@blueh_w
10:58AM
I for one am glad Beeks is back, he ran this club well until the Hayes saga which most people that don't post on here didn't care about either. I would say 5percent don't want Beeks back and that isn't enough is it really. GET A LIFE AND STOP GOING ON AND SUPPORT ANDREW HOWARD WHO CLEARLY KNOWS WHAT HE IS DOING JUDGING BY HIS RECORD SO FAR !!!!!
What about Trust members who want to hold the leadership of the club that they own to account? Do you generally tell people who hold those in positions of power to account to 'get a life'?
Once again a large proportion of fans seem unable to realize that you can support the club while having a healthy dose of skepticism over the way it's run.
To many of us, rightly or wrong, Beeks leaving the board was one of the best things about the Trust takeover. He now appears to have been welcomed back, while we're still recovering from the mismanagement of his previous time in charge.
Even if you're ok with his appointment, can you not see why some of us are unhappy about it?
@eric_plant said:
"you watch the football and you let us run the football club, ok?"
That really doesn't come across well....After what's happened previously us fans have every right to know. It is after all our hard earned money and time that goes into supporting this football club.
Aye, it's our club not his. It doesn't reflect well on him, but I'm sure he only said it in the heat of the moment, and on balance I like having him at the helm.
Oh Dear. I am a glory hunter who only arrived at the end of Gorman so I do not have the same depth of feeling with regard to Mr Beeks...but that sounds a bit dodgy. He might as well have said 'Just give us your money and we'll spend it how we like, ok?'
I think the BFP has got it verbatim - I was at the meeting and saw how incensed AH was.
I agree with him what was the relevance of the question to our current position and moving forward. I still don't understand. AH then went on to answer the guy's question ,as per BFP piece, I am still unsure why the guy needed to know but more importantly what he would have done with the information once extracted.
I too, like many others, came way from the meeting feeling very positive about the future and our Chairman who looks to know where we are going and has most of the answers as to the how. We should ALL be working together to help US achieve this.
@woodlands You think it's ok that AH spoke to a supporter like that? Couldn't you imagine the same words in Steve Hates' mouth? 'Don't worry about the debt...'
All football fans love to talk about football, and many to speculate on off-field matters too. Those speculations are made almost invariably without access to all the relevant facts and hence full understanding of the issue.
It does appear AH comments were clumsily put but reading the BFP article starts to put them more into context. Full context would be the tone of voice from the questioner, previous questions and indeed whether the question had droned on on the same issue asking the same questions before previously.
I suspect what AH was trying to say has some validity. The supporters elect representatives whose job it is in turn to hold a majority of seats on the board and to scrutinise and approve non-trust board members. We do need to trust those representatives armed with all the information to do the job we elect them to do and make appropriate decisions on our behalf.
It would appear that our representatives are happy with the new Board structure. I am prepared to back that judgement and look forward rather than continue to discuss (probably mis-) conceptions of what may or may not have happened in the past.
Floyd - I think everyone of us can get angry and act irrationally.I have not yet seen anything about AH to suggest that he can be compared to Steve Hayes. Peter Parrot Face - the whole meeting at that point was upbeat and forward looking and I think maybe he felt it was being dragged back to the dark days. I obviously can't speak for AH but that is my view. I also heard him have the grace to apologise to our fellow supporter more than once.
Why ask any questions at all? Just let these heroic figures do the job unchallenged. It's not like any of them have run up levels of debt likely to cause serious problems before is it?
@woodlands Thanks, although i understand the argument against dragging up the past, Beeks made some pretty shocking decisions didn't he? Doesn't his appointment demand a few detailed answers besides 'he knows about floodlights'?
Just out of interest, how many people do you think were at the meeting?
Midlander - you have missed the point. You elect trust representatives to provide effective challenge to the WWFC Board having informed themselves with all the facts relevant to the issue. That is effective challenge, far more effective than direct challenge from the illinformed. If you dont like the way your representatives have performed their duty of challenge, vote on somebody else who can do that job better.
PPF - I may have slightly misundertood your point, so apols if I have. If the question is should the Trust Board ratify all Directors of WWFC, I think the answer is probably yes (although even then as long as the Trust have majority it is probably not overly important). If the question is should supporters elect all WWFC directors directly, I would say probably not. We elect representatives who can arm themselves with full information on what is required and who is best man for the job and probably make better appointments on our behalf than a direct election.
I must admit, having no head for business especially in the mad house that is football, I work on the theory that as long as the club is progressing, I will just worry about what's going on on the pitch. If things get bad it becomes obvious quite quickly...so while we are signing decent players and making a fist of it on the pitch, rather than fear/expect the worst before it happens I choose to trust in those in power. AH at least deserves that after last season...
@DevC you understood my point, cheers. Do you agree with a Trust board appointed chairman rather than an elected one?
I think I would prefer the football club board to be elected by Trust members, and I think that would enhance the idea of fan ownership and increase buy-in for the idea of a community share scheme.
I would expect the FC board to look almost identical if it was elected, but it would at least put an end to the debates over personalities.
PPF - feels to me that in the context of WWFC, what is called a chairman is in fact effectively the MD. I am relaxed that the MD/Chairman is appointed by my representatives to be honest - they have the facts of what is required, they have met the guy, they have formed an indepth judgement on his capabilities, I think they are better placed than me to judge who at best would be judging any candidates on how good they are at pitching in some sort of hustings and at worst may just become a contest of who can be the most populist and who has the most mates.
Come to think of it, the same arguments probably apply to all football club positions,
Whatever people may think about Mr Beeks, I think it is fair to say that his recent efforts in relation to the renovation of the pitch and in obtaining replacement floodlight bulbs
(? from the Olympic Stadium) have been thoroughly worthy - the new lights, based on figures quoted last night, should be around 65-70% more powerful. And the pitch, by all accounts, is absolutely superb. It was also clear that his FA and Football League connections have proved very fruitful - something from which Mr Howard is also deriving great benefit.
Season ticket sales are also up by 65-70% compared with this time last year and 13% of purchasers are first time buyers.
There were many other good news items but, in the interests of accuracy and completeness, I will leave the details to the official report.
It's nice of Howard to point out the shite state the club was in whilst ushering in the man who oversaw our long and steady march from robust financial health to teatering on the verge of liquidation. And then he treats anyone questioning this appointment as impertinent.
Comments
What about Trust members who want to hold the leadership of the club that they own to account? Do you generally tell people who hold those in positions of power to account to 'get a life'?
http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/sport/13376906.Blues_chairman_leaps_to_Beeks__defence_at_fans__forum/
Once again a large proportion of fans seem unable to realize that you can support the club while having a healthy dose of skepticism over the way it's run.
To many of us, rightly or wrong, Beeks leaving the board was one of the best things about the Trust takeover. He now appears to have been welcomed back, while we're still recovering from the mismanagement of his previous time in charge.
Even if you're ok with his appointment, can you not see why some of us are unhappy about it?
"you watch the football and you let us run the football club, ok?"
@eric_plant Were you there? Didn't see you but that is pretty much verbatim.
That really doesn't come across well....After what's happened previously us fans have every right to know. It is after all our hard earned money and time that goes into supporting this football club.
Aye, it's our club not his. It doesn't reflect well on him, but I'm sure he only said it in the heat of the moment, and on balance I like having him at the helm.
@eric_plant Someone actually said that? Someone on the board of a Trust owned club actually said that?
Oh Dear. I am a glory hunter who only arrived at the end of Gorman so I do not have the same depth of feeling with regard to Mr Beeks...but that sounds a bit dodgy. He might as well have said 'Just give us your money and we'll spend it how we like, ok?'
I think the BFP has got it verbatim - I was at the meeting and saw how incensed AH was.
I agree with him what was the relevance of the question to our current position and moving forward. I still don't understand. AH then went on to answer the guy's question ,as per BFP piece, I am still unsure why the guy needed to know but more importantly what he would have done with the information once extracted.
I too, like many others, came way from the meeting feeling very positive about the future and our Chairman who looks to know where we are going and has most of the answers as to the how. We should ALL be working together to help US achieve this.
@woodlands why do you think he was so angry?
@woodlands You think it's ok that AH spoke to a supporter like that? Couldn't you imagine the same words in Steve Hates' mouth? 'Don't worry about the debt...'
All football fans love to talk about football, and many to speculate on off-field matters too. Those speculations are made almost invariably without access to all the relevant facts and hence full understanding of the issue.
It does appear AH comments were clumsily put but reading the BFP article starts to put them more into context. Full context would be the tone of voice from the questioner, previous questions and indeed whether the question had droned on on the same issue asking the same questions before previously.
I suspect what AH was trying to say has some validity. The supporters elect representatives whose job it is in turn to hold a majority of seats on the board and to scrutinise and approve non-trust board members. We do need to trust those representatives armed with all the information to do the job we elect them to do and make appropriate decisions on our behalf.
It would appear that our representatives are happy with the new Board structure. I am prepared to back that judgement and look forward rather than continue to discuss (probably mis-) conceptions of what may or may not have happened in the past.
Floyd - I think everyone of us can get angry and act irrationally.I have not yet seen anything about AH to suggest that he can be compared to Steve Hayes. Peter Parrot Face - the whole meeting at that point was upbeat and forward looking and I think maybe he felt it was being dragged back to the dark days. I obviously can't speak for AH but that is my view. I also heard him have the grace to apologise to our fellow supporter more than once.
I agree DevC. Let us get on with getting out of Div 2.
Why ask any questions at all? Just let these heroic figures do the job unchallenged. It's not like any of them have run up levels of debt likely to cause serious problems before is it?
@woodlands thanks for the answer.
No problem,Peter
@DevC Alright Dev - interesting comment - "The supporters elect representatives whose job it is in turn to hold a majority of seats on the board".
Why do you think the whole of the board shouldn't be elected by the supporters? Or doesn't it matter?
Is it clear that when supporters elect Trust Directors that they are then delegating appointing non-elected members to the Football Club board?
Just a debate, I've not got a view either way really.
The whole of the board should be elected by the supporters though. A major flaw in the constitution.
@woodlands Thanks, although i understand the argument against dragging up the past, Beeks made some pretty shocking decisions didn't he? Doesn't his appointment demand a few detailed answers besides 'he knows about floodlights'?
Just out of interest, how many people do you think were at the meeting?
Midlander - you have missed the point. You elect trust representatives to provide effective challenge to the WWFC Board having informed themselves with all the facts relevant to the issue. That is effective challenge, far more effective than direct challenge from the illinformed. If you dont like the way your representatives have performed their duty of challenge, vote on somebody else who can do that job better.
PPF - I may have slightly misundertood your point, so apols if I have. If the question is should the Trust Board ratify all Directors of WWFC, I think the answer is probably yes (although even then as long as the Trust have majority it is probably not overly important). If the question is should supporters elect all WWFC directors directly, I would say probably not. We elect representatives who can arm themselves with full information on what is required and who is best man for the job and probably make better appointments on our behalf than a direct election.
I must admit, having no head for business especially in the mad house that is football, I work on the theory that as long as the club is progressing, I will just worry about what's going on on the pitch. If things get bad it becomes obvious quite quickly...so while we are signing decent players and making a fist of it on the pitch, rather than fear/expect the worst before it happens I choose to trust in those in power. AH at least deserves that after last season...
@DevC you understood my point, cheers. Do you agree with a Trust board appointed chairman rather than an elected one?
I think I would prefer the football club board to be elected by Trust members, and I think that would enhance the idea of fan ownership and increase buy-in for the idea of a community share scheme.
I would expect the FC board to look almost identical if it was elected, but it would at least put an end to the debates over personalities.
PPF - feels to me that in the context of WWFC, what is called a chairman is in fact effectively the MD. I am relaxed that the MD/Chairman is appointed by my representatives to be honest - they have the facts of what is required, they have met the guy, they have formed an indepth judgement on his capabilities, I think they are better placed than me to judge who at best would be judging any candidates on how good they are at pitching in some sort of hustings and at worst may just become a contest of who can be the most populist and who has the most mates.
Come to think of it, the same arguments probably apply to all football club positions,
Whatever people may think about Mr Beeks, I think it is fair to say that his recent efforts in relation to the renovation of the pitch and in obtaining replacement floodlight bulbs
(? from the Olympic Stadium) have been thoroughly worthy - the new lights, based on figures quoted last night, should be around 65-70% more powerful. And the pitch, by all accounts, is absolutely superb. It was also clear that his FA and Football League connections have proved very fruitful - something from which Mr Howard is also deriving great benefit.
Season ticket sales are also up by 65-70% compared with this time last year and 13% of purchasers are first time buyers.
There were many other good news items but, in the interests of accuracy and completeness, I will leave the details to the official report.
"For which he later apologised "
did they give a total for season tickets so far?
Brilliant so he is a useful contact. Give him a discounted season ticket. Why a board place?
It's nice of Howard to point out the shite state the club was in whilst ushering in the man who oversaw our long and steady march from robust financial health to teatering on the verge of liquidation. And then he treats anyone questioning this appointment as impertinent.