AGM Shambles

[Packer Spout]

Larry Man who put in 175 k put in got abused its mad bloke in Regal said a woman was shouting at everyone = Larry you put some in Tyron put some in or stop causing trouble 

[Larry Jones]

Seriously have you been sniffing glue.  I really can't for the life of me understand your post?  Or begin to reply to you.

[Excolt 1]

Forget all the doom and gloom, don't worry about funding until if and when it happens. Let the new people get a winning side on the field then all this annymosity goes away. 

[Athleticgrounds]

7 minutes ago, Excolt 1 said:

Forget all the doom and gloom, don't worry about funding until if and when it happens. Let the new people get a winning side on the field then all this annymosity goes away. 

Not much chance of that I'm afraid. Take a look at the Hornets Twitter page!!!!!!

[Bruce Almighty]

Having slept on it I feel even more angry about what happened yesterday, especially having just got off the phone and being told a lot of the volunteers who support the club have had enough and are walking away.

Shame on those who have caused this

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Yes I agree with you Larry. Some of the people running the club at the time were also Hornets through and through and they lived for the club. In some instances I'm sure to the detriment of their own health and well being. Unfortunately they allowed their hearts to rule their heads. I suppose we were all guilty of that to some extent. They thought the " Build it and they will come " theory would work but sadly for us all it didn't.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

12 hours ago, Packer Spout said:

Larry Man who put in 175 k put in got abused its mad bloke in Regal said a woman was shouting at everyone = Larry you put some in Tyron put some in or stop causing trouble 

I won't be " causing trouble " any more. As things stand now I'm done. I was going to go to Widnes today, I'll go for a pint instead. End of an era for me. My first game - Hornets v Leigh in the mid 1960's. One game and I was hooked.

[The Lad]

As a person who was at the AGM, it was more than a shambles. To witness the compleat disregard for members that the board showed and the way in which they alowed indeviduals to speaks to others shows they believe they can do it without us.

Changing their mind and voting for things that where not on the agenda, bullying tactics, people one minute saying they are all for the club and looking forward to working with us the members, only half an hour later saying you know what I'll just force it through. The chairman believeing that because indeviduals have put money in the club no one has the right to ask that individual a question or criticise. People i believe are putting status and their titles above the job it come with.

As far as the new board are concerned I don't believe that anyone elected in the way that was shown yesterday or endorsed by some of the people that were there can be good for the club. 

[glemiln]

Sorry to hear your decision TS -  Hornets can ill afford any supporter loss.

For anyone who hasn’t seen it, the “official” new Board announcement.....https://t.co/18rRq21hDX;

Time will tell - depending here especially, on its longevity.

[Athleticgrounds]

1 hour ago, The Lad said:

As a person who was at the AGM, it was more than a shambles. To witness the compleat disregard for members that the board showed and the way in which they alowed indeviduals to speaks to others shows they believe they can do it without us.

Changing their mind and voting for things that where not on the agenda, bullying tactics, people one minute saying they are all for the club and looking forward to working with us the members, only half an hour later saying you know what I'll just force it through. The chairman believeing that because indeviduals have put money in the club no one has the right to ask that individual a question or criticise. People i believe are putting status and their titles above the job it come with.

As far as the new board are concerned I don't believe that anyone elected in the way that was shown yesterday or endorsed by some of the people that were there can be good for the club. 

Why.!!!!!   

They weren't voted for at the meeting, all the voting was done prior to the AGM by a record number of members and presided over by impartial adjudicators. The shambles at the meeting was about a change of mind whether to have a 6 or 9 man board that had previously been passed as a 9 man board and to be quite honest it was hard to understand why that was put before the AGM. It is very unfair of you to criticize those elected as it was clearly carried out in a democratic manner.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 hour ago, The Lad said:

As a person who was at the AGM, it was more than a shambles. To witness the compleat disregard for members that the board showed and the way in which they alowed indeviduals to speaks to others shows they believe they can do it without us.

Changing their mind and voting for things that where not on the agenda, bullying tactics, people one minute saying they are all for the club and looking forward to working with us the members, only half an hour later saying you know what I'll just force it through. The chairman believeing that because indeviduals have put money in the club no one has the right to ask that individual a question or criticise. People i believe are putting status and their titles above the job it come with.

As far as the new board are concerned I don't believe that anyone elected in the way that was shown yesterday or endorsed by some of the people that were there can be good for the club. 

The low point for me was when the " chairman " was asked  " Were you at the board meeting that endorsed the increase of board members from 6 to 9 ? " He answered " Yes ". He was then asked " Did you vote for the increase ? "  Again he answered " Yes ". This is the same " chairman " who was busy using his 32 proxy votes to reverse the decision that he'd actually voted for !

I know, you couldn't make it up.

That was when I decided enough was enough and it was time for me to find something better to do with my time.

[Athleticgrounds]

1 hour ago, glemiln said:

Sorry to hear your decision TS -  Hornets can ill afford any supporter loss.

For anyone who hasn’t seen it, the “official” new Board announcement.....https://t.co/18rRq21hDX;

Time will tell - depending here especially, on its longevity.

If what happens at board room level, causes supporters to stop following their club, then between 1970 and 2000 + when the club was run by majority shareholders,then we would have had no support. Best of luck to the new board.........they will certainly need it, 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, Athleticgrounds said:

Why.!!!!!   

They weren't voted for at the meeting, all the voting was done prior to the AGM by a record number of members and presided over by impartial adjudicators. The shambles at the meeting was about a change of mind whether to have a 6 or 9 man board that had previously been passed as a 9 man board and to be quite honest it was hard to understand why that was put before the AGM. It is very unfair of you to criticize those elected as it was clearly carried out in a democratic manner.

But it wasn't. The " show of hands " was chaotic, people had already walked out by then.The members who weren't at the meeting were totally excluded from having a say in the issue. The meeting should have been temporarily suspended, the issue put to another ballot of members, and the meeting reconvened at a later date for the results of that ballot to be announced. That is the democratic way  to proceed with the issue. Peter Rush's " 32 proxy votes " and Paul Ormerod losing his cool and verbally brandishing his " £ 175 k  votes " left a bad taste in my mouth and the mouth's of many other members there.

That isn't democracy and it's not why I joined the members club back in the day.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 minute ago, Athleticgrounds said:

If what happens at board room level, causes supporters to stop following their club, then between 1970 and 2000 + when the club was run by majority shareholders,then we would have had no support. Best of luck to the new board.........they will certainly need it, 

I don't think I'm the first and I don't think I'll be the last either.

[Athleticgrounds]

17 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

But it wasn't. The " show of hands " was chaotic, people had already walked out by then.The members who weren't at the meeting were totally excluded from having a say in the issue. The meeting should have been temporarily suspended, the issue put to another ballot of members, and the meeting reconvened at a later date for the results of that ballot to be announced. That is the democratic way  to proceed with the issue. Peter Rush's " 32 proxy votes " and Paul Ormerod losing his cool and verbally brandishing his " £ 175 k  votes " left a bad taste in my mouth and the mouth's of many other members there.

That isn't democracy and it's not why I joined the members club back in the day.

There were no board members voted on at the meeting, it was all done prior. The issue over the 9 man vote was when members walked out.and yes I agree it wasn't good. Having slept on it I do believe the meeting should have been adjourned and all members allowed to vote on 6 or 9 man board.

[The Lad]

27 minutes ago, Athleticgrounds said:

Why.!!!!!   

They weren't voted for at the meeting, all the voting was done prior to the AGM by a record number of members and presided over by impartial adjudicators. The shambles at the meeting was about a change of mind whether to have a 6 or 9 man board that had previously been passed as a 9 man board and to be quite honest it was hard to understand why that was put before the AGM.

That the point you can't vote for that at a AGM and when this was pointed out the true colours of these people was shown by the way they went on the attack. People who have been endorsed by and have strong ties to people like that can't be a good thing.

33 minutes ago, Athleticgrounds said:

It is very unfair of you to criticize those elected as it was clearly carried out in a democratic manner.

And here we go again can't criticise anyone, why? what's stopping me from doing it?. Oh right they are your mates or people you voted for. It seems to me that there are a great number of people on this forum and at the membership yesterday that are up for a fair discussion and a debate until it comes around to them.

[Athleticgrounds]

1 minute ago, The Lad said:

That the point you can't vote for that at a AGM and when this was pointed out the true colours of these people was shown by the way they went on the attack. People who have been endorsed by and have strong ties to people like that can't be a good thing.

And here we go again can't criticise anyone, why? what's stopping me from doing it?. Oh right they are your mates or people you voted for. It seems to me that there are a great number of people on this forum and at the membership yesterday that are up for a fair discussion and a debate until it comes around to them.

You may be able to criticize them or disagree with them or not want them on the board, but you can't criticize the way they were elected,  it was supervised by independent adjudicators.

[The Lad]

25 minutes ago, Athleticgrounds said:

You may be able to criticize them or disagree with them or not want them on the board, but you can't criticize the way they were elected,  it was supervised by independent adjudicators.

When did I do that?, I said that changing it mid way through an AGM which is also not what an AGM is for was a bad idea and that when this was shown they showed their true colours , that if those are the kind of people we have elected then it's not great.  Also who are you to say that to me, yet again people are dictating what can and can't be questioned, discussed or talked about. I have to wonder why.

I never question the election I questioned why the number was changed, who we have elected and the respons those people and people around the gave when questioned.

[Hornets Nest]

The whole election process from day one was a farce from wrong address on paperwork to the number of elected positions - was it 6 or 9.

 I suggest starting the whole process again taking everyone along with the process with no alterations made half way through.  The top 6 or 9 are duly elected and then move on.

TS The new co has no moral high ground on how life long volunteers have / were treated and in most cases had given a lifetime of service  like your good self. 

Good luck at Widnes today - I can remember a couple of famous wins there and the 4-4 draw (I think) in 1998? I'll be following from sunny Colne. 

 

 

[Athleticgrounds]

27 minutes ago, The Lad said:

When did I do that?, I said that changing it mid way through an AGM which is also not what an AGM is for was a bad idea and that when this was shown they showed their true colours , that if those are the kind of people we have elected then it's not great.  Also who are you to say that to me, yet again people are dictating what can and can't be questioned, discussed or talked about. I have to wonder why.

I never question the election I questioned why the number was changed, who we have elected and the respons those people and people around the gave when questioned.

Well I'm sure you know all the elected board what is your opinion on them as individuals, having to guide the club through difficult times?

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

3 hours ago, Athleticgrounds said:

There were no board members voted on at the meeting, it was all done prior. The issue over the 9 man vote was when members walked out.and yes I agree it wasn't good. Having slept on it I do believe the meeting should have been adjourned and all members allowed to vote on 6 or 9 man board.

That's my view also, maybe wiser councils will prevail. I always thought that 6 wasn't enough members given we are a summer game now and most people go away for at least a fortnight plus illnesses and all the other things that occur when you have other calls on your time.

[ipods4ever]

2 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

That's my view also, maybe wiser councils will prevail. I always thought that 6 wasn't enough members given we are a summer game now and most people go away for at least a fortnight plus illnesses and all the other things that occur when you have other calls on your time.

Come and support mayfield it's only 2•50 in as well 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

55 minutes ago, ipods4ever said:

Come and support mayfield it's only 2•50 in as well 

That's a kind offer and I've enjoyed both my visits this season. It's a good club. Unfortunately I'm a bit " Rugby Leagued out " at the moment.

[Larry Jones]

WoW.  Gavin has got his wish.  However from being the hunter he is now the hunted.    Rushie is a politician and to be honest a pretty bad one.  Money where your mouths are now lads.  Matt will get the budget he needs to romp through next season?

As I have admitted I am a casual speccie I will leave it alone till I see the investment for next season and I don't mean 5 grand each. Intersting times I hope the real fans have a club in two years.  it's the way forward if the Pratt and the Reynolds family do what David V and Paul O has done and put the money in and show the fans they mean business.

[Athleticgrounds]

12 hours ago, Larry Jones said:

WoW.  Gavin has got his wish.  However from being the hunter he is now the hunted.    Rushie is a politician and to be honest a pretty bad one.  Money where your mouths are now lads.  Matt will get the budget he needs to romp through next season?

As I have admitted I am a casual speccie I will leave it alone till I see the investment for next season and I don't mean 5 grand each. Intersting times I hope the real fans have a club in two years.  it's the way forward if the Pratt and the Reynolds family do what David V and Paul O has done and put the money in and show the fans they mean business.

Regarding Mr Rush, if being Mayor of your town and being a Local Councillor voted in for the last 15 years+ makes him a bad politician, I'd love to see a good one.