Re: Email sent.

92
Stan A. Einstein wrote: March 5th, 2023, 11:19 pm
Bangitintrnet wrote: March 5th, 2023, 10:50 pm

It is you that has alleged that Gavin Foxall has been suspended, on the basis of bullying.

Wrong.

I have stated that Gavin Foxall's 'suspension' is on the basis of an ALLEGATION of bullying.

Try and get something right.
Kelly Anderson is now acting General Manager, so your email will have gone straight to her. She is also the liason point for the internal and external investigation. I don't think she will be impressed with your semantics, or that last week your information was that Gavin Foxall had been deposed due to board room battle over a proposed takeover. The investigation will be far more interested in why you are now blaming another for both names being made public. Likewise it is you that have said that Gavin Foxall is running a personal fiefdom, and that the club is broke. Don't you think by drawing attention to yourself, that the investigation will be asking why a Barrister, who doesn't live in Newport or even the UK, doesn't attend games, just happens upon this information?

Re: Email sent.

93
Taunton Iron Cider wrote: March 5th, 2023, 9:12 pm
pembsexile wrote: March 5th, 2023, 8:34 pm
whoareya wrote: March 5th, 2023, 6:56 pm Ah, so you will claim to be proved right if the parties that you have continually derided don't reply to confirm you are wrong?
Hi mate, I hope you agree with me that there is too much speculation surrounding the club at the moment. I think people have missed the general point in all of this speculation which in my opinion, is this. For some reason there appears to be some unrest at the club. It is not good for the good name of the club, or for the Supporters Trust or the fans in general. It must be resolved. The catalyst for this unrest appears to be Jon Pratt. That is not to say that he is to blame, just that since he joined there has been unrest at the club. I suspect that no one can argue against that.

Gavin Foxhall is/was the Chairman of the football club. He is also on the board as an elected member of the Supporters Trust. He can be removed from one, but not from the other. The Directors can only remove the co-opted members by vote. Jon Pratt is a co opted member. Now, if the Trust board dont like what he is doing, why don’t they vote him off. It would appear to be that the majority of Trust board members want him to be involved. That creates a problem and leads to speculation. It surely must end. Fans are not daft.

For him to be involved at a greater level, there will have to be a change to the supporters Trust model. If he has been brought in to do a job, then he really needs to be an elected member of the Trust. I may be wrong but I cant see how he can change things from his current position. Which begs the question - what is he here for? If change needs to happen, then it would need to be voted for. That would require an EGM to change the rules. That begs another question. How can people vote for any change when they don’t know what the change is for? I just hope the club don’t notify us of an EGM and then JP issues a statement. I think he needs to get his message out there now. That’s just an opinion.

I have said it before and I’ll say it again, the Trust/club have their reasons for not issuing a statement, and that is how it is. I just don’t understand why Jon Pratt can’t issue a statement telling us what his plans are. He could end any speculation at a stroke. Then we would know what likely direction we are heading in.
Pembs, according to Stan the current issue is between Gavin Foxhall and a Club employee, so on that basis it has absolutely nothing to do with Jon Pratt’s recent co-option onto the Board.
Hi TIC, I happen to think that you are wrong on this one. If you look at the first post on this thread, it states that the club Chairman has been suspended. I have no idea why this is, and I do not want to add to any speculation that may damage the club. It is a matter for the club. However, there is unrest, the unrest fuels speculation.

My opinion is that the catalyst for change at the club is geared to the recent involvement of Jon Pratt. He is quite probably a decent man who has County best interest at heart. Why otherwise, would he get involved in the club. If any change is afoot, it cannot be done with JP as a co opted member. It is just not possible. I just hope he makes a statement soon. EGM incoming soon I suspect.

Re: Email sent.

94
Bangitintrnet wrote: March 6th, 2023, 12:19 am

Kelly Anderson is now acting General Manager, so your email will have gone straight to her. She is also the liason point for the internal and external investigation. I don't think she will be impressed with your semantics, or that last week your information was that Gavin Foxall had been deposed due to board room battle over a proposed takeover. The investigation will be far more interested in why you are now blaming another for both names being made public. Likewise it is you that have said that Gavin Foxall is running a personal fiefdom, and that the club is broke. Don't you think by drawing attention to yourself, that the investigation will be asking why a Barrister, who doesn't live in Newport or even the UK, doesn't attend games, just happens upon this information?
For someone with no connection to the club you seem to be claiming a serious amount of knowledge of the internal workings of the club.

But to answer your question, I agree with Mark Crook. Newport County directors should spend more time running the club and less time worrying about who is telling me things. At least that's what I was informed he said, years ago now.

Re: Email sent.

95
Stan A. Einstein wrote: March 5th, 2023, 10:33 pm

However as I said the dispute between Mr Foxall and Nigel Stephenson is a discrete matter. I redacted Mr Stephenson's name as I took the view that the health of an individual is not relevant. As that is now in the public domain I can confirm those details.

Rubbish

His health issues were not known until he was named on this thread after your email was sent.
You have taken the cautious route full of caveats and qualifications, just like Boris - from the same farrow of greased piglets.

Re: Email sent.

96
whoareya wrote: March 6th, 2023, 9:34 am
Stan A. Einstein wrote: March 5th, 2023, 10:33 pm

However as I said the dispute between Mr Foxall and Nigel Stephenson is a discrete matter. I redacted Mr Stephenson's name as I took the view that the health of an individual is not relevant. As that is now in the public domain I can confirm those details.

Rubbish

His health issues were not known until he was named on this thread after your email was sent.
You have taken the cautious route full of caveats and qualifications, just like Boris - from the same farrow of greased piglets.
I didn't mention Mr Stephenson's name or that he was ill. So please stop making a fool of yourself with lies which are easily exposed.

Re: Email sent.

97
No, you wrote:
"I redacted Mr Stephenson's name as I took the view that the health of an individual is not relevant."

But at the time you didn't know of his health issues, just that he was off work. It was only after he was named on your thread that his health issues were posted.

Now backsliding because you feel awkward about personal health issues being posted as a result of your thread?

GOTCHA !

Re: Email sent.

98
whoareya wrote: March 6th, 2023, 9:52 am No, you wrote:
"I redacted Mr Stephenson's name as I took the view that the health of an individual is not relevant."

But at the time you didn't know of his health issues, just that he was off work. It was only after he was named on your thread that his health issues were posted.

Now backsliding because you feel awkward about personal health issues being posted as a result of your thread?

GOTCHA !

Please. That was written after three other people had mentioned Mr Stephenson's illness and that he was the complainant.

You are pathetic in the original sense of the word.

Re: Email sent.

99
I repeat:

You wrote:
"I redacted Mr Stephenson's name as I took the view that the health of an individual is not relevant."

That redaction relates to the email you wrote to the club that started this thread, but at the time you didn't know of his health issues, just that he was off work. It was only after he was named on your thread that his health issues were posted.

You've been caught out and everyone can see it for themselves.

Re: Email sent.

101
Stan A. Einstein wrote: March 6th, 2023, 9:30 am
Bangitintrnet wrote: March 6th, 2023, 12:19 am

Kelly Anderson is now acting General Manager, so your email will have gone straight to her. She is also the liason point for the internal and external investigation. I don't think she will be impressed with your semantics, or that last week your information was that Gavin Foxall had been deposed due to board room battle over a proposed takeover. The investigation will be far more interested in why you are now blaming another for both names being made public. Likewise it is you that have said that Gavin Foxall is running a personal fiefdom, and that the club is broke. Don't you think by drawing attention to yourself, that the investigation will be asking why a Barrister, who doesn't live in Newport or even the UK, doesn't attend games, just happens upon this information?
For someone with no connection to the club you seem to be claiming a serious amount of knowledge of the internal workings of the club.

But to answer your question, I agree with Mark Crook. Newport County directors should spend more time running the club and less time worrying about who is telling me things. At least that's what I was informed he said, years ago now.
Oh, we're back to "you must be part of the club, as who else would bother attack the chosen one" , instead of defending your statements with answers............

Everything posted above, I have attributed to either the meeting that you did not attend at which Kelly Anderson spoke, or from comment's on here.

Re: Email sent.

105
Bonson&Hunt wrote: March 6th, 2023, 10:30 am General Point! Again this forum is seriously derailed from its role by petty personal squabbles. It really is not very becoming of grown men! Once attacked personally, I do however appreciate the right to a defence. Try & stay on topic, please.
Thanks. I agree. As I say no reply as yet to the email although it has only been three days including a weekend.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: countymadbel, OLDCROMWELLIAN