Club Future - Administration or bust?

Growler wrote:

Cajunboy wrote:According to The Times this morning both Dave Richards and John Williams have declined to join the BWFC board. 

That isn't good news especially Williams, they mustn't rate or believe  Bassini's plans

Or they weren't getting paid enough. Not sure why youd leave Sheff Wednesday for us, unless you're a fan.

John Williams was at Rovers, integrity says you don't come unless offered a huge wage.

Dave Richards obviously looked at the mess on the pitch and thought no.

The board needs a fresh approach, a young team who want to go out there and connect with the fan's.

Though I didn't follow all the ins and outs at Southport FC, I was quite impressed with the work of Natalie Atkinson. Some of which we could do with at Bolton 

Someone like that could give the club fresh impetus.

Nigelbwfc wrote:

Growler wrote:

Cajunboy wrote:According to The Times this morning both Dave Richards and John Williams have declined to join the BWFC board. 

That isn't good news especially Williams, they mustn't rate or believe  Bassini's plans

Or they weren't getting paid enough. Not sure why youd leave Sheff Wednesday for us, unless you're a fan.

John Williams was at Rovers, integrity says you don't come unless offered a huge wage.

Dave Richards obviously looked at the mess on the pitch and thought no.

The board needs a fresh approach, a young team who want to go out there and connect with the fan's.

Though I didn't follow all the ins and outs at Southport FC, I was quite impressed with the work of Natalie Atkinson. Some of which we could do with at Bolton 

Someone like that could give the club fresh impetus.

Are you for real?

Dave Richards left Sheffield Wednesday in early 2000, nearly TWENTY YEARS AGO!!!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

He's also SEVENTY-FIVE years old

As for John Williams he's EIGHTY!!!

I very much doubt either of them were ever genuinely linked to the club and were just 'names' mentioned to give the story of the takeover some 'authenticity' to it.

Do people always believe what they read on Twitter and Facebook as gospel these days?  Don't people do the most basic of checks for themselves or do they simply swallow everything they read?  Do people really think a couple of old blokes in and around 80 years old would want to bother themselves at that stage in their lives wanting to get involved with Bassini sorting out Anderson's financial dealings - bearing in mind the financial dealings of both of them in the past???

I know I wouldn't!

As for Natalie Atkinson, all I know about her was that she was at Southport (sixth tier of the football league world) on a 12 months contract as CEO and before that Curzon Ashton for 18 months.

She may be a very capable person but I doubt she has anything like the knowledge, experience or networking to lead the club through the stormy financial waters to safety that will be required from whoever ultimately is appointed to do so.

A certain chairlady from bath may be a good shout.......if only we knew someone who fitted that bill.

y2johnny wrote:A certain chairlady from bath may be a good shout.......if only we knew someone who fitted that bill.

Indeed Johnny.

Maybe if we composed a funny limerick someone might magically appear!?

There was a certain chairlady from Bath.
Who joined Nuts for a bit of a laugh.
But Wanderer's financial performance has been so poor,
Until Ken sneaked out through the back door,
That she stayed where she was drinking skinny latte's at the café!


I'm sure people can do much better!

Sluffy wrote:

y2johnny wrote:A certain chairlady from bath may be a good shout.......if only we knew someone who fitted that bill.

Indeed Johnny.

Maybe if we composed a funny limerick someone might magically appear!?

There was a certain chairlady from Bath.
Who joined Nuts for a bit of a laugh.
But Wanderer's financial performance has been so poor,
Until Ken sneaked out through the back door,
That she stayed where she was drinking skinny latte's at the café!


I'm sure people can do much better!

A fair lady in Bath was a ponderin'

If the time had not come to go wanderin'

Chairman Ken he was done

And so was his son

It was just the right time to get Manda in.

Sluffy wrote:
Do people always believe what they read on Twitter and Facebook as gospel these days?  Don't people do the most basic of checks for themselves or do they simply swallow everything they read?  Do people really think a couple of old blokes in and around 80 years old would want to bother themselves at that stage in their lives wanting to get involved with Bassini sorting out Anderson's financial dealings - bearing in mind the financial dealings of both of them in the past???

Their age does not disprove anything, yours is just another theory. I don’t know why you find it so difficult to understand the difference between what is your opinion and what is a fact.

T.R.O.Y wrote:

Sluffy wrote:
Do people always believe what they read on Twitter and Facebook as gospel these days?  Don't people do the most basic of checks for themselves or do they simply swallow everything they read?  Do people really think a couple of old blokes in and around 80 years old would want to bother themselves at that stage in their lives wanting to get involved with Bassini sorting out Anderson's financial dealings - bearing in mind the financial dealings of both of them in the past???

Their age does not disprove anything, yours is just another theory. I don’t know why you find it so difficult to understand the difference between what is your opinion and what is a fact.

Yawn.

Did I say it was a fact that they wouldn't?

Or was it just me stating my opinion?

Did I not put question marks to indicate a question was expressed as opposed to a statement of fact?

Did I not go on to say "I know I wouldn't" in regards to their age and the financial nightmare it must be at the club right now?

Go and do your trolling somewhere else.

Thank you.

I think most on here can see through your hypocrisy. Site Owner or not, I’ll call it out.

T.R.O.Y wrote:I think most on here can see through your hypocrisy. Site Owner or not, I’ll call it out.

And I think most on here can see through your feeble attempts to create arguments with me just for your own personal amusement.

Sluffy wrote:And I think most on here can see through your feeble attempts to create arguments with me just for your own personal amusement.

I can't see it, and I doubt anyone else (apart from KP) sees it.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Sluffy wrote:And I think most on here can see through your feeble attempts to create arguments with me just for your own personal amusement.

I can't see it, and I doubt anyone else (apart from KP) sees it.

Well KP's off for his summer holiday for several weeks so I'll have to stand up for myself on my own then.

I've never had a problem sticking up for myself on the internet or in real life - so I'll be happy to answer any reasonable questions of me and provide stats where I can to back up what I've been saying.

If people are just out to be abusive or argue far and beyond what any reasonable person would then it should be abundantly clear that they are doing so for their own reasons.

And it's stuff like that which has killed this forum.

Do the few people left really want to be seeing even more of it?

I doubt it.

Nobody sees it, because it doesn’t exist. At some point it would make sense to adjust your own behaviour, rather than blaming everybody else.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Nobody sees it, because it doesn’t exist. At some point it would make sense to adjust your own behaviour, rather than blaming everybody else.

What doesn't exist?

The years of abuse I received off Bread?

You should ask him how many times his twitter accounts have been frozen or outright taken down for the abuse he spews to everyone who doesn't agree with him on there!

And before I get accused of stalking him I know all about it from the random abusive tweets he continues to send to me from time to time.

How about the abuse from Wanderlust?

I could post up the abusive tweets he's made about me on Wways already - but I won't bother - no doubt he'll be putting loads more up yet.

And nobody has ever seen you arguing a glass eye to sleep with your relentless and never ending arguments over nothing - just because you gain some weird form of self-satisfaction for yourself by doing so?

Maybe I should post up the complaints I've received about you from others sick to death of you doing so - but of course I won't.

The internet is a wonderful means of mass communication but it doesn't half create a multitude of negatives that go along with it which include a few people not caring about taking stuff miles too far and spoiling things for others - just because they can - and it pleases them to do so and fuck what everybody else thinks.

Post whatever you want, it’s your site. But I’ll keep calling you out on what I deem hypocritical or inaccurate and you can continue to throw insults around, it’s no skin off my nose.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Post whatever you want, it’s your site. But I’ll keep calling you out on what I deem hypocritical or inaccurate and you can continue to throw insults around, it’s no skin off my nose.

I'm not sure how telling it as it is, is some sort of insult?

Similarly I don't know how it's hypocritical of me to be stating facts?

As for being inaccurate on the internet, well have I posted this a number of times for you - when you become infallible on everything little thing you say and do then that's the time that you should consider yourself to be able to be the judge of others - and certainly not before then.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Don’t want to get into the petty digs Sluffy.

Sluffy wrote:

T.R.O.Y wrote:I think most on here can see through your hypocrisy. Site Owner or not, I’ll call it out.

And I think most on here can see through your feeble attempts to create arguments with me just for your own personal amusement.

I bet he could create an argument with himself!

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Sluffy wrote:And I think most on here can see through your feeble attempts to create arguments with me just for your own personal amusement.

I can't see it, and I doubt anyone else (apart from KP) sees it.

And it's stuff like that which has killed this forum.

Do the few people left really want to be seeing even more of it?

I doubt it.

Spot on! 

I will definitely still be around during my time away.

I’m not going to let people ruin in for the rest of us even though they have done in the past. 

I have been on between airports and on 2 flights for the best part of 20 hours so I have my golden buzzer at the ready!

And Nat before you say anything it’s not that buzzer before you start getting excited!

Dear me, the whole point of a forum is for discussion about differing views. That has been continually stifled over the last 12-18 months.

T.R.O.Y wrote:Nobody sees it, because it doesn’t exist. At some point it would make sense to adjust your own behaviour, rather than blaming everybody else.

I have to agree with this, you say the site is dying but you need to take a large share of the blame for that Sluffy. People are still signing up on here but don't post in general and i can see why. 
The constant lectures and your inability to see you cause most of the friction on here is the main problem.
Sad to say it Sluffy but i'll bet that away from here and in the real world you are not as pompous and patronising as you have become on here.