Sad to see Newcastle United putting out a statement, calling on Premier League chairmen to ban the Mail on Sunday and the Daily Mail.

Having been on the receiving end of bans by a number of football clubs over the years (oh how we miss George Reynolds), it's a move which ultimately achieves nothing.

NUFC banned reporters from the Mail stable last season after "repeated irresponsible press coverage".

The club was considering lifting the ban when the Mail on Sunday published its story about FA chairman Lord Triesman.

Now, the MoS and Mail remain banned for the foreseeable future and other Premier League clubs are being asked to follow suit.

I have my own concerns about the Lord Triesman story, which resulted from a secretly taped conversation. The ex-FA chairman was covertly recorded, saying Spain and Russia were planning to bribe World Cup referees.

It was a stupid thing to say but Lord Triesman was speaking privately to a supposed friend and did not stand to make any personal gain.

The story has damaged England's bid to host the 2018 World Cup, which guarantees matches at Newcastle and Sunderland if successful.

In the circumstances, the decision to go ahead with publication is questionable.

But I draw the line at imposing a ban and encouraging other clubs to do the same. I'll be amazed, and disappointed, if any other clubs follow suit.

There will always be disagreements between football clubs and newspapers. But where is the line to be drawn? Who's to say who's right and who's wrong?

The relationship between football and the media is mutually beneficial.

Clubs that go down the "banning" route - just because they have the power to do so - are treading a dubious path.

Football writers work together. The Mail and Mail on Sunday will still get the coverage they want and Newcastle United will end up being isolated.