Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WT: Zorn tiff no big deal (vs. eye roller)


themurf

Recommended Posts

Confession time, since I'm told Jim Zorn's mini explosion was generating some buzz: I was the eye roller.

The end of the story first: After Jim's press conference (I only call one person 'Coach' and that's the big fella from 980 AM), he talked to myself and Times columnist Dan Daly about the sequence we/I was trying to ask about and chalked it up to a misunderstanding.

Some background: Dan first brought it up and I agreed -- the Lions helped the Redskins get the late first-half field goal by calling timeout with 36 seconds remaining. Zorn had just called a Clinton Portis draw play on second-and-27 from the Redskins' 9-yard line. Translation (we thought): The Redskins are running out the clock and will go to halftime down 10-3. But the Lions wouldn't allow that and called timeout. The Redskins subsequently marched down to get a field goal to make it 10-6. I thought that was a semi turning point. After a penalty-filled first half, the Redskins at least cut into the lead.

I haven't listed to the tape of the Zorn exchange or watched the video. And I won't. I tried to ask about the momentum gained by getting the three on the board and whether Detroit helped the Redskins out and whether Zorn was going to run the clock out.

Zorn thought the subject was about the previous drive (which ended with a Shaun Suisham missed field goal) and his use of timeouts. At the time, I had no idea what he was talking about.

Anyway, I tried to re-phase it more clearly but to no avail. Another reporter asked it more bluntly and Zorn answered.

Click here for full article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I rolled my eyes out of frustration that it took 3-4 questions for us to figure out what sequence he was talking about.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/redskins/2008/Oct/27/zorn-tiff-no-big-deal/

This quote summarizes the problem here. O'Hallaran should be grateful that Zorn spends so much time answering questions and that he tries to answer each question asked. So many HC's dodge the questions and recite cliches. In addition, O'Hallaran should show more respect for Zorn. I don't care if he has to ask 20 questions and they still don't understand each other; you still don't roll your eyes at Zorn. IMO, O'Hallaran should be taught a lesson here and not be allowed to ask any questions at press conferences for awhile. :2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh guys, the article was posted October 27 2008 12:46 AM BY Ryan O'Halloran.

Murph is NOT Ryan.

Some of you are posting like Murph was the :rolleyes:

murf should edit his post then, because unless you click the link his whole post leads one to believe it is him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/redskins/2008/Oct/27/zorn-tiff-no-big-deal/

This quote summarizes the problem here. O'Hallaran should be grateful that Zorn spends so much time answering questions and that he tries to answer each question asked. So many HC's dodge the questions and recite cliches. In addition, O'Hallaran should show more respect for Zorn. I don't care if he has to ask 20 questions and they still don't understand each other; you still don't roll your eyes at Zorn. IMO, O'Hallaran should be taught a lesson here and not be allowed to ask any questions at press conferences for awhile. :2cents:

This is just over the top. Is Zorn royalty and the press are his minions? People post things like KNEEL BEFORE ZORN, and they're kidding. You seem to be serious, though.

They had some miscommunication, and both the reporter and the coach got frustrated.

To me, more telling than Zorn's outburst is that he took the time to get with the reporter afterward and iron out the misunderstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

murf should edit his post then, because unless you click the link his whole post leads one to believe it is him.

The "WT" in the headline of the thread identifies that this is a Washington Times article. As usual, the first few paragraphs are quoted and then a link to the rest of the article is provided. If people aren't bright enough to catch on, then they should probably spend less time posting and more time coloring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "WT" in the headline of the thread identifies that this is a Washington Times article. As usual, the first few paragraphs are quoted and then a link to the rest of the article is provided. If people aren't bright enough to catch on, then they should probably spend less time posting and more time coloring.

Nice insult, "murf".

The way you've constructed the post, and with your press-guy avatar, it's easy to assume you're talking about yourself. It takes clicking on the link to figure it out who you are talking about. So common courtesy would dictate putting O'Halloran's name somewhere in the vicinity of the lede. You know, as the author of the article you apparently are quoting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just over the top. Is Zorn royalty and the press are his minions? People post things like KNEEL BEFORE ZORN, and they're kidding. You seem to be serious, though.

They had some miscommunication, and both the reporter and the coach got frustrated.

To me, more telling than Zorn's outburst is that he took the time to get with the reporter afterward and iron out the misunderstanding.

To each their own opinion, but yes I'm serious, and no I don't think it's over the top. Nobody said Zorn is royalty, but I think reporters need to show basic respect for people they're questioning, and eye rolling is not professional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "WT" in the headline of the thread identifies that this is a Washington Times article. As usual, the first few paragraphs are quoted and then a link to the rest of the article is provided. If people aren't bright enough to catch on, then they should probably spend less time posting and more time coloring.

To be fair, Murf, I did the same thing too at first, despite the title. Considering the conversational style of the article, I can understand the confusion.

Usually when I post an article, I post the link first and then the article summary, but that's just me.

Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...