Frank Nouble 3 wrote:

Morganrum wrote:Didn’t his group have to delete a video and publicly apologise for singing about fires to Stuart McCAll who’s dad was burnt in the 1985 Bradford fire disaster?

Never see him by the "choir anymore"
"his group is not really correct either"

I stand corrected, These things are rarely as black and white as they seem and people forget that the board are also volunteers, let’s see what comes out in the wash.

Morganrum wrote: These things are rarely as black and white as they seem and people forget that the board are also volunteers, let’s see what comes out in the wash.

It seems to me that all you need to do is have answers to a series of questions.

Firstly has this person been asked to stand down as a volunteer?

If the answer to that is yes then on what basis was this done and on whose behest was it done?

Does the version of events given by the club agree with that of the removed volunteer?

If yes then supporters can make up their own minds, if no, supporters need to ask whom they believe.

And that is pretty much it.

The plot thickens. Taff says he was asked to stand down due the the board getting pressure from the Dragons as he has been critical of them of late.

lol our board are so cowardly

MrPessimist wrote:The plot thickens. Taff says he was asked to stand down due the the board getting pressure from the Dragons as he has been critical of them of late.

lol our board are so cowardly

Assuming that is correct, that would be the biggest load of bollox since Red Rum was gelded.

More worryingly if it is true, that that has been said by the Dragons then it is hard to imagine a more pusillanimous reaction. The Dragons tell Newport County who Newport County can have volunteer for them and County accept this.

My caveat is that this is so far into lalaland that I am having trouble believing it.

Hope this is nothing more than some one`s sick windup, if not we as a club are doomed, let`s hope the club has the sense to squash this story one way or another.

MrPessimist wrote:The plot thickens. Taff says he was asked to stand down due the the board getting pressure from the Dragons as he has been critical of them of late.

lol our board are so cowardly

In your first post you say Taff said on Facebook he was asked to stand down because he criticised the club after Oldham disgrace now he has said it was after pressure from the Dragons because he has been critical of them
Either reason would be disgraceful after all the work Taff has put in but I'm curious as to which reason is correct
Not doubting Mr Pessimist or anyone else just wondering who and why has forced this decision

worksop amber wrote:

MrPessimist wrote:The plot thickens. Taff says he was asked to stand down due the the board getting pressure from the Dragons as he has been critical of them of late.

lol our board are so cowardly

In your first post you say Taff said on Facebook he was asked to stand down because he criticised the club after Oldham disgrace now he has said it was after pressure from the Dragons because he has been critical of them
Either reason would be disgraceful after all the work Taff has put in but I'm curious as to which reason is correct
Not doubting Mr Pessimist or anyone else just wondering who and why has forced this decision

To quote direct off Taff's Facebook page:

"In order to pre answer any questions which may be asked on Saturday. I will no longer be doing the half time draw at County. The club have asked me to stand down as a volunteer because of my opinions and views I share on Social Media. Would seem clear that there are individuals out there with the motive to see this happen. Have been happy to give my time to help the club on match day whilst being a season ticket holder for about 4 years. A shame that it's over but I will now focus on the Amber Army group and serve a purpose to the club there. Thank you to everyone who bought half time draw tickets from me and stopped to talk to me. Always enjoyed it! UTC".

Further down the post he then states:

"Guys. Just to clarify one thing. Dragons/WRU/RP have been one of the big voices pressuring the club.
Appreciate the support everyone. It means a lot".
"club made the call. They have just had pressure because I criticise them quite often and it would seem I hurt their feelings"
then later:
" I meant about the WRU complaining about me"

I don't know taff personally what I do know is he has done a lot of good work for and on behalf of our club, if he has been over critical of the club or trust that is his perogotive its called free speech and the club/trust should respond to him their thoughts on why they think he's wrong and not by some knee jerk decision of telling him his services are no longer required.

If on the other hand it's because he has been over critical of the drags then what has happened is completely unacceptable, they have no say what so ever in the running of our club, so if the club/trust have taken this action on their behalf then it is they who should be held accountable to the membership for taking actions influenced by an outside party.

Not a go at Taff he's done a great job

But if you work for an organisation even volunteer you can't go having a go at the organisation on social media it's happened to people I know that have been sacked example a red cross volunteer said something on twitface next day he was told his service was no longer required

In steelworks a guy posted I asked for a Saturday night off here I am sat here doing nothing because we have a major breakdown he took a selfie of himself sat on a chair

Next morning shift he was called to office where security where waiting escorted off site eventually sacked but did win his tribunal because the social media policy wasn't updated

Not on Facebook so have not read all that has been written.

I fail to see how or why the WRU/Dragons could possibly care about what was said about the Oldham game. The game after all was played at Oldham.

It is further not clear whose feeling are said to be hurt. Is it officials at the Dragons, officials at Newport County, the ground staff?

Further what is the criticism which has been made? I take UTP's point but the removal of a volunteer for criticism is somewhat different from removal for abuse.

The accusation as I understand it is, at least in part, that Newport County have dispensed with a volunteer because of pressure put upon the club by WRU/Dragons. If this is true then it is shameful. However it can be cleared up. As the volunteer in question has chosen to go public as for the reasons for his dismissal, Newport County can not be said to have any duty of confidentiality towards that volunteer. The club should release a statement as to the reasons for this action.

I believe there is a 'code of conduct' form that volunteers sign - did he break that?

Willthiswork wrote:I believe there is a 'code of conduct' form that volunteers sign - did he break that?

That's the point. We don't know. However as one side of the story has been put, and contains the serious accusation that Newport County are acting at the behest of a third party then the club should release a statement as to their version as to what happened.

Social media eh...... It's got a life of it's own.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:Not on Facebook so have not read all that has been written.

I fail to see how or why the WRU/Dragons could possibly care about what was said about the Oldham game. The game after all was played at Oldham.

It is further not clear whose feeling are said to be hurt. Is it officials at the Dragons, officials at Newport County, the ground staff?

Further what is the criticism which has been made? I take UTP's point but the removal of a volunteer for criticism is somewhat different from removal for abuse.

The accusation as I understand it is, at least in part, that Newport County have dispensed with a volunteer because of pressure put upon the club by WRU/Dragons. If this is true then it is shameful. However it can be cleared up. As the volunteer in question has chosen to go public as for the reasons for his dismissal, Newport County can not be said to have any duty of confidentiality towards that volunteer. The club should release a statement as to the reasons for this action.

Morning Brendan.
Most large (ish) organisations these days have a ‘Social media’ policy. This policy will state what you can and can’t say about the organisation on social media. We need an employment law expert to verify, but I would suggest that this policy applies to volunteers as well.

excessbee wrote:Social media eh...... It's got a life of it's own.

Yip. Allows for all manner of deflection.