|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Dec 26, 2021 22:11:01 GMT
I don't blame him for not speaking about what his role and goals are - he'd just arrived, needed to work it out for himself, and to have spoken would only have held himself out as a hostage to fortune so I think your expectation was unrealistic swiss (if you were his boss I think it might have been reasonable, but with 6k bosses every home game it made no sense at all) I couldn’t disagree more Piratey. A successful business has a strategy and recruits people to implement that strategy it doesn’t wait for someone to call up looking for a job, give them one, and then think about what that person is going to do. If Wael had seriously been looking for a CEO he would have gone into the market knowing exactly the role he needed that person to play and selected the candidate who had demonstrated he or she was best suited to fulfill the role. In which case it would be very easy for the appointee to explain their role and how they planned to go about fulfilling it. Perhaps this is an area the PC could help with if they are all successful businessmen with experience with board level appointments? Again, if a close and trusted relationship could be established then what’s not to say the owner would tap into the experience of such people. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 26, 2021 22:20:04 GMT
Based upon past history I’d wager there was no formal recruitment process and no robust interviewing. You only have to look at how Tom Gorringe and Martyn Starnes came to be at the the club. Unless you were part of the recruitment process you aren’t in a position to comment specifically just make an assumption. I’ve interviewed and employed hundreds of people over the years and pretty much know and have employed every tactic under the sun when doing so. Some people I’ve employed have been absolute superstars, some are typical 9-5ers who take their wages for a fair days work and some do not live up to their interview skills in real time and can cause nothing but problems. My point is, you can grill and ask as many questions as you like but until you get anyone into the working environment you never will be able to truly judge or assume their performance. I’m not making assumptions about the process through which Martyn and Tom were appointed because they explained it themselves. In an interview Martyn told how he had left Plymouth for personal reasons and because he had met Wael at a football conference he thought it would be worth calling him to ask for a job. And in the October podcast Tom said he had also met Wael at a football conference and been invited to a game at the Mem. Following this I believe he contacted the club asking if their were any opportunities at Rovers because his family were still in Cardiff and the commute to and from Brighton was becoming difficult. When you said the Presidents Club lacked transparency and it looked as though an “if your face fits” mentality prevailed I agreed with you. But is it any different at Rovers ? I was optimistic that the business side of the club was being strengthened when I heard about three additions to the management team. So the opacity surrounding these appointments, with little said about who they are and their qualification for their roles, is disappointing and with a suspicion that they may be conveniently available people who’s face fits. |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 26, 2021 22:43:24 GMT
I couldn’t disagree more Piratey. A successful business has a strategy and recruits people to implement that strategy it doesn’t wait for someone to call up looking for a job, give them one, and then think about what that person is going to do. If Wael had seriously been looking for a CEO he would have gone into the market knowing exactly the role he needed that person to play and selected the candidate who had demonstrated he or she was best suited to fulfill the role. In which case it would be very easy for the appointee to explain their role and how they planned to go about fulfilling it. I'm disagreeing on to whom he should explain it You want less transparency with senior managers and directors communicating only with Wael ? I think transparency and a willingness to communicate, whether it is good or bad news, shows a confident business which knows what it is trying to achieve and how it is going to achieve it. And that strategy is far more likely to stimulate enthusiasm and willingness to unite behind a common purpose than keeping things hidden and using appeals for loyalty and sense of duty as a form of coercion. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 26, 2021 22:48:59 GMT
I'm disagreeing on to whom he should explain it You want less transparency with senior managers and directors communicating only with Wael ? I think transparency and a willingness to communicate, whether it is good or bad news, shows a confident business which knows what it is trying to achieve and how it is going to achieve it. And that strategy is far more likely to stimulate enthusiasm and willingness to unite behind a common purpose than keeping things hidden and using appeals for loyalty and sense of duty as a form of coercion. I'll just re-post what I wrote originally. I think that captured it.. I don't blame him for not speaking about what his role and goals are - he'd just arrived, needed to work it out for himself, and to have spoken would only have held himself out as a hostage to fortune so I think your expectation was unrealistic swiss |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 26, 2021 23:05:23 GMT
I think that's it in a nutshell from the little reported about when knowall and John met Tom and Colonel Mustard, it seems that there was nothing useful in terms of a way forward which seems a shame, after the SC thing seems to have been very effectively refreshed I don’t think that it helped that the PC went in to that meeting and the question was asked of the FC, what exactly were the FC prepared to do for them? I don't know if that's true, but what makes it plausible is that it rings true to the entitled tone of some of the posts on here which is sad |
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Dec 27, 2021 8:03:57 GMT
Unless you were part of the recruitment process you aren’t in a position to comment specifically just make an assumption. I’ve interviewed and employed hundreds of people over the years and pretty much know and have employed every tactic under the sun when doing so. Some people I’ve employed have been absolute superstars, some are typical 9-5ers who take their wages for a fair days work and some do not live up to their interview skills in real time and can cause nothing but problems. My point is, you can grill and ask as many questions as you like but until you get anyone into the working environment you never will be able to truly judge or assume their performance. I’m not making assumptions about the process through which Martyn and Tom were appointed because they explained it themselves. In an interview Martyn told how he had left Plymouth for personal reasons and because he had met Wael at a football conference he thought it would be worth calling him to ask for a job. And in the October podcast Tom said he had also met Wael at a football conference and been invited to a game at the Mem. Following this I believe he contacted the club asking if their were any opportunities at Rovers because his family were still in Cardiff and the commute to and from Brighton was becoming difficult. When you said the Presidents Club lacked transparency and it looked as though an “if your face fits” mentality prevailed I agreed with you. But is it any different at Rovers ? I was optimistic that the business side of the club was being strengthened when I heard about three additions to the management team. So the opacity surrounding these appointments, with little said about who they are and their qualification for their roles, is disappointing and with a suspicion that they may be conveniently available people who’s face fits. Just a thought but if Wael was such a good businessman would he have ever bought basket case Rovers in the first place? Unfortunately Wael keeps on being let down by the men he chooses, Hamer, Starnes etc, perhaps the like of Gorringe and Gibson will now finally be the right men to lead the club forward. As ITB(?) suggested if the PC had concerns about Wael's leadership of the club perhaps they could have offered to assist him, rather than it seems fail to come to any kind of agreement. |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920 
|
Post by Peter Parker on Dec 27, 2021 8:30:04 GMT
I'm finding this thread quite informative It seems to me that the club is being led in a new and more professional direction, and that there are some vocal fans who have had their relationship with the club changed against their will. So they feel upset and disenfranchised. But things do change, and an ability to adapt and find a new role and relationship is required to thrive in life Many seem to me to see their club like a church - a timeless constant in a sea of change. But even churches change, usually after tumult of the type we've seen within some BRFC institutions Manure, Chelski, PSG etc have become global brands. Manure have become a huge source of dividends for the owning family. Man City have, I believe, helped regenerate a big chunk of their hood 82 have a posh stand and training centre. We've just got a less posh training centre - which is still a massive step forward Maybe some babies have gone out with the bathwater, but the need for change and more professionalism seems clear to me So apart from the Joeybag bit, which seems the definition of dilletante amateurism to me, I think like the direction of travel - it is more of a business, and less of a club, but I don't see any option if the team is to do well When do you think this greater professionalism started ? I thought it had started in February 2016 but that didn’t quite work out. Then we had Wael’s new vision in June 2020 which very quickly faded away. So I guess we’ll just have to believe the greater professionalism started earlier this month after Martyn Starnes, Tommy Widdrington, Shaun Roberts, Ben Rendle, Kerry Price, Nikki Parker and James Hayhoe had been shown the door. But it’s a bit early to say the greater professionalism is working isn’t it ? Who are the last 4? What did/do they do? I know nothing of those people, should we know who they are? It stands to reason that with Tom elevated to CEO there may be some restructuring for good or bad. Martyn Starnes seems to have left amicably enough with his departure announced ahead of time and the fact he was in the box talking to Wael after the announcement |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Dec 27, 2021 8:38:41 GMT
I don't blame him for not speaking about what his role and goals are - he'd just arrived, needed to work it out for himself, and to have spoken would only have held himself out as a hostage to fortune so I think your expectation was unrealistic swiss (if you were his boss I think it might have been reasonable, but with 6k bosses every home game it made no sense at all) I couldn’t disagree more Piratey. A successful business has a strategy and recruits people to implement that strategy it doesn’t wait for someone to call up looking for a job, give them one, and then think about what that person is going to do. If Wael had seriously been looking for a CEO he would have gone into the market knowing exactly the role he needed that person to play and selected the candidate who had demonstrated he or she was best suited to fulfill the role. In which case it would be very easy for the appointee to explain their role and how they planned to go about fulfilling it. I mean, I agree to an extent about going into the market and advertising for a CEO, but at the same time if there is someone in the organisation that maybe deserves a promotion or the chance based on past work, surely they should also be considered. Whether Tom G is the right man, we will find out and no doubt he will be replaced or move on himself depending on performance Out of interest without dragging up any of the other arguments around it, how did Mike Turl enter the fray. A vigorous interview process or did someone call him up? |
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Dec 27, 2021 9:51:18 GMT
Unless you were part of the recruitment process you aren’t in a position to comment specifically just make an assumption. I’ve interviewed and employed hundreds of people over the years and pretty much know and have employed every tactic under the sun when doing so. Some people I’ve employed have been absolute superstars, some are typical 9-5ers who take their wages for a fair days work and some do not live up to their interview skills in real time and can cause nothing but problems. My point is, you can grill and ask as many questions as you like but until you get anyone into the working environment you never will be able to truly judge or assume their performance. I’m not making assumptions about the process through which Martyn and Tom were appointed because they explained it themselves. In an interview Martyn told how he had left Plymouth for personal reasons and because he had met Wael at a football conference he thought it would be worth calling him to ask for a job. And in the October podcast Tom said he had also met Wael at a football conference and been invited to a game at the Mem. Following this I believe he contacted the club asking if their were any opportunities at Rovers because his family were still in Cardiff and the commute to and from Brighton was becoming difficult. When you said the Presidents Club lacked transparency and it looked as though an “if your face fits” mentality prevailed I agreed with you. But is it any different at Rovers ? I was optimistic that the business side of the club was being strengthened when I heard about three additions to the management team. So the opacity surrounding these appointments, with little said about who they are and their qualification for their roles, is disappointing and with a suspicion that they may be conveniently available people who’s face fits. Industry connecting at conferences or trade shows and other things is quite normal, or it certainly is in my industry at senior management and board level. Connecting at such events never guarantees employment. It certainly helps networking for a conversation at a future date. The football industry is also, for want of a better phrase, very incestuous, directors at clubs all know each other quite well, as do other senior staff managers and players so it’s very difficult to dupe someone into hiring you if you are a constant under performer. The difference between fits at the PC and the FC is that you are being employed by Wael, it’s his show, his money/livelihood, he has to trust you to run his business so there needs to be a degree of fit which also has to be balanced with being able to be direct and honest with him about what is working and what isnt and what and how to change things for the better. The Pc is a membership club, it doesn’t belong to one individual and is a not for profit organisation. That means any governance must follow the terms of its constitution or aim and as funds are raised publicly, essentially by donation, transparency is absolutely key as is working in the best interest of those donating. If it does indeed state in the PC constitution that it is to support the club then surely that can be done in a far more conciliatory manner than is what is evidenced so far by the owner of the FC refusing to work with them. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 27, 2021 10:01:42 GMT
I’m not making assumptions about the process through which Martyn and Tom were appointed because they explained it themselves. In an interview Martyn told how he had left Plymouth for personal reasons and because he had met Wael at a football conference he thought it would be worth calling him to ask for a job. And in the October podcast Tom said he had also met Wael at a football conference and been invited to a game at the Mem. Following this I believe he contacted the club asking if their were any opportunities at Rovers because his family were still in Cardiff and the commute to and from Brighton was becoming difficult. When you said the Presidents Club lacked transparency and it looked as though an “if your face fits” mentality prevailed I agreed with you. But is it any different at Rovers ? I was optimistic that the business side of the club was being strengthened when I heard about three additions to the management team. So the opacity surrounding these appointments, with little said about who they are and their qualification for their roles, is disappointing and with a suspicion that they may be conveniently available people who’s face fits. If it does indeed state in the PC constitution that it is to support the club then surely that can be done in a far more conciliatory manner than is what is evidenced so far by the owner of the FC refusing to work with them. is that the state of affairs then - if so, I didn't know that? so a re-set, of the type finally embraced by the SC (and, though it's early days, appears to have struck the right tone and generated a sense of momentum), seems to be the obvious option |
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Dec 27, 2021 10:12:08 GMT
I couldn’t disagree more Piratey. A successful business has a strategy and recruits people to implement that strategy it doesn’t wait for someone to call up looking for a job, give them one, and then think about what that person is going to do. If Wael had seriously been looking for a CEO he would have gone into the market knowing exactly the role he needed that person to play and selected the candidate who had demonstrated he or she was best suited to fulfill the role. In which case it would be very easy for the appointee to explain their role and how they planned to go about fulfilling it. I mean, I agree to an extent about going into the market and advertising for a CEO, but at the same time if there is someone in the organisation that maybe deserves a promotion or the chance based on past work, surely they should also be considered. Whether Tom G is the right man, we will find out and no doubt he will be replaced or move on himself depending on performance Out of interest without dragging up any of the other arguments around it, how did Mike Turl enter the fray. A vigorous interview process or did someone call him up? It’s very rare for companies to advertise for a CEO, largely because it’s such a unique position. Usually they have a controlling interest in the company, a minority interest, have sold their controlling stake but have stayed on to run the business, have been an absolute right hand to the person who owns the company (The best example I could think of in a company I have worked at was Martin Whitmarsh at McLaren who was Ron Dennis trusted lieutenant for years) or is basically a proven trouble shooter, someone who is able to go in and restructure organisations from the top down within a certain timeframe to improve their performance or profitability. Usually a CEO is headhunted from another organisation with an already demonstrable track record as a CEO/Chairman or has been trained and groomed and promoted within. So to say Rovers should advertise for a CEO isn’t really the right thing, but certainly robustly interviewing someone should be. How that is done is down to the owner and I’m pretty sure Wael is better than having a casual coffee and a general chat in Starbucks, which seems to be the general insinuation to his appointments. |
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Dec 27, 2021 10:33:01 GMT
If it does indeed state in the PC constitution that it is to support the club then surely that can be done in a far more conciliatory manner than is what is evidenced so far by the owner of the FC refusing to work with them. is that the state of affairs then - if so, I didn't know that? so a re-set, of the type finally embraced by the SC (and, though it's early days, appears to have struck the right tone and generated a sense of momentum), seems to be the obvious option I think we would have heard some reconciliation statement if there had been. John Harding and Jim Chappell went hand in glove, but now the PC has lost its most important ally it now has even less influence and to my knowledge, has not made any real reconciliatory attempts that have made a difference. As you say, a change in governance and attitude is probably needed, like the SC. |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 27, 2021 10:44:30 GMT
is that the state of affairs then - if so, I didn't know that? so a re-set, of the type finally embraced by the SC (and, though it's early days, appears to have struck the right tone and generated a sense of momentum), seems to be the obvious option I think we would have heard some reconciliation statement if there had been. John Harding and Jim Chappell went hand in glove, but now the PC has lost its most important ally it now has even less influence and to my knowledge, has not made any real reconciliatory attempts that have made a difference. As you say, a change in governance and attitude is probably needed, like the SC. I'm gonna guess that, like many of the posters on here, the PC leaders are very seasoned individuals (as they say across the pond), who (like the rest of us) won't find it easy to accept, embrace or enact change hopefully I'm miles wide of the mark, but the prognosis might not be good |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 27, 2021 10:46:51 GMT
slightly separate subject itb - do you have a view on what Colonel Mustard is bringing to the table?
my guess is that he's been very useful in advancing the SC issue by speaking plainly and not accepting the status quo, but it's based on nothing more that I read on here
|
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Dec 27, 2021 11:31:22 GMT
When is the Presidents Club Man of The Match App going to be ready, and have finished the trial?
|
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Dec 27, 2021 11:35:26 GMT
slightly separate subject itb - do you have a view on what Colonel Mustard is bringing to the table? my guess is that he's been very useful in advancing the SC issue by speaking plainly and not accepting the status quo, but it's based on nothing more that I read on here I think it’s fair to say he’s had some influence on finally sorting out the relations between the 2 clubs. I don’t know much about him or what he’s up to on a day to day though mate. I get the impression he’s more of an advisor on certain structures rather than involved in the direct running of the club. Usually that’s how non-exec directors work, they keep an outside looking in role and offer the benefit of their experience from that perspective. |
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Dec 27, 2021 11:54:03 GMT
I think we need more truly independent groups and as independents, they have no need to show and tell. To me, it looks like we have someone who wants to control everything and I don’t think it’s healthy but then, that is just my opinion. Fans have proved to be a huge asset. I don’t like the way we are now punters I don’t see it as someone or the club who wants to control everything. I see it as the PC and previously the SC, had an attitude of “what can the football club do for us”, when it really should be, “what can the PC do for the FC” bearing in mind Knowall stated their constitution was to support the running of the club. And I think that’s the problem. The PC think they are owed something from works they did in 1986-2005 long before the ALQs took over. Previously having an ear of a director and warm seat in the west stand was enough to placate them but now they have nothing. Whilst independent groups are good, they still need a measure of transparency, because if there isn’t any, it appears to be a closed shop to “applicants subject to approval”, in other words if your face fits. This is why knowing how many members they have shows how relevant they are and how much money they donate to the club will show whether it’s worth the cause of other members joining. I can't speak for the PC, and you'd know far more about that than me, but to say that about the SC is just plain wrong and bordering on slanderous. You're talking about people that have invested hours of their spare time assisting the FC, and energy in helping raise funds. This is by no means an exhaustive list, just based on what I'm aware of: - The SC took on running of Pirate Leisure for many years, including voluntary work, to help save the FC money. - They spent their own time in projects such as helping get the grounds ready at Twerton Park and Memorial Stadium, before we moved in. - Spent time organising fund raising, such as the 50:50 Draw, and other events, contributing to ground improvements and support to the Youth Team, Academy, and Gas Girls. - Follow the team home and away, while having to miss watching large parts of home games due to admin responsibilities before half-time. Don't forget that many of the current SC Committee were involved when the previous SC Committee were in place, and will have remained friends with those that have moved on. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2021 12:31:31 GMT
I don’t see it as someone or the club who wants to control everything. I see it as the PC and previously the SC, had an attitude of “what can the football club do for us”, when it really should be, “what can the PC do for the FC” bearing in mind Knowall stated their constitution was to support the running of the club. And I think that’s the problem. The PC think they are owed something from works they did in 1986-2005 long before the ALQs took over. Previously having an ear of a director and warm seat in the west stand was enough to placate them but now they have nothing. Whilst independent groups are good, they still need a measure of transparency, because if there isn’t any, it appears to be a closed shop to “applicants subject to approval”, in other words if your face fits. This is why knowing how many members they have shows how relevant they are and how much money they donate to the club will show whether it’s worth the cause of other members joining. I can't speak for the PC, and you'd know far more about that than me, but to say that about the SC is just plain wrong and bordering on slanderous. You're talking about people that have invested hours of their spare time assisting the FC, and energy in helping raise funds. This is by no means an exhaustive list, just based on what I'm aware of: - The SC took on running of Pirate Leisure for many years, including voluntary work, to help save the FC money. - They spent their own time in projects such as helping get the grounds ready at Twerton Park and Memorial Stadium, before we moved in. - Spent time organising fund raising, such as the 50:50 Draw, and other events, contributing to ground improvements and support to the Youth Team, Academy, and Gas Girls. - Follow the team home and away, while having to miss watching large parts of home games due to admin responsibilities before half-time. Don't forget that many of the current SC Committee were involved when the previous SC Committee were in place, and will have remained friends with those that have moved on. Add the bit about the ones that were given match day / season passes usually also paid for a season ticket as well. To even suggest that everybody involved in SC activities had selfish motivation only serves to display a lack of knowledge of all of the people involved. In fairness, even before Jim resigned, wasn't this been recognised by the club in finding things that SC volunteers can do to assist on matchdays? |
|
|
|
Post by irenestoyboy on Dec 27, 2021 14:13:23 GMT
I don’t see it as someone or the club who wants to control everything. I see it as the PC and previously the SC, had an attitude of “what can the football club do for us”, when it really should be, “what can the PC do for the FC” bearing in mind Knowall stated their constitution was to support the running of the club. And I think that’s the problem. The PC think they are owed something from works they did in 1986-2005 long before the ALQs took over. Previously having an ear of a director and warm seat in the west stand was enough to placate them but now they have nothing. Whilst independent groups are good, they still need a measure of transparency, because if there isn’t any, it appears to be a closed shop to “applicants subject to approval”, in other words if your face fits. This is why knowing how many members they have shows how relevant they are and how much money they donate to the club will show whether it’s worth the cause of other members joining. I can't speak for the PC, and you'd know far more about that than me, but to say that about the SC is just plain wrong and bordering on slanderous. You're talking about people that have invested hours of their spare time assisting the FC, and energy in helping raise funds. This is by no means an exhaustive list, just based on what I'm aware of: - The SC took on running of Pirate Leisure for many years, including voluntary work, to help save the FC money. - They spent their own time in projects such as helping get the grounds ready at Twerton Park and Memorial Stadium, before we moved in. - Spent time organising fund raising, such as the 50:50 Draw, and other events, contributing to ground improvements and support to the Youth Team, Academy, and Gas Girls. - Follow the team home and away, while having to miss watching large parts of home games due to admin responsibilities before half-time. Don't forget that many of the current SC Committee were involved when the previous SC Committee were in place, and will have remained friends with those that have moved on. Fair comment. I was speaking specifically about the time since the ALQ ownership and the fragmented relationship that was created by those running the SC. I had always said that the volunteers were let down badly by the ones running it and years of good service does not and cannot condone behaviour which was unacceptable and as a result it dragged everyone down. The top table come the end were in it for themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Dec 27, 2021 14:18:29 GMT
When do you think this greater professionalism started ? I thought it had started in February 2016 but that didn’t quite work out. Then we had Wael’s new vision in June 2020 which very quickly faded away. So I guess we’ll just have to believe the greater professionalism started earlier this month after Martyn Starnes, Tommy Widdrington, Shaun Roberts, Ben Rendle, Kerry Price, Nikki Parker and James Hayhoe had been shown the door. But it’s a bit early to say the greater professionalism is working isn’t it ? Who are the last 4? What did/do they do? I know nothing of those people, should we know who they are? It stands to reason that with Tom elevated to CEO there may be some restructuring for good or bad. Martyn Starnes seems to have left amicably enough with his departure announced ahead of time and the fact he was in the box talking to Wael after the announcement Shaun Roberts was the club'sOperations Manager and Safety Officer, I'd have thought that was a pretty significant role at Rovers? He was also the guy apparently in charge of The Quarter's development and gave some impressive updates. Perhaps the updates were more impressive than the actual construction, who knows. |
|
