Re: clowngate

46
Mr Figo wrote:
Stan A. Einstein wrote:
DeePeeNCAFC wrote:

As a fans-owned club we ought to demand answers around exactly what the contract with Elite entailed and whether anyone on the board or club management team ever benefitted financially from that arrangement.
Amen to that.
Be careful asking that question - as you are likely to be deemed a troublemaker (but not a clown).
You need to differentiate between posters who defend the club administration against unfair or unrealistic expectations as automatically considering all distractors are troublemakers - its the same as those who do seek to distract claiming that posters who dont share their prophecies of impending doom must all be happy with the status quo; Im not happy at all, but I dont support the impulsive alternatives.

The crux is the amount of posts/posters who 'demand answers' that are actually prepared to do anything about it. I dont mean that to sound like lazy rhetoric, but if people were that concerned, and in such numbers, then they would make it their business to get the answers they want.

But should there be a thorough review of current set-up in the summer? Definitely.

Re: clowngate

47
whoareya wrote:
You need to differentiate between posters who defend the club administration against unfair or unrealistic expectations as automatically considering all distractors are troublemakers - its the same as those who do seek to distract claiming that posters who dont share their prophecies of impending doom must all be happy with the status quo; Im not happy at all, but I dont support the impulsive alternatives.

The crux is the amount of posts/posters who 'demand answers' that are actually prepared to do anything about it. I dont mean that to sound like lazy rhetoric, but if people were that concerned, and in such numbers, then they would make it their business to get the answers they want.

But should there be a thorough review of current set-up in the summer? Definitely.
Well let us examine this.

Doing nothing you say. But my career involved only doing one thing, and that was asking questions. And to persist in asking those questions until they were answered.

And the result is that eventually others will start to ask, why aren't these questions being answered? As indeed perhaps you too are beginning to do.

Re: clowngate

48
whoareya wrote:
Mr Figo wrote:
Stan A. Einstein wrote:
DeePeeNCAFC wrote:

As a fans-owned club we ought to demand answers around exactly what the contract with Elite entailed and whether anyone on the board or club management team ever benefitted financially from that arrangement.
Amen to that.
Be careful asking that question - as you are likely to be deemed a troublemaker (but not a clown).
You need to differentiate between posters who defend the club administration against unfair or unrealistic expectations as automatically considering all distractors are troublemakers - its the same as those who do seek to distract claiming that posters who dont share their prophecies of impending doom must all be happy with the status quo; Im not happy at all, but I dont support the impulsive alternatives.

The crux is the amount of posts/posters who 'demand answers' that are actually prepared to do anything about it. I dont mean that to sound like lazy rhetoric, but if people were that concerned, and in such numbers, then they would make it their business to get the answers they want.

But should there be a thorough review of current set-up in the summer? Definitely.
Cannot believe this but I must agree with most of your reply.

My pet hate is when you are not happy with a decision made by the directors the answer comes back.
"if you are not happy stand for election"
Totally ludicrous to most on here.
Remember not through any fault of theirs 3 were re elected as they had no opponents.
2 on the board have never ever been elected but co opted by mates.
Never heard either speak at any meeting either.
Corona could even guarantees Flynnys job until next season now, goodness knows how this season with current events will pan out.

Re: clowngate

49
Stan A. Einstein wrote:
whoareya wrote:
You need to differentiate between posters who defend the club administration against unfair or unrealistic expectations as automatically considering all distractors are troublemakers - its the same as those who do seek to distract claiming that posters who dont share their prophecies of impending doom must all be happy with the status quo; Im not happy at all, but I dont support the impulsive alternatives.

The crux is the amount of posts/posters who 'demand answers' that are actually prepared to do anything about it. I dont mean that to sound like lazy rhetoric, but if people were that concerned, and in such numbers, then they would make it their business to get the answers they want.

But should there be a thorough review of current set-up in the summer? Definitely.
Well let us examine this.

Doing nothing you say. But my career involved only doing one thing, and that was asking questions. And to persist in asking those questions until they were answered.

And the result is that eventually others will start to ask, why aren't these questions being answered? As indeed perhaps you too are beginning to do.

All I'm doing is what I assume most others will be doing after a disappointing end to a season that started well and got us to within a whisker of another Wembley appearance. A review would be no more unusual than any project debrief/lessons learned session after any project stage of completion.

I happen to agree with the posts that MF seems to be doing an awful lot of the leg work himself, LL looks increasingly like he's got of a bus at the wrong stop, but off an incredible run of success since the great escape, my hope is that the management team will be supported and strengthened, not sacked.

For me the questions from some posters concerning the club structure and Trust regime are longstanding and will continue regardless of the playing squad and management teams' performance.

The questions have been asked since the Trust achieved the fund raising, numerous directors have come and gone since, the same questions asked, different directors have been lambasted/apologised to/ridiculed. Opportunities have arisen for change if change were indeed the popular goal. But it hasn't happened, so its not unreasonable to assume that its not on most supporters agenda.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users