Sir Alex Ferguson’s snubbing of the BBC has come to be second nature when watching Match of the Day, we expect Mike Phelan, or before him Carlos Quieroz, to come out and speak to the organisation. Manchester United have enacted this scenario game after game with no sign of it relenting, the sole origin of this state of affairs came from a BBC documentary in 2004 which investigated Ferguson’s son Jason and his affiliation with the club as an agent. It didn’t cast a favourable light upon his son and therefore Ferguson demanded an apology, the BBC declined and the rest is history.

It has become a dictate under new legislation from the Premier League for managers to comply with the interview process as the BBC is a team-broadcast partner. So in one corner we have the national broadcasting provider who wishes to bring highlights of every single Premier League manager before and after a game, giving foresight and reactions to the game. Whilst in the opposite corner we have an obdurate, head-strong and scorned manager who hasn’t given interviews to the BBC previously and refuses to yield to these new rules.

The Premier League is therefore likely to issue a £65,000 fine to Manchester United due to the continued refusal of Ferguson to cooperate with the BBC; they also have the power to issue further £20,000 fines for every other instance of refusal. The Glazers ought to have their already depleted bank account at the ready, for Ferguson is unlikely to change tact. But when you have David Gill as your chief executive the rules suddenly become less stringent, as he also resides on The FA’s main board of representatives. A softer penalty is expected due to these circumstances, but over the course of the season this will accumulate steadily.

For me it appears rather dogmatic of The FA to curtail and influence the behaviour of Ferguson, especially when he has a former grievance which has been left to ferment since 2004, one he recognises as being unreasonable. The street heads in a one-way direction, managers must elicit dulcet tones that don’t impinge upon the governing bodies interests, but when they do the sky darkens over the Wembley headquarters and threats get issued when referees are criticised and certain interviews are boycotted.

I mean does it really give people sleepless nights when Ferguson, yet again, doesn’t speak to the BBC? It merely seems an exercise in trying to gain a moral victory over someone who has stood steadfast in their judgment. The FA have hardly won over managers in recent times, with Sam Allardyce, Harry Redknapp and Ian Holloway all having fallen foul of the BBC or the Premier League. With ultimatums being announced by Redknapp and Holloway, The FA have had to reconsider their handling of wanton threats and subdue their alacrity in, what they see as, defending the game.

Ferguson won’t relent, he’ll continue to rebuke the BBC’s advances and incur the financial pains with a shrug of the shoulders. Whilst freedom of speech is the positive slogan, the refusal to speak is the negative and should hold as much as the former, for to be coerced into speech is equivalent to being denied the option of speech.

To read more articles of mine follow me on Twitter or RSS Feed.