|
Post by phillistine on Mar 15, 2016 14:31:19 GMT
Our debt increased under NH. Our League Position nosedived under NH. The relationship between the Fans and Board broke down under NH. We saw no improvements at the Mem under NH (certainly not in the last 5 years) We DID NOT get a new ground under NH! He failed several times to deliver a new stadium and we will find out shortly if he was about to fail again. He negotiated a contract that he claimed was "watertight" that our partners then walked away from. He then lied to fans about Sainsbury still being on board with the plan when he knew they were not. Yes, he backed DC. I'll give him credit for that. But then he also backed McGhee, Buckle and Ward until he didn't.... He also lied about knowing a consortium when he knew full well he was in talks and that he'd banned local media from reporting it. He also closed down the OF because he could no longer control the criticism of his regime and the players behaviour. He froze fans Directors out of any meaningful role despite fans paying for the right to have themselves represented at board level. The only success he had was that he got bought out! Arise Sir Nick!! Our League position nosedived but in the last 18 months has started to climb. We did not get a new ground under NH but everyone knows that Rome didnt get built in a day. We did get the foundations on which the new owners will hopefully build a new stadium. He didnt negotiate the Contract - his solicitors did . Legally it would have been suicide to admit that he believed Sainsbury were trying to pull out. You could argue that he gave established and succesful managers their chance until it became evident that they were taking us backwards. Hindsight is a great thing. The new owner has said that he would have pulled out had the matter got into the public arena. Did he actually say that he knew nothing about a consortium or did he say that there were no serious buyers for the club. The fact that the consortium never went public seems to back up this. He closed down the OF because of the slanderous comments being made on there by some of the members. The accusations towards a number of players in particular led to the OF being closed. If he had been seen to condone those comments by allowing the OF to continue then the club could have been joined in the actions. I cant comment on the last point as I dont know. His only success according to you was getting bought out. I suggest that you go back and read the new owners interviews about why they purchased the Rovers. It was because of the potential with a new ground in the pipeline. Isnt making the club a good proposition to a dynamic prosepctive purchaser who is more equiped than yourself to take it forward - a success?
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Mar 15, 2016 14:33:35 GMT
We need to name one of the stands at UWE after him ( i said stands not sh@thouse, Hugo ) ! Certainly not. Maybe a food outlet, having said that even the pasties got smaller and dearer under him
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Mar 15, 2016 14:40:45 GMT
We need to name one of the stands at UWE after him ( i said stands not sh@thouse, Hugo ) ! Certainly not. Maybe a food outlet, having said that even the pasties got smaller and dearer under him you can blame the franchise owner on that one
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 15, 2016 15:00:03 GMT
Our debt increased under NH. Our League Position nosedived under NH. The relationship between the Fans and Board broke down under NH. We saw no improvements at the Mem under NH (certainly not in the last 5 years) We DID NOT get a new ground under NH! He failed several times to deliver a new stadium and we will find out shortly if he was about to fail again. He negotiated a contract that he claimed was "watertight" that our partners then walked away from. He then lied to fans about Sainsbury still being on board with the plan when he knew they were not. Yes, he backed DC. I'll give him credit for that. But then he also backed McGhee, Buckle and Ward until he didn't.... He also lied about knowing a consortium when he knew full well he was in talks and that he'd banned local media from reporting it. He also closed down the OF because he could no longer control the criticism of his regime and the players behaviour. He froze fans Directors out of any meaningful role despite fans paying for the right to have themselves represented at board level. The only success he had was that he got bought out! Arise Sir Nick!! Our League position nosedived but in the last 18 months has started to climb. But we are still a division lower than where we were when he took over We did not get a new ground under NH but everyone knows that Rome didnt get built in a day. or indeed 10yrs We did get the foundations on which the new owners will hopefully build a new stadium. Which our new owners are renegotiating because it wasn't a great deal for the club He didnt negotiate the Contract - his solicitors did Who was lauded as having a fantastic background in construction and who appointed them? Legally it would have been suicide to admit that he believed Sainsbury were trying to pull out. So say nothing, its better than lying to us You could argue that he gave established and succesful managers their chance until it became evident that they were taking us backwards. Hindsight is a great thing. So is an ability to learn from your past mistakes The new owner has said that he would have pulled out had the matter got into the public arena. Did he actually say that he knew nothing about a consortium or did he say that there were no serious buyers for the club. The fact that the consortium never went public seems to back up this. He asked if someone could tell him who it was that was trying to buy us because it was a the first he'd heard of it. Another lie when saying nothing would have been preferable He closed down the OF because of the slanderous comments being made on there by some of the members. The accusations towards a number of players in particular led to the OF being closed. If he had been seen to condone those comments by allowing the OF to continue then the club could have been joined in the actions. Lucky no one was slagging off his running of the club and asking for the review he promised then otherwise people might start to get cynical I cant comment on the last point as I dont know. His only success according to you was getting bought out. Yes. That was unfair of me, I should have mentioned Santa's grotto too. I suggest that you go back and read the new owners interviews about why they purchased the Rovers. It was because of the potential with a new ground in the pipeline. Isnt making the club a good proposition to a dynamic prosepctive purchaser who is more equiped than yourself to take it forward  - a success? Yes, that's a success. Which was what I said. Selling up was his biggest success.      Apologies if I seem flippant, but I can't really agree with much you raise, even if you have taken the time to raise a good argument. I'm not sure really that you've said much to actually put forward NH as a success other than to nearly get the UWE and to have sold up. I'm not sure if we are even in disagreement. Edit, forgot to mention the debt. Mustn't forget that!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:06:40 GMT
How many pages would there be to this thread if we hadn't been taken over!! The result of the appeal is why we were sold. Are you absolutely certain of this or is it just your opinion
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:09:52 GMT
Nor me. That's why you employ legal teams. But they didn't spot it either. As for blame, why did we allow the end date of the contract to be brought forward by six months? That was the killer, because if we had left it as it was we would have been home and dry. AND WE HAD TO AGREE WITH THAT OR IT COULDNT HAVE BEEN MOVED. Six months is no time, if Sainsburys decided that if they prevaricated long enough they could see the contract run out regardless of the amount of time still left to run
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:15:56 GMT
Was he such a proven failure? He was guilty of seeing us relegated and no-one can argue with that. Certainly that has to be seen as a major failure in the short term. A failure however accepts defeat and doesn't turn everything around in the way that the club has been transformed. The Board's decision to stick with Dc when he was untried got us back into the football League. The new owners openly state that they wouldn't have looked at us had we not been in the Football LeagueWas his work on the new stadium a failure? He effectively found us the new stadium site - negotiated a back to back agreement which would have self funded had Trash not raised its head. The new owners admit that the new stadium made the club an attractive proposition and so we wouldn't be where we are today had he not laid the foundations of that . The reality is that everyone judges him based on the fact that he got us relegated and ignores everything else. In a few years time we may well be looking at a different Rovers completely and when we look back we will see that the relegation was the spark that started the new era for Bristol Rovers . NH has been chairman for the first 1.5 seasons of that and that should not be forgotten. ......or did NH just get v. lucky at the 11th hour when MSP put Hamer/Wael in touch with the club, what would have happened if Scully had decided to sell Gillingham to the Al-Q's? So now its MSP who oversaw the buy out,who is the next one to get credit ?Father Christmas
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:19:17 GMT
Our debt increased under NH. Our League Position nosedived under NH. The relationship between the Fans and Board broke down under NH. We saw no improvements at the Mem under NH (certainly not in the last 5 years) We DID NOT get a new ground under NH! He failed several times to deliver a new stadium and we will find out shortly if he was about to fail again. He negotiated a contract that he claimed was "watertight" that our partners then walked away from. He then lied to fans about Sainsbury still being on board with the plan when he knew they were not. Yes, he backed DC. I'll give him credit for that. But then he also backed McGhee, Buckle and Ward until he didn't.... He also lied about knowing a consortium when he knew full well he was in talks and that he'd banned local media from reporting it. Talk about an unhidden agenda He also closed down the OF because he could no longer control the criticism of his regime and the players behaviour. He froze fans Directors out of any meaningful role despite fans paying for the right to have themselves represented at board level. The only success he had was that he got bought out! Arise Sir Nick!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:21:55 GMT
Wasn't the "consortium" just fragment of somebody's imagination anyway? Perhaps we should all just pause for breath on this thread and see what Thursday brings as I assume win or lose the new owners will have to make some announcement about building the new stadium. If you mean the consortium referred to by JTS etc, probably not. When Ali Durden reported on Points West about the Al Qadi buy out, he said there was another consortium interested. As to their identities, I imagine only a few people know for sure. If I had to guess, the registration of a company involving the name Bristol Rovers might point to Mike Turl being the ex Bristol Rovers connection and Swissgas has experience of arranging contacts etc in the states. All speculation on my part and history now anyway. I do wonder if Wael will settle for 21,700 or go straight for the second tier taking it up to 26,000. Wrong in both cases not Turl or Swiss,but there was another ex director involved in a consortium
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Mar 15, 2016 15:22:55 GMT
If you mean the consortium referred to by JTS etc, probably not. When Ali Durden reported on Points West about the Al Qadi buy out, he said there was another consortium interested. As to their identities, I imagine only a few people know for sure. If I had to guess, the registration of a company involving the name Bristol Rovers might point to Mike Turl being the ex Bristol Rovers connection and Swissgas has experience of arranging contacts etc in the states. All speculation on my part and history now anyway. I do wonder if Wael will settle for 21,700 or go straight for the second tier taking it up to 26,000. Wrong in both cases not Turl or Swiss,but there was another ex director involved in a consortium would he have a house on Filton Ave by chance ?
|
|
|
Post by newmarketgas on Mar 15, 2016 15:28:38 GMT
Opinions, Good thread lads and lasses. Did I see Hugo towing a large wicker man up to the Mem car park earlier ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:28:44 GMT
No,but one of his members on the consortium at one stage had something to do with greyhounds
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:28:57 GMT
NH laughing all the way to the bank... piggies bank.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 15:29:57 GMT
Opinions, Good thread lads and lasses. Did I see Hugo towing a large wicker man up to the Mem car park earlier ? No that was the chip on his shoulder,i just wonder whether he was a member of the ill fated gas trust from a few years ago
|
|
|
Post by newmarketgas on Mar 15, 2016 15:30:37 GMT
NH laughing all the way to the bank... piggies bank. Watch out, he might call you a pleb and you would not like that.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 15, 2016 15:54:39 GMT
Opinions, Good thread lads and lasses. Did I see Hugo towing a large wicker man up to the Mem car park earlier ? No that was the chip on his shoulder,i just wonder whether he was a member of the ill fated gas trust from a few years ago I wasn't no. No chip on my shoulder and no hidden agenda either. Just my own opinion. No more or less valuable or correct than anyone elses.
|
|
|
Post by newmarketgas on Mar 15, 2016 16:01:06 GMT
No that was the chip on his shoulder,i just wonder whether he was a member of the ill fated gas trust from a few years ago I wasn't no. No chip on my shoulder and no hidden agenda either. Just my own opinion. No more or less valuable or correct than anyone elses. My opinions are usualy wrong ( so my good Lady says ) but I love making them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2016 16:02:54 GMT
As it is just an opinion I suggest you respect other posters opinions instead of treating them with either contempt or like you would a small child.Somewhere in the past you have fallen out with the club or not agrred with what was happening at the time which explains you attitude towards some board or staff members.let me guess the events of approx. 2006 ish that didn't go the way you wanted them to go
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 15, 2016 16:06:01 GMT
Aye, I know how that feels.
At the end of the day we are all going to look back and assess what something means to us and what was our experience of it.
Hats of to those here who are happy or positive about his tenure as a whole.
Personally, I'm not.
It's all interesting stuff that can be talked about without the need to make digs or personal comments about posters.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 15, 2016 16:09:25 GMT
As it is just an opinion I suggest you respect other posters opinions instead of treating them with either contempt or like you would a small child.Somewhere in the past you have fallen out with the club or not agrred with what was happening at the time which explains you attitude towards some board or staff members.let me guess the events of approx. 2006 ish that didn't go the way you wanted them to go Again, you could not be more wrong. I've never had any dealings in anything to do with anyone at the club. Ever. Nor have I any supporters groups other than when I first joined the FFSC. I only joined the OF around 2 yrs before it closed down! I'm just an ordinary fan. Sorry if that disappoints you. I'm not sure where I have been contemptuous? I simply don't agree with the points people have made and have said so.
|
|