|
Post by gashead1981 on Aug 3, 2019 10:51:21 GMT
It may seem like vitriol but I’m just facing the facts of the position of the SC and minority shareholders is not fit for purpose anymore, that in the past 5 years they could have done much more to help, isn’t the last year to 18 months there has been a split in the boardroom where the chairman has repeated tried to undermine the owners and the president and has been using the above to attempt anything he can to disrupt efficient running of the club and what’s worse is that Ken Masters knows he’s been a pawn in all of that. GIs original post was an example of how members of that club are trying to discredit the owners at every given opportunity. Were you at the agm? You could have seen that in real time action for yourself. Regardless of how implausible that may be. Whilst the SC owns a 8% share they are still independent and they still can communicate with the fans and their members. They have chosen not to and KMs leadership is showing to be weak, old fashioned and untenable. I’m not aligning myself with anyone, there is no advantage for me to side with one or the other, I’m a season ticket paying fan who occasionally does some other sponsorship or whatever for the club. I’m Just calling it as it is and how I see it based on what I know/have found out. I have been more critical than I have supportive of this regime. If the SC went with the direction they want to go in, and that is with full support of Hamer then we would have Hamers mate (that’s right, a good mate) in Cottrell in charge of the first team and a proper coup on our hands. Where do you think that link came from with odds slashed to almost zero? Because he was a decent manager at L1 level who wants publicly mocked us? All of the fans were against it and yet this was Hamers candidate with full support from KM!! Morning gashead1981 How do you know this please as I have never heard this from anyone prior to this. I did see a fair few who were saying Cotterill would be a good choice though. Thanks in advance Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back.
|
|
|
Post by burnthewitch on Aug 3, 2019 11:18:15 GMT
Morning gashead1981 How do you know this please as I have never heard this from anyone prior to this. I did see a fair few who were saying Cotterill would be a good choice though. Thanks in advance Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back. Gosh - you do get told a lot of things that do not appear to be in the public domain. Do you ever feel like you are being "used"? Are you told to keep this sort of information to yourself - or are you encouraged to share it? From this perspective I'm really struggling to tell the difference between your modus operandi and that of gasincider & knowall.
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 3, 2019 11:26:08 GMT
Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back. Gosh - you do get told a lot of things that do not appear to be in the public domain. Do you ever feel like you are being "used"? Are you told to keep this sort of information to yourself - or are you encouraged to share it? From this perspective I'm really struggling to tell the difference between your modus operandi and that of gasincider & knowall. Give up. Far easier.
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Aug 3, 2019 12:08:13 GMT
Morning gashead1981 How do you know this please as I have never heard this from anyone prior to this. I did see a fair few who were saying Cotterill would be a good choice though. Thanks in advance Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back. I can confirm the veracity of this. In fact there was a split in the Board as whether to appoint him until the end of that season with an optional extension or to give him a 2 1/2 year contract.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Aug 3, 2019 12:27:53 GMT
Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back. Gosh - you do get told a lot of things that do not appear to be in the public domain. Do you ever feel like you are being "used"? Are you told to keep this sort of information to yourself - or are you encouraged to share it? From this perspective I'm really struggling to tell the difference between your modus operandi and that of gasincider & knowall. Not all the time. And when I was told this back last season I kept my mouth shut. Why? Because I have no agenda and it’s of no advantage to me to say anything at the time. Times past now though, GC is in charge and the info now is irrelevant. So how am I being used?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2019 14:55:12 GMT
I rest my case, get your apple and pears in boys.
Can’t wait for the next AGM 😂🙈👏🏻🚀
|
|
|
Post by burnthewitch on Aug 4, 2019 11:33:53 GMT
Gosh - you do get told a lot of things that do not appear to be in the public domain. Do you ever feel like you are being "used"? Are you told to keep this sort of information to yourself - or are you encouraged to share it? From this perspective I'm really struggling to tell the difference between your modus operandi and that of gasincider & knowall. Give up. Far easier. Nah - I don't do giving up. If I see what I perceive to be hypocrisy, I will call it out. Happy Sunday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2019 11:34:32 GMT
So who's pulling who off? I've lost track.
|
|
|
Post by burnthewitch on Aug 4, 2019 11:48:08 GMT
Gosh - you do get told a lot of things that do not appear to be in the public domain. Do you ever feel like you are being "used"? Are you told to keep this sort of information to yourself - or are you encouraged to share it? From this perspective I'm really struggling to tell the difference between your modus operandi and that of gasincider & knowall. Not all the time. And when I was told this back last season I kept my mouth shut. Why? Because I have no agenda and it’s of no advantage to me to say anything at the time. Times past now though, GC is in charge and the info now is irrelevant. So how am I being used? I am not a fan of the Board, any of them. But you have made quite a few comments - specifically against Steve Hamer that are borderline libellous. If those comments are based on fact and not hearsay, not a problem. To conclude - if there is an "anti-Hamer agenda" at Board level - it looks like you are being used to propagate that message via this forum. Which is your right. Anyway - Wycombe next week.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Aug 4, 2019 14:05:26 GMT
Not all the time. And when I was told this back last season I kept my mouth shut. Why? Because I have no agenda and it’s of no advantage to me to say anything at the time. Times past now though, GC is in charge and the info now is irrelevant. So how am I being used? I am not a fan of the Board, any of them. But you have made quite a few comments - specifically against Steve Hamer that are borderline libellous. If those comments are based on fact and not hearsay, not a problem. To conclude - if there is an "anti-Hamer agenda" at Board level - it looks like you are being used to propagate that message via this forum. Which is your right. Anyway - Wycombe next week. Absolutely nothing I have written is libellous. I have always had my suspicions about Hamer since he joined mainly because he comes across as a bit smarmy in interviews. Some of the things he said under pressure from GT at interview. They were misrepresentative, putting it kindly. What I have found out since has confirmed that suspicion. Now did I run on here as soon as I found out? No. Have I posted all I do know? No. Have posts by people connected to Hamer and outbursts at the agm proven that he is a trouble maker? Yes. How can I possibly control those events? No one can curry my favour, it’s impossible. There is nothing they can bribe me with to get me to do it and certainly not via the forum. Not with position, don’t need it or want it. Not financially, or anything else.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 4, 2019 14:16:37 GMT
I am not a fan of the Board, any of them. But you have made quite a few comments - specifically against Steve Hamer that are borderline libellous. If those comments are based on fact and not hearsay, not a problem. To conclude - if there is an "anti-Hamer agenda" at Board level - it looks like you are being used to propagate that message via this forum. Which is your right. Anyway - Wycombe next week. Absolutely nothing I have written is libellous. I have always had my suspicions about Hamer since he joined mainly because he comes across as a bit smarmy in interviews. Some of the things he said under pressure from GT at interview. They were misrepresentative, putting it kindly. What I have found out since has confirmed that suspicion. Now did I run on here as soon as I found out? No. Have I posted all I do know? No. Have posts by people connected to Hamer and outbursts at the agm proven that he is a trouble maker? Yes. How can I possibly control those events? No one can curry my favour, it’s impossible. There is nothing they can bribe me with to get me to do it and certainly not via the forum. Not with position, don’t need it or want it. Not financially, or anything else. Hi Wael, I can be bought. 2 pasties and a coke and I will tell these losers on here anything. Call me xxx
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Aug 4, 2019 15:31:29 GMT
Absolutely nothing I have written is libellous. I have always had my suspicions about Hamer since he joined mainly because he comes across as a bit smarmy in interviews. Some of the things he said under pressure from GT at interview. They were misrepresentative, putting it kindly. What I have found out since has confirmed that suspicion. Now did I run on here as soon as I found out? No. Have I posted all I do know? No. Have posts by people connected to Hamer and outbursts at the agm proven that he is a trouble maker? Yes. How can I possibly control those events? No one can curry my favour, it’s impossible. There is nothing they can bribe me with to get me to do it and certainly not via the forum. Not with position, don’t need it or want it. Not financially, or anything else. Hi Wael, I can be bought. 2 pasties and a coke and I will tell these losers on here anything. Call me xxx I will do it for for one Piglet Pie and a coke
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2019 16:49:42 GMT
Morning gashead1981 How do you know this please as I have never heard this from anyone prior to this. I did see a fair few who were saying Cotterill would be a good choice though. Thanks in advance Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back. GC with his Plymouth connections obviously being a completely neutral choice for the board? There is so much nepotism at the club on either side of this debate and it’s not a particularly good look in my view.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 4, 2019 17:15:13 GMT
Can anybody work out what GC was referring to in his post match interview yesterday when he suddenly starting talking in riddles like DC:
"There are things that need changing, I know that, the Rovers fans know that.
And until we can make those changes ... we'll ... carry on.
I want to make changes, of course, but, realistically, in the real world can I? I don't think I can make the changes that I need to make.
Is that based on finance? No, finance is nothing to do with it. Players are here, they're under contract.
There are one or two things I'd like to do at the football club, and I'm not just talking about players, I'm talking about the football club in general. But maybe I can't."
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 4, 2019 17:17:56 GMT
Can anybody work out what GC was referring to in his post match interview yesterday when he suddenly starting talking in riddles like DC: "There are things that need changing, I know that, the Rovers fans know that. And until we can make those changes ... we'll ... carry on. I want to make changes, of course, but, realistically, in the real world can I? I don't think I can make the changes that I need to make. Is that based on finance? No, finance is nothing to do with it. Players are here, they're under contract. There are one or two things I'd like to do at the football club, and I'm not just talking about players, I'm talking about the football club in general. But maybe I can't." I think maybe he should concentrate on football and leave the media work to somebody else
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Aug 4, 2019 18:39:25 GMT
Can anybody work out what GC was referring to in his post match interview yesterday when he suddenly starting talking in riddles like DC: "There are things that need changing, I know that, the Rovers fans know that. And until we can make those changes ... we'll ... carry on. I want to make changes, of course, but, realistically, in the real world can I? I don't think I can make the changes that I need to make. Is that based on finance? No, finance is nothing to do with it. Players are here, they're under contract. There are one or two things I'd like to do at the football club, and I'm not just talking about players, I'm talking about the football club in general. But maybe I can't." sh** players on long/expensive contracts.
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Aug 4, 2019 22:08:03 GMT
Told directly by a member of the club. It was the reason that we couldn’t announce GC sooner, who was the first choice of the rest of the board and seen as the natural successor to DC. Why did we wait for week 3 or 4 post DC to announce him? It wasn’t because GC was getting a work on the job interview. It was because there was vast lobbying for Cotts and why he was sat with Hamer at a game or 2. If you recall from most threads on here. 90% didn’t want Cotts near our club. Most wanted Holloway back. GC with his Plymouth connections obviously being a completely neutral choice for the board? There is so much nepotism at the club on either side of this debate and it’s not a particularly good look in my view. GC was also here at the choice of Darrell Clarke, who appointed him as a coach and at the start of the season, was the manager who had no intention of leaving or his team falling apart. Are you saying that both Martin and GC knew DC was going to lose the plot and get sacked in August before we had even kicked a competitive ball? And that as a result, the job had been promised to him? Let’s not forget Marcus Stewart was offered a role to stay on above anyone else. But chose to leave himself. GC was the best candidate we could afford. And it was the right appointment as he kept us up. There wasn’t an awful lot of choice out there at the time.
|
|