Don Woodward Stands Down From Trust Board
The resignation from the Wycombe Wanderers Trust Board, of former Football Club Chairman, Don Woodward, has been announced. Don was a Trust Board director for 5 years, and was Chairman of the Football Club for the two years following the Trust taking ownership. Woodward cited that he felt it was time for others to take responsibility for the next stage of Wycombe’s revival and upward journey, as the reason behind his resignation.
Commenting on the announcement, Trust Chairman Trevor Stroud said, “I would like to thank Don for his pivotal contribution in establishing Wycombe Wanderers as a Trust owned football club, as well as his contribution as Club Chairman. During this time he was instrumental in reducing the significant losses the Club were incurring, and putting the Club on the path to financial stability. It is not an understatement to say that without Don’s involvement, the Club would not be in the position it currently is.”
An announcement regarding the replacement of Don on the Trust Board will be made in due course.
Comments
Does seem strange that Don did not stand down before the AGM, so his position could be filled at the recent election, as the other former members of the Trust board decided to do.
I wonder why he's elected to stand down now ????
Not sure to be honest I fully believed the "wanting to spend more time with family" reason behind him being replaced as Club Chairman.
To be honest Trust board would appear to have limited responsibilities and I can imagine would not be terribly stimulating to be involved with after chairing the club especially if departure from that role was not entirely his choice.
Never ideal to be honest to have yesterdays executive still hanging around albeit in a nonexec capacity. Best perhaps for all to move on with the new regime.
Life does not always fit into a schedule, so maybe he could not make his decision before the latest elections
@StrongestTeam I have to agree with you, Don did a great job in stabilising the Club. He might have been the best PR person but he always did what was best for the club, and dealt with th Brizzle Rovers fiasco with aplomb
Should read "he might not be the best PR person"
@DevC what a horrible post filled with assumptions to make damaging conclusions. Leave the agenda at the door eh?
Don should be congratulated for what he did for the club. Those actions far outweigh the limitations he's shown in certain areas. The club needed someone to take charge at a key time. He stepped up. Thanks Don and enjoy being a fan again.
Hear, hear RITM. He made mistakes, but wouldn't any of us in his position? Did a good job in very trying circumstances and deserves our thanks and best wishes for the future.
@Right_in_the_Middle
From outside, with little knowledge of what went on in the first two years of Trust ownership, I think it is very hard to make a full judgement on Mr Woodwards contribution.
It was clear that the FA tribunal regarded him as an honest witness and the contrast between that and other witnesses contributed to the punishment being largely a slap on the wrists when it could have been much worse. We should be grateful for that.
Odd then that experience of public utterances was that it was wise to take anything he said with a pinch of salt as it tended to unravel instantly.
Plainly there were issues with commerical judgement, the Philips affair demonstrated that. In view of other inaccuracies that emerged, I do find myself being less than confident that the acadamy decision was commercially right and based on sound financial basis either.
But more importantly. Plainly there was a poisonous atmosphere at the club last season. It nearly resulted in the club going out of the league and possibly out of business.
One scenario is that was just a "bad egg" player issue with no influence or blame attributable to the Board and Mr Woodward. It may be that his "looking forward to working with Ainsworth to build our team together" comment immediately post Torquay was his genuine feeling at the time replaced by a desire to spend more time with his family a couple of months later
or there is an alternate scenario that Woodward was just as untrustworthy behind the scenes as he was in public, made too many promises which he then failed to keep, was as negative behind the scenes as he often was in public and that in so doing he lost the confidence of the most important employees, the players, in the club. maybe in that scenario, possibly in conjunction with conversations with Ainsworth, the remainder of the trust board worked out he had to go.
I have genuinely no idea which of these scenarios is closest to reality nor where on the somewhere in between spectrum reality lies. I would need better information to judge whether Woodward regime was good or bad for the club as a result. I do have to say that I instinctively have more confidence in the current chairman than the past.
I also have little knowledge of the first two years of trust ownership therefore I shall keep my alternative scenarios to myself
@devc I've no idea what Don has done to you but your constant attacks based on assumptions don't do you any favours. Woodward's public statements weren't great but not everyone is a gifted public speaker. Maybe you could have travelled up from your palace to help?
The selling of the Matt Phillips sell on looked like a bad deal in hindsight but the saying about a bird in the hand is one that has to be remembered in this case. We may not have had a chance to check the proverbial bush without that decision.
Talking about the reason for the 13/14 season turning out as it did is an interesting one. I've not heard anything to back up your assumption and subsequent assassination. Either tell us a fact or leave the guesses at that stage and not base a kicking based on it.
You don't like Don Woodward. I get that. Let's just leave it at that. I can't see how much can be gained by discussing the guesses and assumptions you've made. I've not heard anything to back up anything you say
Just catching up with this (isn't it irritating how work sometimes gets in the way of the Gasroom). I often find myself in mild sympathy with DevC's independence of thought, even if not always the views it leads to, but boy has he got it wrong here.
Trevor Stroud's comments understate the club's debt to Don Woodward. But for Don's efforts the club would not exist in the form it now does, if at all. And beyond the question of economic survival he should be given real credit for positioning the club, both financially and in terms of the relationship with GA, for the season its had - or, I should say, continues to have. Remember that the key signings (Hayes, JJ, Sido, Pierre) all happened while he was chairman of the club, as did the radical change in management style of GA himself, which for one I'm prepared to think was at least in some part down to Don's guidance.
I must admit I would not want to get anywhere near the running of a football club...suspected of everything, credited with nothing. Questioned on your motives on arrival...suspected of incompetence when you go.
The most important point in my mind is that the club now seems to be run in a more professional, honest and open manner post Woodward.
just to be clear I so not "hate" Don Woodward, far as I know I've never spoken to the bloke. Nor do I have any reason to doubt his good intentions for the club.
I have no knowledge on whether Woodward was loved or hated within the club, I have heard rumours but nothing substantial to base any judgement on.
Football seems to encourage a very black or white view amongst its followers, the manager is either great or inept, the centre forward is either england class or lazy and disinterested. Rarely it seems is there any shade of grey - yet that is universally my experience of the vast majority of people in real life.
Was Woodward a saint or the devil - probably neither, just like Ainsworth wasn't useless last year, isn't the messiah now and very possibly will not be useless again next season.
My point is that very few if any of us know enough to definitively judge his performance. We would have to have much more knowledge of behind the scenes to do so.
He wasn't just weak at PR, he lets be frank bare faced lied on more than one occasion. Was that just stage fright in front of an audience ( in which case while embarrassing they did no real harm) or was that how he conducted himself in private. None of us know. That is one plausible ( but clearly not the only, some would say not the most likely) explanation of why things appear to have turned so toxic behind the scenes.
Anyway I wholeheartedly agree with Mooneyman above re the current chairman and given that Woodward is now gone on reflection probably not much point in raking over old coals now. Enough said on the matter I think.
Personally I think that Don was the perfect man to take over at that time. He sorted out what was a royal cluster **** that just kept on getting worse with each skeleton that came out the cupboard. His professionalism put the club in a position where we had a chance of survival and at that time we needed and numbers man not a personality to run the club.
After we moved in the direction of stability (not quite there yet) we needed a different personality to take us forward again, and I think AH fits that bill again. There may come a time when his stewardship also runs its course but for the moment I will raise a glass to both.
Right man, right time
@Wig_and_Pen and @TheAndyGrahamFanClub - both spot on
Dev has excelled himself again I see. I'm not a massive Woodward fan either, though the work he did pre- and immediately post takeover was important to the survival of the club. Sadly we'll also have to remember some frankly bizarre promises and at times poor commercial decision making.
Though Dev might want to clarify how the hell we would have funded the academy post takeover when banks were withdrawing lines of finance?
Awful, awful posts by Dev. If you know nothing, shut the f*ck up and don't insinuate the worst possible scenario. And, above all, pretend to put distance between you and what you've insinuated with weasel words. Really, the worst kind of behind the hand corner of the mouth smear tactics
In response to Reading, there was controversy at the time re whether the funding issue was resolved from other sources. it appeared it was, then Woodward vetoed it. at the time I was very happy to take it as his word that the numbers didnt stack up. In view of subsequent public statements proving less than reliable, I find myself doubting that too. I suppose thats the trouble with a reputation, its very easy to lose a reputation of trust, very hard to regain it.
In response to Oakwood, this is of course a WWFC gossip board and I think there is room for doubt here. Perhaps we will have to wait one day for gareth Ainsworth's autobiography - already plenty in his short managerial career to make it fascinating I suspect. But in retrospect, whatever my instincts that is all they are with no real evidence to prove whether they are true or not, so perhaps would have been better to leave unsaid. You are right, I stand corrected.
You've bottled that Dev
Blimey, cant win what ever I do you.
You're not by any chance, secretly my missus??
or worse still, hoping to be my missus?
DevC
You will be in even more trouble, if her indoors finds out
youve been calling her missus and not 'Wifey'.
Well wifey is never fully happy unless she has something to moan about. Still good to give her pretty little head something to think about while she is doing the ironing........