|
Post by nostrings on Sept 14, 2017 11:13:21 GMT
The Puppet Master (under his snidy Reporter log-in obviously, not his money making MUFC..OK log-in) is now the one guiding the appointment of any potential new Manager. Not saying it is not an important subject but again "it ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it".
So the potential options to replace our Manager of over 12 years are being communicated via this method......"the board have already been provided with one option"...... This message is not from the CEO, not the democratically voted-in Board, but an individual who is revealing information that only the Board/CEO could possibly know, and getting the SS to light their torches up and head for the castle. It would be laughable is if wasn’t so embarrassing. The people on TSIO have so little dignity and ability to think for themselves that they cannot even think like owners anymore. No surprise when the club is run from the (hidden) top now, rather than from the Owners> Board>CEO.
So much for better transparency and democracy. Poor that so many cannot see it. Looks like the boiling Frog analogy in a pan has come true again, shame it had to be in our club.
|
|
|
Post by oddball on Sept 14, 2017 11:38:32 GMT
Karl has been a target for quite some time unfortunately as he dared to criticise last year. His cards were marked from that point onwards. It comes as no surprise to me that he's the next one being lined up for special treatment on TSIO. I'd be surprised if he lasts much longer, his best players have all gone and he's now working with one hand tied behind his back. Only a matter of time there i think.
|
|
|
Post by frankbough on Sept 14, 2017 12:19:08 GMT
Karl was a PM protégé and he stuck up for him vehemently even up until 2 years ago when arguably the shortfalls in his management were already well in evidence, then Karl made the fatal error of not wholeheartedly backing his putsch and from then on he was a mortal enemy......textbook PM modus operandi
|
|
|
Post by redstars on Sept 14, 2017 14:33:50 GMT
"the board have already been provided with one option"...... This message is not from the CEO, not the democratically voted-in Board, but an individual who is revealing information that only the Board/CEO could possibly know, and getting the SS to light their torches up and head for the castle. That actually makes no sense. At our work, we have a suggestions box in our canteen. I'm quite at liberty to drop a piece of paper in there telling them that, I dunno, they need more tabasco sauce or something. Then if I tell people "I've already asked them to supply more tabasco", well, what does that mean? That I'm revealing information that only the suggestion box and the powers-that-be could possibly know? Or do you reckon, in this case, it could be that the person in question has passed on a suggestion to the board, in the same way any of us can, and is relaying the information they have provided the board? Because that's how I read it: "i've already provided the board with one option and here it is". It doesn't necessarily mean that "the board have consulted someone privately and found some options, and I have found them out and I am now nefariously revealing them to the world AHA!", does it? Whaddya think?
|
|
|
Post by oddball on Sept 14, 2017 15:05:52 GMT
"the board have already been provided with one option"...... This message is not from the CEO, not the democratically voted-in Board, but an individual who is revealing information that only the Board/CEO could possibly know, and getting the SS to light their torches up and head for the castle. That actually makes no sense. At our work, we have a suggestions box in our canteen. I'm quite at liberty to drop a piece of paper in there telling them that, I dunno, they need more tabasco sauce or something. Then if I tell people "I've already asked them to supply more tabasco", well, what does that mean? That I'm revealing information that only the suggestion box and the powers-that-be could possibly know? Or do you reckon, in this case, it could be that the person in question has passed on a suggestion to the board, in the same way any of us can, and is relaying the information they have provided the board? Because that's how I read it: "i've already provided the board with one option and here it is". It doesn't necessarily mean that "the board have consulted someone privately and found some options, and I have found them out and I am now nefariously revealing them to the world AHA!", does it? Whaddya think? Even by your standards that is quite an unbelievable response. Have you actually got any ability to disagree with O'Neill on anything at all? You know full well what gets posted and who it is on TSIO. All that Reporter bullshit. You are either nuts or one of his right hand men. The latter i'd suggest.
|
|
|
Post by redstars on Sept 14, 2017 15:14:35 GMT
That actually makes no sense. At our work, we have a suggestions box in our canteen. I'm quite at liberty to drop a piece of paper in there telling them that, I dunno, they need more tabasco sauce or something. Then if I tell people "I've already asked them to supply more tabasco", well, what does that mean? That I'm revealing information that only the suggestion box and the powers-that-be could possibly know? Or do you reckon, in this case, it could be that the person in question has passed on a suggestion to the board, in the same way any of us can, and is relaying the information they have provided the board? Because that's how I read it: "i've already provided the board with one option and here it is". It doesn't necessarily mean that "the board have consulted someone privately and found some options, and I have found them out and I am now nefariously revealing them to the world AHA!", does it? Whaddya think? Even by your standards that is quite an unbelievable response. Have you actually got any ability to disagree with O'Neill on anything at all? You know full well what gets posted and who it is on TSIO. All that Reporter bullshit. You are either nuts or one of his right hand men. The latter i'd suggest. Maybe a bit of the former, but deffo not the latter. He doesn't know me from Adam. I'm just trying to point out the logical fallacy which has led you to, to borrow a phrase, light up the torches and head on up to the castle.
|
|
|
Post by oddball on Sept 14, 2017 15:45:51 GMT
It doesn't matter what Karl does anymore, he's going to get blamed, the narrative is set. Just a question of time now before he get's fired. Having said that, it is one fear the nutters in control have and the paradox. Getting rid of him leaves no excuses left, he's a useful lightning rod for the b*llends.
|
|
|
Post by glumfcer on Sept 14, 2017 16:28:55 GMT
That the age of wibblery is not yet dead oh smirking mere pseud underling.
|
|
|
Post by redstars on Sept 14, 2017 17:39:16 GMT
That the age of wibblery is not yet dead oh smirking mere pseud underling. Bravo
|
|
greg24
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by greg24 on Sept 14, 2017 18:02:13 GMT
Anyone who was appointed by,knew, or had dealings with Andy Walsh,staff or volunteer has been a target of JPs since he decided on his takeover. Not just getting rid of them but destroying them personally and professionally. I have seen the effect of his methods on people who were loyal to FC. Karl has been aware of this for some time. Why were so many staff that have gone off sick before leaving?
|
|
|
Post by mufcum on Sept 14, 2017 20:04:42 GMT
It seems to me that all this point scoring is academic now. The Club has no money and that will only lead to one outcome.
|
|
|
Post by nostrings on Sept 15, 2017 9:42:11 GMT
"the board have already been provided with one option"...... This message is not from the CEO, not the democratically voted-in Board, but an individual who is revealing information that only the Board/CEO could possibly know, and getting the SS to light their torches up and head for the castle. Or do you reckon, in this case, it could be that the person in question has passed on a suggestion to the board, in the same way any of us can, and is relaying the information they have provided the board? Because that's how I read it: "i've already provided the board with one option and here it is". It doesn't necessarily mean that "the board have consulted someone privately and found some options, and I have found them out and I am now nefariously revealing them to the world AHA!", does it? Whaddya think? I think Bullshit. Exact wording was..... The Board has been furnished with one proposal however. From where? The egoist is not shy in saying if something is his idea, it's his own raison d'etre for fucks sake. Hence the assumption that he is doing the PR and spin for the hapless board and CEO. Snidy and not transparent at all. Reads as The proposal suggested, not MY proposal suggested.If you read it as I've (as shown in bold above) then I suggest you get bsack to reading school or get to Specsavers. It is always in the 3rd person. You know the angle that people who love themselves use.
|
|
|
Post by glumfcer on Sept 15, 2017 14:13:35 GMT
I think we're pissing in the wind trying to talk sense to them, they know exactly what they are doing and what the end result will be, like a bunch of mentally disordered arsonists on glue.
It is possible to feel and almost hear the glee in their drivel communications whether here or elsewhere. Theirs are entirely disingenuous lies and had they not hoodwinked, or in some cases scared, a significant number of genuine reds (many of whom should now hang their heads in shame) the game would have been up long ago and the true founders of FC United would have been able to reclaim the club from the fire.
The echoes of 2005 are deafening only this lot have no money and no future plans other then to destroy the club. WE started it ... they will finish it.
|
|
|
Post by fcum on Sept 15, 2017 14:26:28 GMT
I think we're pissing in the wind trying to talk sense to them, they know exactly what they are doing and what the end result will be, like a bunch of mentally disordered arsonists on glue. It is possible to feel and almost hear the glee in their drivel communications whether here or elsewhere. Theirs are entirely disingenuous lies and had they not hoodwinked, or in some cases scared, a significant number of genuine reds (many of whom should now hang their heads in shame) the game would have been up long ago and the true founders of FC United would have been able to reclaim the club from the fire. The echoes of 2005 are deafening only this lot have no money and no future plans other then to destroy the club. WE started it ... they will finish it. That might be the biggest load of twaddle I have ever read.
|
|
|
Post by facedontfit on Sept 18, 2017 15:34:52 GMT
"Anyone who was appointed by,knew, or had dealings with Andy Walsh,staff or volunteer has been a target of JPs since he decided on his takeover. Not just getting rid of them but destroying them personally and professionally. I have seen the effect of his methods on people who were loyal to FC."
Absolutely bang on and nail on head. The people, and I use the term loosely , that are now running the football club, are so blindly following the PM, that they cant see the wood for the trees. I cannot recollect many of them being around, never mind active in all the fundraising and graft that it took to build BP. Board meetings may as well be held in London alongside the London branch meetings. I was hounded out at the end of the first season at BP, and have no interest in any arguments from the current disciples of the PM. The manager is unfortunately now the target for the current malaise and a convenient scapegoat. Watching 10 years work being slowly destroyed, does not give me any joy, only sadness that I was unable to do anything to stop it happening.
|
|