| The Resurrections Agenda 09:02 - Oct 30 with 10620 views | Darran |
Well it's quite obvious that he's oblivious to what was in The Trust statement from last week anyway,surely if he had read it he'd be 10 times more vociferous about the sellouts than the Trust considering what they've done to the club and Trust.
Summin not right here it's as if he's in cohorts with one of them simply to bring the Trust down.
As I said a couple of days ago anyone that doesn't see the Trust/Huw Cooze business as the lesser of two evils by a country mile must be the as thick as f*ck.
Not to be mentioning the other business considering he's been so critical of Dineen and Jenkins in the past.
Very strange,very strange indeed. |  |
| |  |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:08 - Oct 30 with 1113 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 14:55 - Oct 30 by dobjack2 |
As to the last point if your family circumstances have changed to enable you to stand I would have thought that was all the more reason to stand next time. |
What about the people on the Trust who deceived us? They are still there. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:30 - Oct 30 with 1065 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:08 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
What about the people on the Trust who deceived us? They are still there. |
Deceiving is an interesting word. Def. "deliberately cause (someone) to believe something that is not true, especially for personal gain."
Who remaining on the Trust board has gained, financially or otherwise, from the fact that the HC payments were not publicly disclosed? No-one I can ascertain.
Not for a second going to argue against that this information should have been made public the moment it was agreed that HC should receive remuneration. The Trust have held their hands up to that, along with ensuring that any payments from the club need to go through the Trust books so that they can be publicly disclosed and the members judge accordingly.
This isn't a deception IMO. It's a lack of governance. The lessons should have been learned from the Dineen fiasco, and whilst this isn't even in the same stratosphere as the previous SD obtaining a 5% stake in the football club (I'm sorry it isn't, principle be damned), it still developed into a conflict of interest the moment the SLO role became paid.
As for the rest of the Trust board, I see no reason or justification for mass resignations over this. In fact, I think it'd be gross negligence if the entire board did resign. There is a lot of expertise and knowledge there that it'd be reckless in the extreme to jettison, especially when the alternative is completely unknown. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:45 - Oct 30 with 1016 views | Dr_Winston |
The first two paragraphs are a little off Uxy. Cooze received recompense for the role he did and people who would have known otherwise publically claimed that he didn't. Dictionary definitions of deception don't excuse that.
I agree that mass resignations shouldn't follow (Cooze will do, and not just for this) but some explanations from the parties involved as to why the membership weren't fully informed without resorting to conversations about Governance might go some way towards clearing the air.
People must have known that the membership wouldn't be happy at the news coming out. A certain level of, let's call it "news management" must have taken place.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:50 - Oct 30 with 992 views | monmouth |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:45 - Oct 30 by Dr_Winston |
The first two paragraphs are a little off Uxy. Cooze received recompense for the role he did and people who would have known otherwise publically claimed that he didn't. Dictionary definitions of deception don't excuse that.
I agree that mass resignations shouldn't follow (Cooze will do, and not just for this) but some explanations from the parties involved as to why the membership weren't fully informed without resorting to conversations about Governance might go some way towards clearing the air.
People must have known that the membership wouldn't be happy at the news coming out. A certain level of, let's call it "news management" must have taken place.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
This. I felt deceived when I found he was paid. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:55 - Oct 30 with 973 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:45 - Oct 30 by Dr_Winston |
The first two paragraphs are a little off Uxy. Cooze received recompense for the role he did and people who would have known otherwise publically claimed that he didn't. Dictionary definitions of deception don't excuse that.
I agree that mass resignations shouldn't follow (Cooze will do, and not just for this) but some explanations from the parties involved as to why the membership weren't fully informed without resorting to conversations about Governance might go some way towards clearing the air.
People must have known that the membership wouldn't be happy at the news coming out. A certain level of, let's call it "news management" must have taken place.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Did they claim that? You may well be right, and I would agree that would be misrepresentation. Depends on the who and when I guess.
In terms of news management, it couldn't have gone worse really. Ideally it would have been publicised months ago but what with the Americans etc then focus was taken off the ball a bit. At worst, should have been published the moment completed and approved after the October board meeting. You're right, of course everyone understood the potential fallout, but the moment we approved it was going to come out soon enough.
As for the Why not earlier, I can't really answer that. May sound like a cop out, but it's before my time. 6 years or whatever it is a long time to go back and try to figure out rationale. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:00 - Oct 30 with 945 views | Dr_Winston |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:55 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
Did they claim that? You may well be right, and I would agree that would be misrepresentation. Depends on the who and when I guess.
In terms of news management, it couldn't have gone worse really. Ideally it would have been publicised months ago but what with the Americans etc then focus was taken off the ball a bit. At worst, should have been published the moment completed and approved after the October board meeting. You're right, of course everyone understood the potential fallout, but the moment we approved it was going to come out soon enough.
As for the Why not earlier, I can't really answer that. May sound like a cop out, but it's before my time. 6 years or whatever it is a long time to go back and try to figure out rationale. |
No, not a cop out. Seems to me like you're fielding the proverbial "hospital ball" on a number of things.
I'd also like to be clear that the fanbase, myself included can't absolve themselves entirely of blame either. If more people had been willing to put themselves forward for election to the Trust on a regular basis then maybe these things would have happened sooner, as they appear to have since people like yourself got involved.
Less than 1,500 full members out of a regular home attendance of approx 18,000 would suggest that most people were quite happy with the way things were going at the time. | |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:02 - Oct 30 with 931 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:55 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
Did they claim that? You may well be right, and I would agree that would be misrepresentation. Depends on the who and when I guess.
In terms of news management, it couldn't have gone worse really. Ideally it would have been publicised months ago but what with the Americans etc then focus was taken off the ball a bit. At worst, should have been published the moment completed and approved after the October board meeting. You're right, of course everyone understood the potential fallout, but the moment we approved it was going to come out soon enough.
As for the Why not earlier, I can't really answer that. May sound like a cop out, but it's before my time. 6 years or whatever it is a long time to go back and try to figure out rationale. |
You've been on the Trust for 2 and a half years.
You constantly backed Cooze and constantly stated you were happy with the situation.
Why did you continue to deceive us for all this time? | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:02 - Oct 30 with 931 views | Loyal |
The trust should at least gain some lawful guidance on HC and his payments.
IMO as it stands this falls within a potential act of fraud. And I say potential. Albeit there was knowledge of payments it needs clarifying that by HC not disclosing them ( and Godden knowing about them but stating the opposite ) that there needs to be a lawful direction, at least that way everyone is clear. So if Godden stands or decides to then unless this matter is cleared up he fails at the first hurdle regards his own personal credibility.
It isn't good enough in law to say I didn't know, or I didn't realise, or it was a mistake - conspiracy to defraud directly or indirectly regardless of the excuses is unlawful. Hence the reason why people go to trial.
I got this from someone I trust implicitly with criminal law, and the law is the law, hence the reason why the trust should act. Or maybe someone should make a complaint to SWP and leave it to them ? Best move first and act than having your hand forced.
Just a thought. |  |
| Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows.
The official inventor of the tit w@nk. | | Poll: | Who should be Swansea number 1 |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:04 - Oct 30 with 921 views | dobjack2 |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:08 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
What about the people on the Trust who deceived us? They are still there. |
elections?
The governance error has been exposed and matters appear to have been put in hand to deal with it. A new supporter director will be appointed in accordance with the trust constitution and I believe that we need to move on from this position to deal with the selling shareholders, the new majority shareholders and their allies. In my view the biggest issues we are facing.
I have no doubt that you will be watching everything like a hawk and that the trust board know that. Healthy in my view.
The time to raise issues about who knew what did what and when is in my view when the next elections come around.
I am pretty sure we will disagree on this point.
All I would say is that you seem bitter about being banned from this forum as T2C and I'm sorry to say it but you seem to be conducting a crusade against the trust because you were banned from this forum. I hope I am wrong on this point. However I also hope that you can see the bigger picture and can put any personal animosity with Phil and anyone else to one side for the good of the supporters of this club. Turning on each other will not help the new supporter director and in my view will not help discussions with the Americans. All to the detriment of us supporters.
The bickering and accusations being levelled on here do not help us to show a united front to the majority shareholders and their allies. They must be pi$$ing themselves laughing at us as must our neighbours up the road. [Post edited 30 Oct 2016 16:13]
|  | | |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:07 - Oct 30 with 911 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:00 - Oct 30 by Dr_Winston |
No, not a cop out. Seems to me like you're fielding the proverbial "hospital ball" on a number of things.
I'd also like to be clear that the fanbase, myself included can't absolve themselves entirely of blame either. If more people had been willing to put themselves forward for election to the Trust on a regular basis then maybe these things would have happened sooner, as they appear to have since people like yourself got involved.
Less than 1,500 full members out of a regular home attendance of approx 18,000 would suggest that most people were quite happy with the way things were going at the time. |
It's peacetime. A period of unprecedented success. Those aren't great conditions for recruitment of an organisation whose very raison d'etre is trying to protect the football club. To many, the question will be "Why"?
It's no coincidence that when people see a reason why ... the Americans v1.0, and now last week's address, membership surges. The Trust has historically been poor at proclaiming its successess, and that is also a reason. In HC's resignation announcement, a lot of his successes were listed there ... frankly, the Trust didn't do enough to blow its own trumpet.
Anyway, I think all this may just be to the benefit of the Trust in the long term. It'll be messy in the short term though. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:11 - Oct 30 with 893 views | Highjack |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 15:50 - Oct 30 by monmouth |
This. I felt deceived when I found he was paid. |
Me too. The issue with HC has been building for a while because of suggestions around his printing firm getting business from the club. It was brought up on here many times and every time we were told it went through the correct tender process and the trust were happy with the deal.
This was the trusts biggest error in my opinion because it left him wide open to suggestions he was on the gravy train. He probably wasn't, everyone says how hardworking, honest and committed he was and I have no reason to doubt them. Ive only heard good things. But that suggestion that he could potentially be on the make would always be there whilst his firm was being paid by the club.
The frustrating thing about all this is that it could have been stopped months or years ago just by insisting the printing contract went elsewhere. People probably would have understood if he was just taking a salary for his legitimate hard work, but when you throw in the extra business and the perceived freebies it's made his position untenable.
However I don't agree there should be any sort of mass resignation. They've served us well all these years, they've had one massive giant gargantuan blip which they've held their hands up to, now we move forward and fix the important stuff. |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:26 - Oct 30 with 834 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:02 - Oct 30 by Loyal |
The trust should at least gain some lawful guidance on HC and his payments.
IMO as it stands this falls within a potential act of fraud. And I say potential. Albeit there was knowledge of payments it needs clarifying that by HC not disclosing them ( and Godden knowing about them but stating the opposite ) that there needs to be a lawful direction, at least that way everyone is clear. So if Godden stands or decides to then unless this matter is cleared up he fails at the first hurdle regards his own personal credibility.
It isn't good enough in law to say I didn't know, or I didn't realise, or it was a mistake - conspiracy to defraud directly or indirectly regardless of the excuses is unlawful. Hence the reason why people go to trial.
I got this from someone I trust implicitly with criminal law, and the law is the law, hence the reason why the trust should act. Or maybe someone should make a complaint to SWP and leave it to them ? Best move first and act than having your hand forced.
Just a thought. |
Given I wasn't even involved with the Trust when this arrangement started, I'm not entirely sure why I'd be guilty of any fraud. Care to elaborate?
Not that this would ever come under the area of fraud anyway. It is perfectly legal for companies to pay their directors. If it wasn't, every other director of the football club would be done. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:28 - Oct 30 with 825 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:02 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
You've been on the Trust for 2 and a half years.
You constantly backed Cooze and constantly stated you were happy with the situation.
Why did you continue to deceive us for all this time? |
How did I deceive Chris? Speak clearly for once. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:30 - Oct 30 with 811 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:11 - Oct 30 by Highjack |
Me too. The issue with HC has been building for a while because of suggestions around his printing firm getting business from the club. It was brought up on here many times and every time we were told it went through the correct tender process and the trust were happy with the deal.
This was the trusts biggest error in my opinion because it left him wide open to suggestions he was on the gravy train. He probably wasn't, everyone says how hardworking, honest and committed he was and I have no reason to doubt them. Ive only heard good things. But that suggestion that he could potentially be on the make would always be there whilst his firm was being paid by the club.
The frustrating thing about all this is that it could have been stopped months or years ago just by insisting the printing contract went elsewhere. People probably would have understood if he was just taking a salary for his legitimate hard work, but when you throw in the extra business and the perceived freebies it's made his position untenable.
However I don't agree there should be any sort of mass resignation. They've served us well all these years, they've had one massive giant gargantuan blip which they've held their hands up to, now we move forward and fix the important stuff. |
I think it's important to make it clear. And I thank you for your well balanced post because I know you find it really difficult to post anything sensible, normally.
But it was never about him being on the make as you put it.
It was always more about the going into battle and bringing up thorny issues whilst being dependent on his overall income streams.
He should never have been put in a position to even worry about these things yet the Trust Board deemed them satisfactory.
They are the real problems here, not Cooze. He just got on with things and was put in a terrible position by both the Trust and the Board of Directors.
I understand he will keep the SLO role and I think he's the right man for the job
He just should never have been Trust Director and the real problems are still here today.
It's their fault and from what I'm hearing it's them who are going to get another chance to make more mistakes.
. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:31 - Oct 30 with 811 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:11 - Oct 30 by Highjack |
Me too. The issue with HC has been building for a while because of suggestions around his printing firm getting business from the club. It was brought up on here many times and every time we were told it went through the correct tender process and the trust were happy with the deal.
This was the trusts biggest error in my opinion because it left him wide open to suggestions he was on the gravy train. He probably wasn't, everyone says how hardworking, honest and committed he was and I have no reason to doubt them. Ive only heard good things. But that suggestion that he could potentially be on the make would always be there whilst his firm was being paid by the club.
The frustrating thing about all this is that it could have been stopped months or years ago just by insisting the printing contract went elsewhere. People probably would have understood if he was just taking a salary for his legitimate hard work, but when you throw in the extra business and the perceived freebies it's made his position untenable.
However I don't agree there should be any sort of mass resignation. They've served us well all these years, they've had one massive giant gargantuan blip which they've held their hands up to, now we move forward and fix the important stuff. |
The printing contract is entirely separate from this whole discussion IMO. That was entirely public, and had been for years. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:33 - Oct 30 with 791 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:26 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
Given I wasn't even involved with the Trust when this arrangement started, I'm not entirely sure why I'd be guilty of any fraud. Care to elaborate?
Not that this would ever come under the area of fraud anyway. It is perfectly legal for companies to pay their directors. If it wasn't, every other director of the football club would be done. |
Even Directors of charitable organisations?
I mean you all say it's limited what we could do with the money if the shares were sold. You wouldn't expect Trust members to be financially better off would you? | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:35 - Oct 30 with 780 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:28 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
How did I deceive Chris? Speak clearly for once. |
By continuously stating you were happy with the Cooze conflict of interest situation and you've been saying that ever since you've been on the Board. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:37 - Oct 30 with 767 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:33 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
Even Directors of charitable organisations?
I mean you all say it's limited what we could do with the money if the shares were sold. You wouldn't expect Trust members to be financially better off would you? |
Which is a separate organisation from SCFC. I'm really not following your logic here Chris.
It's not what "we all say". It's what legal counsel says. Legal counsel also says that any funds would be retained and could not be distributed to the members, and if the Trust is wound up the funds would have to go to a similar organisation in the area ... like Cardiff Supporters Trust for example. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:37 - Oct 30 with 764 views | TheResurrection |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:31 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
The printing contract is entirely separate from this whole discussion IMO. That was entirely public, and had been for years. |
No chance are they. Not on your Nelly and this is why you should never be Trust Director. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:43 - Oct 30 with 737 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:35 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
By continuously stating you were happy with the Cooze conflict of interest situation and you've been saying that ever since you've been on the Board. |
That was in respect of the printing contract. And that has always been your argument regarding the SD position. I've always stated I didn't think it was ideal, but it wasn't a conflict that should disqualify him from being SD.
This is patently a different situation. The payments for the SD/SLO role and lack of disclosure became a conflict of interest. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:44 - Oct 30 with 727 views | NeiltheTaylor |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:30 - Oct 30 by TheResurrection |
I think it's important to make it clear. And I thank you for your well balanced post because I know you find it really difficult to post anything sensible, normally.
But it was never about him being on the make as you put it.
It was always more about the going into battle and bringing up thorny issues whilst being dependent on his overall income streams.
He should never have been put in a position to even worry about these things yet the Trust Board deemed them satisfactory.
They are the real problems here, not Cooze. He just got on with things and was put in a terrible position by both the Trust and the Board of Directors.
I understand he will keep the SLO role and I think he's the right man for the job
He just should never have been Trust Director and the real problems are still here today.
It's their fault and from what I'm hearing it's them who are going to get another chance to make more mistakes.
. |
"understand he will keep the SLO role and I think he's the right man for the job "
Interesting considering Katzen's tearful farewell yesterday. | |
| Joe_bradshaw -I thought the cryochamber was the new name for Cardiff's stadium.
|
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:47 - Oct 30 with 709 views | NeiltheTaylor |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:37 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
Which is a separate organisation from SCFC. I'm really not following your logic here Chris.
It's not what "we all say". It's what legal counsel says. Legal counsel also says that any funds would be retained and could not be distributed to the members, and if the Trust is wound up the funds would have to go to a similar organisation in the area ... like Cardiff Supporters Trust for example. |
Hahaha - but why do the Trust reps always bring up giving it away to a random charity rather than use it for Swansea City FC supporters? | |
| Joe_bradshaw -I thought the cryochamber was the new name for Cardiff's stadium.
|
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:47 - Oct 30 with 706 views | exiledclaseboy |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:02 - Oct 30 by Loyal |
The trust should at least gain some lawful guidance on HC and his payments.
IMO as it stands this falls within a potential act of fraud. And I say potential. Albeit there was knowledge of payments it needs clarifying that by HC not disclosing them ( and Godden knowing about them but stating the opposite ) that there needs to be a lawful direction, at least that way everyone is clear. So if Godden stands or decides to then unless this matter is cleared up he fails at the first hurdle regards his own personal credibility.
It isn't good enough in law to say I didn't know, or I didn't realise, or it was a mistake - conspiracy to defraud directly or indirectly regardless of the excuses is unlawful. Hence the reason why people go to trial.
I got this from someone I trust implicitly with criminal law, and the law is the law, hence the reason why the trust should act. Or maybe someone should make a complaint to SWP and leave it to them ? Best move first and act than having your hand forced.
Just a thought. |
Where's the potential criminal act here? And which law does your expert mate reckon may have been broken? What would the complaint to the police be about? |  |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:49 - Oct 30 with 694 views | Uxbridge |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:47 - Oct 30 by NeiltheTaylor |
Hahaha - but why do the Trust reps always bring up giving it away to a random charity rather than use it for Swansea City FC supporters? |
Well, I'd have to dig out the guidance, but I think it has to be an organisation with broadly similar aims as the Trust. | |
| |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:52 - Oct 30 with 686 views | NeiltheTaylor |
| The Resurrections Agenda on 16:49 - Oct 30 by Uxbridge |
Well, I'd have to dig out the guidance, but I think it has to be an organisation with broadly similar aims as the Trust. |
I understand that, but I'm sure our Muslim fans wouldn't be happy with it going to the Red Cross, say.
It seems deliberately provocative to mention it being used for anything other than fans of the club specifically. | |
| Joe_bradshaw -I thought the cryochamber was the new name for Cardiff's stadium.
|
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
