Well done the board of Newcastle United

[Dave]

NE5, has it not occurred to you that people are unhappy with the board overall, but are impressed with this bit of business hence the existence of this thread and the posts within it?

 

What exactly are you after? A sticker saying 'I win!' on it?

 

As I say, the 5th best in the country overall over a decade, 7 qualifications for europe, 2 FA Cup Finals, and the bringing to the club of quality England international footballers and other internationals is not to be sneezed at.

 

Facts.

 

If they are unhappy, they should look at other big city clubs like Everton, Man City, Sheff Wed, Villa, Wolves, Spurs, West Ham, Southampton, Leeds, Luton, Forest, Derby, Wimbledon, Oxford, Leicester, Ipswich, Norwich to name some. All of which are clubs that have won a domestic trophy since we did, and were above us for significant periods prior to Shepherd and Hall taking over the club and consolodating our status as having overtaken all these clubs, with the exception of Spurs, for now.

 

Fact.

 

If you don;t like this being pointed out because it doesn't suit you, it is nevertheless, fact. Set in stone and the record books.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks. For. That.

[NE5]

NE5, has it not occurred to you that people are unhappy with the board overall, but are impressed with this bit of business hence the existence of this thread and the posts within it?

 

What exactly are you after? A sticker saying 'I win!' on it?

 

As I say, the 5th best in the country overall over a decade, 7 qualifications for europe, 2 FA Cup Finals, and the bringing to the club of quality England international footballers and other internationals is not to be sneezed at.

 

Facts.

 

If they are unhappy, they should look at other big city clubs like Everton, Man City, Sheff Wed, Villa, Wolves, Spurs, West Ham, Southampton, Leeds, Luton, Forest, Derby, Wimbledon, Oxford, Leicester, Ipswich, Norwich to name some. All of which are clubs that have won a domestic trophy since we did, and were above us for significant periods prior to Shepherd and Hall taking over the club and consolodating our status as having overtaken all these clubs, with the exception of Spurs, for now.

 

Fact.

 

If you don;t like this being pointed out because it doesn't suit you, it is nevertheless, fact. Set in stone and the record books.

 

 

 

Thanks. For. That.

 

You're welcome. Put it into your spreadsheet.

 

 

[Guest elbee909]

We, as fans don't do the club, any sort of service to that club by simply being happy with the board.  They're in a monopolistic position, of their own engineering, and thus they need to be pushed.  Soon as they think we're happy with just qualifying for the Champions' League then we're all in trouble. 

 

That's the thing I don't understand, what service do you do anyone by awarding the board plaudits?  They already take a fair bit of reward in terms of dividends, self-congratulation and the like.  Doesn't it bother anyone that the members of the board suffered near fuck-all as a result of the Souness debacle?  "I knew something was wrong when two players ran into each other at Man City" - well thanks for the sharp insight, fricking genius.

 

I don't care whether we're '5th best in the country over a decade' - this still shows to me how narrow-focus stats can be used whenever one likes to prove, well, not much.  I don't believe we have a divine right to win things but we sure as hell have as much right as the four clubs above us in your list that have all won things in that time.

 

I want signs of improvement, as we all do.  To sit back and say well done for coming 5th in an arbitrary list doesn't push things forward.

[NE5]

We, as fans don't do the club, any sort of service to that club by simply being happy with the board.  They're in a monopolistic position, of their own engineering, and thus they need to be pushed.  Soon as they think we're happy with just qualifying for the Champions' League then we're all in trouble. 

 

That's the thing I don't understand, what service do you do anyone by awarding the board plaudits?  They already take a fair bit of reward in terms of dividends, self-congratulation and the like.  Doesn't it bother anyone that the members of the board suffered near fuck-all as a result of the Souness debacle?  "I knew something was wrong when two players ran into each other at Man City" - well thanks for the sharp insight, fricking genius.

 

I don't care whether we're '5th best in the country over a decade' - this still shows to me how narrow-focus stats can be used whenever one likes to prove, well, not much.  I don't believe we have a divine right to win things but we sure as hell have as much right as the four clubs above us in your list that have all won things in that time.

 

I want signs of improvement, as we all do.  To sit back and say well done for coming 5th in an arbitrary list doesn't push things forward.

 

No one is saying "Well Done". Just appling perspective to the overall performance of the club since they took over in 1992. Which is improvement, massive improvement. There has been one or two blips, but overall the club is light years superior to back then. Everybody wants to win trophies, but there are only 2. Europe is an achievement too. Of the 4 clubs above us, 2 of them are are a special case and the other two have a winning tradition mentality going back decades. Back to..eerr... when we started to develop our losing one actually. Or don't you think such a change from that to challenging them again is a big improvement ?

 

 

[Shearergol]

Has anyone completed their "Leazesmag/NE5 Bingo card" yet? I'm just waiting on a "would you rather have Doug Ellis" to complete mine

[Guest elbee909]

 

No one is saying "Well Done". Just appling perspective to the overall performance of the club since they took over in 1992. Which is improvement, massive improvement. There has been one or two blips, but overall the club is light years superior to back then. Everybody wants to win trophies, but there are only 2. Europe is an achievement too. Of the 4 clubs above us, 2 of them are are a special case and the other two have a winning tradition mentality going back decades. Back to..eerr... when we started to develop our losing one actually. Or don't you think such a change from that to challenging them again is a big improvement ?

 

 

I accept Chelsea are a special case, but who's the other you're referring to, out of interest?  I don't think Arsenal, Man Utd or Liverpool are special cases - maybe Man Utd slightly.

 

I also accept that Newcastle are that much improved since the early 90s, but I think what a lot of people are worried about is our board might rest on their laurels if they don't get frequent kicks up the arse.  I know the idea of that sort of complacency worries me and in recent years, it feels there's been a tendency towards that.  The 'powder-dry' summer, the sacking of Bobby Robson, the appointment of Souness - I think were signs of a board that felt that were somehow untouchable and suffering from short-sightedness.  They don't seem to truly challenge themselves, to reach beyond their grasp.  If so, why bother?  I know they might make money, but they could make their money doing other things if they so wanted.

 

The nepotism and lack of objectivity at board level is concerning,  they're going to get hammered if they don't bring in those that will challenge them professionally.  With the nepotism they have, there's a lack of professionalism that I think the boards of the clubs above us have.

 

We're not challenging now as we were in the mid-90s, and again, that's cause for concern.  What are they doing to get us moving upwards?  Just because we're better than we were, what are we doing to try to be the best?  We're not challenging the top four where it counts - on the field.

 

I understand you consistently offering a counter argument to a lot of the critique (some unjust) that the board does get, but in my view it's hard to justify hammering people as much as you do for having a go at the board.  If we don't keep them on their toes, who will?

[alpal78]

NE5, I appreciate the fact that you've pointed out that the current board is an improvement from those in the 70s, but since we are doing comparisons, one simple question, do you not think that the club under Shepherd's chairmanship has taken a few steps backwards since the height of SJH's tenure? Yes or no and why?

 

I notice when you talk of improvements, you always mention Shepherd's chairmanship along with SJH's. To me thats a sneaky tactic to make them seem the same and transfer some credit from SJH's to Shepherd's time and avoid comparing the two.

 

You are more than welcomed to do another cop out and say that you will ignore my post, in which case I wont blame you really. 

[Guest Gemmill]

Bored of Newcastle United after reading this tbh.

 

Tee-hee.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Signing Duff for 5m, well that's just insane, a great peice of business, so well done the board  bluebigeek.gif 

 

I'm sure in a month or so when we don't spend another years budget for most other clubs plenty of people will be complaining about having no confidence in the board again.

 

Quite amazing the transformation from a period in the past when we lost 3 local lads to Spurs and Liverpool , now we sign a quality player who turns both those clubs down.

 

I'm sure the irony will be lost on almost everybody.

 

 

It would appear that nobody, including Grass, seems to wish to respond to this either, just like the thread about the board. Why not ?

 

 

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index.php?showtopic=1900

 

tbh

 

 

[Guest TheOrder]

Signing Duff for 5m, well that's just insane, a great peice of business, so well done the board  bluebigeek.gif 

 

I'm sure in a month or so when we don't spend another years budget for most other clubs plenty of people will be complaining about having no confidence in the board again.

 

Quite amazing the transformation from a period in the past when we lost 3 local lads to Spurs and Liverpool , now we sign a quality player who turns both those clubs down.

 

I'm sure the irony will be lost on almost everybody.

 

 

It would appear that nobody, including Grass, seems to wish to respond to this either, just like the thread about the board. Why not ?

 

 

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index.php?showtopic=1900

 

tbh

 

 

 

I'm glad I go to games then... otherwise they wouldnt like me

[Guest The Fox]

NE5, has it not occurred to you that people are unhappy with the board overall, but are impressed with this bit of business hence the existence of this thread and the posts within it?

 

What exactly are you after? A sticker saying 'I win!' on it?

 

As I say, the 5th best in the country overall over a decade, 7 qualifications for europe, 2 FA Cup Finals, and the bringing to the club of quality England international footballers and other internationals is not to be sneezed at.

 

Facts.

 

If they are unhappy, they should look at other big city clubs like Everton, Man City, Sheff Wed, Villa, Wolves, Spurs, West Ham, Southampton, Leeds, Luton, Forest, Derby, Wimbledon, Oxford, Leicester, Ipswich, Norwich to name some. All of which are clubs that have won a domestic trophy since we did, and were above us for significant periods prior to Shepherd and Hall taking over the club and consolodating our status as having overtaken all these clubs, with the exception of Spurs, for now.

 

Fact.

 

If you don;t like this being pointed out because it doesn't suit you, it is nevertheless, fact. Set in stone and the record books.

 

Here is a prime example of settling for second best. Instead of quoting Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal etc, we get all the other clubs quoted.

In the list of what we have achieved is the standout fact, no trophies. 2 Cup Finals and two piss poor embarassing performances.

There is no reason whatsoever why we cannot be as big as Arsenal, Liverpool, Manu Utd.

Until this season our ground capacity was greater than Arsenal and Liverpools and therefore revenue generated matches if not betters theirs, however we are way behind the top 4 in terms of achievement and since Keegans time we have gone backwards in terms of league position.

I can therefore understand some people not being over enamoured by the Board. There are of course numerous reasons for this but what have turned out to be less than successful Managerial Appointments and wsating transfer money are pretty high on the list.

Lets hope they are about to get it right and there is icing on the cake, but one signing does not a season make and we need similar quality to Duff in others areas which Roeder is onviously aware of.

Lets not blow our trumpets until we have achieved success.

 

I think you've totally missed the point of NE5's post, tbh.

I think you've mussed my points but I'm not surprised.

I have not missed the point at all merely highlighting why some members are not as enamoured with the board as others, in response to the topic title.

This comparison with where we were before Sir John Hall needs to be taken forward, where are we now in comparison to Sir John Hall/Kevin Keegan era, highest league since the 20's under that regime and a far better team on the pitch. Would seem to me that we have in terms of challenging at the top gone backwards since then. Remember we were above Arsenal and Liverpool then, last season we finished 24 points behind Liverpool.

Lets not kid ourselves, is that progress.

Hopefully now under Roeder we will start to move upwards.

[UV]

 

I also accept that Newcastle are that much improved since the early 90s, but I think what a lot of people are worried about is our board might rest on their laurels if they don't get frequent kicks up the arse.  I know the idea of that sort of complacency worries me and in recent years, it feels there's been a tendency towards that.  The 'powder-dry' summer, the sacking of Bobby Robson, the appointment of Souness - I think were signs of a board that felt that were somehow untouchable and suffering from short-sightedness.  They don't seem to truly challenge themselves, to reach beyond their grasp.  If so, why bother?  I know they might make money, but they could make their money doing other things if they so wanted.

 

You're contradicting yourself there. If the board are complacent and resting on their laurels, then why weren't they happy to carry on with Robson? They saw a downturn in performances and results, and Bobby's increasing inability to keep the players in line and acted on it. That's not a sign of complacency.

 

The nepotism and lack of objectivity at board level is concerning,  they're going to get hammered if they don't bring in those that will challenge them professionally.  With the nepotism they have, there's a lack of professionalism that I think the boards of the clubs above us have.

 

No nepotism at Man Utd at all is there  :roll:

 

We're not challenging now as we were in the mid-90s, and again, that's cause for concern.  What are they doing to get us moving upwards?  Just because we're better than we were, what are we doing to try to be the best?  We're not challenging the top four where it counts - on the field.

 

NE5, I appreciate the fact that you've pointed out that the current board is an improvement from those in the 70s, but since we are doing comparisons, one simple question, do you not think that the club under Shepherd's chairmanship has taken a few steps backwards since the height of SJH's tenure? Yes or no and why?

 

Because it's relatively easy to have one or two very good seasons (Norwich & Villa 92/93, Blackburn 93-95, Leeds 97-01, Everton 04/05, Spurs 05/06?) but it's a damn sight harder to maintain that and not just fall back into the rest of the pack. Every other team in the league is trying to improve every year. Every year some team gets lucky but when their luck runs out (best players or manager leaves, their tactics are sussed) they fall back. We drop back into the pack every now and then, but for the most part even then we're at the top of that pack. A lot of supporters seem to think that's easy and we have a divine right to be one of the best teams in the country, but it's not and we dont.

 

[Howaythelads]

 

No one is saying "Well Done". Just appling perspective to the overall performance of the club since they took over in 1992. Which is improvement, massive improvement. There has been one or two blips, but overall the club is light years superior to back then. Everybody wants to win trophies, but there are only 2. Europe is an achievement too. Of the 4 clubs above us, 2 of them are are a special case and the other two have a winning tradition mentality going back decades. Back to..eerr... when we started to develop our losing one actually. Or don't you think such a change from that to challenging them again is a big improvement ?

 

 

I accept Chelsea are a special case, but who's the other you're referring to, out of interest?  I don't think Arsenal, Man Utd or Liverpool are special cases - maybe Man Utd slightly.

 

I also accept that Newcastle are that much improved since the early 90s, but I think what a lot of people are worried about is our board might rest on their laurels if they don't get frequent kicks up the arse.  I know the idea of that sort of complacency worries me and in recent years, it feels there's been a tendency towards that.  The 'powder-dry' summer, the sacking of Bobby Robson, the appointment of Souness - I think were signs of a board that felt that were somehow untouchable and suffering from short-sightedness.  They don't seem to truly challenge themselves, to reach beyond their grasp.  If so, why bother?  I know they might make money, but they could make their money doing other things if they so wanted.

 

The nepotism and lack of objectivity at board level is concerning,  they're going to get hammered if they don't bring in those that will challenge them professionally.  With the nepotism they have, there's a lack of professionalism that I think the boards of the clubs above us have.

 

We're not challenging now as we were in the mid-90s, and again, that's cause for concern.  What are they doing to get us moving upwards?  Just because we're better than we were, what are we doing to try to be the best?  We're not challenging the top four where it counts - on the field.

 

I understand you consistently offering a counter argument to a lot of the critique (some unjust) that the board does get, but in my view it's hard to justify hammering people as much as you do for having a go at the board.  If we don't keep them on their toes, who will?

 

Manure is clearly a special case based on their worldwide popularity, which gives them a huge advantage financially and in general appeal. How you see manure as only 'slightly' a special case is surprising.

 

You also said..."  but I think what a lot of people are worried about is our board might rest on their laurels if they don't get frequent kicks up the arse "

 

I think you're totally wrong here mate. The posts of a lot of people aren't made with the motive of giving the Board a kick up the arse, these people really do want the board out because they think the board is crap.

[Guest elbee909]

You're contradicting yourself there. If the board are complacent and resting on their laurels, then why weren't they happy to carry on with Robson? They saw a downturn in performances and results, and Bobby's increasing inability to keep the players in line and acted on it. That's not a sign of complacency.

 

I think the whole affair was an example of them frantically backpedalling and coming up with convenient excuses for them not dealing with it in a better manner prior, due to them not having felt the need to figure out what direction they were taking.

 

If they'd wanted to replace Robson, they should have dealt with that the summer before, similar to Liverpool's targeting of Benitez, with Houllier dealt with ruthlessly - but justifiably - in line with their longer term plan of action.

 

The complacency, if you like, is in resorting to short-term solutions for short-term reasons where longer-term factors should have been considered.  The Robson sacking was an example of this.  They were quick to point to a very recent poorness of performance, that was massively overblown at the time by a board looking to justify their actions.  Knee-jerk.  As was the follow up appointment.

 

I'm not saying there was some grand conspiracy (who's to say) - I just think they should have taken a long hard look at themselves around that time - they thought they were coasting under Robson, spoilt by consistent European football, and that they could replace hm with a muppet and still maintain that momentum.

 

The 'keeping players in line' thing... well, that's a whole issue in itself, to me it was a paper-thin excuse to get rid of Robson and cooked up in order to justify their dodgy actions.  Could argue that appointing a successor with a worse record of player relations hardly smacks of intelligent decision making.

 

No nepotism at Man Utd at all is there  :roll:

 

Compared to ours it's a drop in the bloody ocean.

 

[Howaythelads]

You're contradicting yourself there. If the board are complacent and resting on their laurels, then why weren't they happy to carry on with Robson? They saw a downturn in performances and results, and Bobby's increasing inability to keep the players in line and acted on it. That's not a sign of complacency.

 

I think the whole affair was an example of them frantically backpedalling and coming up with convenient excuses for them not dealing with it in a better manner prior, due to them not having felt the need to figure out what direction they were taking.

 

If they'd wanted to replace Robson, they should have dealt with that the summer before, similar to Liverpool's targeting of Benitez, with Houllier dealt with ruthlessly - but justifiably - in line with their longer term plan of action.

 

The complacency, if you like, is in resorting to short-term solutions for short-term reasons where longer-term factors should have been considered.  The Robson sacking was an example of this.  They were quick to point to a very recent poorness of performance, that was massively overblown at the time by a board looking to justify their actions.  Knee-jerk.  As was the follow up appointment.

 

I'm not saying there was some grand conspiracy (who's to say) - I just think they should have taken a long hard look at themselves around that time - they thought they were coasting under Robson, spoilt by consistent European football, and that they could replace hm with a muppet and still maintain that momentum.

 

The 'keeping players in line' thing... well, that's a whole issue in itself, to me it was a paper-thin excuse to get rid of Robson and cooked up in order to justify their dodgy actions.  Could argue that appointing a successor with a worse record of player relations hardly smacks of intelligent decision making.

 

No nepotism at Man Utd at all is there  :roll:

 

Compared to ours it's a drop in the bloody ocean.

 

 

I don't agree with much in there at all, tbh.

 

These references to short term stuff, complacency, spoilt by European football, believing they could replace a manager with a muppet. I don't know where you get any of this from.

 

They made a mistake with Souness, but they must have had a reason to offer him the job and I suspect it was to restore some discipline / control over certain players who had lost respect for Robson and probably everything else. I don't particularly like the reason if that was it, but I think it would have been a consideration in their deliberations. Don't forget that somehow Souness had also won some cups at his previous clubs, similar to the much touted Martin O'Neill, as it happens.

 

They believed he was the right man, they made a big mistake but it's nowt to do with the stuff you mention, in my opinion.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

There is no nepotism at Man Utd, their board are clearly independent to the owners or major shareholders, even under Edwards that was the case. Kenyon was head hunted and so was Gill, they both then appointed board members to work alongside on behalf of the owners/major shareholders.

 

At Newcastle every independent member of the board has either left or been sacked, with family members such as Bruce Shepherd and Halls' sister appointed to the board in their place.

 

The City has questioned this parctice on a number of occassions and raised concerns enough to vote no confidence in the boardroom dynamics, that is why the likes of Shepherd have been free to buy up shares because no-one else wants them or are quite willing to dump their stock in a company that has zero transpancy and independent thinking.

 

Anyone who can't see this setup as being unhealthy is deluded, naive or just plain stupid.

 

Of course, we all have agendas, axes to grind and say what we say to get hits...  :roll:

[Howaythelads]

There is no nepotism at Man Utd, their board are clearly independent to the owners or major shareholders, even under Edwards that was the case. Kenyon was head hunted and so was Gill, they both then appointed board members to work alongside on behalf of the owners/major shareholders.

 

At Newcastle every independent member of the board has either left or been sacked, with family members such as Bruce Shepherd and Halls' sister appointed to the board in their place.

 

The City has questioned this parctice on a number of occassions and raised concerns enough to vote no confidence in the boardroom dynamics, that is why the likes of Shepherd have been free to buy up shares because no-one else wants them or are quite willing to dump their stock in a company that has zero transpancy and independent thinking.

 

Anyone who can't see this setup as being unhealthy is deluded, naive or just plain stupid.

 

Of course, we all have agendas, axes to grind and say what we say to get hits...  :roll:

 

Not saying I agree with your post but it wasn't bad until the last sentence when that toddler jumped in. Roll on the next 10 years and maturity, eh.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

There is no nepotism at Man Utd, their board are clearly independent to the owners or major shareholders, even under Edwards that was the case. Kenyon was head hunted and so was Gill, they both then appointed board members to work alongside on behalf of the owners/major shareholders.

 

At Newcastle every independent member of the board has either left or been sacked, with family members such as Bruce Shepherd and Halls' sister appointed to the board in their place.

 

The City has questioned this parctice on a number of occassions and raised concerns enough to vote no confidence in the boardroom dynamics, that is why the likes of Shepherd have been free to buy up shares because no-one else wants them or are quite willing to dump their stock in a company that has zero transpancy and independent thinking.

 

Anyone who can't see this setup as being unhealthy is deluded, naive or just plain stupid.

 

Of course, we all have agendas, axes to grind and say what we say to get hits...  :roll:

 

Not saying I agree with your post but it wasn't bad until the last sentence when that toddler jumped in. Roll on the next 10 years and maturity, eh.

 

You have accused me of having an agenda, an axe to grind and "out to get hits" so who actually is the bairn here, me or you?  :roll:

 

Just stating facts.

[macca888]

NE5

 

Once again, immediately on the defensive when proven wrong.

 

As for my Keegan comments, once again, can I ask you.........................

 

WHAT DID HE WIN FOR THE CLUB???????????????

 

That is the measure of success, in my opinion, and the opinion of many others on this forum.

 

As the Fox mentioned, you seem to be all too happy to settle for second bgest and look back over the so called good old days.

[Wullie]

NE5

 

Once again, immediately on the defensive when proven wrong.

 

As for my Keegan comments, once again, can I ask you.........................

 

WHAT DID HE WIN FOR THE CLUB???????????????

 

That is the measure of success, in my opinion, and the opinion of many others on this forum.

 

As the Fox mentioned, you seem to be all too happy to settle for second bgest and look back over the so called good old days.

 

Keep bollocks like that to yourself tbh. You won't find 'many' on this forum who don't think Keegan was a success at NUFC.

[Guest elbee909]

 

I don't agree with much in there at all, tbh.

 

These references to short term stuff, complacency, spoilt by European football, believing they could replace a manager with a muppet. I don't know where you get any of this from.

 

I'm not saying it's the gospel truth.  It's my interpretation.  If my own attempt to join the dots is wrong in your opinion then we'll respectfully agree to disagree.  Whatever the case, I'd rather try to make that sort of attempt and propose an idea of how I think the board is running things (or not), than to excuse screw-ups as isolated wrong decisions.

 

 

They made a mistake with Souness, but they must have had a reason to offer him the job and I suspect it was to restore some discipline / control over certain players who had lost respect for Robson and probably everything else. I don't particularly like the reason if that was it, but I think it would have been a consideration in their deliberations. Don't forget that somehow Souness had also won some cups at his previous clubs, similar to the much touted Martin O'Neill, as it happens.

 

They believed he was the right man, they made a big mistake but it's nowt to do with the stuff you mention, in my opinion.

 

Well, I think a general short-term-fix outlook contributed to his being appointed.  Incidentally I think the board had lost respect for Robson by that time, and vice versa - which came first, don't know.  Robson having lost control of his players?  The most obvious example of this I can think of was Dyer being a twat, but then, no news there.  I'm as curious as anyone as to why the players might suddenly have begun to disrespect Robson, and think it would be naive to assume the board had nothing to do with the situation, but we'll probably never know for sure.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

KK didn't win any trophies but his success can't be measured by trophies because no amount of sliver can reward us or the club for what he did.

[Guest alex]

To be fair, all Keegan ever did was take us from the brink of relegation to the third flight of English football and then transform us into the second best side in the country.

[Howaythelads]

There is no nepotism at Man Utd, their board are clearly independent to the owners or major shareholders, even under Edwards that was the case. Kenyon was head hunted and so was Gill, they both then appointed board members to work alongside on behalf of the owners/major shareholders.

 

At Newcastle every independent member of the board has either left or been sacked, with family members such as Bruce Shepherd and Halls' sister appointed to the board in their place.

 

The City has questioned this parctice on a number of occassions and raised concerns enough to vote no confidence in the boardroom dynamics, that is why the likes of Shepherd have been free to buy up shares because no-one else wants them or are quite willing to dump their stock in a company that has zero transpancy and independent thinking.

 

Anyone who can't see this setup as being unhealthy is deluded, naive or just plain stupid.

 

Of course, we all have agendas, axes to grind and say what we say to get hits...  :roll:

 

Not saying I agree with your post but it wasn't bad until the last sentence when that toddler jumped in. Roll on the next 10 years and maturity, eh.

 

You have accused me of having an agenda, an axe to grind and "out to get hits" so who actually is the bairn here, me or you?  :roll:

 

Just stating facts.

 

Where's that violin?

[Guest Howaythetoon]

KK done more than that Alex, he reawakened a city and the very club we follow today is all down to him and SJH, using our cash of course