| New chairman stands down 11:02 - Nov 22 with 25475 views | biggar |
Just had email saying new chairman has stood down. |  | | |  |
| New chairman stands down on 13:58 - Nov 22 with 2396 views | Nookiejack |
| New chairman stands down on 11:40 - Nov 22 by MoscowJack |
How can that statement be released without mentioning the FACT that he HAD to resign as he is over his 12 year maximum tenure?
I can't believe how this can honestly be happening.
At least have some balls and come out with the truth instead of blaming some p!ssed off fans for being so unhappy with what's going on that they felt the need to do some digging!
It's not their fault that they've got so much wrong....but it's our fault for reporting it?
Also, what about the Associate Director role? Does he still have that? |
That’s an interesting one to watch out for.
If the Trust is allowed an observer position at Club Board meetings in addition to the Supporter Director then will the new observer be called an ‘Associate Director’?
Also the previous set up would have allowed both the new Chairman of the Trust (as the Observer) and the Supporter Director to attend Club oard meetings. (Phil I suppose didn’t attend Club Board meetings - so was Will still intending to do so - or was he going to relinquish that Observer role to another Trust Board member).
I have no view re any potential conflicts of interest in respect of both the Trust Chairman and Supporter Director attending Club Board meetings. Or whether another Trust Board member should attend as Observer- with the Trust Supporter Director. The Observer maybe then reporting back to the full Trust Board. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 13:59 - Nov 22 with 2384 views | Darran |
| New chairman stands down on 13:31 - Nov 22 by TheResurrection |
Your whole sad life revolves around 2 things
This site
And me
But you'll never be me, you'll always be the same sad old soul looking to bait people online.
You've tried your hardest to mention the same thing at least 6 times in the last two days, hoping you get some reaction from it. You've had at least 4 or 5 different posters trying to shut you up but continue you do.
How many more times do you want to repeat yourself or get others to repeat the same things to you.
You're boring as fack. |
You have no idea about my life çunt and the day I repeat myself as much as you I’ll start worrying.
Anyway what part of what I’ve said do you disagree with? [Post edited 22 Nov 2017 14:05]
|  |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 14:04 - Nov 22 with 2363 views | Nookiejack |
| New chairman stands down on 11:40 - Nov 22 by MoscowJack |
How can that statement be released without mentioning the FACT that he HAD to resign as he is over his 12 year maximum tenure?
I can't believe how this can honestly be happening.
At least have some balls and come out with the truth instead of blaming some p!ssed off fans for being so unhappy with what's going on that they felt the need to do some digging!
It's not their fault that they've got so much wrong....but it's our fault for reporting it?
Also, what about the Associate Director role? Does he still have that? |
That’s an interesting one to watch out for.
If the Trust is allowed an observer position at Club Board meetings in addition to the Supporter Director then will the new observer be called an ‘Associate Director’?
Also the previous set up would have allowed both the new Chairman of the Trust (as the Observer) and the Supporter Director to attend Club oard meetings. (Phil I suppose didn’t attend Club Board meetings - so was Will still intending to do so - or was he going to relinquish that Observer role to another Trust Board member).
I have no view re any potential conflicts of interest in respect of both the Trust Chairman and Supporter Director attending Club Board meetings. Or whether another Trust Board member should attend as Observer- with the Trust Supporter Director. The Observer maybe then reporting back to the full Trust Board. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 14:06 - Nov 22 with 2354 views | MoscowJack |
| New chairman stands down on 13:58 - Nov 22 by Nookiejack |
That’s an interesting one to watch out for.
If the Trust is allowed an observer position at Club Board meetings in addition to the Supporter Director then will the new observer be called an ‘Associate Director’?
Also the previous set up would have allowed both the new Chairman of the Trust (as the Observer) and the Supporter Director to attend Club oard meetings. (Phil I suppose didn’t attend Club Board meetings - so was Will still intending to do so - or was he going to relinquish that Observer role to another Trust Board member).
I have no view re any potential conflicts of interest in respect of both the Trust Chairman and Supporter Director attending Club Board meetings. Or whether another Trust Board member should attend as Observer- with the Trust Supporter Director. The Observer maybe then reporting back to the full Trust Board. |
It's been reported in the Western Mail that he's stepped down from his Associate Director role too.
I don't think there should be any conflict of interest at all, not since Huw Cooze was forced to leave his role. We need transparency and consistency, but I'll leave it up to the ones who understand this better than me to work our the best way forward. | |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 14:26 - Nov 22 with 2289 views | Swanseajill |
| New chairman stands down on 13:19 - Nov 22 by jack247 |
Well exactly. Phil Sumbler may or not have been the best person for the job, same goes for Will Morris. I genuinely don’t know.
Who is going to want to take it on now though.
The only people winning here are the ones who don’t have SCFCs best interests at heart. |
Your last sentence hits home 247.
And the amount of work voluntarily that Phil and the rest of the board have put in, is to be admired.
Talk is so cheap, let those that have given the Trust so much grief on here, step up to the plate and show us all where the Trust has gone wrong, and volunteer to replace the board members and show us what they can do.
The share sellers, along with the new owners must be ecstatic at this moment in time. I really fear for the future of this club if we lose the only input on proceedings that we have,, the Trust..as the voice of our fans. |  | | |
| New chairman stands down on 14:29 - Nov 22 with 2269 views | Darran |
| New chairman stands down on 14:26 - Nov 22 by Swanseajill |
Your last sentence hits home 247.
And the amount of work voluntarily that Phil and the rest of the board have put in, is to be admired.
Talk is so cheap, let those that have given the Trust so much grief on here, step up to the plate and show us all where the Trust has gone wrong, and volunteer to replace the board members and show us what they can do.
The share sellers, along with the new owners must be ecstatic at this moment in time. I really fear for the future of this club if we lose the only input on proceedings that we have,, the Trust..as the voice of our fans. |
Great post. | |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 14:43 - Nov 22 with 2226 views | londonlisa2001 |
| New chairman stands down on 14:26 - Nov 22 by Swanseajill |
Your last sentence hits home 247.
And the amount of work voluntarily that Phil and the rest of the board have put in, is to be admired.
Talk is so cheap, let those that have given the Trust so much grief on here, step up to the plate and show us all where the Trust has gone wrong, and volunteer to replace the board members and show us what they can do.
The share sellers, along with the new owners must be ecstatic at this moment in time. I really fear for the future of this club if we lose the only input on proceedings that we have,, the Trust..as the voice of our fans. |
The issue as i see it, is that those who have been left on the Trust board (with some exceptions I'm sure, we know Uxbridge is one, for example), seem to want to go against the wishes of Phil, Matt and I imagine others.
There is no unity of thought, and Phil's resignation statement brought that into sharp focus.
Many on here are deeply concerned with the current direction of travel, as there is so much distrust of the ownership of the club (as can be seen from the latest thread which indicates that the VPs are the latest target).
After all, the person who's led the Trust for years is also saying he thinks the Trust is going wrong, by resigning. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 14:51 - Nov 22 with 2175 views | Bobby_Fischer |
Shocking statement, have they ever taken responsibility for anything?
A few people asked the new chairman some tough but fair questions and he's resigned. Brilliant.
How did he expect to negotiate with the Americans if this is all it takes?
Even if he wasn't over his 12 years, it doesn't seem like he has the strength of mind or "willpower" (excuse the pun) to hold the position, especially not in these times. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| New chairman stands down on 14:52 - Nov 22 with 2174 views | vetchonian |
| New chairman stands down on 14:43 - Nov 22 by londonlisa2001 |
The issue as i see it, is that those who have been left on the Trust board (with some exceptions I'm sure, we know Uxbridge is one, for example), seem to want to go against the wishes of Phil, Matt and I imagine others.
There is no unity of thought, and Phil's resignation statement brought that into sharp focus.
Many on here are deeply concerned with the current direction of travel, as there is so much distrust of the ownership of the club (as can be seen from the latest thread which indicates that the VPs are the latest target).
After all, the person who's led the Trust for years is also saying he thinks the Trust is going wrong, by resigning. |
Absolutely whihc is why an EGM is needed as soon as!
Concerned fans need to sign up and seize control of the Trust if for nothing more than to maximise the money that can be got form our "investment" and ensure that the Trust does not go wrong by allowing those left in charge to carry on regardless | |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 15:01 - Nov 22 with 2144 views | longlostjack |
| New chairman stands down on 14:52 - Nov 22 by vetchonian |
Absolutely whihc is why an EGM is needed as soon as!
Concerned fans need to sign up and seize control of the Trust if for nothing more than to maximise the money that can be got form our "investment" and ensure that the Trust does not go wrong by allowing those left in charge to carry on regardless |
I agree. |  |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 15:01 - Nov 22 with 2140 views | Landore_Jack |
The Trust website still has Will Morris listed as Associate Director/Vice Chairman. So who's left?
Meet The Board
+ Member elected to serve until July 2018
++ Member elected to serve until July 2019
Stuart McDonald ++
Supporter Director/Treasurer
Viv Brooks +
Fund-raising
Alan Lewis +
Membership/Community
Ron Knuszka +
Community/Fundraising
Cath Dyer ++
Disability issues/Media/ Welsh Language spokesperson
Viv Williams +
Commercial
Andrew Godden ++
Community and IT
Sian Davies ++
Community
Co-Opted Members to serve until 31 July 2018
Dave Dalton
Roger Goodwin
Secretary to the Board
Nigel Hamer
Affiliated Representatives
David Little
Legal |  |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 15:02 - Nov 22 with 2135 views | Swanseajill |
| New chairman stands down on 14:43 - Nov 22 by londonlisa2001 |
The issue as i see it, is that those who have been left on the Trust board (with some exceptions I'm sure, we know Uxbridge is one, for example), seem to want to go against the wishes of Phil, Matt and I imagine others.
There is no unity of thought, and Phil's resignation statement brought that into sharp focus.
Many on here are deeply concerned with the current direction of travel, as there is so much distrust of the ownership of the club (as can be seen from the latest thread which indicates that the VPs are the latest target).
After all, the person who's led the Trust for years is also saying he thinks the Trust is going wrong, by resigning. |
Until I've been told by the people involved, and not read "hearsay" on here Lisa, I don't feel comfortable making guesses on why people have resigned or stayed on the Trust board.
How do we know that Ux is staying on because he has an idea that removing himself from the board........means he can do nowt for the betterment of this club.( and that's not a guess really, as I know the guy very well, and what he feels for SCFC.)
Which is the only reason we should cut away all these Chinese whispers, and concentrate on what we can do to stop this club being ground down to obscurity and slowly being bled dry.
I admire your posts of recent days, mostly covering....FACTS.  | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 15:13 - Nov 22 with 2094 views | LeonWasGod |
| New chairman stands down on 11:19 - Nov 22 by Jacket |
Trust needs to sell off shares now while they're still worth something and put the money in some bank account somewhere ready for when the proverbial hits the fan. It is the only way.
They're wasting their time, they have no influence, cut your losses, stash it somewhere and then we'll have a club when the yanks sod off having burnt their fingers and taken the club up shit's creek. |
It's not the only way at all. And with the money they'd get they'd have to wait until we were in League 2 at best before they could afford to buy us. They'd be sitting on a bunch of cash with nothing to spend it on and completely excluded from the club. That's the worse scenario imo as they'd cease to be relevant.
The baiting on here has backfired imo. No problem with pointing out that the Trust are in breach of their own rules - that's fine and correct. But then the issue should have been brought to the attention of the Trust through the correct channels by the members. Now the Trust (and Club) have an excuse to publicly blame the fans and the real problems will not be reported.
On the flip side, how seriously thin skinned do you need to be to be rattled by a tiny minority who are aiming strong views (and only 1 personal attack that I saw on here that falls under this potentially libelous claim)? Maybe someone that easily rattled isn't suited to a position in the public scrutiny anyway. |  | | |
| New chairman stands down on 15:16 - Nov 22 with 2080 views | jack247 |
| New chairman stands down on 15:13 - Nov 22 by LeonWasGod |
It's not the only way at all. And with the money they'd get they'd have to wait until we were in League 2 at best before they could afford to buy us. They'd be sitting on a bunch of cash with nothing to spend it on and completely excluded from the club. That's the worse scenario imo as they'd cease to be relevant.
The baiting on here has backfired imo. No problem with pointing out that the Trust are in breach of their own rules - that's fine and correct. But then the issue should have been brought to the attention of the Trust through the correct channels by the members. Now the Trust (and Club) have an excuse to publicly blame the fans and the real problems will not be reported.
On the flip side, how seriously thin skinned do you need to be to be rattled by a tiny minority who are aiming strong views (and only 1 personal attack that I saw on here that falls under this potentially libelous claim)? Maybe someone that easily rattled isn't suited to a position in the public scrutiny anyway. |
‘Maybe someone that easily rattled isn’t suited to a position in the public scrutiny anyway’
Possibly not. I hope someone suitable steps up. I won’t hold my breath. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 15:25 - Nov 22 with 2031 views | LeonWasGod |
| New chairman stands down on 11:40 - Nov 22 by MoscowJack |
How can that statement be released without mentioning the FACT that he HAD to resign as he is over his 12 year maximum tenure?
I can't believe how this can honestly be happening.
At least have some balls and come out with the truth instead of blaming some p!ssed off fans for being so unhappy with what's going on that they felt the need to do some digging!
It's not their fault that they've got so much wrong....but it's our fault for reporting it?
Also, what about the Associate Director role? Does he still have that? |
Because they've been given a tap in. Complains need to be dealt with in the correct manner, not blasted out of social media wrapped up in a personal attack. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 15:26 - Nov 22 with 2032 views | Uxbridge |
I really didn’t want to get involved in this, largely for my own stress levels. Guess I have no choice. This’ll probably turn into a speech but I’ll just put everything I think in one thread and log off, if only in the interests of my sanity.
You know what Nick, and you’ll know this, I have absolutely no issue with you saying what you have been told from your sources (I don’t know who they are, but can pretty much guess given the subject matter, material covered and the lack of any other obvious suspects). We can debate the content, and I’ll get to that, but I’ve got no issue with that bit. I’ve got a problem with several other things though, and they’re not really problems with you but in general. Mainly the lack of any sort of critical analysis of your comments (which I’m sure we agree aren’t actually facts but someone’s views), the lack of the same courtesy given to Will when he came onto here to rebut, and the way he and other members of his family were commented upon.
I should probably declare something here. Will and I have butted heads many a time over the last few years and argued the toss over many things. We have different views on certain things. Ironically, he’s someone who had grasped that the Trust board needed to be a lot more proactive in terms of their personal engagement online, and his recent appearances on here had been part of that. Anyway, I digress, Will and I were often on differing ends of the argument. This irony is not lost on me.
However, there are things I know and there are things I can neither confirm or deny. I don’t know if Will had conversations with Nigel in an attempt to whip up support for a tilt at Chairman, but they both vehemently deny it. I’m not even sure if it’s even relevant if they did, but anyway. What I do know are two things — if this happened, nobody approached me about it or even mentioned it, and Phil was elected to the chair unopposed in both 2015 and 2017. Actually I know a third thing, Phil proposed Will to be vice chair. Read into that what you will. Between you, me and the lamppost, he was pretty much pressganged into the Chairman role due to that appointment. If any of us could have seen into the future, that’d have been a very different meeting. He didn’t stab me in the back to the best of my knowledge, although as a board member without portfolio that may be a moot point. I won’t mention the irony of people on PS disapproving of a coup when there are ones being openly planned here, but it did make my chuckle. Anyway, I couldn’t disprove something that I have no knowledge of, so there we are, but the evidence doesn’t really support any of it and I do wonder if Nick’s sources have their own axe’s to grind.
This whole Associate Director nonsense staggers me to be honest. It’s been answered plenty of times, occasionally by the same people saying that there’s no clarity. However, in the futile hope of putting this to bed, can someone please cut and paste this in the future. The AD position has been in the possession of the Trust for donkeys years, possibly from the beginning when Tenko was also conferred the same title as a sop. It means nothing in practice, they don’t attend board meetings or vote, and I doubt it has any legal standing. Anyway, point is the position is always held by a Trust board member, and I believe Will is the second holder of that title. Recently the Trust had some additional rights conferred onto it with the Trust now having the right to a second, non-voting, director being able to attend board meetings. That’s usually the AD, with Chair as backup Will didn’t have the role before he joined the Trust board, principally because it’s a position appointed by the Trust board. Allegations of conflict of interest on that basis are preposterous.
As Will himself mentioned, he attends the directors box on rota with Stu and Phil as the senior officers of the Trust, probably more than originally planned as Phil has his own thoughts on the situation. The Trust has a number of spaces (6 I think) it uses for various purposes (raffle prizes, volunteers who have performed tasks for the Trust etc), one of which being to get members of the Trust board into a position to express their views with the directors or officers of the club, or often opposition clubs. Now it’s true that Trust board attendees often have a +1, not always but often, it depends on capacity. Sometimes that’s because there’s the space, sometimes that’s because it’s a pretty lonely place without someone you can speak to, and sometimes it actually helps smooth things as other attendees would have their partners there too. Now we can debate whether the Trust should be in the directors box at all, and that’s something I’ve alternated my view on depending on how relations are, but the Trust has the right to its spaces there and I have no issue with those who think the Trust should be there. As I’ll no doubt be asked, I’ve been in there a few times over the last few years (4 I think, 2 league, 2 league cup), sometimes by myself, twice with someone else, one of those with the other half last Boxing Day. To go back to my earlier point, she got more out of Pearlman and his wife than I did, so she should probably be in there more than I should. I could mention who else was there that day, but that’ll move this away from where I want to go. Anyway, my point was, being accompanied by his wife is an unfair stick to beat Will with (as otherwise she’d be attending the game on her own), and to infer that it’s something to do with status is only ever somebody’s opinion, not fact, and nothing more than cheap gossip. If it’s a perk, it’s a crap one. Give me my seat in the East every day of the week.
As for his departure statement, entirely his prerogative I say. Not for me, or anyone else on the Trust board, to dictate what message he wanted in that, although I doubt there’s much dissention in the fundamental message of the statement. And this is the bit that always gets missed. Everyone involved with the Trust board is an actual real person, with feelings, thoughts, families etc. Thing is with the Trust, it takes over sometimes, especially the last 18 months and especially if you’re getting properly involved. It affects your families as they get dragged into it, for no other reason than it becomes a big part of your life. They’ll occasionally put their own heads above the parapet and give their own views. This is something I’ve personally had a fair bit of experience of in recent times, and it’s not fun for someone’s other half to see their partner attacked for the crime of expressing their view, especially if they get dragged into it. I’ve seen that first hand when my partner committed the cardinal sin of correcting some utter nonsense on the Facebook group. She got accused of all sorts and all of it utter nonsense which was easy to disprove. I know Will’s family faced similar issues when they commented online. A lot of it comes with the territory I know, but there has to be a line surely. Anyway, back to the statement, it is nothing more than heartfelt departure statement from someone who gave over a decade to the Trust board. He earned that right, and the statement should be taken at face value. I think a lot of it needed saying to be honest. If it affects your family, it isn’t worth it. End of.
And this is the bit where I really disliked what happened on Sunday. Things got very personal very quickly, and all off the back of some sensationalised allegations that, for the record, Will denied. Lines were crossed IMO in that thread that got locked in particular as all sorts of allegations were made and delight taken in joining the attack. I tell a lie, there was one post questioning the accuracy of the allegations. I expect little agreement on that point, but frankly I think you’re all wrong if you think that part was acceptable. Would that have happened face to face? Not a chance.
What happens next will be interesting. There’ll be clarity on the model rules situation in the next couple of days, although from the provisional details from the legal types I’ve seen I expect people are going to be disappointed on that score. Shaky has made most of the points I was going to make, which made me smile. There’ll also be further announcements on next steps, some detail on where we are with the Americans etc. There’s a general lack of clarity out there on that particular for various reasons, and that’s not helped. However, if I may address the position of Chairman for a moment. Firstly, the members electing a chairman makes no sense to me. The chair doesn’t have special powers, they get one vote (and occasionally a casting one). They don’t dictate Trust policy, as Phil found out. Secondly, I hope whoever is next in the hotseat (and no, it won’t be me for reasons which are well publicised although I’d probably add a few new ones after the last week), is given a fair crack.
Disagree with them all you want, disagree with the Trust board view all you want, I’ll often agree, but their views are as valid as anyone else’s. And this is the fundamental thing for me … everyone has the right to their own view. Don’t agree with it, fine no problem. I just wish those who disagreed with the view of the Trust board stood and tried to change that policy. There’s only 15 spaces, it wouldn’t take much to tilt the balance. You have 2 days left on that score. Personally, I want a Trust board that can argue both sides of the argument. Who could ever think that everyone agreeing would be a good thing? This episode is unlikely to make people jump up and stand, and anyone who does has my upmost respect. And that’s the thing … regardless of my views on certain things, I have respect for anyone who steps up, and I most definitely include Will in that. It’s a thankless task.
With perfect hindsight, we were always going to get to this position. Tensions are red hot, fans feel alienated, the Trust board haven’t helped themselves at times, myself included. Sunday was probably a perfect storm in that regard. Something like this was always going to happen. Doesn’t make it right though.
All I ask is this. Every action of the Trust is analysed in microscopic detail. Frequently overanalysed, often goes way down the wrong track, but that’s the job of every fan to do. Lots of the criticism is justified. However, the same action should also apply to everything else that comes up. Just because you agree with something or if it fits in with your worldview doesn’t mean you shouldn’t also put the same tests to that. Question everything, and I mean everything. Oh and taking things at face value and giving people the benefit of the doubt isn’t a bad place to start either. The Trust is trying to change and improve, but it’s got no chance of making that change in the way I, and I suspect most on here, want if people get written off the moment they step up, or the worst is automatically not only accepted but believed without any consideration. |  |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 15:26 - Nov 22 with 2029 views | londonlisa2001 |
| New chairman stands down on 15:02 - Nov 22 by Swanseajill |
Until I've been told by the people involved, and not read "hearsay" on here Lisa, I don't feel comfortable making guesses on why people have resigned or stayed on the Trust board.
How do we know that Ux is staying on because he has an idea that removing himself from the board........means he can do nowt for the betterment of this club.( and that's not a guess really, as I know the guy very well, and what he feels for SCFC.)
Which is the only reason we should cut away all these Chinese whispers, and concentrate on what we can do to stop this club being ground down to obscurity and slowly being bled dry.
I admire your posts of recent days, mostly covering....FACTS. |
I'm only referring to statements made by Phil and Matt themselves swanseajill.
Both stated that they believed that the terms of the deal had altered and the deal should come back to members. Both stated that they were outvoted on that, and resigned as a result.
I trust that they have both told the truth on that and they are in disagreement with the current direction of travel. Uxbridge said he also disagreed but wanted to stay involved in an attempt to change minds from within. Which is completely fair and reasonable. I told him so both on here and privately.
I'm a firm believer in the Trust, always have been, as Phil, Nick and others will attest.
The issue that I have is I trust the new owners about as far as I could throw them I'm afraid. I believe they are only interested in making a quick buck, understandably by the way - they have no affinity for this club. And I do not want to see the Trust being made fools of, by pretending that they are interested in what the Trustvhave to say when laughing behind the Trust's back.
Unfortunately, in selling the club to people that would transparently only use it to make a quick profit, whatever that meant for the long term future, the sellers have put the Trust in a position where the only possible route was to look to the long term, and maximise the chance of one day being in a position to pick up the pieces. My disagreement with Phil and others, which I was open about, was I thought that it was so obvious what would happen, that trying to deal with them and build bridges was always naive in the extreme. Therefore I wanted the Trust to take action, amass a significant pot of money, and play the long game.
That's not the same as wanting to destroy the Trust, which was not the case even slightly. It was recognising the futility of the current crappy position and trying to make the most of it.
A situation that was entirely caused by the way, by the dreadful and inexcusable actions of the outgoing ownership whose only concern was their own pockets. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 15:40 - Nov 22 with 1957 views | LeonWasGod |
| New chairman stands down on 13:14 - Nov 22 by Darran |
Yeah we are. There’s been nothing like the campaign to destroy Jenkins and others as there’s been to destroy the Trust.
Fuçk me The Bollox Office actually wants Jenkins to stay and everytime JVZ is mentioned someone will always pop into the thread and find a positive for him. |
You're talking about one or two individuals though who have been very vocal (and very tenacious in the Res' case, but I don't think he's stepped over into personal abuse). I've only seen one poster get personal and that was whoever accused this Will fella of stabbing Phil in the back.
The breadth of feelings against HJ and the rest of the old board is held by far more people on here, they're just not as vocal. We should be though. The way the sale was handled was a disgrace (and possibly illegal wrt to the Trust shareholding). The way the Americans seem to be further dismissive of the fans and what the club stands for is also a disgrace. If anyone is the enemy here it is absolutely them.
The Trust is our vehicle to have a say in the club. We shouldn't be destroying it, but it seems it does need 'encouragement' to act in a proper manner in line with it's own rules. Just has to be done in the right way. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 15:49 - Nov 22 with 1938 views | Whiterockin |
| New chairman stands down on 14:52 - Nov 22 by vetchonian |
Absolutely whihc is why an EGM is needed as soon as!
Concerned fans need to sign up and seize control of the Trust if for nothing more than to maximise the money that can be got form our "investment" and ensure that the Trust does not go wrong by allowing those left in charge to carry on regardless |
Serious question.
Would you personally be prepared to give up your time to volunteer to serve on the trust board. |  | | |
| New chairman stands down on 16:08 - Nov 22 with 1838 views | BillyChong |
| New chairman stands down on 14:26 - Nov 22 by Swanseajill |
Your last sentence hits home 247.
And the amount of work voluntarily that Phil and the rest of the board have put in, is to be admired.
Talk is so cheap, let those that have given the Trust so much grief on here, step up to the plate and show us all where the Trust has gone wrong, and volunteer to replace the board members and show us what they can do.
The share sellers, along with the new owners must be ecstatic at this moment in time. I really fear for the future of this club if we lose the only input on proceedings that we have,, the Trust..as the voice of our fans. |
I’d have thought the Americans and Jenkins and co would be less than happy with disruption to a Trust Board that are/were keen and eager to sell their shares. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 16:11 - Nov 22 with 1813 views | Darran |
| New chairman stands down on 15:40 - Nov 22 by LeonWasGod |
You're talking about one or two individuals though who have been very vocal (and very tenacious in the Res' case, but I don't think he's stepped over into personal abuse). I've only seen one poster get personal and that was whoever accused this Will fella of stabbing Phil in the back.
The breadth of feelings against HJ and the rest of the old board is held by far more people on here, they're just not as vocal. We should be though. The way the sale was handled was a disgrace (and possibly illegal wrt to the Trust shareholding). The way the Americans seem to be further dismissive of the fans and what the club stands for is also a disgrace. If anyone is the enemy here it is absolutely them.
The Trust is our vehicle to have a say in the club. We shouldn't be destroying it, but it seems it does need 'encouragement' to act in a proper manner in line with it's own rules. Just has to be done in the right way. |
It’s irrelevant who I’m talking about. We aren’t in this position because Will took his missus on a freebie in the Directors Box.
What people are losing track of is that the Trust couldn’t stop the sellouts selling even if Huw Cooze had never been born to go for a pint in Morgan’s.
People often accuse me of trying to deflect threads on here but by fuçk they’ve deflected from the real culprits. | |
| |
| New chairman stands down on 16:19 - Nov 22 with 1754 views | whiterock |
| New chairman stands down on 15:26 - Nov 22 by Uxbridge |
I really didn’t want to get involved in this, largely for my own stress levels. Guess I have no choice. This’ll probably turn into a speech but I’ll just put everything I think in one thread and log off, if only in the interests of my sanity.
You know what Nick, and you’ll know this, I have absolutely no issue with you saying what you have been told from your sources (I don’t know who they are, but can pretty much guess given the subject matter, material covered and the lack of any other obvious suspects). We can debate the content, and I’ll get to that, but I’ve got no issue with that bit. I’ve got a problem with several other things though, and they’re not really problems with you but in general. Mainly the lack of any sort of critical analysis of your comments (which I’m sure we agree aren’t actually facts but someone’s views), the lack of the same courtesy given to Will when he came onto here to rebut, and the way he and other members of his family were commented upon.
I should probably declare something here. Will and I have butted heads many a time over the last few years and argued the toss over many things. We have different views on certain things. Ironically, he’s someone who had grasped that the Trust board needed to be a lot more proactive in terms of their personal engagement online, and his recent appearances on here had been part of that. Anyway, I digress, Will and I were often on differing ends of the argument. This irony is not lost on me.
However, there are things I know and there are things I can neither confirm or deny. I don’t know if Will had conversations with Nigel in an attempt to whip up support for a tilt at Chairman, but they both vehemently deny it. I’m not even sure if it’s even relevant if they did, but anyway. What I do know are two things — if this happened, nobody approached me about it or even mentioned it, and Phil was elected to the chair unopposed in both 2015 and 2017. Actually I know a third thing, Phil proposed Will to be vice chair. Read into that what you will. Between you, me and the lamppost, he was pretty much pressganged into the Chairman role due to that appointment. If any of us could have seen into the future, that’d have been a very different meeting. He didn’t stab me in the back to the best of my knowledge, although as a board member without portfolio that may be a moot point. I won’t mention the irony of people on PS disapproving of a coup when there are ones being openly planned here, but it did make my chuckle. Anyway, I couldn’t disprove something that I have no knowledge of, so there we are, but the evidence doesn’t really support any of it and I do wonder if Nick’s sources have their own axe’s to grind.
This whole Associate Director nonsense staggers me to be honest. It’s been answered plenty of times, occasionally by the same people saying that there’s no clarity. However, in the futile hope of putting this to bed, can someone please cut and paste this in the future. The AD position has been in the possession of the Trust for donkeys years, possibly from the beginning when Tenko was also conferred the same title as a sop. It means nothing in practice, they don’t attend board meetings or vote, and I doubt it has any legal standing. Anyway, point is the position is always held by a Trust board member, and I believe Will is the second holder of that title. Recently the Trust had some additional rights conferred onto it with the Trust now having the right to a second, non-voting, director being able to attend board meetings. That’s usually the AD, with Chair as backup Will didn’t have the role before he joined the Trust board, principally because it’s a position appointed by the Trust board. Allegations of conflict of interest on that basis are preposterous.
As Will himself mentioned, he attends the directors box on rota with Stu and Phil as the senior officers of the Trust, probably more than originally planned as Phil has his own thoughts on the situation. The Trust has a number of spaces (6 I think) it uses for various purposes (raffle prizes, volunteers who have performed tasks for the Trust etc), one of which being to get members of the Trust board into a position to express their views with the directors or officers of the club, or often opposition clubs. Now it’s true that Trust board attendees often have a +1, not always but often, it depends on capacity. Sometimes that’s because there’s the space, sometimes that’s because it’s a pretty lonely place without someone you can speak to, and sometimes it actually helps smooth things as other attendees would have their partners there too. Now we can debate whether the Trust should be in the directors box at all, and that’s something I’ve alternated my view on depending on how relations are, but the Trust has the right to its spaces there and I have no issue with those who think the Trust should be there. As I’ll no doubt be asked, I’ve been in there a few times over the last few years (4 I think, 2 league, 2 league cup), sometimes by myself, twice with someone else, one of those with the other half last Boxing Day. To go back to my earlier point, she got more out of Pearlman and his wife than I did, so she should probably be in there more than I should. I could mention who else was there that day, but that’ll move this away from where I want to go. Anyway, my point was, being accompanied by his wife is an unfair stick to beat Will with (as otherwise she’d be attending the game on her own), and to infer that it’s something to do with status is only ever somebody’s opinion, not fact, and nothing more than cheap gossip. If it’s a perk, it’s a crap one. Give me my seat in the East every day of the week.
As for his departure statement, entirely his prerogative I say. Not for me, or anyone else on the Trust board, to dictate what message he wanted in that, although I doubt there’s much dissention in the fundamental message of the statement. And this is the bit that always gets missed. Everyone involved with the Trust board is an actual real person, with feelings, thoughts, families etc. Thing is with the Trust, it takes over sometimes, especially the last 18 months and especially if you’re getting properly involved. It affects your families as they get dragged into it, for no other reason than it becomes a big part of your life. They’ll occasionally put their own heads above the parapet and give their own views. This is something I’ve personally had a fair bit of experience of in recent times, and it’s not fun for someone’s other half to see their partner attacked for the crime of expressing their view, especially if they get dragged into it. I’ve seen that first hand when my partner committed the cardinal sin of correcting some utter nonsense on the Facebook group. She got accused of all sorts and all of it utter nonsense which was easy to disprove. I know Will’s family faced similar issues when they commented online. A lot of it comes with the territory I know, but there has to be a line surely. Anyway, back to the statement, it is nothing more than heartfelt departure statement from someone who gave over a decade to the Trust board. He earned that right, and the statement should be taken at face value. I think a lot of it needed saying to be honest. If it affects your family, it isn’t worth it. End of.
And this is the bit where I really disliked what happened on Sunday. Things got very personal very quickly, and all off the back of some sensationalised allegations that, for the record, Will denied. Lines were crossed IMO in that thread that got locked in particular as all sorts of allegations were made and delight taken in joining the attack. I tell a lie, there was one post questioning the accuracy of the allegations. I expect little agreement on that point, but frankly I think you’re all wrong if you think that part was acceptable. Would that have happened face to face? Not a chance.
What happens next will be interesting. There’ll be clarity on the model rules situation in the next couple of days, although from the provisional details from the legal types I’ve seen I expect people are going to be disappointed on that score. Shaky has made most of the points I was going to make, which made me smile. There’ll also be further announcements on next steps, some detail on where we are with the Americans etc. There’s a general lack of clarity out there on that particular for various reasons, and that’s not helped. However, if I may address the position of Chairman for a moment. Firstly, the members electing a chairman makes no sense to me. The chair doesn’t have special powers, they get one vote (and occasionally a casting one). They don’t dictate Trust policy, as Phil found out. Secondly, I hope whoever is next in the hotseat (and no, it won’t be me for reasons which are well publicised although I’d probably add a few new ones after the last week), is given a fair crack.
Disagree with them all you want, disagree with the Trust board view all you want, I’ll often agree, but their views are as valid as anyone else’s. And this is the fundamental thing for me … everyone has the right to their own view. Don’t agree with it, fine no problem. I just wish those who disagreed with the view of the Trust board stood and tried to change that policy. There’s only 15 spaces, it wouldn’t take much to tilt the balance. You have 2 days left on that score. Personally, I want a Trust board that can argue both sides of the argument. Who could ever think that everyone agreeing would be a good thing? This episode is unlikely to make people jump up and stand, and anyone who does has my upmost respect. And that’s the thing … regardless of my views on certain things, I have respect for anyone who steps up, and I most definitely include Will in that. It’s a thankless task.
With perfect hindsight, we were always going to get to this position. Tensions are red hot, fans feel alienated, the Trust board haven’t helped themselves at times, myself included. Sunday was probably a perfect storm in that regard. Something like this was always going to happen. Doesn’t make it right though.
All I ask is this. Every action of the Trust is analysed in microscopic detail. Frequently overanalysed, often goes way down the wrong track, but that’s the job of every fan to do. Lots of the criticism is justified. However, the same action should also apply to everything else that comes up. Just because you agree with something or if it fits in with your worldview doesn’t mean you shouldn’t also put the same tests to that. Question everything, and I mean everything. Oh and taking things at face value and giving people the benefit of the doubt isn’t a bad place to start either. The Trust is trying to change and improve, but it’s got no chance of making that change in the way I, and I suspect most on here, want if people get written off the moment they step up, or the worst is automatically not only accepted but believed without any consideration. |
Wow, that's some statement, took me an hour to read it, must have taken you a day to write it, well said | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 16:24 - Nov 22 with 1730 views | Swanseajill |
| New chairman stands down on 16:08 - Nov 22 by BillyChong |
I’d have thought the Americans and Jenkins and co would be less than happy with disruption to a Trust Board that are/were keen and eager to sell their shares. |
And I've had thought that the more the fans are unhappy with the Trust ( our one small voice) the share sellers and the new owners will be over the moon to see the fans small grip on our club...disintegrate.
They will feel that the fans must remain weak, and chant nice football songs during matches. Not to have any input in how are club is being run....at all.
It was ever so. But the Trust changed that. [Post edited 22 Nov 2017 16:30]
| | | |
| New chairman stands down on 16:30 - Nov 22 with 1687 views | LeonWasGod |
| New chairman stands down on 16:11 - Nov 22 by Darran |
It’s irrelevant who I’m talking about. We aren’t in this position because Will took his missus on a freebie in the Directors Box.
What people are losing track of is that the Trust couldn’t stop the sellouts selling even if Huw Cooze had never been born to go for a pint in Morgan’s.
People often accuse me of trying to deflect threads on here but by fuçk they’ve deflected from the real culprits. |
I don't disagree that it's a major distraction. They must be pissing themselves with laughter in the club boardroom. | | | |
| New chairman stands down on 16:38 - Nov 22 with 1636 views | Darran |
| New chairman stands down on 16:30 - Nov 22 by LeonWasGod |
I don't disagree that it's a major distraction. They must be pissing themselves with laughter in the club boardroom. |
Absolutely and this thick twát The Box Office has already started campaigning for Jenkins remain in position because he’s da man in the transfer market.
Fuçking work that one out. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
