Scholes gone

[singe]

27 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

 

 

The trust has never recovered from the original rep falling victim to Stockholm Syndrome.  Been on the backfoot ever since.

Very true.

I did mean the icing on the cake, the final nail in the coffin. 

 

Not to you directly Dave, but generally, the Trust only has 3% and can be outvoted every time, so the obvous question is why is the owner bothered by it, and it seems obvious the potential thorn on his side it could be if revitalised has him worried. Phillipa's viewing of the accounts exposed certain things. 

 

It just seems an injustice to roll over, let the owner have his little coup, and then let them hand over the 3% for nothing. 

[tGWB]

2 hours ago, Lags said:

 

Absolutely not. When he needs criticism he gets it from me. Please don't ignore where I say there's plenty of stuff to beat them with. It's tedious the amount of posts citing BO fault!! regardless what it is. It's playground populist shite.

 

Are all these people mentioned liars? I very much doubt some of the claims are not true. Do I think Al as interfered? yes. I can also say without fear of contradiction that Corney also gave part of the reason he sacked a manager was he didn't agree with some of the players he played. The ultimate interference if you want.

 

Did Wild lie when he went on record to say Al didn't interfere or when later he said he did? 

two things for me Lags 

 

1. I have personally had no dealings with BO in any shape or form but I find it staggering that any Board Director of any business that has been in situ under different ownership through a continuous decline to its lowest point since the late 60’s hasnt been removed or hasnt had the personal strength to retire

Clearly his work isnt having a positive impact 

 

2. I find myself partially agreeing with you regarding Owner > Coach/Manager ‘influencing’ player selections

Anyone who doesnt think an Owner doesnt  pass his thoughts on about players is simply wrong.

Owners dip into their own pockets to buy or pay players so they absolutely do voice their opinions,

 

An Owner is looking to fund the recruitment of players to (a) enhance the team to improve results (b) sell them on for profit

 

And here lies the problem Lags

 

Really good players go straight on the team sheet and there would be very little unwanted conversation between Owner > Coach / Manager on those type of players

 

Our problem is, with the odd exception, our player recruitment has been dreadful and we’ve been left stuck with a high number of players not good enough that the Owner needed to move on hence were the ‘interference’ spills over as he wants to put them in the shop window but the Coach / Manager knows they would detrimentally impact team performance on the pitch 

 

Player recruitment is controlled by the Owner and his brother Mohamed Lemsagam

I would suggest that if his brother wasnt  our Director of Football that our current Director of Football would have been moved out some time ago.

 

Two relatively easy changes to make which should deliver positives for our club and most certainly worth taking the risk in my view

[singe]

1 hour ago, Lags said:

 

I haven't castigated no one. Least of all Pete Wild. I answered a question posed to me with the truth what happened, Nothing more.

Down the years there have been plenty sat on the trust board who have resigned citing abuse. Whether your confidence in the trust as been eroded or not doesn't alter my point. 

You said you'd wager it was for abuse, so that's not the case then?

[Lags]

3 hours ago, singe said:

You said you'd wager it was for abuse, so that's not the case then?

 

Id wager means an assumption based on the high percentage of others citing abuse as the reason for resignation. There for it is clearly my opinion, which in turn is not fact. 

 

However, I again would wager I am right. 

 

 

[Lags]

3 hours ago, tGWB said:

two things for me Lags 

 

1. I have personally had no dealings with BO in any shape or form but I find it staggering that any Board Director of any business that has been in situ under different ownership through a continuous decline to its lowest point since the late 60’s hasnt been removed or hasnt had the personal strength to retire

Clearly his work isnt having a positive impact 

 

2. I find myself partially agreeing with you regarding Owner > Coach/Manager ‘influencing’ player selections

Anyone who doesnt think an Owner doesnt  pass his thoughts on about players is simply wrong.

Owners dip into their own pockets to buy or pay players so they absolutely do voice their opinions,

 

An Owner is looking to fund the recruitment of players to (a) enhance the team to improve results (b) sell them on for profit

 

And here lies the problem Lags

 

Really good players go straight on the team sheet and there would be very little unwanted conversation between Owner > Coach / Manager on those type of players

 

Our problem is, with the odd exception, our player recruitment has been dreadful and we’ve been left stuck with a high number of players not good enough that the Owner needed to move on hence were the ‘interference’ spills over as he wants to put them in the shop window but the Coach / Manager knows they would detrimentally impact team performance on the pitch 

 

Player recruitment is controlled by the Owner and his brother Mohamed Lemsagam

I would suggest that if his brother wasnt  our Director of Football that our current Director of Football would have been moved out some time ago.

 

Two relatively easy changes to make which should deliver positives for our club and most certainly worth taking the risk in my view

 

A very considered response. Regarding point one re BO remaining on the board, I can't speak for BO, nor know his motives for staying. Other than I'd guess he likes it. 

Why have successive owners / chairman kept him in situ, you'd need to ask them. I'd again guess he must bring something to the party. Once he doesn't, he'd be plums. 

[singe]

6 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

Id wager means an assumption based on the high percentage of others citing abuse as the reason for resignation. There for it is clearly my opinion, which in turn is not fact. 

 

However, I again would wager I am right. 

 

 

I, and many others, will wager the owner interferes on the high percentage of others citing interference as the reason for resignation etc , etc.

[Lags]

1 minute ago, singe said:

I, and many others, will wager the owner interferes on the high percentage of others citing interference as the reason for resignation etc , etc.

 

I think you're getting confused. I wagered on the trust board members resigning. Not Pete wild. Perhaps now you'll agree? 

[singe]

9 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

I think you're getting confused. I wagered on the trust board members resigning. Not Pete wild. Perhaps now you'll agree? 

Not confused at all.

[tGWB]

17 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

A very considered response. Regarding point one re BO remaining on the board, I can't speak for BO, nor know his motives for staying. Other than I'd guess he likes it. 

Why have successive owners / chairman kept him in situ, you'd need to ask them. I'd again guess he must bring something to the party. Once he doesn't, he'd be plums. 

It is truly baffling Lags

[Lags]

7 minutes ago, singe said:

Not confused at all.

 Ahh, so it's not the content of the post, but the poster. Why didn't you say that in the first place. 

 

Regards you along with many others wager Al has interfered. I along with many others have in this thread alone said it also. So I am really failing to see what your gripe is. 

 

 

[oafc 123]

1 minute ago, tGWB said:

It is truly baffling Lags

Don't push him.

 

I can see another Lags special appearing at this rate.

 

Barry Owen- The Truth Part 2

[Lags]

2 minutes ago, oafc 123 said:

Don't push him.

 

I can see another Lags special appearing at this rate.

 

Barry Owen- The Truth Part 2

 

Sorry to disappoint. 

 

Very poor

[al_bro]

20 hours ago, oafc 123 said:

It's funny because with all of Corney's faults, I don't think he was ever accused of tampering  

I might be wrong, but wasn't there at least one occurrence of a player (can't remember who) not being played, because it triggered another season?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1)

[Chaddyexile84]

8 minutes ago, al_bro said:

I might be wrong, but wasn't there at least one occurrence of a player (can't remember who) not being played, because it triggered another season?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1)

Not sure about another season but wasn’t Lee Hughes sent out on loan as another goal or appearance would have triggered something?
 

Also I was reliably informed that Fane was a Corney signing (though we had no manager at the time) and Rob Hunt wasn’t brought in by Shez

 

3 players from memory (2 of which were good players) aren’t quite in the same league as:

 

Vera

Desire

Kokos

Gonzales

Fage

Egert

Sefil

Menig

Omrani

Branger

 

 

[al_bro]

10 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

Not sure about another season but wasn’t Lee Hughes sent out on loan as another goal or appearance would have triggered something?
 

Also I was reliably informed that Fane was a Corney signing (though we had no manager at the time) and Rob Hunt wasn’t brought in by Shez

 

3 players from memory (2 of which were good players) aren’t quite in the same league as:

 

Vera

Desire

Kokos

Gonzales

Fage

Egert

Sefil

Menig

Omrani

Branger

 

 

Gerrard was also signed by Corney.

[oafc 123]

9 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

Not sure about another season but wasn’t Lee Hughes sent out on loan as another goal or appearance would have triggered something?
 

Also I was reliably informed that Fane was a Corney signing (though we had no manager at the time) and Rob Hunt wasn’t brought in by Shez

 

3 players from memory (2 of which were good players) aren’t quite in the same league as:

 

Vera

Desire

Kokos

Gonzales

Fage

Egert

Sefil

Menig

Omrani

Branger

 

 

Joe Jacobson was a Corney signing.

[Chaddyexile84]

2 minutes ago, oafc 123 said:

Joe Jacobson was a Corney signing.

looking at how he’s done at Wycombe he’s another that Boundary Park just didn't get the best out of 

 

we all know Corney made signings but one or 2 a year over a 15 year period compared to the 11 plus a year Mo has made is the issue - then there’s the quality or lack of on those signings.

 

Corney also largely left managers to it only getting involved when things went tits up 

[Lags]

19 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

looking at how he’s done at Wycombe he’s another that Boundary Park just didn't get the best out of 

 

we all know Corney made signings but one or 2 a year over a 15 year period compared to the 11 plus a year Mo has made is the issue - then there’s the quality or lack of on those signings.

 

Corney also largely left managers to it only getting involved when things went tits up 

 

So some interference is acceptable? Or is it dependant who it is. 

 

Remember posters, I am on record saying I want managers to manage. Including all signings. 

[Chaddyexile84]

10 minutes ago, Lags said:

 

So some interference is acceptable? Or is it dependant who it is. 

 

Remember posters, I am on record saying I want managers to manage. Including all signings. 

oh bore off you’re incredibly condescending (no wonder you love Barry)  - signing players isn’t interference and not on the level that I just explained - I have no issue whatsoever with a sporting director in principle - just one that recruits from the schoolyard pool ours does - how many of his super signings have gone on to better things? Jacobsen and Hunt at least went on to higher levels.  Also I fully expect a chairman to get involved when things are going badly - not from day one as your idol does 

 

for someone who constantly bemoans people ignoring comments where you call the regime in to question you don’t half read only what you want to read 

[Lags]

57 minutes ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

oh bore off you’re incredibly condescending (no wonder you love Barry)  - signing players isn’t interference and not on the level that I just explained - I have no issue whatsoever with a sporting director in principle - just one that recruits from the schoolyard pool ours does - how many of his super signings have gone on to better things? Jacobsen and Hunt at least went on to higher levels.  Also I fully expect a chairman to get involved when things are going badly - not from day one as your idol does 

 

for someone who constantly bemoans people ignoring comments where you call the regime in to question you don’t half read only what you want to read 

 

It's just an opinion. Chill out. 

 

My idol

[whittles left foot]

1 hour ago, al_bro said:

I might be wrong, but wasn't there at least one occurrence of a player (can't remember who) not being played, because it triggered another season?

 

 

Was it Mills last year?

[underdog]

12 hours ago, singe said:

Very true.

I did mean the icing on the cake, the final nail in the coffin. 

 

Not to you directly Dave, but generally, the Trust only has 3% and can be outvoted every time, so the obvous question is why is the owner bothered by it, and it seems obvious the potential thorn on his side it could be if revitalised has him worried. Phillipa's viewing of the accounts exposed certain things. 

 

It just seems an injustice to roll over, let the owner have his little coup, and then let them hand over the 3% for nothing. 

Agreed. There seems to have been an an increase of interest of  late with regards to The Trust, its current and ex personnel. Appears to me Like a vulture picking at a carcass, yet it still has a faint pulse.

 

I don't suppose owner was too happy with the the Trust with our complaint letter  in December. This meant acknowledgement and registering at companies house of the 3rd shareholder (although a current director at Oct fans forum said there was only two) and the 2017/18 accounts being re-done to include 6 critical points that needed more detail..the annoying wasp that gives you a sting every so often...yikes

 

I saw Paul Whitehead status yesterday with regards to him publically denying he had any interest in the Trust nor would be standing for trust election. That was an interesting statement of how a rumour got back to him that he had to deny it in the public domain. Is it that bad that parties are under and over the radar attempting to infiltrate it.....is as a supporter organisation with 3% and extra entitlement that much of a threat to someone or another organisation? I say yes, it has un-fulfilled potential but it has to been in the right qualified hands and I urge any member to vote accordingly at the AGM (when announced)....exercise your right to vote. Don't veto it.

 

I am sure those still in situ will be exhausting the legal aspect of the Trust, its share holding, logistics of holding an and EGM/AGM (has to be done by 30th Sept). All to ensure it has ticked all the legal boxes so no party can legally challenge any minimum decisions it can make pre - AGM or even post.

 

If it was me I would have FSA legal team on speed dial. Something the Trust can do as part of its membership with them

 

 

 

 

[Worcester Owl]

12 hours ago, Lags said:

 

I haven't castigated no one. Least of all Pete Wild. I answered a question posed to me with the truth what happened, Nothing more.

Down the years there have been plenty sat on the trust board who have resigned citing abuse. Whether your confidence in the trust as been eroded or not doesn't alter my point. 

We are long overdue a visit from the grammar police. A double negative is more than disappointing.

 

"I haven't castigated anyone" 

"I have castigated no one" 

 

To be clear, I am not offering an opinion on whether Lags has or has not castigated anyone.

[Chaddyexile84]

6 minutes ago, Worcester Owl said:

We are long overdue a visit from the grammar police. A double negative is more than disappointing.

 

"I haven't castigated anyone" 

"I have castigated no one" 

 

To be clear, I am not offering an opinion on whether Lags has or has not castigated anyone.

well spotted and pushing further to Barry Owen the truth part 2 

[whittles left foot]

1 minute ago, Chaddyexile84 said:

well spotted and pushing further to Barry Owen the truth part 2 

Wasn't it you who posted a few hours ago that a certain other poster was becoming boring?