deyres42 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 6 minutes ago, Andy b said: To clarify our position further to Underdog’s post: 1) We asked questions and set our expectations based on what was discussed at the meet on 23rd. Whether people liked the specific questions/expectations as presented is, to some degree, academic. The bigger picture is that we are attempting to make our presence felt and hold the owner to account (publically) in a way the trust has not done for a long time. That I think is supported by most as a principle 2) the trust does not have a lawyer on the Board so we used our collective judgement in concluding that some info in the letter received could be privileged or that the release of that info could prejudice legal proceedings ongoing. We formed the view that that could come back to harm the Trust (and trust directors) particularly in the absence of any agreement from the sender to put that information into the public domain. This was a laypersons judgement. That’s not a risk to be taken even if ‘experts’ on this board believe that risk to be low or nil. We stand by that decision. The info to which we refer was volunteered by the owner - we didn’t ask for it - and we didn’t consider it was our info to put into the public domain. Anyone who operates in a real world context will understand that I would hope. 3) On 17th April we sought the sender’s permission to distribute the letter. Should we have held off saying anything until he had either given us that permission or declined it? Maybe. We wanted to brief fans ASAP so took the decision to present our summary of the letter and explain our position on the extent to which it addressed our collective concerns. 4) Our summary was written entirely in good faith with no agenda or attempt at bias. My concsious is totally clear. We stand by our position that it is balanced and a fair reflection of the content and sentiments within the letter, aside from the points which we held back. Yes our brief expresses an opinion on the content and that is entirely appropriate. 5) Our judgement on the letter (are we satisfied?) is set out. I am not aware that anyone disagrees that we have come to the right conclusion about whether it addresses fans’ concerns and issues. Correct me if I am wrong. 6) that the letter has been leaked by someone and any inevitability in that happening should not have had any bearing on the trust’s decision to release the letter or not We have extracted a written communication from the owner clearly aimed at responding to fans’ concerns. Focus your energies on judging that response and whether you are happy with it. That is the first such communication of this type in many months. It is step forward in enabling us to understand the owner’s perspective and form a view as to whether he is going to be capable of running the club in a responsible manner. You may wish to prejudge the answer to that question but this is a process and we have to take it in incremental steps. I would urge people to see the bigger picture objective here rather than focusing on finer points of detail that, in the grand scheme of things, do not matter much. Action is needed. The Trust is taking well intended steps to deliver that. We don’t always get it right and we are open to ways to doing things better in the future and learning from past experience. Just crack on now for me, shouldn't feel the need to respond to every bit of criticism. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcmetty Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Keep going trust folks - you're never going to please everyone, but at least you're doing something. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbooth Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 The information left out was information they didn't ask for. The information left in gave essentially the same effect as the rest of the original. You're doing a fine job guys and girls, some people are just itching to protest so they can feel important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 For the record, he has said that the coach company was paid and turned up to take the players to the Bury game. Think that was Orion, wasn't it? There's no mention in that response from him about why Swans wouldn't take us. Wasn't he asked for proof that we didn't owe Swans any money? And don't even get me started on the not interfering in team selection... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFC1958 South Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 54 minutes ago, Andy b said: So sorry. Andy - you have done the right thing. I know enough about the new Data Privacy Laws (GDPR) as had involvement with my Global Company I work for - it is very complex Legislation. It is always safer to seek permission from the originator of the information if intent is to share. Always be cautious without being paranoid obviously. I don't trust AL either unfortunately although I try to - to take the Trust on due to breaking Data Privacy Laws would be just perfect for him … but I'm paranoid ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laticsmarra Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Keep going Andy, the only certainty in this process is when you put your head above the parapet you will be shot at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Sinnott Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Anyway, Trust people. It may have been mentioned before, so apologies if it has. It was said you weren't satisfied with the response in the letter. What are the next steps...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 37 minutes ago, OAFC1958 South said: Andy - you have done the right thing. I know enough about the new Data Privacy Laws (GDPR) as had involvement with my Global Company I work for - it is very complex Legislation. It is always safer to seek permission from the originator of the information if intent is to share. Always be cautious without being paranoid obviously. I don't trust AL either unfortunately although I try to - to take the Trust on due to breaking Data Privacy Laws would be just perfect for him … but I'm paranoid ! Literally nothing to do with GDPR. Zero. Speaking as someone who has created a GDPR policy for a heavily regulated firm. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Crack on @andyb It's important what you are doing because a glimpse into the future is happening at Bolton. Being taken over by the dodgiest ex Watford owner, "subject to approval" He shouldn't come within a country mile of passing the Owners & Directors Test. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Bassini Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 16 minutes ago, Lee Sinnott said: Anyway, Trust people. It may have been mentioned before, so apologies if it has. It was said you weren't satisfied with the response in the letter. What are the next steps...? Yes. I’m a bit confused. The original Trust response was (to paraphrase) “AL’s letter is not acceptable, we move to step 2” and that is reaffirmed at point 5 of the response above. Yet we have this paragraph too? (Which seems slightly more conciliatory) That is the first such communication of this type in many months. It is step forward in enabling us to understand the owner’s perspective and form a view as to whether he is going to be capable of running the club in a responsible manner. You may wish to prejudge the answer to that question but this is a process and we have to take it in incremental steps. So is the plan to just try to engage further with AL or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 1 hour ago, oafcmetty said: Keep going trust folks - you're never going to please everyone, but at least you're doing something. Agreed keep going And keep the pressure on the clown. Certain posters on here were always going to criticise you for your actions and will regardless of what you do in the future Ignore them! You are doing the right thing and pursuing the right path. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 3 hours ago, kowenicki said: This is all a bit... hmmm... your way or the highway isn’t it? “We have holidays” , “we are volunteers you know”. To play devils advocate, he may well be extremely busy or out of the country too. You are demanding a meeting before season end... why? What’s wrong with the week after? What is it that is so time sensitive? I’d be very grateful for a proper answer to this because it seems unnecessarily awkward if you are “reaching out”. We are lead to believe owner may not be available much after post season...and why not roll out the vision as is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Lee Sinnott said: For the record, he has said that the coach company was paid and turned up to take the players to the Bury game. Think that was Orion, wasn't it? There's no mention in that response from him about why Swans wouldn't take us. Wasn't he asked for proof that we didn't owe Swans any money? And don't even get me started on the not interfering in team selection... Swan's is firmly in m mind re evidence request.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 (edited) 38 minutes ago, kowenicki said: Yes. I’m a bit confused. The original Trust response was (to paraphrase) “AL’s letter is not acceptable, we move to step 2” and that is reaffirmed at point 5 of the response above. Yet we have this paragraph too? (Which seems slightly more conciliatory) That is the first such communication of this type in many months. It is step forward in enabling us to understand the owner’s perspective and form a view as to whether he is going to be capable of running the club in a responsible manner. You may wish to prejudge the answer to that question but this is a process and we have to take it in incremental steps. So is the plan to just try to engage further with AL or not? Yes...Asked for fan/trust meeting next week if possible Edited April 17, 2019 by underdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 46 minutes ago, kowenicki said: Literally nothing to do with GDPR. Zero. Speaking as someone who has created a GDPR policy for a heavily regulated firm. Agreed. Maybe health and safety Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFC1958 South Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Dave_Og said: Agreed. Maybe health and safety I had no idea you had both seen the original AL response to make that conclusion...sorry. I also led the rollout of GDPR policies for large Global company ..caution is best approach but it is an opinion.. based in not seeing the content Anyway, forget if's and buts...the plan going forward is more important Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritchierich Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Re team interference, didn’t Scholes say it only happened once on that BT sport piece the other day? ...obviously I’m no fan of our clown owner but nobody is coming out of this with any credibility Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kusunga_Is_God Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 On a personal note I just want to apologise if my comments offended anyone last night. They were wide of the mark and out of order. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, Kusunga_Is_God said: On a personal note I just want to apologise if my comments offended anyone last night. They were wide of the mark and out of order. FWIW I saw nothing that offended ne, but didn't see all posts. Bottom line, we might not all agree the way forward, but we all want the same success for OAFC. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowenicki Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 38 minutes ago, Kusunga_Is_God said: On a personal note I just want to apologise if my comments offended anyone last night. They were wide of the mark and out of order. Fair play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristolatic Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 45 minutes ago, Kusunga_Is_God said: On a personal note I just want to apologise if my comments offended anyone last night. They were wide of the mark and out of order. That'll do for me. Fair do's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League one forever Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Personally, I really feel for Andy B. FWIW. If your reading mate, stay off here. When you get information that you think needs wider attention. Invite anyone that wants to know to a meeting. Not a trust meeting- a fans meeting. (Like the recent gathering at the north stand) You’ll find very few who love holding you to account on here will turn up. Which says everything. I’ll be completely honest. The situation at the club saddens me. An I won’t go in the current climate. But equally I don’t care enough to attend meetings. Or to put anywhere near the effort in that Andy and others do. Therefore, while I don’t always agree with their every decision. I wouldn’t dream of holding you to account in the way some do on here, while themselves doing fuck all. To the posters on here. (You know who you are) Have a long look at yourselves. A lot of you should be ashamed. Your happy to post repeated replies to him, but you offer fuck all. No actual help, or even moral support. All you do is sniping, bitching, and offering your pearls of wisdom. From the comfort of armchair. Andy. Keep yourself to yourself, and from me personally I admire your passion and willingness to confront things whilst keeping a dignity and professionalism. Top man. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 7 hours ago, Kusunga_Is_God said: On a personal note I just want to apologise if my comments offended anyone last night. They were wide of the mark and out of order. Accepted . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog73 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 On 4/16/2019 at 10:03 PM, Andy b said: Guys, we have presented the relevant points on the letter and been very thorough about it. If you choose to focus on what we cannot say I can’t do anything about that. Any additional info in the response does not change our stance on the letter and the extent to which we are reassured by it, as reported in our statement. Will be saying no more on the matter for now. You want AL to engage with the fans but want to cherry pick out of his response to the fans, you really couldn't make it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disjointed Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 7 hours ago, League one forever said: Personally, I really feel for Andy B. FWIW. If your reading mate, stay off here. When you get information that you think needs wider attention. Invite anyone that wants to know to a meeting. Not a trust meeting- a fans meeting. (Like the recent gathering at the north stand) You’ll find very few who love holding you to account on here will turn up. Which says everything. I’ll be completely honest. The situation at the club saddens me. An I won’t go in the current climate. But equally I don’t care enough to attend meetings. Or to put anywhere near the effort in that Andy and others do. Therefore, while I don’t always agree with their every decision. I wouldn’t dream of holding you to account in the way some do on here, while themselves doing fuck all. To the posters on here. (You know who you are) Have a long look at yourselves. A lot of you should be ashamed. Your happy to post repeated replies to him, but you offer fuck all. No actual help, or even moral support. All you do is sniping, bitching, and offering your pearls of wisdom. From the comfort of armchair. Andy. Keep yourself to yourself, and from me personally I admire your passion and willingness to confront things whilst keeping a dignity and professionalism. Top man. For some reason I can't upboat, but this ^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.