Sorry OB.
Is there any point discussing the original topic because if you do and dare to offer you view or opinion on GD wise words (all three sentences of them) then you are hit by a wall of abusive responses from people who just should not be representing this club in any form whatsoever. The whole mafia style bullying of these ****ing idiots has left BU on its arse with original members dropping like flies and those that are left offering apologies left right and centre (well most of them with two very noteable exceptions at least).
Greg (or Peter) basically said that he was seeing one of the candidates with David Heath and Keith Dickens. I suggested that Jones and Gosling had been dumped when it turns out Jones was up north running his business or else he would again be involved. No response yet from JG so lets just leave him be for a minute.
Is it worth debating that clearly the lessons we have been told have been learnt clearly does not comprise changing the selection panel? I thought it was worthwhile but that of course is b***ocks.
Now I like this cos it feels like the poacher turned gamekeeper cos instead of me shouting abuse at the directors as was the case in 92 we have now got the obviously hard working, superbly talented football knowledgeable David Heath shouting the abuse back. Now I have not had the best of days today but to come home to someone I have no knowledge of and of course his trusted companion giving me stick for daring to question his very involvement seems to me like exactly the cancer that is spreading through this club.
The next question is who therefore would I have do it instead and the answer to that is not the same people who got it wrong last time (irrespective of whether I agreed with the appointment of Fitz) cos that is not who they collectively decided upon. Why not ask Matthew Benham to draw up a short list from his knowledge of football and our wage structure and get KD and BB to interview those put forward and to make an agreed recommendation for MB to approve?
Maybe that idea would also just be me talking b***ocks again Bee H but a good little director (Keith Loring for example) would just say thanks for that Paul we will give your idea due consideration along with the other 100 odd we have already received.
Er, hang on a minute. If you are so keen to smear the previous interview panel then surely that would mean Keith Dickens would not be involved either. In fact, neither would Greg Dyke. Or does his responsibility as Chair of the Board only come in to play when it's good news? And I don't even understand the bit I have put in bold though you are absolutely right - Fitz was not the choice of
anyone on the interview panel. Patterson was.
Somewhere between the panel's recommendation to the Board that Patterson be offered the job and the end of the phone call between Keith Dickens who was tasked to offer the job to him, something went badly wrong. Some people believe it's because Patterson wasn't happy with the money. Unlike you, I don't have a hotline straight into the MD's office but you might be interested to ask him next time he's briefing you to post on here.
How do I know all this? Because I was on the BU Board and had every right to know.
Keith Dickens made an attempt last time to move the Club towards a professional method of appointing a manager. Personally, I can do without all this cloak-and-dagger, "I know a bloke..." type appointment process so I was quite happy with that. However, you are suggesting that Matthew Benham make the choice this time. Why? Do you want the Club's major decisions made by a single individual? His data will doubtless prove interesting reading for those involved in the hiring of the new manager but there is
no way he should be calling the shots. Input, yes. Final say, no. And if he does have the final say, ROB, and the appointment is another disaster, will you be on here calling for his resignation?
Perhaps when you reply you could also inform us which lessons were learnt during the last interview process. I haven't seen them spelt out anywhere so I'm curious to know what has been identified as the mistakes and what is being done differently this time to avoid the same pitfalls.
:mad1:
