Following further inaccurate claims made by Blackburn Rovers, the Lancashire Telegraph would like to address these following the match against Charlton Athletic.
Despite the club lobbying Charlton to bar Rovers reporter Elliott Jackson from The Valley, he was permitted entry and provided exemplary reporting of the match, despite being refused interviews with players or the coach, and being barred from asking questions during the post-match press conference.
One of the most galling claims by Rovers, made in a statement on Saturday, is an alleged refusal to cooperate by the Lancashire Telegraph.
The club stated we were being unreasonable by sending Elliott to Charlton on Saturday.
RECAP: Blackburn Rovers ban Lancashire Telegraph over reporter's coverage
As has been clearly communicated by us, we have limited resources covering a broad sporting landscape, with careful planning needed and staff rotas drawn up weeks in advance.
Sports reporters also need media accreditation and to plan travel arrangements, which are also organised weeks in advance.
The truth of the situation is Elliott was allocated, as is his role, to cover the Rovers game weeks ago, and it was not possible logistically at such short notice to allocate a different reporter.
It was Friday lunchtime when a different reporter was turned away from the press conference, and negotiations, including with the EFL, went on late into Friday afternoon, far too short notice for the sportsdesk’s diary to be so drastically rearranged.
The claim we are being unreasonable is false, it is in fact the Rovers hierarchy that is unreasonable by failing to accept and acknowledge the logistical jigsaw that is local sports coverage.
MORE: Our reporting commitment to readers after Rovers ban
MORE: Key takeaways from dismal defeat at the Valley for Rovers
Other allegations include the publishing of “inaccurate claims and misleading social media posts” – a claim we say is false, and we have seen messages which corroborate our viewpoint.
The claim of “leaking of sensitive information around team selection” is either naïve or a deliberate ignorance of basic journalism – using information from reliable sources.
It also ignores the fact that if information is leaked, the problem is inside their own organisation, and they would be better off finding the source than picking fights with us.
The club claims requests for a meeting between executives have been unfulfilled. A meeting was scheduled, and we were always willing to meet, and hope that despite this latest action from Rovers, it will still take place instead of resorting to tit-for-tat statements.
Other issues included Elliott directly approaching players – as is his right; these are grown men. While understandably the club would prefer oversight and to try and control the narrative, there is no requirement to go through the club.
This is the same as how councils would prefer news journalists to approach senior councillors through their press offices, but we are well within our rights to go to them directly.
The club also alleges “stories were banked to disrupt the club” during the transfer window, something we refute.
The one time we did sit on a story was actually when we were doing the club a favour.
We remain open and willing to meet with Blackburn Rovers to resolve this issue in a timely manner in the interests of our readers and Rovers fans, so we can continue to bring you the coverage you deserve.
Share