www.altyfans.co.uk
General Category => Altrincham FC First Team => Topic started by: John Edwards on March 28, 2017, 05:01:18 PM
-
Please see the club's website for a message from director Bill Waterson concerning social media.
-
It's very honourable of Bill to apologise for somebody else's mistake.
-
I find it abhorrent that Bill has been forced to make a statement on this issue, especially considering the circumstances surrounding the game which meant he couldn't be there.
I also think it's a disgrace that "the club" haven't apologised for the actions which have forced somebod, who volunteers a hell of a lot of time and effort, to pen a resignation.
I think it's a shambles that they have then allowed our Social media pages to not update for nearly 3 days, not even with a final score of the Stalybridge game.
It is also farcical that they then allowed the social media updates for the Nuneaton match to be handled by what can only be assumed to be an underperforming primate with severe dyslexia. One that then gave personal judgements on the game and asked who was getting drunk in the CSH after the game.
The whole thing stinks. Yet another PR disaster by the club. I didn't think the board could sink any lower, but forcing Bill to put his name to that caricature of a statement is beyond me.
-
Good to see an apology but a shame it's not from the person (still unidentified) who made the ghastly decision on the day.
If Jack left the ground and Andrew was at work, who was doing the Twitter after the 15 min mark?
-
I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable
I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.
-
Does this apology open enough doors for either of the lads that update Twitter to return?
I suspect I know the answer.
-
Did Bill read that statement before agreeing to have his name connected to it? It looks like a child's written it.
-
Jack, can you clarify how much notice you gave Bill about your participation. If the action was "precautionary" surely it would have done before the game. I take it Bill was not concerned at the time you spoke to him.
-
Jack, can you clarify how much notice you gave Bill about your participation. If the action was "precautionary" surely it would have done before the game. I take it Bill was not concerned at the time you spoke to him.
Indeed. This statement is a valid gesture from Bill but merely exposes the Chairman for his lack of honesty and integrity. Bill had no issues with Jack and Andrew protesting and has built up a good relationship with both. The decision to lock them out was a Rowley family decision with no justification.
Rowley is ruining our club, and what point does this end?
-
Since Bill has been nominated as the director responsible for communications, I would NORMALLY expect him to take responsibility for dealing with this shambles.
But since he wasn't at the game, I would expect somebody else at board level to deal with the matter, and certainly quicker than 10 days later !
What were they scared of ? Is Twitter only designed to relay positive news about the club, or is it truly a social media tool that is allowed to comment freely when everything in the garden is not rosy, but withered and dying ?
Thanks for trying Bill - hope you're 100% fit again by the way - but I'm afraid this isn't enough to change my decision to finish with the club.
-
The statement is awful, it doesn't actually address any of the issues people are upset about.
Even if it is was legitimate to remove Jack of his social media access, it isn't clear whether this was going to be a permanent revocation of access or just for the game in question (the latter being more defensible).
In any case the main problem was the way it was handled. Whilst social media might be a relatively new thing for football clubs to deal with politeness and professionalism aren't. The problem could have been solved before the protest through an email or a phone call.
The person who made this decision ended up making the club looking unprofessional by abandoning social media coverage midway through the match, and personally vindictive given the mild nature of the offending tweets.
Following the Tolson cock-up I thought the main problem with the board was that they were too loyal and didn't have the ability to make tough decisions, now it turns out that that many of them are just a bit thick.
-
I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable
I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.
Just to clear up, how can you possibly tweet about the match if you aren't there? Were you watching from outside?
-
I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable
I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.
Just to clear up, how can you possibly tweet about the match if you aren't there? Were you watching from outside?
You can "live tweet" by following different outlets. E.g., using Radio Robins plus matchday updates to put together tweets.
This is not exhaustive, and when this has been done you will probably notice that the teeets aren't every minute, but every 3 or so.
Im sure someone else will tell me I'm wrong, but that's a simplistic cover of it.
-
When there was a game neither one of us could get to, we would provide text updates based on the audio commentary of Radio Robins or John Laidlar'a text updates. We still produced ours in the same format as usual so you probably never noticed. The plan was for Jack to exit the ground and then continue match day updates from the pub.
-
When there was a game neither one of us could get to, we would provide text updates based on the audio commentary of Radio Robins or John Laidlar'a text updates. We still produced ours in the same format as usual so you probably never noticed. The plan was for Jack to exit the ground and then continue match day updates from the pub.
With this in mind Jack, can we assume that your final tweet was relaying information from radio robins or John Laidlars updates? I'm not looking for trouble here, I believe this whole thing has been a disaster and this alone will do enough damage to warrant club officials stepping down. However I also believe that this action being precautionary is a lie and so I want to know why it really happened. As the club won't tell the whole truth we'll need our own investigation.
-
Good to see an apology but a shame it's not from the person (still unidentified) who made the ghastly decision on the day.
If Jack left the ground and Andrew was at work, who was doing the Twitter after the 15 min mark?
Probably someone who was appointed through the club nepotistical tendancies
-
Good to see an apology but a shame it's not from the person (still unidentified) who made the ghastly decision on the day.
If Jack left the ground and Andrew was at work, who was doing the Twitter after the 15 min mark?
Probably someone who was appointed through the club nepotistical tendancies
All of the 29 know who it was ;D
And yes nepotism sums it up
-
Good to see an apology but a shame it's not from the person (still unidentified) who made the ghastly decision on the day.
If Jack left the ground and Andrew was at work, who was doing the Twitter after the 15 min mark?
Probably someone who was appointed through the club nepotistical tendancies
All of the 29 know who it was ;D
And yes nepotism sums it up
Big clue here :) .....
I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable
I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.
-
The statement is bizarre - jack was sacked mid-game as a precaution? Where was the planning for that decision?
What a poor way to treat a hard working volunteer.
-
Social media is a relatively new phenomenon... really ?
Facebook is 13 years old and twitter is 11 years old
We are living in the past
-
I did the tweets up until 56 minutes
-
It's very honourable of Bill to apologise for somebody else's mistake.
your right but how much more can the fans take ?
I'm trying to remain upbeat but it's one thing after another
-
I find it abhorrent that Bill has been forced to make a statement on this issue, especially considering the circumstances surrounding the game which meant he couldn't be there.
I also think it's a disgrace that "the club" haven't apologised for the actions which have forced somebod, who volunteers a hell of a lot of time and effort, to pen a resignation.
I think it's a shambles that they have then allowed our Social media pages to not update for nearly 3 days, not even with a final score of the Stalybridge game.
It is also farcical that they then allowed the social media updates for the Nuneaton match to be handled by what can only be assumed to be an underperforming primate with severe dyslexia. One that then gave personal judgements on the game and asked who was getting drunk in the CSH after the game.
The whole thing stinks. Yet another PR disaster by the club. I didn't think the board could sink any lower, but forcing Bill to put his name to that caricature of a statement is beyond me.
Apart from a couple of recent TASC related announcements, Since November last year I have chosen not to post anything on the Forum,
This is due to the nature and subject matter and the declining standards that now pervades this once great Forum providing all supporters near and far, the opportunity to discuss and debate, often with great wit and humour, a wide variety of Altrincham FC topics with fellow fans.
I do however feel obliged to temporarily break my self- imposed code of silence to comment and refute the comments about the person who provided the Twiitter updates for the Nuneaton match.
Following the mass desertion of our so called ‘Social Media’ team with what I personally consider was a show of childish petulance (look it up Mike if you don’t know what it means ?) and having read Brian Flynn’s post that he and John Edwards had assumed the further responsibility of Twitter updates for Tuesday’s match v Nuneaton, on top of the many other duties both perform on a voluntary basis I offered my services to my fellow Radio Robins colleagues as I had not been selected for commentary duties for that particular match.
Brian was pleased to accept my offer of assistance particularly as John Edwards was acting as match summariser and Brian was overseeing the technicalities of ensuring Radio Robins hits the airways (or more correctly internet).
Unfortunately for myself, some 12 days before the Nuneaton match, I underwent emergency eye surgery at the Manchester Eye Hospital to repair a detached retina. This resulted in a minimum 14 day recovery period where I suffered from blurred vision and restricted eyesight in my right eye due to a gas bubble inserted as part of the treatment. This made it particularly difficult when looking downwards at say a keyboard,
Despite this temporary impediment and having also had no previous experience in ‘Tweeting’ I offered my services. Brian offered me a crash course which took place 10 minutes before the scheduled kick off. This was because I had to make my way across from the Community Sports Hall after conducting the TASC Goal Rush Draws. The ‘Tweets’ were provided from Brian’s own laptop with a keyboard which was unfamiliar to myself.
Anyone who attended the match will also recall that the weather that night was particularly cold. Not only did the extreme temperature cause my ‘bad’ eye to water excessively, one also had to cope with freezing fingers whilst trying to type without gloves.
Yes the ’Tweets’ were actually been provided by someone who was actually attending the match sat on the Radio Robins/Alty TV gantry in the freezing cold as opposed someone providing Tweets from the comfort of their own front room, or the Tatton Arms with a nice plate of prawn sandwiches and a pint close by.
Given this set of background circumstances, I was disappointed to read, but decided against commenting on Hashtag Alty’s comment after the Nuneaton match namely ‘As for tonight Twitter. What an utter shambles’ after all everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I do however take exception to the suggestion that the service on the night was ‘ farcical’ the extent that ‘that they then allowed the social media updates for the Nuneaton match to be handled by what can only be assumed to be an underperforming primate with severe dyslexia.’
I fully accept that the standard and quality of the Tweets did not match up to the quality provided by our ‘Social Media’ team and on that score I would apologise to anyone who was following the match on Twitter if the service provided on the night dipped below your expected standards. I hope however that the extenuating circumstances outlined above provide adequate explanation. If given the opportunity again I am sure the quality will be much improved.
Whilst posting, I would further question the suggestion that I ‘gave personal judgements on the game and asked who was getting drunk in the CSH after the game.’
Having re-checked the Tweets made on the night, I am at a loss to understand how such conclusions can be arrived at ? The only two ‘Tweets’ I can only assume you are referring to, to arrive at such a damning conclusion are the following -
1. Altrincham FC @altrinchamfc Mar 21 Full time whistle - Final Score Atrincham 1 Nuneaton Town 3 Improved second half performance not good enough on night
2. Altrincham FC @altrinchamfc Mar 21 Everyone off to bar for a hot drink or something stronger ?
If the first ’Tweet’ one above is to be interpreted as a personal judgment then I plead ‘guilty as charged’
If you think the second ‘Tweet’ was an incitement to get drunk in the bar when you have been sat on a gantry for over an hour and a half in the freezing cold, trying to provide a service for our exiled supporters be it either Radio Robins, Alty TV or Twitter , then may I seriously suggest you ‘get a life?’ if all you can do is slag off people who have the best interests of Altrincham Football Club at heart.
Just stop for a minute and consider what would happen if Brian Flynn, John Edwards, Mark Bennett and the rest of the Radio Robins and Alty TV volunteers acted in the same manner as our ‘Social Media’ team and upped sticks and walked out ?
Not only would that deprive many of our exiled Altrincham supporters a vital link, but how would our 'Social Media' team be able to Tweet from the comfort of their own homes. work or even The Tatton Arms ?
We may not be perfect at everything we do, after all some of us are just ‘ underperforming primates with severe dyslexia.’
In fact I may get that printed on a tee shirt and stand at the bar after the match getting drunk?
-
Great post Paul, nothing to add other than to hope that certain individuals who are venting on here take time to consider your comments and understand that you are a volunteer who does not deserve that kind of comment ( I hope you receive an appropriate apology, but somehow I doubt it )
Graeme
-
This from the guy that thought it would be a good idea to have John King present vs Stalybridge
Stop the hard luck stories, you wouldn't have had to jump in if the chairman hadn't spat his dummy out on the Saturday
If you don't understand twitter don't do it. Stop being a martyr - it comes across as a bit sad and depressing
-
Two points in response to Salty
1) I think it rather ingenuous to call it ' childish petulance ', when as I understand it the volunteers were locked out by someone at the club, changing their password. Equally until today, nobody contacted them to explain this.......you have the wrong person when you start bandying accusations of 'childish petulance about and maybe should accuse whoever took the decision to block the Twitter account.
2) Clearly you were not the right person to take over the Twitter duties in terms of both your health and your experience. I think you should be given every credit for being willing to step in to a situation that you admit was physically 'difficult when looking down at the keyboard' and for which you 'had no previous experience.'
My point is the person who made this decision to change the password created this situation and put you into the situation where you could have impaired your recovery and for which you were not sufficiently trained. You should receive no personal criticism but you have made a irrefutable case for why the person that made the decision should be held to account.
Who was it that told Dan Jones to change the password ? .... as he clearly created all this, as you have so eloquently described and it is he who should be brought to account.
-
Really hope this forum doesn't descend into name calling again, it seemed to have moved on from that in the week or so I've been reading it.
We've been blessed with a very high standard of social media posts through the years (if I may include myself in that as I started the Twitter and Facebook accounts with Brian and people after me were better than I was). Fair play to Paul for stepping into the breach and doing his best, although you can't expect people to know you were doing it with cataracts or whatever you said mate.
Statement's been done, doesn't really say much but most people know that Bill played no part in this due to his circumstances at the time and that either Dan Jones saw his arse and changed the password and then told Grahame or vice versa.
I believe the Facebook page has not been updated with any mention of the BPA game which is really sad. Now it seems that the lads won't be coming back, surely a fresh appeal should be out there for new people to run it? Sure we've got bigger fish to fry than Facebook but it's a public face of the club followed by many people with a passing interest and should be utilised.
Bottom line is that two very good volunteers with skills have now been lost, it's another hurdle to get over and it is another very very sad episode in a season of sad episodes.
-
I did the tweets up until 56 minutes
As per my previous post, can we assume your update on 56 minutes was relaying info from radio robins or John Laidlers updates?
-
Markecky
Fair points but I find it totally perplexing that even at this stage, nobody has owned up to making the actual decision.
Why?
If the Club believe it was the right decision as Bill Waterson has stated, why is the decision maker so coy?
I also find it strange that the two volunteers were not contacted within, literally a few hours to have the decision explained to them, as they had clearly done a lot for the club and were keen supporters.
Twittergate, rather like Watergate gives the impression of a cover up .......although of course I could be entirely wrong and everyone has acted entirely innocently and in the best interests of the football club.
-
e are able to perform twitter updates via Radio Robins, John Laidlar updates, and oppositions information - the latter two we use even when present at the game to ensure an accurate and fair coverage of events. So whether we are in the Tatton, at the game, or sat at home, able to provide a consistant level of coverage.
S(ALTY). What absolute drivel you've written.
Just stop for a minute and consider what would happen if Brian Flynn, John Edwards, Mark Bennett and the rest of the Radio Robins and Alty TV volunteers acted in the same manner as our ‘Social Media’ team and upped sticks and walked out ?
How dare you tag the entire social media team with one brush. I walked out. Not Andrew. Not Jacque. Don't use Social media in inverted comment to imply we're some sort of weird off shoot cult. Grahame Rowley hanging up the phone and refusing to enter into adult communication regarding the whole twitter incidence equally childish.
Secondly, how many children walk out silently when repeated dialogue has failed? Finally, I was only spotted walking out after deciding to offer Pete Foster and Stacey a hand with their community banners which the chairman decided to use as a pawn in the day events.
following the mass desertion of our so called ‘Social Media’ team with what I personally consider was a show of childish petulance
I suggest rather than asking Mike to go look up words you spend a little more time brushing up on your own vocabulary. Mass when used as an adjective means a large number, group or selections of things, items or people. Not 1. The word desertion is a smilie for abandon. The social media account and coverage was never abadoned.
-
There was only 1....just as there were "only" 29.
Next season there'll "only" be a hundred plus.
-
Jack, let me put it another way. Your last comment on twitter was that the atmosphere was quiet. You weren't there so assume that was reported elsewhere?
It's no coincidence that was the last tweet.
-
Jack, let me put it another way. Your last comment on twitter was that the atmosphere was quiet. You weren't there so assume that was reported elsewhere?
It's no coincidence that was the last tweet.
The lack of atmosphere was reported elsewhere on other official channels and by people at the game, hence that specific tweet.
I think that tweet has nothing to do with the removal, again - the statement infers that the removal of access has nothing to with the tweets, but the decision to leave and as such supporting a Rowley out movement.
I find it interest that its a protest many other club volunteers took part in (Rocky Robin, a club shop volunteer another high profile club member even created the rowley out posters) yet its me that's been removed.
-
Jack, let me put it another way. Your last comment on twitter was that the atmosphere was quiet. You weren't there so assume that was reported elsewhere?
It's no coincidence that was the last tweet.
The lack of atmosphere was reported elsewhere on other official channels and by people at the game, hence that specific tweet.
I think that tweet has nothing to do with the removal, again - the statement infers that the removal of access has nothing to with the tweets, but the decision to leave and as such supporting a Rowley out movement.
I find it interest that its a protest many other club volunteers took part in (Rocky Robin, a club shop volunteer another high profile club member even created the rowley out posters) yet its me that's been removed.
Don't take it too personally pal. I haven't been asked my availability for this months Radio Robins schedule either. That in spite of the fact there was another Radio Robins commentator involved in the walkout too (who has subsequently been on air).
Paul, I apologise if you find my comments offensive. I didn't know who it was WHO. DID. THE TWITTER! But I am just saying it as I see it.
The fact you were put in that position in the first place is ridiculous. I'm sorry for describing you as such. However, focusing on goal alerts, half time and full time scores should have been the way forward. Stripping everything back and going to basics.
Be that as it may, thank you for attempting to insult my intelligence by asking me to look up words I use on a regular basis to describe our chairman. Knowingly trying to insult someone's intellectual properties, despite knowing that person on a personal level, is the lowest form of an argument. Also, you make it seem like I don't understand the comforts people forgo to take part as certain volunteers at the club. You know full well that I have known the feeling of being on the gantry for nearly 2 hours, in the freezing cold (Grimsby for example, when you kindly drove me there and back, or Walsall in the FA Youth Cup when we both contemplated our mental hygiene after not taking extra layers).
Thank you though, for pointing out the absolute disaster of a few weeks we have had due to the petulant actions of Mr Rowley.
-
I'm not sure why Bill is apologising for the Chairman and his family, but it is completely inappropriate. He arrived just over a month ago providing hope for beleaguered supporters but I can't work this out. Hopefully Mr Waterson can explain?
-
The atmosphere at Alty, and all things Alty, is poisonous. The twitter lock out, the walk out, the crap served up on the field, the negative press coverage, the failed review meeting etc.
All these, and more, need bringing to a head, resolving, the air cleared and replaced with a fresh outlook. I know how I beleive that can be done, the resignation of Mr. Rowley.
-
Jack, let me put it another way. Your last comment on twitter was that the atmosphere was quiet. You weren't there so assume that was reported elsewhere?
It's no coincidence that was the last tweet.
The lack of atmosphere was reported elsewhere on other official channels and by people at the game, hence that specific tweet.
I think that tweet has nothing to do with the removal, again - the statement infers that the removal of access has nothing to with the tweets, but the decision to leave and as such supporting a Rowley out movement.
I find it interest that its a protest many other club volunteers took part in (Rocky Robin, a club shop volunteer another high profile club member even created the rowley out posters) yet its me that's been removed.
Jack, thanks. To me its pretty clear that this tweet triggered the lockout. The club had every chance to do it earlier and were aware of the walkout and your involvement. I suspect certain individuals within the club were already upset at the situation and that saying the atmosphere was quiet whilst not even in the ground was inflammatory and seen as the final straw. The club were quite happy with the situation before that. I think they had some just reason to be upset by that, its a bit of a smack in the face, regardless of any real intent of the tweet and if anything it just demonstrates the real conflict of interests that was caused, this is after all the clubs official twitter page. What I really take issue with though is the circumstances caused by the club that allowed it to happen in the firs place and the subsequent handling of the matter which has been an embarrassment.
The statement is a complete spin on the events to save face and is utterly bizarre. They changed the password of an account and later apologise and say it should have been changed temporarily for one person as a precaution against.... what exactly? Thats not even technically possible on twitter, and such piffle going out in a club statement about how naive we are to the new world of social media and the associated user account management functions is as odd a statement as the club has made in the last 2 years. It was a snap decision made far too late, most likely by the wrong person and reacted to by the club in such a slow and poor manner that they only have themselves to blame for the consequences. The consequences by the way will be significant because I don't believe the club will find a finer social media team than the one they have lost. They would have to pay good money to replace like for like and its just not in the current boards mindset to invest well in people (see recent and current roster of paid employees that frequently wear club colours). Essentially you only have worth if you're willing to work for free at Alty. This was definitely nothing personal Jack, its just a made up response to try and put an official spin on what was a very poorly handled situation at the midst of a plethora of poorly handled situations.
Regards to the comments by Paul ((S)Alty). Definitely uncalled for to be labelled as you were and you were quite right to be upset about it. I think we should all avoid getting too personal about this, as bad as the comments were I think if anything it was just a way of trying to further stick the knife in the club so to speak following 'twittergate'. Nobody was to know your situation and had they done i'm pretty sure the frustration would have been directed elsewhere. The club cant do right for wrong at the moment in most of our eyes and unfortunately I think you've suffered the consequences. What I will say is that expecting you to make the twitter updates with lack of experience and personal circumstances as you had, even though you willingly volunteered, just shows how desperately out of touch the club are with fans and the environment they operate in these days. What a shame!
As a side note, I also noticed at BPA we were belittling their ground improvements on the official twitter last weekend. Classy stuff. Just shows how far we are falling and the pace we are falling at is yet to recede. Anyone who thins that this all stops as soon as the seasons over and a new management team are in place is in for a shock, its going to get worse for some time before its gets better under the current regime.
I'll get back in my box now. I said I wouldnt post but this topic has had my full attention due to the number of personal messages relating to it and a number of other related threads which have caused people to report posts. Lets try and leave the personal stuff out now and agree to disagree where necessary. When the volunteers of the club and fans are upsetting each other we should all calm down a bit and stick together.
-
That last paragraph is the most important thing Chris. There is an underlying current of attempting to split those of us who are prepared to take any sort of stand against the inner circle that controls the club.
I know Bill Waterson won't be happy with a lot of what's going on, but he won't be allowed to tell us so.
Unity is strength.....not just for the board though, but for us supporters.
I suggest that any wrangling that emerges between fans on this forum be channelled immediately to personal message level, and resolved "off the field".
-
Flynny hasn't done you any favours there Paul, has he? I'm not sure "What is Twitter?" and " I can't see!" are the greatest defence against an accusation of incompetence but well done for trying. I don't see any mention of the Head of Communications in your post. You do realise that , as a club volunteer, you are entitled to hide behind Bill Waterson when you drop a bollock, don't you?
-
I suggest that Andrew produces as job spec to outline specifically what the role of social media entails. There are three key roles that need fulfilling that Andrew and I took upon us.
We set out with a vision to minimise the time spent on Twitter with good practise (industry software and planning) to maximise output.
1. Match Updates
At its basic form it needs match updates. A final score and attendance included for league. This can be done remotely anywhere with a decent internet connection. So essentially between those fulfilling the role 1 person must be available for 3-5. You can follow on radio robins, or simply just post JL's updates.
2. Non Matchday updates
Most pre game amble can be set up to post automatically in advance to minimise the time required on a matchday. This software is simple.
3. Midweek content
Photography etc. From past or upcoming games - this again can be set up in advance.
4. Responding to comments.
Anyone with a smart phone can monitor our messages and respond when appropriate
-
I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable
I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.
Just to clear up, how can you possibly tweet about the match if you aren't there? Were you watching from outside?
Updates have been done remotely for many matches over the past 4 years, using match day updates page on the official website and radio robins commentary as the source of information. With so few volunteers to manage the account, and no offer from the club to get people to away games, it is not always possible for the social media people to attend every single home and away match.
-
Social media is a relatively new phenomenon... really ?
Facebook is 13 years old and twitter is 11 years old
We are living in the past
Indeed the club is, and I really do think that the chairman couldn't give a flying f*** about social media.
-
The strategic review highlighted how good our social media presence was; now it's been wrecked with the -also praised in the report -loyal fanbase alienated and cut down even further.
Great start to the 5 year plan...
-
Those individuals who were responsible for orchestrating that farcical Twitter blackout appear to be using Bill Waterson as a human shield.
If they believe that the decisions that they took were correct, then they should at least have the integrity to own them.
Anything else makes them appear spineless.
Yet another shameful fiasco in this omnishambles of a season.
-
I have to say I totally agree with The Cults comment.
I did not agree with the decision because the so called provocation was minimal but at least it was a decision. The shameless thing has been the cover up and the lack of accountability for the decision.
I still don't know where the decision came from and for the good of our beloved football club genuinely hope it did not emenate from the Chairman. If it did, and he then did not stand up and say, yes I made the decision for these reasons, as I believed them to be in the best interests of the club, we are in an even worse leadership situation than I had imagined.
Surely no real leader would hide behind others, not stand by his actions and just remain silent.
No sorry guys however much you denigrate our Chairman, I do not believe for one minute he would act like that or he would not have got to the level he has. Much more likely is that an underling took the decision and the Chairman is being totally honourable and protecting him.. Let's at least give him the benefit of the doubt.
-
Who blocked the twitter then ? Is Dan Jones the lad married to rowleys daughter ?
-
Who blocked the twitter then ? Is Dan Jones the lad married to rowleys daughter ?
Dan changed the password on the request of Grahame Rowley.
Yes, he is married to Sarah.
-
Hashtag
Is that a fact or an assumption?
I still find it really hard to believe and if it is purely an assumption I think you ought to make that Clear as it would be totally inappropriate to say this unless you have categoric proof.. I still favour the view that the Chairman did not know.
If you have categoric proof surely the Chairmans position begins to become untenable which is why I still find it hard to believe.
It is really important to be totally clear on this because unless you know it as a fact, it is better to be cautious, in my view..
Twittergate or Watergate?
-
Sorry Spring old buddy....nepotism, sheer bloody nepotism.
-
Hashtag
Is that a fact or an assumption?
I still find it really hard to believe and if it is purely an assumption I think you ought to make that Clear as it would be totally inappropriate to say this unless you have categoric proof.. I still favour the view that the Chairman did not know.
If you have categoric proof surely the Chairmans position begins to become untenable which is why I still find it hard to believe.
It is really important to be totally clear on this because unless you know it as a fact, it is better to be cautious, in my view..
Twittergate or Watergate?
Spring wake up and smell the coffee - Hashtag spoke to the chairman minutes after the twitter blackout - we all know what happened except you
To say that the chairman wouldn't do this is a farce under the circumstances - yes the chairmans position is untenable, thats the whole f**king point for a number of reasons
-
Romeo (Phil)
You may have missed my point.
If, as I think, someone close to the Chairman pulled the plug and he let events take their course and then Bill put out a statement...... that is one thing. This I believe is the most likely scenario and one that could be understood.
However if the Chairman himself instructed an underling to pull the plug, and then refused to go public on this and did not see fit to contact the volunteers to explain the decision and then stood by, whilst Bill tried to explain away the decision.....then that is an entirely different thing.
In these circumstances it could indicate someone that was not prepared to stand behind their decision, someone who had no regard for the work of the volunteers and someone who was prepared to hide behind others..............would anyone in a leadership position with any sense of responsibility do this? I doubt it, as it would be tantamount to showing their total unsuitability for leadership and be unbelievably naive. It would almost be a resigning matter!
I repeat that I cannot believe that this is what happened and that is why nobody should throw around accusations without being entirely sure of their facts. In the circumstances let us give the Chairman the benefit of the doubt and assume scenario one.
-
It is a FACT Spring not an assumption. Hashtag is not daft enough to go public with assumptions.
-
This is an utter disgrace completely of the chairman's making and he made it worse...and worse to the point another director has to apologise for his petulant behaviour and now another kindly volunteer who stepped up in an hour of need and did a respectable job has been insulted and insults returned.
Divide and conquer Mr Rowley?
I urge Alty fans to stay level headed....ask questions, avoid insults and be mindful of upsetting other loyal fans who are equally upset as everyone else at our predicament.
It isn't going to get better Grahame, it's going to get worse.....please do the decent thing
-
However if the Chairman himself instructed an underling to pull the plug, and then refused to go public on this and did not see fit to contact the volunteers to explain the decision and then stood by, whilst Bill tried to explain away the decision.....then that is an entirely different thing.
In these circumstances it could indicate someone that was not prepared to stand behind their decision, someone who had no regard for the work of the volunteers and someone who was prepared to hide behind others..............would anyone in a leadership position with any sense of responsibility do this? I doubt it, as it would be tantamount to showing their total unsuitability for leadership and be unbelievably naive. It would almost be a resigning matter!
I repeat that I cannot believe that this is what happened and that is why nobody should throw around accusations without being entirely sure of their facts. In the circumstances let us give the Chairman the benefit of the doubt and assume scenario one.
Be told Spring this is exactly what happened, hence why so many people are unhappy about it
And yes it is tantamount to showing his total unsuitability for leadership - thats exactly the point everyone is making, about this and a number of other f**k ups (NLP etc)
We haven't got into this mess by accident
It's a question of accountability
-
It's a question of accountability
Unquestionably a lack of.
-
To be fair to the chairman if he had shown humality and accountability for all his gaffs over the last twelve months he could have just maybe ridden all this out with some respect from the fans intact -
However he has consistently refused to take any responsibility or accountability, pointing fingers everywhere but at himself
With the NLP allegations and now the twitter fiasco he has basically destroyed himself as being a credible person to run this club - and with it he is also destroying the club we all love
Altrincham supporters are amongst the most fair minded in the country - but enough is enough
This farce needs to end now or I'll be joining Mike Garnett at Ashton United next season
-
Grahame, I am told, had the backing off two other directors to make the call.
However, as chairman, he triggered the process and Dan Jones according to those who were involved in the decision did so.
When I questioned Dan, he has not objected to the notion he did it.
-
The whole situation is not helped by Grahame Rowley refusal to adopt a social media policy which I volunteered produce. I've offered on three occasions.
-
The whole situation is not helped by Grahame Rowley refusal to adopt a social media policy which I volunteered produce. I've offered on three occasions.
Met with many a tut, wasn't it.
-
This is the final straw for me. I'm finished with Rowley FC. So many happy memories and emotions watching the alty since 1994 when I fell in love with shazza, carmo, Andy green etc. Sometimes in life you have to make a stand. I won't be attending when that man is at the club (apart from any action as regards to future protests)
-
Just for information how many followers does the twitter feed have?
-
I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.
1. The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board. As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward. In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.
2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication. No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations. Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after. What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be. Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control. In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.
3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time. But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family. I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue. Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans. So please can we make every effort to cut this out.
As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club. Please recognise our positive intentions. We have a big job ahead of us. And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.
-
Grahame, I am told, had the backing off two other directors to make the call.
However, as chairman, he triggered the process and Dan Jones according to those who were involved in the decision did so.
When I questioned Dan, he has not objected to the notion he did it.
For me that is the crux of the matter. On here Graheme Rowley is portrayed as devil incarnate but as Chairman (not dictator) his role is to implement the agreed wishes of the board. If you are telling me that he is a dictator and the board simply kiss his feet replacing him comes with massive risk.
Edited to add Bill has spoken whilst i was typing. I concur with his submission.
-
This is the final straw for me. I'm finished with Rowley FC. So many happy memories and emotions watching the alty since 1994 when I fell in love with shazza, carmo, Andy green etc. Sometimes in life you have to make a stand. I won't be attending when that man is at the club (apart from any action as regards to future protests)
Same for me.
My club is a shambles.
Regarding the social media: We had a damn good team of volunteers who dragged the club into 2017, gaining popularity for tweets and the such. All gone at the change of a password given the nod from the chairman. That decision wasn't in the interest of the football club but was clearly to save further embarrassment to Rowley. As for Paul Salts comment, if you're going to dish out patronising literature at least make sure it's relevant.
-
I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.
1. The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board. As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward. In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.
2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication. No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations. Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after. What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be. Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control. In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.
3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time. But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family. I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue. Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans. So please can we make every effort to cut this out.
As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club. Please recognise our positive intentions. We have a big job ahead of us. And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.
I would never myself get personal but as chairman of my football club I see Rowley at the head of criticism, and quite rightly so.
Positive intentions? We're about to be relegated AGAIN, to our lowest EVER position on our history. Ive seen nothing positive whatsoever for a long time, don't think I will, don't expect to. Lost heart following the team I've supported for 14 years, season in season out
-
I can put up with total incompetence on the field for 18 months, I can just about put up with very poor managerial appointments and woeful PR. But the treatment of Jack and Andrew is totally wrong and something I won't be associated with. They did nothing wrong. Nothing. Jack had an opinion and is being punished because it didn't fit in with the board. If it was a board decision Bill, then fine. I don't agree with any of you. I hope you all take great pleasure playing micklover sports in front of 200 nodding dogs without one bit of atmosphere. Enjoy.
-
I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.
1. The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board. As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward. In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.
2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication. No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations. Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after. What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be. Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control. In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.
3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time. But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family. I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue. Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans. So please can we make every effort to cut this out.
As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club. Please recognise our positive intentions. We have a big job ahead of us. And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.
I understand your statement, but I feel it is too late for the board to continue in it's current form. You have come to the table late in the day and can not be held accountable for a lot of what has gone on before. Any credibility the chairman ever had has gone through a succession of bad decisions and actions and I'm sorry, but collective responsibility is great in principle, but in this case one man heads the operation and one man is accountable. There is now a huge rift in the support. We have lost large sections of support from the young (and future) supporters as they naturally don't wish to see a losing team week in, week out to supporters of decades standing who will not set foot inside the ground again whilst GR remains in position.
For my part, I have been supporting this once great club for the best part of forty years and I've had enough. I actually don't care about our results any more this season and that in itself is a sad indictment of where we currently stand.
From bad mouthing and unfounded allegations in the national press (no apology or remorse) to a farce of a strategic review carried out by a family friend where any question deemed too 'difficult' for the current regime was cut short. Horrendous PR statements, the whole sorry Twitter episode and that's before we even begin to talk about two successive relegations whilst having sold a player to a Premiership club. The footballing side of things was far from the final straw for me though. This no longer feels like my club and I don't see how your 'collective responsibility' can rectify that.
-
Just for information how many followers does the twitter feed have?
Twitter - 13,725
Facebook - 4,556
Instagram - 806
Post 'reach' (how many people's Facebook or Twitter accounts you are hitting) during our time on the channels probably averaged out at about 50,000-60,000 per month on Facebook and well over 100,000 on Twitter. It sometimes exceeded that if we 'went viral', an example being the tweet following Jim Harvey's departure that amassed 6.000 or so retweets.
-
Thanks Fabio
-
Our reach during our tenure we reached in excess of 9 million people on Twitter.
We averaged over 75,000 per day at many points.
Our best single tweet received a million unique views, with 85,000 responding in one way or another.
in our last full month we reached close to 1 million views.
Not bad for a few Twitter lads.
-
I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.
1. The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board. As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward. In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.
2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication. No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations. Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after. What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be. Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control. In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.
3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time. But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family. I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue. Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans. So please can we make every effort to cut this out.
As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club. Please recognise our positive intentions. We have a big job ahead of us. And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.
The fact that the Twitter password was changed after about 25 minutes of the game strongly suggests it was an impulsive decision made in the moment by one individual, presumably GR, and without thought to the social media coverage of the rest of the match. If it had been a board decision, presumably it would all have happened pre-match?
I appreciate you trying to explain. But you shouldn't ask people to stop criticising the chairman specifically because many fans believe him to be the specific source of the profound malaise affecting our club. At some point you're going to have to decide whose side you're on.
-
It was clearly a positive gesture of Management Guru, a member of the board to come on the forum and further explain the Twittergate episode and I for one applaud him for doing this. I also totally endorse his comments about not involving family members in criticism and by inference to refrain from flinging out insults instead of having logical discussion. Everyone I believe at the end of the day has the same objective, what is best for Alty F C. The difficulty is that people see a solution to this in different ways and inevitably this will result in criticisms being made of the Chairman and the Board as I believe Management Guru accepts. To not be criticised when we are facing a second relegation in two seasons would be a human impossibility in the passionate world of football.
He has thrown more light on the Twittergate situation which is slowly unravelling but why it has taken so long and been so convuluted is best known to those directly involved. It would now appear from piecing things together that during the match, the Chairman consulted with other board members and they together took the decision to pull the plug and instructed someone to do this. It would also appear that as the Chairman has devolved communication to a board member he did not involve himself in talking to volunteers or to clarify the situation himself. This then is the rationale that is finally been given to the fans, as I understand it but inevitably the fact that it has taken two weeks to establish this has clearly caused anguish and has already resulted in a number of longstanding and loyal supporters to quit the club which everyone must see as unfortunate.
Management Guru , if I have misunderstood anything I apologise and please correct me but at least now we understand what happened, I think. Thank you for explaining what happened and why the Chairman remained mute and at least now the fans know they are not being ignored or taken for fools.
-
A board decision taken 25 minutes into a game?
Pull the other one.
-
I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.
1. The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board. As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward. In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.
2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication. No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations. Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after. What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be. Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control. In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.
3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time. But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family. I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue. Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans. So please can we make every effort to cut this out.
As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club. Please recognise our positive intentions. We have a big job ahead of us. And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.
Was it a 'board decision' to change the password halfway through the match?
Going by some of the comments from the Rowley/board camp, I suspect they are stuck in the 1980's and don't appreciate how important social media is. The fact they thought that someone could do it after just 10 mins training prior to a match shows this. They consider it an after-thought, something that keeps the kids amused. Social media (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram etc.) is VITAL for companies. Companies and brands spend a fortune on social media, so for the work that Jack and Andrew did voluntarily to be dismissed is outrageous and unforgivable. Social media represents how professional a company or business is. The fact that the feed from the Stalybridge game was cut halfway through is embarrassing and unprofessional.
The sooner this antiquated board drag themselves into the 21st century the better.
-
More likely it was decided BEFORE the game that a Twitter shutdown would be effected if the walkout was mentioned. The chairman "was too busy watching the game" to discuss the matter with Jack, yet SOMEBODY was monitoring the Twitter feed as a first priority.
In any event, it's purely and simply censorship at a time when the club promised us better communication and openness.
I don't care who pulled the plug, or on whose instructions. What I DO care about is the club, yet again, treating its supporters like idiots. It's cancer, it's incurable, it's the end for me and many other long suffering fans of a club we've loved for years.
-
I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.
1. The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board. As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward. In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.
2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication. No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations. Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after. What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be. Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control. In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.
3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time. But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family. I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue. Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans. So please can we make every effort to cut this out.
As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club. Please recognise our positive intentions. We have a big job ahead of us. And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.
The fact that the Twitter password was changed after about 25 minutes of the game strongly suggests it was an impulsive decision made in the moment by one individual, presumably GR, and without thought to the social media coverage of the rest of the match. If it had been a board decision, presumably it would all have happened pre-match?
I appreciate you trying to explain. But you shouldn't ask people to stop criticising the chairman specifically because many fans believe him to be the specific source of the profound malaise affecting our club. At some point you're going to have to decide whose side you're on.
Well said that man. Sums up my feelings exactly but put a lot better than I would've done!
-
Twittergate still seems to be rumbling on and my attempt to summarise what I believed had happened and to help draw a line under events may actually have caused confusion, for which I apologise. Perhaps, in order to FINALLY draw a line under the whole thing we can get answers to the following from Management Guru, which will then mean we had had a definitive communication from the Board, which I am sure would be appreciated by everyone that has the best interest of the club at heart. I have tried to keep the questions related only to facts and not opinions and as requested by Management Guru, have assumed collective Board responsibility rather than a focus only on the Chairman.
1) When actually was the decision taken to change the password? Before, during or after the Stalybridge match?
2) Who took the decision at that time? The whole Board or some of the Board and were you as the Communications holder personally party to the decision at the time it was first taken?
3) Why was the decision taken and if ‘precautionary’, what was it that was assumed might happen?
4) What was the actual event or the actual wording used that triggered the decision to change the password after 25 minutes of the match?
5) What discussions took place with the two volunteers either prior to or after the event and when did these take place? Were these discussions seen as ample by the Board?
6) Did the Board see it as appropriate, that another volunteer who admitted to be was suffering from health problems and had no previous experience was drafted in as a replacement?
7) Do the Board value Twitter? Value Volunteers and Value open communication with supporters on issues such as this?
8) What future plans do the Board have for the Twitter account?
Let us hope that the open communication promised by the Board as part of the Strategic Review outcome is put into practice, so that FINALLY we can all move on from Twittergate and maybe some of the supporters that have decided to leave, may come back.
Full and frank answers to the above will be a good start in achieving more trust which can only be good for the club.
-
Bill, yours and the Board's accountability is an arrangement between yourselves. The fans are not party to it and are under no obligation to observe it. They are therefore free to hold to account anyone they feel is responsible for mistakes made. That being said,can you elaborate on which members of the board are responsible for which areas? Is the Chairman still accountable for his mistakes made before this arrangement? If so, can we expect him to apologise for them? I believe that you were in hospital on the day of the Staleybridge game, were you party to the decision to suspend twitter? If the decision was taken without your prior consent doesn't that make your position redundant as "the Board" can do as they please and ask you to carry the can.
-
Not sure where 25 minutes has come from. It was probably around the 58 minute mark. I was only locked out when placing the next update.
The board - Bill or any member - never offered us the opportunity to protest and return the next.
I take issue with the fact the board are making group decisions, is Grahame even chairman now?
-
The Directors provide governance for the club. The Chairman, coordinates their efforts and facilitates decision making.
It doesn't necessarily mean the club is run by committee but it doesn't mean there's a dictatorial tyrant in post either. We could sink to that situation if someone got their hands on 51% of the shares though.
It's having checks and balances in place that reduces the chances of ill advised decisions being made.
Just because someone holds a specific responsibility doesn't mean the world has to stop because they aren't around.
-
What was it the strategic review said about the board.....it lacked structure, was weak and divided .......I suppose this is an attempt to rectify a fairly self damning appraisal.
It also said it had to improve communication if I recall......interesting in light of a Twittergate.
-
The Directors provide governance for the club. The Chairman, coordinates their efforts and facilitates decision making.
It doesn't necessarily mean the club is run by committee but it doesn't mean there's a dictatorial tyrant in post either. We could sink to that situation if someone got their hands on 51% of the shares though.
It's having checks and balances in place that reduces the chances of ill advised decisions being made.
Just because someone holds a specific responsibility doesn't mean the world has to stop because they aren't around.
it's working really well too.....where is Shaw Lane Aqua force anyways?
-
The Directors provide governance for the club. The Chairman, coordinates their efforts and facilitates decision making.
It doesn't necessarily mean the club is run by committee but it doesn't mean there's a dictatorial tyrant in post either. We could sink to that situation if someone got their hands on 51% of the shares though.
It's having checks and balances in place that reduces the chances of ill advised decisions being made.
Just because someone holds a specific responsibility doesn't mean the world has to stop because they aren't around.
it's working really well too.....where is Shaw Lane Aqua force anyways?
Just Shaw Lane FC now. They play in front of 180 people at a leisure centre near Barnsley and ex Robin Kieran Lugsden is with them.
-
Rome wasn't built in a day. New blood on the board, improvement in comms? It will take a bit of time.
The worst thing of all is one disastrous appointment on the management front and you can pretty much right off the season. No magic wand when you've signed a load of substandard players.
-
agreed, one disastrous appointment has caused a season worth writing off, and who is to be held accountable for that?
as that appointment happened before the review, what board room model was in practice when this appointment was made? was due diligence not done by someone in an area of responsibility for this on the board? (i.e. picking up the phone to stockport and asking for a reference).
this is not personally aimed at you mr cat, just so happens you write good jumping off points for the argument that something went disastrously wrong on the footballing side of the boards responsibilities (i amongst others would see this as the boards main priority, but accept that some fantastic community projects also need oversight to ensure continued growth of the club) and as of yet no one has been held to account for this.
-
I get the impression from afar that Cheshire Cat's ' Rome wasn't built in a day' and by inference, ' time will be a healer,'isn't going to be enough. I also perceive that the Chairman has his tin hat on and is trying to keep his head down while Bill Waterson is taking a more prominent public role because he is seen as more acceptable to the supporters.
What clearly is needed is something that will galvanise the club together, after the inevitable relegation as otherwise one could argue the splits will get worse and the fortunes of our great club deteriorate even more. Already people are clearly voting with their feet.
The question is whether the supporters would rally behind Bill Waterson as chairman and take an 'all is forgotten stance ' and the club then show a semblance of togetherness before the end of the season which would be much needed if we are to work positively over the close season andimmediately bounce back as a united and we'll,supported club.
Could someone perhaps do a poll on this?
-
I don't think bill wants to do it so the pool would be pointless Spring,at a guess I'd say 80% would be happy enough if he was.
-
Jimmy
You make a good point that Bill, who I do not know, would have to be prepared to do the job, if only for an interim time and in an 'avuncular' capacity.
What is much needed is something that will get the club together before it is too late.
Is this the general perception or do people believe that the club leadership can remain and time will indeed be the healer. .?
My perception is that things have gone too far and some gestures are needed .......either GR to take the view that he has to put the Club first and move over......and...or Bill being prepared to take the role for a 'healing' period in a way where the day to day work his spread and he takes the 'wise owl' role.
-
The Directors provide governance for the club. The Chairman, coordinates their efforts and facilitates decision making.
It doesn't necessarily mean the club is run by committee but it doesn't mean there's a dictatorial tyrant in post either. We could sink to that situation if someone got their hands on 51% of the shares though.
It's having checks and balances in place that reduces the chances of ill advised decisions being made.
Just because someone holds a specific responsibility doesn't mean the world has to stop because they aren't around.
it's working really well too.....where is Shaw Lane Aqua force anyways?
Just Shaw Lane FC now. They play in front of 180 people at a leisure centre near Barnsley and ex Robin Kieran Lugsden is with them.
And, during a bit of research for an upcoming "Where Are They Now?" feature on some of the dross we've had this season, I noticed they also have Simon Lenighan.
-
You might like to include Adam Griffin from last season. I can't find trace of him having played anywhere since Young released him.
-
Whatever happened to Fabio Bassangue?
-
You might like to include Adam Griffin from last season. I can't find trace of him having played anywhere since Young released him.
shaved his hair and is the frontman in a Bad manners tribute act.
-
You might like to include Adam Griffin from last season. I can't find trace of him having played anywhere since Young released him.
shaved his hair and is the frontman in a Bad manners tribute act.
He was seldom sufficiently energetic to Buster Bloodvessel last season !
-
Yes to be fair to buster he puts on a good show and Is lively on stage
-
Yes to be fair to buster he puts on a good show and Is lively on stage
And his missus isn't arsed if he's got a gig in midweek and/or a fair distance away.
-
Jimmy
You make a good point that Bill, who I do not know, would have to be prepared to do the job, if only for an interim time and in an 'avuncular' capacity.
What is much needed is something that will get the club together before it is too late.
Is this the general perception or do people believe that the club leadership can remain and time will indeed be the healer. .?
My perception is that things have gone too far and some gestures are needed .......either GR to take the view that he has to put the Club first and move over......and...or Bill being prepared to take the role for a 'healing' period in a way where the day to day work his spread and he takes the 'wise owl' role.
Spring,Iv been going 30 odd years the vast majority home and away,2 years ago I moved to Cambridge and last year still went most matches now I barely look for the result,that will remain the case with Rowley as chairman
-
You might like to include Adam Griffin from last season. I can't find trace of him having played anywhere since Young released him.
He signed for Ashton United after leaving us but not sure if he ever played a match for them.
He did play a couple of matches when he first joined Ashton in September, but isn't listed as a player there now.
The team for Ashton United 's last match included Cavell Coo, Simon Woodford, Mark Lees, Ryan Crowther and Jody Banim (substitute and player-manager). No wonder some people are so keen to watch Ashton United with all these great names from the past. To be fair, one or two could probably get into the current team.
-
Hi Jimmy
Thanks for the input which makes me really sad, as did Romeo (Phil's) similar comments and several more on here.
What is particularly sad is that the Club seems to just accept that it can lose 'REAL' fans by the bucket load and do nothing to heal the rift.
It was pretty obvious to me when I started reading this forum that the several hundred that seem to come on the site are REAL supporters or why on earth would they enlist but they almost appear to be classed as a 'vocal' minority that don't matter.
Something has to be done to bridge the widening divide between the REAL fans and the Board or the club will continue to spiral into decline with attendances getting lower and lower and the level of player than can be afforded getting lower and lower. Equally young blood will not be attracted and the writing becomes on the wall.
The trouble is if Bill does not want the job and nobody else seems willing to come forward we will continue as we are and I just don't understand what will change our fortunes and get everyone pulling in the same direction because I can see no rapprochement possible given the current scenario.