Gary Neville – Banning the media harms Forest’s reputation

In this Member Insights piece, David Alexander, the founder and MD of Calacus PR pens down Gary Neville’s evolution from a breath of fresh air as a pundit in 2011 to a figure often at the heart of controversy highlights the growing tensions between media freedom and club interests in modern football.

When Gary Neville became a pundit for Sky Sports in 2011, he was a breath of fresh air, offering insight and opinion not seen in football broadcasting before.

After a brief and disastrous spell as coach of Valencia, he made his return to Sky Sports and has regularly set the football narrative agenda – for better or for worse.

His punditry has become predictable in recent years, with club biases tainting his performances behind the microphone and leading to criticism from fans and journalists alike.

When Nottingham Forest banned Neville from attending their final crucial Premier League match against Chelsea at the City Ground, it sparked waves of criticism and sparked debate about the importance of editorial independence.

It’s not the first time sports clubs have banned the media. 

In the past decade or so, Swindon Town banned its local newspaper, the Advertiser, at the request of its chairman, Lee Power, while Newcastle banned their local newspaper and threatened legal action, a decision which even prompted debate in Parliament.

Former Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson boycotted the BBC between 2004 and 2011 after allegations made against Jason Ferguson, his son, in a TV documentary and the club also banned selected journalists in 2023 over the way then-manager Erik ten Hag’s press conferences were being reported. 

Forest have previous as well, having banned The Guardian and The Observer after reporter Daniel Taylor did not file a match report for a game six months previously.

Where Neville is concerned, the controversy began after Forest’s 2-2 draw with Leicester City on May 11, when striker Taiwo Awoniyi suffered a bad injury. 

Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis confronted manager Nuno Espírito Santo on the pitch, appearing frustrated that his side had drawn against already-relegated Leicester City, a result which would severely hamper their chances of qualifying for the UEFA Champions League. 

Commentating for Sky Sports, Neville criticsed Marinakis’s actions and said: “What the Forest owner has just done on the pitch over at the City Ground is absolutely scandalous.

“If I was Nuno, I’d be going and having a very strong word with him, because that is an absolute scandal.

“He’s just qualified them for a European competition, and from where that club’s been, and to be remonstrated with on that pitch in front of the club’s fans is an absolute joke.” Neville went on to suggest that Nuno should negotiate his departure from the club.

Forest put out their own statement, accusing Neville of spreading “fake news” and claiming that Marinakis was focused on player welfare when he entered the pitch and that any other interpretation of events was “ill informed outrage for the purposes of personal social media traction.” The club also emphasised their commitment to the mental and physical well-being of their players and staff. 

It’s not the first time Neville has criticised Forest. Sky had to apologise in July for “any offence caused” after he accused the club of acting like a “mafia gang” after their 2-0 loss at Everton in April 2024.

When it came to that final Premier League game, Forest denied Neville accreditation, leading Sky Sports to alter their broadcast plans and present their coverage from their London studios.

Sky Sports reaffirmed their support for Neville and adjusting their coverage accordingly and said: Sky said in a statement: “Earlier this week, Sky Sports confirmed its first pick for the last day of the Premier League season which was Nottingham Forest v Chelsea. Gary Neville was confirmed to co-commentate live from the City Ground.

“Sky Sports was subsequently informed by Nottingham Forest that Gary Neville would be denied accreditation to the match. This was an unprecedented and unwelcome step.

“As a result, Sky Sports has decided to revise its production plans and has taken the decision to present the game from Sky Studios in west London. As he was no longer able to commentate from the ground, Gary has chosen to not be part of the coverage on Sunday — a decision fully supported by Sky. Sky will continue to have a commentary team at the ground.”

Neville expressed disappointment over the ban, describing it as “unprecedented” in his 14-year broadcasting career. He stated on Instagram: “Personally, I think it’s disappointing that a great club like Nottingham Forest have been reduced to making such a decision.

“I’ve dished out my fair share of criticism and praise in the last 14 years of doing this job and have never come close to this unprecedented action.

“Whilst they have every right to choose who they let into their own stadium, it’s symptomatic of things that have happened over the last 12 months with the club.

“I wish the coaching staff, players and fans of the club all the best in their quest to achieve Champions League football.”

Neville has a huge social media following of almost six million, giving him a huge platform to set the agenda. His measured statement very much put Forest on the back foot, and unable to respond without appearing even more retaliatory. His proactive approach gave him the high ground, even amongst his detractors.

The Premier League also expressed concern, engaging in discussions with broadcasters to address the implications of such actions on media access and rights agreements.

Those comments could have struck a nerve with Marinakis who was accused of match-fixing and inciting hooligans and claimed to be the target of a smear campaign back in his Greek homeland.

Given that Sky have paid billions for the rights to show Premier League football, excluding members of their presentation team whose views or narrative are not sympathetic to a specific club sets a worrying precedent, potentially leading to a culture where only favourable coverage is permitted, stifling constructive criticism and accountability.

The decision by Forest to ban Neville highlights the delicate balance between protecting a club’s image and upholding journalistic freedom. 

Forest broke no Premier League rules by banning Neville, but excluding critical voices gives the impression of censorship and a lack of confidence.

It’s likely that future broadcasting agreements include clauses that prevent clubs from picking and choosing who they allow to cover their matches and a review by the Premier League seems likely ahead of next season. 

In the short term, Sky could reduce the number of times it broadcasts Forest games, which would have financial implications for the club. 

While clubs may disagree with media portrayals, open dialogue and mutual respect are essential for the integrity of the sport and journalism in general. 

Suppressing dissenting voices not only damages relationships with broadcasters but also risks alienating fans who rely on diverse perspectives to engage with the game.

For communications support and information, please contact Calacus via info@calacus.com