Why would Powell lie about RD trying to force him to pick Thuram at Sheff U?! Surely RD was the one with the agenda, wanting to prove who was boss? The fact Riga is picking Hamer for me proves RD was the one playing games and forcing Powell out. The more I think about it, the more I blame RD for our cup exit and all that disappointment.
This is how I've been viewing it since Riga's selection of Hamer. If what we have been told is correct.
Let's assume that RD had this agenda. How do you feel about Alex Dyer apparently going along with this -- one minute Thuram is a must-play, then (now) he's not... Dyer just shrugs his shoulders and carries on, and accepts the underlying agenda to force CP out? I don't buy it, personally, and doubt that Alex Dyer would be as two-faced as that himself.
i hadn't even considered that point and what a relevant point it is,
Seriously Red i was told i had an agenda when i kept saying it, yann only had to play one more game and that is a fact, that game as it turned out was huds in the fa cup and he had insinuated he wouldn't play , yet he played against Donny and was on the coach to both games
Even @Henry Irving has piped down a little as he can see the progress and policy evolving!
Don't even dare to assume that you have the faintest idea why I choose to post or not or that you have even the slightest clue as to what I am thinking.
Why would Powell lie about RD trying to force him to pick Thuram at Sheff U?! Surely RD was the one with the agenda, wanting to prove who was boss? The fact Riga is picking Hamer for me proves RD was the one playing games and forcing Powell out. The more I think about it, the more I blame RD for our cup exit and all that disappointment.
This is how I've been viewing it since Riga's selection of Hamer. If what we have been told is correct.
Let's assume that RD had this agenda. How do you feel about Alex Dyer apparently going along with this -- one minute Thuram is a must-play, then (now) he's not... Dyer just shrugs his shoulders and carries on, and accepts the underlying agenda to force CP out? I don't buy it, personally, and doubt that Alex Dyer would be as two-faced as that himself.
I guess a job is a job, i find it strange that he's still employed. But maybe He enjoys his job and needs to take home a salary as he has a large mortgage? Like us all. Its an odd one. Anyway not something i really feel strongly about, its just the way i see it at the moment.
Why would Powell lie about RD trying to force him to pick Thuram at Sheff U?! Surely RD was the one with the agenda, wanting to prove who was boss? The fact Riga is picking Hamer for me proves RD was the one playing games and forcing Powell out. The more I think about it, the more I blame RD for our cup exit and all that disappointment.
This is how I've been viewing it since Riga's selection of Hamer. If what we have been told is correct.
Let's assume that RD had this agenda. How do you feel about Alex Dyer apparently going along with this -- one minute Thuram is a must-play, then (now) he's not... Dyer just shrugs his shoulders and carries on, and accepts the underlying agenda to force CP out? I don't buy it, personally, and doubt that Alex Dyer would be as two-faced as that himself.
i hadn't even considered that point and what a relevant point it is,
Seriously Red i was told i had an agenda when i kept saying it, yann only had to play one more game and that is a fact, that game as it turned out was huds in the fa cup and he had insinuated he wouldn't play , yet he played against Donny and was on the coach to both games
I never knew the number of games nor how close he was but he put it out there last September. In the end it was his call to go to Bournemouth. We beat them 1-0 and he failed to defend Dervite's header at the end.
"A shame but I think all of that involvement in the 90s has given you and others a sense of entitlement that the club has to explain everything to you in minute detail? New York Addick nailed this elsewhere proposing that the likes of you, Airman and Varney are attacking the new owner simply because you sense that the last links to that old cozy world are disappearing. The irony is that it is you who now have to cope with change"
I don't think they'd ever admit it but there's probably an element of truth to this.
I wonder how many other clubs around the country have owners who tell their fans everything they're up to.
Let me make it absolutely clear that my appearance on the list of the G21 was not, and should not be seen as my joining in with some old guard to attack RD, as you infer. I am on there because, as you know, it was presented to us as an attempt to form a broad church of fans to enquire about what RDs future plans are. As you well know, and has been explained publicly, this enables me, and the others to find out what this group thinks might be a severe threat to the future of the club, and report back to the Trust. Nothing more.
I am very aware that I am physically removed from the club and the people there, so I find it useful to discuss here and elsewhere with other people issues which puzzle me. Such as Thuram.
NOthing is to be gained by pretending that there is some kind of civil war going on between fans with fundamentally opposed views, and I am not going to be drawn into it. I have respect for Airman Brown, Henry Irving,and NLA. All know far more than I about various aspects of the club. That they may disagree with each other is all the more reason to engage with all of them.
This thread has developed a life of its own with claim, counter-claim, 'I know', 'I assume', I'm guessing', 'my guess is better than yours' and so on and on and on and on.
The only people who truly know what went on between CP and RD are CP and RD - and those conversations are confidential and the true reasons will/should never come out as there will definitely be a confidentiality clause in the Settlement Agreement (which, as I said elsewhere, would have also included the wording of CP's statement via the LMA).
Most of the 'leaks' if that's what they are rather than supposition, are coming from the CP camp, in particular PV but I'm of the view that the circumstances surrounding CP's dismissal are irrelevant - he's gone and he aint coming back. Am I happy with that? No and some of my previous posts will testify to my admiration for Chris. Can I do anything about it? No. Am I annoyed, angered, betrayed that I don't know the truth? No. Do I believe (I don't know) that RD wanted to pick the team? No. Do I think RD wanted final say on transfer dealings? Yes - as every other Chairman does.
@PragueAddick - is there anything you know that gives you concern about RD that we, the majority of CAFC fans, have yet to be made aware of because if not I, for one, think that the words mountain and molehill spring to mind.
Just catching up with all this. The reason I've not been on here much in recent days is indeed that I have been working on the Voice, however it's not because I want to hold anything back. I just can't afford the time to engage on here when I'm doing it or it would never get done.
A few factual points: I believe it was Derek Chappell, not Richard Murray, who said that Parkinson would be judged on results. I may be wrong, but that's my recollection.
Secondly, it says in the third paragraph of my article about Yann in the last Voice: "His expiring deal was widely believed to contain a clause triggering an extension if he played a certain number of games." So it's a bit rich to read claims I never mentioned it, blah, blah, blah.
The truth is I could not get to the bottom of this at the time, despite speaking to people involved in the deal and our source for YK's side of the story. But I put it in and also referred to NLA's story about him not wanting to travel to Huddersfield. Subsequently, Seriously Red reminded us on here that it came originally from Yann himself at a meeting.
You can be absolutely confident that the source of the stories about team selection is Chris Powell. At the same time, he isn't going to say anything publicly, any more than he did about Slater and Jimenez because he knows in the future it will count against him elsewhere if he does. So you'll never get the conclusive proof you want and people on each side of this argument will continue to believe what they prefer to believe.
A lot of people, however, seem to want to confuse the respect and affection for Chris with the view that he was infallible. That is not my view, but I do believe he has been badly treated. Nevertheless, we move on because there is no alternative unless we are going to give up supporting the club.
There is no conspiracy or agenda from former employees, directors, Valley Party candidates, journalists or anyone else against RD. Why would there be? However there is concern - at different levels of intensity - about the future based on what has happened so far, including attempts to interfere in team selection. But why that happened - and it did - nobody really understands.
@PragueAddick - is there anything you know that gives you concern about RD that we, the majority of CAFC fans, have yet to be made aware of because if not I, for one, think that the words mountain and molehill spring to mind.
Hi Large. Short answer: no. But I freely concede that I don't have the connections, or physical engagement that I had ten years ago, so I rely on others. I hope you' d agree that I'm capable of making up my own mind, and not be over influenced either by friendship or indeed those who choose sometimes to be antagonistic.
I do though like to study the business of football, and therefore try to understand RD's business model. I can see both why it might be exciting and good for us, and why it might be dangerously destructive. I'm in the Trust because I believe we can over time persuade RD to be a little more forthcoming, bit by bit, about some aspects of his model which give rise to concern among fans.
Why would Powell lie about RD trying to force him to pick Thuram at Sheff U?! Surely RD was the one with the agenda, wanting to prove who was boss? The fact Riga is picking Hamer for me proves RD was the one playing games and forcing Powell out. The more I think about it, the more I blame RD for our cup exit and all that disappointment.
This is how I've been viewing it since Riga's selection of Hamer. If what we have been told is correct.
Let's assume that RD had this agenda. How do you feel about Alex Dyer apparently going along with this -- one minute Thuram is a must-play, then (now) he's not... Dyer just shrugs his shoulders and carries on, and accepts the underlying agenda to force CP out? I don't buy it, personally, and doubt that Alex Dyer would be as two-faced as that himself.
I guess a job is a job, i find it strange that he's still employed. But maybe He enjoys his job and needs to take home a salary as he has a large mortgage? Like us all. Its an odd one. Anyway not something i really feel strongly about, its just the way i see it at the moment.
You are right there Curb It, Alex Dyer is not a rich man - certainly did not get rich from playing football in the 80s/90s or from lower league coaching.
He needs a steady monthly income as much as the next bloke and ex-footballers looking for coaching gigs are ten-a-penny so he cant really afford to walk out.
AB why though are you more concerned about RD than TJ and MS and why was there not the need to rally a group as strong as the G21 back then
No one can say that AB was soft on TJ and MS.
As I remember he was slagged off for attacking them "bitter" "Agenda" etc etc and that was despite having one typing arm tied behind his back by the employment tribunal. And yet it seems that now he is being attacked for questioning RD on the basis that "RD is better than those shysters TJ and MS". Well it was AB and others who were telling us all that for a long time.
Not getting into the minutiae of why, when, who, what or the point scoring.
What I have been saying since the TJ/MS/KC takeover is that the owners should provide clarity on six issues. Two (who owns the club and what are the plans for the academy?) have been finally answered. The other four (What's the business plan?, what is the investment level?, What are the plans for the Valley and you all know the last one) still haven't been fully addressed.
RD seems to be viewing all of this as an extension to his political ideology. Vivant failed so he is now seeing football as a a new way of fulfilling his somewhat eccentric/bonkers/megalomaniac/Aspergic dreams. He said, in his first video to us, 'You have to be aware that a football club is not just a matter of winning. I know it's important but if you look at football today, it's also a huge social event'. He appears intrigued that football can gather such a diverse group of people under one roof. He seems to think that the church used to fulfill this role and now it's up to football to introduce community ( he said communion but I think that was a language thing). It's all very odd.
AB why though are you more concerned about RD than TJ and MS and why was there not the need to rally a group as strong as the G21 back then
Firstly, I think there's an assumption that I brought the group together. In fact, I was asked by some other names on the list to take a lead. I said I would only be involved if there was a broad-based group that was so wide it could not reasonably be accused of pursuing a narrow agenda, wanting to damage the club, etc, etc, which all involved know is claptrap in respect of any one of us, but clearly that is not the view of everyone outside it. We bent over backwards to involve the trust in the group, but as the subsequent debate has shown the only thing people in the group could have done that would have avoided the perception of a split or a takeover is nothing.
Secondly, as far as most fans are concerned, the most important thing they know about TJ/MS is that we got promoted and then finished ninth. I think most if not all of the G21 know there was a lot more going on, but realistically staffing issues - the most public manifestation of a problem - don't engage the average fan. The people best placed to blow that regime apart were Varney and Kavanagh, but not only were they in personal disputes with the club, we were all mindful of the question of what would happen next if they did. I don't believe that risk exists in the same way now.
The current situation, on the other hand, has the potential to go to the heart of why we follow the team and affects everyone. But we don't understand it properly yet, which is what we are trying to do. Granted, everyone can have different views about how that should be addressed and if some believe the latest video answers all the questions they have that's up to them. But I am not going to criticise the fact it exists, because it doesn't subtract for what we know and it shows the owner recognises that what we - in the widest sense - think, collectively, matters. That's a start.
"Alnwick went to Orient and with 24hrs was not expected to be in a position to play due to personal issues, ( it would be naïve to think that we may not have been aware of this prior to getting Thuram)"
That, for me, is the key issue re Thuram. If your supposition is correct, I would have little problem with it. I accept too, that if it is true, it is not something the club can gab about. Not fair on Alnwick for a start.
Can I just say something about Ben Alnwick. I'm not sufficiently computer literate to do the whole cut & paste thing, but there are some remarks on here that would be considered poor taste if people knew the truth.
He was transferred to Orient on the Friday, played at Rotherham on the Saturday and discovered a problem the following day that no-one could possibly have been aware of, at either club. Do people really think Orient would have signed him if they didn't think he would be available?
I am not going into detail, but it does not affect him physically or mentally, and we should send him our best wishes and leave it at that.
Airman thankfully for your clarification. The video is another episode and a step on the journey and there are unanswered questions but there is also a relegation battle. I am not sure of how the group was formed but it was surely clear that an organisation which has patiently built into a mass membership body could never subsume it's identity to a body meeting in a pub. This has been explored at length on the other thread by fans who are far more articulate than I. The Trust was established in the wake of the disputes you allude to one reason it exists is to have a dialogue with the club. I don't believe there is civil war amongst fan groups as Prague insinuates. Instead I think it would be more precise to suggest that there needs to be a collective effort to frame the dialogue between fans and club around expectations parameters and outcomes. There are unanswered questions about player acquisition and retention which need answering over time if only to boost the season ticket marketing for next season. This might be achieved if several groups approach the club simultaneously but I actually believe that the different approaches should be quietly considered and then put as one to the club. I suggest the Trust is in a good place to lead on this simply because of its reputation and network and because it cannot be considered bitter or fighting old battles. Whether members of the 21 support the Trust in this is their choice clearly. I actually think it is in there interests whether they are members or not...why? It has the website, brand, resources and contacts to 5,000 fans so that work is already done. And if it is not doing the right thing now then people need to help it shift direction. The alternative is Life of Brian! Ps I'm off to buy some popcorn
You state that 'the current situation, on the other hand, has the potential to go to the heart of why we follow the team and affects everyone. But we don't understand it properly yet, which is what we are trying to do.'
this is what I don't get, and this isn't aimed at you personally but all of 'G21'. Of course it has the potential for anything to happen and none of us understand it properly yet and I can understand the need for more imformation or clarification from RD but the statement initially issued sounded more like war-mongering and threats of action before you even know whether RD will talk to you or not. In my opinion this didn't help your cause because it made it seem, correctly or not and I think not, that you were saying we are important and if you don't listen to us we can sort you out matey. All in my opinion of course.
Thanks, Pico - yes, I would hope everyone can talk about the Trust, even if they aren't a member, let alone on the Board.
Just puts a rather different spin for me on SR's comment above: "If it (the Trust) is not doing the right thing now then people need to help it shift direction."
@seriously-red - haven't you recently resigned from the Trust board?
The more I find out, the less I understand what is going on...
You are correct. I left the board the other day once the Trust were able to agree a statement and release to the membership and wider fanbase. I still believe 100% in the concept but it is time for others to get involved and drive it on. It is in good hands and needs ideas energy and opinions from the fans. I will of course keep an eye out for Pico and the lads especially if one of them is carrying an umbrella as the weather warms up. PS it was real and I met a whole number of fans like yourself Weegie who I would not have met otherwise... Good times.
Comments
i hadn't even considered that point and what a relevant point it is,
Seriously Red i was told i had an agenda when i kept saying it, yann only had to play one more game and that is a fact, that game as it turned out was
huds in the fa cup and he had insinuated he wouldn't play , yet he played against Donny and was on the coach to both games
We move on because we want to and we have to.
I don't think they'd ever admit it but there's probably an element of truth to this.
I wonder how many other clubs around the country have owners who tell their fans everything they're up to.
Let me make it absolutely clear that my appearance on the list of the G21 was not, and should not be seen as my joining in with some old guard to attack RD, as you infer. I am on there because, as you know, it was presented to us as an attempt to form a broad church of fans to enquire about what RDs future plans are. As you well know, and has been explained publicly, this enables me, and the others to find out what this group thinks might be a severe threat to the future of the club, and report back to the Trust. Nothing more.
I am very aware that I am physically removed from the club and the people there, so I find it useful to discuss here and elsewhere with other people issues which puzzle me. Such as Thuram.
NOthing is to be gained by pretending that there is some kind of civil war going on between fans with fundamentally opposed views, and I am not going to be drawn into it. I have respect for Airman Brown, Henry Irving,and NLA. All know far more than I about various aspects of the club. That they may disagree with each other is all the more reason to engage with all of them.
I suggest we leave it at that.
The only people who truly know what went on between CP and RD are CP and RD - and those conversations are confidential and the true reasons will/should never come out as there will definitely be a confidentiality clause in the Settlement Agreement (which, as I said elsewhere, would have also included the wording of CP's statement via the LMA).
Most of the 'leaks' if that's what they are rather than supposition, are coming from the CP camp, in particular PV but I'm of the view that the circumstances surrounding CP's dismissal are irrelevant - he's gone and he aint coming back. Am I happy with that? No and some of my previous posts will testify to my admiration for Chris. Can I do anything about it? No. Am I annoyed, angered, betrayed that I don't know the truth? No. Do I believe (I don't know) that RD wanted to pick the team? No. Do I think RD wanted final say on transfer dealings? Yes - as every other Chairman does.
That's my take anyway!
A few factual points: I believe it was Derek Chappell, not Richard Murray, who said that Parkinson would be judged on results. I may be wrong, but that's my recollection.
Secondly, it says in the third paragraph of my article about Yann in the last Voice: "His expiring deal was widely believed to contain a clause triggering an extension if he played a certain number of games." So it's a bit rich to read claims I never mentioned it, blah, blah, blah.
The truth is I could not get to the bottom of this at the time, despite speaking to people involved in the deal and our source for YK's side of the story. But I put it in and also referred to NLA's story about him not wanting to travel to Huddersfield. Subsequently, Seriously Red reminded us on here that it came originally from Yann himself at a meeting.
You can be absolutely confident that the source of the stories about team selection is Chris Powell. At the same time, he isn't going to say anything publicly, any more than he did about Slater and Jimenez because he knows in the future it will count against him elsewhere if he does. So you'll never get the conclusive proof you want and people on each side of this argument will continue to believe what they prefer to believe.
A lot of people, however, seem to want to confuse the respect and affection for Chris with the view that he was infallible. That is not my view, but I do believe he has been badly treated. Nevertheless, we move on because there is no alternative unless we are going to give up supporting the club.
There is no conspiracy or agenda from former employees, directors, Valley Party candidates, journalists or anyone else against RD. Why would there be? However there is concern - at different levels of intensity - about the future based on what has happened so far, including attempts to interfere in team selection. But why that happened - and it did - nobody really understands.
Does anything RD say in his last video interview released by the Club, satisfy any of the issues you have?
It certainly seemed to answer virtually every question you raised in the other thread.
Just out of interest, Rick - is there a bigger print run for this week's VOTV? ;-)
I do though like to study the business of football, and therefore try to understand RD's business model. I can see both why it might be exciting and good for us, and why it might be dangerously destructive. I'm in the Trust because I believe we can over time persuade RD to be a little more forthcoming, bit by bit, about some aspects of his model which give rise to concern among fans.
He needs a steady monthly income as much as the next bloke and ex-footballers looking for coaching gigs are ten-a-penny so he cant really afford to walk out.
As I remember he was slagged off for attacking them "bitter" "Agenda" etc etc and that was despite having one typing arm tied behind his back by the employment tribunal. And yet it seems that now he is being attacked for questioning RD on the basis that "RD is better than those shysters TJ and MS". Well it was AB and others who were telling us all that for a long time.
Not getting into the minutiae of why, when, who, what or the point scoring.
What I have been saying since the TJ/MS/KC takeover is that the owners should provide clarity on six issues. Two (who owns the club and what are the plans for the academy?) have been finally answered. The other four (What's the business plan?, what is the investment level?, What are the plans for the Valley and you all know the last one) still haven't been fully addressed.
Secondly, as far as most fans are concerned, the most important thing they know about TJ/MS is that we got promoted and then finished ninth. I think most if not all of the G21 know there was a lot more going on, but realistically staffing issues - the most public manifestation of a problem - don't engage the average fan. The people best placed to blow that regime apart were Varney and Kavanagh, but not only were they in personal disputes with the club, we were all mindful of the question of what would happen next if they did. I don't believe that risk exists in the same way now.
The current situation, on the other hand, has the potential to go to the heart of why we follow the team and affects everyone. But we don't understand it properly yet, which is what we are trying to do. Granted, everyone can have different views about how that should be addressed and if some believe the latest video answers all the questions they have that's up to them. But I am not going to criticise the fact it exists, because it doesn't subtract for what we know and it shows the owner recognises that what we - in the widest sense - think, collectively, matters. That's a start.
Can I just say something about Ben Alnwick. I'm not sufficiently computer literate to do the whole cut & paste thing, but there are some remarks on here that would be considered poor taste if people knew the truth.
He was transferred to Orient on the Friday, played at Rotherham on the Saturday and discovered a problem the following day that no-one could possibly have been aware of, at either club. Do people really think Orient would have signed him if they didn't think he would be available?
I am not going into detail, but it does not affect him physically or mentally, and we should send him our best wishes and leave it at that.
The Trust was established in the wake of the disputes you allude to one reason it exists is to have a dialogue with the club.
I don't believe there is civil war amongst fan groups as Prague insinuates. Instead I think it would be more precise to suggest that there needs to be a collective effort to frame the dialogue between fans and club around expectations parameters and outcomes.
There are unanswered questions about player acquisition and retention which need answering over time if only to boost the season ticket marketing for next season.
This might be achieved if several groups approach the club simultaneously but I actually believe that the different approaches should be quietly considered and then put as one to the club.
I suggest the Trust is in a good place to lead on this simply because of its reputation and network and because it cannot be considered bitter or fighting old battles. Whether members of the 21 support the Trust in this is their choice clearly. I actually think it is in there interests whether they are members or not...why?
It has the website, brand, resources and contacts to 5,000 fans so that work is already done. And if it is not doing the right thing now then people need to help it shift direction.
The alternative is Life of Brian!
Ps I'm off to buy some popcorn
The more I find out, the less I understand what is going on...
You state that 'the current situation, on the other hand, has the potential to go to the heart of why we follow the team and affects everyone. But we don't understand it properly yet, which is what we are trying to do.'
this is what I don't get, and this isn't aimed at you personally but all of 'G21'. Of course it has the potential for anything to happen and none of us understand it properly yet and I can understand the need for more imformation or clarification from RD but the statement initially issued sounded more like war-mongering and threats of action before you even know whether RD will talk to you or not. In my opinion this didn't help your cause because it made it seem, correctly or not and I think not, that you were saying we are important and if you don't listen to us we can sort you out matey. All in my opinion of course.
Just puts a rather different spin for me on SR's comment above: "If it (the Trust) is not doing the right thing now then people need to help it shift direction."
I will of course keep an eye out for Pico and the lads especially if one of them is carrying an umbrella as the weather warms up.
PS it was real and I met a whole number of fans like yourself Weegie who I would not have met otherwise... Good times.