be an arrogant SOB, but NO ONE can deny he has the best interests of bodybuilders at heart. He has gone to bat for both Lee and Milos - two of his fiercest online tormentors. He is also the most eloquent and well presented bodybuilder. Compare that to the hideously abhorrent freaks and ex cons from MD.