President's Club

I would say that when Hamer was involved in trying to broker the FM, he made certain guarantees that executive members of the SC and PC were to be given positions on the new board of BRFC in exchange for their support. Hamer was definitely trying to look after his own interests.

Why else would you have the likes of Knowall throwing NDAs around then collectively trying to muddy the character of our existing owner, even going to the lengths of accusing Wael he was grooming children?

Either you have a massively strong vendetta against an individual, and those or extreme lengths to go to in order to have one over on someone, and bang out of order to use accusations that low, or you have something to gain by having them out the way. There are no other plausible reasons for such repugnant behaviour.

Why don’t you ask Knowall directly? He’s in the clique with Chappell Harding, Masters and a couple of others. But as you can’t get a straight answer about how many members the PC club has, good luck with finding out why they went to the lengths they did.

It's your accusation, you ask him.

He's on here often enough.

Jim was SC Chair prior to John Malyckyj, he took over again in 2006, so I'm afraid that suggesting that Jim's reason for seeking that position was somehow tied in with Hamer, who arrived, I think in 2016, some 10 years after Jim started his second stint as SC Chair, simply doesn't add up.

I have no clue why Masters ever wanted an executive position within the SC or FC.

You seem to be saying the only reason Jim Chappell  supported Steve Hamer and Hani Al-Qadi’s plan for Rovers to get new owners and a stadium at the Fruit Market was because he was promised some prestigious position within the new set up.

Don’t  you think that any genuine Gashead, whether  a fan of the club for 50 years or 5 minutes, would support a plan through which Rovers were able to get a new stadium and wouldn’t need the promise of a prestigious position to do so ?

Ah! The 'safeguarding issue'. I wondered if this would come up. I'm trying to piece things together.

- JC said he was handed a 'letter of concern' - are you saying this came from Knowall?
- JC described how the matter was handled by the SC, which sounded as though the correct protocols were followed - don't you think the SC was right to follow the protocols?
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the reason that your application to become the Supporters Club Director was turned down was because you'd disclosed information on a BRFC independent forum? And was that information about the 'safeguarding issue', effectively making it public?  
 

P.P. I've asked someone who will know how Mike got involved, he'll reply when he's able.

Ref overall Rovers recruitment, have had a very brief look around the internet to see what, if any, positions have been or are advertised.

Couldn't find any historic ads for senior posts, but maybe someone who is actually good at this type of thing like Anne would have more joy?


Anyway, they do presently have some positions advertised on indeed.com

Jobs on Indeed


Lead Academy Physiotherapist £26~30k


Accounts Assistant/Trainee Accountant £20~25k


Maintenance Technician. Dealing with general repairs, carpentry, electrical work etc. £9 per-hour.


 

City’s accounts are shocking. Reading through the thread on One Turd it would appear the Teds put the blame fairly and squarely on LJ and that bloke Mark Ashton. Not forgetting that the price of beer in the various bars has gone up by 30p! The Duke of Guernsey also comes in for his fair share of criticism. One Ted has speculated that his tenure has cost him several hundred million.

This reminds me of Mice and Men. Whatever happened to Lansdown’s great reset, sustainability built on 5 pillars, or some such bollox?

At what cost though Swiss? The reputation of a totally innocent man? Are we really that desperate?

Business can be ruthless, I have no complaints when it is, been there and been ruthless myself, but never, ever, regardless of how I would benefit, would I see an innocent man accused of something he didn’t do, and even if I knew they were knowingly not guilty from the start, pursue and support a line of enquiry that would only serve to discredit someone.

If someone tried to involve me in any corruption like that, and it is corruption, I would like to think I would have the integrity to tell them to go swivel, including a new stadium for Rovers.

I wouldn’t want characters who were capable of things like that in the boardroom of the club I support, no matter what kind of things they could deliver.

Wael deserves a measure of respect for dealing with that with great humility and still carrying on supporting us when many people may have walked away.

Probably not in Mike's case.

But his reputation and experience in business would have stood in in good stead.

One of the other factors back then may have been the ability, and willingness to put cash in and make a commitment to assist with ongoing running costs?

Mike went on to Solihull Moors as we all know. My understanding of what happened there was that he was asked to look at their business model. He came up with a plan which initially involved an additional investment for the owners / Directors of £10,000 each. Since then they've been punching way above their weight and presently sit in a play off position. Rovers and Solihull are today separated by 13 other clubs in the League tables, which is a complete nonsense given our stadium, support base, geographical location and the amount of money pumped in to Rovers in recent years. 

Anyway, any thoughts on those jobs advertised?

The safeguarding issue is just one of a list of things they used to try and discredit Wael or the Al'Qadi family with.  They or Wael have no money, they are going to sell the mem, there was no transfer funds available, people not being paid...the list is endless.  However it was all coming from them.

Concept, here is my version based on what I know, and the evidence I have seen and been given of the things you raise.

The letter of concern:

The letter of concern was something that was drafted, proofed and finalised by Steve Hamer and Ken Masters.  Jim Chappell knew about it, but I don't think he was complicit in its construction.  Given the close relationship that the executive of the previous SC had with the PC and the close-nit relationship of the ones at the top table of both organisations there is little doubt all knew about this.

The letter was based on a question that was asked by another supporters club member about how a supporter together with a family relative obtained an invitation by Wael to enjoy a match in the directors box in the West Stand.

Protocols:

The SC never had a direct complainant.  There was no accusation of any foul play by anyone, either by the person concerned, his relative that attended with him or any parent/legal guardian.  As there was no complainant, and not a shred of evidence to suggest anything was inappropriate from the offer or the acceptance thereof, nor anything happening during the corporate box, there was nothing to investigate. All that had to be done was ask the simple question of the club and the people involved who approved the invite.  

However the decision was taken to inform the EFL, Police and Council and all 3 found absolutely nothing doing.  

Whatever protocols were followed, there appeared to be one that said it had to be attempted to be sold to the national press, in case the ones above didn't work, just for additional sleaze purposes I would imagine.  

Being removed as a SC director candidate:

Your assumption is incorrect, it had nothing to do with releasing information about anything to any forums. In relation to the SG issue, I had already been blackballed by then.

The reason I was removed was because of a comment I made on Gaschat towards a poster called Gasincider or Brian Williams who has sadly since passed away.  Me and Brian didn't see eye to eye and we both sledged and insulted each other publicly on the forums and privately in PMs or other forums of electronic communication.  

He was vociferously supportive of the above gang who I had exposed as ones who were working against the ownership and of course, I was as vocal in my disapproval of their tactics, and, as a result we became sworn enemies, which is strange in itself as I believe we had only met in person 2 or 3 times and even then it was very briefly.

On one occasion though, I admit I had made a comment that although was made in the spirit of jest and with no real malice intended, I took it too far, made it too personal and crossed a line.  On this occasion Brian took major offence (I could see why) and made a couple of threats in return.  I removed my comments, apologised to him privately (which wasn't accepted) and was then vilified on here and by a few others to my face at a game or 2 after.  

In my defence, Brian had crossed a few lines with me in the past, but I ignored them because I didn't see the need to make a big deal out of it, as offensive as it was.  Some mods wanted to ban him from GC and rather than get involved, I stayed out of any discussion about it and often voted for him to stay a poster. Being an old totender with a past reputation, I assumed it to be as fair game as he appeared to be with me, but I misjudged that and with retrospect, I'm not proud of it, because its not really who I am.  

Now Brian isn't here anymore to give his side of the story, he may well have told a different one to his family and friends, but thats my take on it.  What is sad is that although we disagreed and spared with great passion, I truly wished him no physical harm, the same with any poster on here I might lock horns with, but this spat took place when his wife was poorly with covid after which he contracted and succumbed to.  I had no idea at the time that he was going through that and had I known, I certainly would have been more dispassionate and conciliatory towards him.

Perhaps with a meeting face to face, an apology and a truce we may have been able to sit down and work out our differences.  Perhaps not, but maybe and I wouldn't have been against it personally. 

Anyway, after that comment Jim sent me an email standing me down from the current election and any going forward citing the reasons for my disagreements and the tone of them with Brian as not becoming of the standards of a director.  Well, I've never accused an innocent man of being a nonce without evidence or reason and if that isn't unbecoming then our standards differ greatly in any case.




Edit:

The reason why I know so much about this, and I said it here before, was because I was sent an anonymous letter by someone addressed to my business after I had stated on both forums there was a public witch-hunt of our owner.

This had nothing to do with anyone from inside the club giving me information they shouldn’t or using me as a pawn to try and shame or discredit members of the SC/PC.

The letter that I received came from the SC which included the letter of concern. I still have that letter.

I actually went directly to Wael and asked him what was going on and if there is anything I should be concerned about, bearing in mind I also have a young son myself and these kind of things make my skin crawl.

I also had the thought that if this sort of thing was being passed about, and it isn’t true, what it can do to a man’s reputation even though he is innocent. Wael also being a father himself had that side of things to protect.

I was pretty convinced Wael hadn’t done anything wrong but he was gracious enough to talk to me very fully about it, even showing why these accusations could be so easily discredited.

That’s why I stated that these people can’t be true fans of rovers and how they must have something to gain by going to extreme lengths such as these, even if their motive was just to obtain a stadium, but I highly doubt that was their only motive and positions of authority or financial gain wasn’t in the terms and conditions somewhere.