Campaign: Sack The Board

[Aus Fox]

7 hours ago, Foxaholic ME said:

Like he was out of his depth when they won the league and FA cup

Like Ranieri was doing a great job when we won the league, and Rodgers was doing a great job when we won the FA Cup. 
Times move on, and if you don’t adjust and keep up you go stale.

Things change rapidly in football and as a club we need to keep up and make sure we have the best people possible in the positions that matter.

[Globalfox]

11 hours ago, Lako42 said:

Exactly, it's unacceptable that Rudkin and Whelan aren't with us but against us.

 

 

SACK THE ****ING BOARD

Just to be pedantic but if the board is sacked as requested Rudkin remains as he is not on the board. In fact the only individual on the board who could be sacked per se is Susan Whelan the rest are Tops Brother and their Chinese friend. So the campaign is to remove the owners if you want to sack the board. Your campaign therefore is really Sack the Owners. Grammatically that is incorrect so the demonstration you want is Top Out. More succinct and more aligned with the true aims. Or is it we want more and additional experienced football staff added to the board? Not such a zingy ring to it. If being charged per letter Top Out will be cheaper to print. Not for or against just saying.

[walkerleeds]

Edited 27 January by walkerleeds

[Mickyblueeyes]

26 minutes ago, Globalfox said:

Just to be pedantic but if the board is sacked as requested Rudkin remains as he is not on the board. In fact the only individual on the board who could be sacked per se is Susan Whelan the rest are Tops Brother and their Chinese friend. So the campaign is to remove the owners if you want to sack the board. Your campaign therefore is really Sack the Owners. Grammatically that is incorrect so the demonstration you want is Top Out. More succinct and more aligned with the true aims. Or is it we want more and additional experienced football staff added to the board? Not such a zingy ring to it. If being charged per letter Top Out will be cheaper to print. Not for or against just saying.

Just because someone isnt a statutory director doesnt mean they are not on the board. By that logic, a lot of businesses with C-suites are not neccessarily on the board. Rudkin, the FD, the Football operations Director, the GC, the comms and commercial director are all board roles. None are stat directors. 

[fox in the sox]

4 hours ago, C.J said:

There's been more failure than success.

It depends what you mean by failure. We have had a brilliant run compared to many similar size/bigger clubs such as Derby, Coventry and Sheffield Wednesday.

[David Lowe]

56 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Just because someone isnt a statutory director doesnt mean they are not on the board. By that logic, a lot of businesses with C-suites are not neccessarily on the board. Rudkin, the FD, the Football operations Director, the GC, the comms and commercial director are all board roles. None are stat directors. 

Sacking the whole board doesn’t make any sense. Surely any protests have got to be aimed at people who are thought to be doing a bad job ie RVN if it’s thought to be a football issue, Rudkin if it’s thought to be a contracts/wages issue, Glover if it’s thought to be a scouting issue.

[Muzzy_no7]

10 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

It depends what you mean by failure. We have had a brilliant run compared to many similar size/bigger clubs such as Derby, Coventry and Sheffield Wednesday.

Don’t think we have been a similar size to Derby or Coventry for a good 30-40 years. 
 

Wednesday just have a big fanbase, nothing else. Much like Newcastle and Sunderland. 

[LCFCJohn]

3 minutes ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Don’t think we have been a similar size to Derby or Coventry for a good 30-40 years. 
 

Wednesday just have a big fanbase, nothing else. Much like Newcastle and Sunderland. 

Do they even have that? They are having their best season in a while. A manager they can get behind and on the back of a great escape last season but their average attendance is still 3k less than their city neighbours who were coming off the back of a awful season last year.

 

Yes theirs a couple of factors such as many Wednesday fans will be avoiding giving Chansiri their money and Utd are a bit higher in the league but I think it’s more than they have a bigger stadium that they can’t fill than a massive fan base.

 

Sunderland and Newcastle can at least fill their (large) grounds.

[Mickyblueeyes]

19 minutes ago, David Lowe said:

Sacking the whole board doesn’t make any sense. Surely any protests have got to be aimed at people who are thought to be doing a bad job ie RVN if it’s thought to be a football issue, Rudkin if it’s thought to be a contracts/wages issue, Glover if it’s thought to be a scouting issue.

The chant “sack the board” is an age old chant where the board, as a collective are falling below standards. That is, without doubt an issue at our club. 
 

The suggestion and subsequent chant of “sack the board” is effectively telling them all that whichever colleague is in charge of the various issue departments at our club, need removing. 
 

I mean, we could if we are being critical suggest aside from on the pitch issues, we’ve also had issues with communication, commercial relationships and general overall management (CEO, Comms director and Commercial Director). This is in addition to financial and football mismanagement (FD and DOF).

 

We’ve been failing in virtually every department. Never has the chant, Sack the Board been more relevant. Hold them to account. 

[fox in the sox]

21 minutes ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Don’t think we have been a similar size to Derby or Coventry for a good 30-40 years. 
 

Wednesday just have a big fanbase, nothing else. Much like Newcastle and Sunderland. 

All of those clubs and ourselves would be put in a group of teams below the big names. We have certainly had more success than any of those teams recently and that has been because of the owners who people now want out.

[dmayne7]

2 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

All of those clubs and ourselves would be put in a group of teams below the big names. We have certainly had more success than any of those teams recently and that has been because of the owners who people now want out.

In part, not because of. And that was by and large under a completely different figurehead

[David Lowe]

2 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

The chant “sack the board” is an age old chant where the board, as a collective are falling below standards. That is, without doubt an issue at our club. 
 

The suggestion and subsequent chant of “sack the board” is effectively telling them all that whichever colleague is in charge of the various issue departments at our club, need removing. 
 

I mean, we could if we are being critical suggest aside from on the pitch issues, we’ve also had issues with communication, commercial relationships and general overall management (CEO, Comms director and Commercial Director). This is in addition to financial and football mismanagement (FD and DOF).

 

We’ve been failing in virtually every department. Never has the chant, Sack the Board been more relevant. Hold them to account. 

But getting rid of the owners and removing all of the key decision makers during a season doesn’t make any sense.

[fox in the sox]

3 minutes ago, dmayne7 said:

In part, not because of. And that was by and large under a completely different figurehead

Of course it’s because of the owners - we were nowhere near to a Premier League title and FA Cup before they arrived. I take your point that it is a different figurehead but a lot of people who brought us the success remain.

[john ridley]

11 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

All of those clubs and ourselves would be put in a group of teams below the big names. We have certainly had more success than any of those teams recently and that has been because of the owners who people now want out.

The same people  we want out have overseen mega debt and possibly  2 relegations in 3 seasons .

[Paninistickers]

49 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

It depends what you mean by failure. We have had a brilliant run compared to many similar size/bigger clubs such as Derby, Coventry and Sheffield Wednesday.

Amazes me how some of our fanbase seem to have such an inferior view of our profile/standing/status within the game... 

 

For a start, you've got to be well over 30 to remember any of them in the PL

 

All three - even if they attract 30k crowds - are light years behind us in terms of recognition, profile,  latent fanbase,.social media, media coverage, profile outside of UK. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[fox in the sox]

22 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Amazes me how some of our fanbase seem to have such an inferior view of our profile/standing/status within the game... 

 

For a start, you've got to be well over 30 to remember any of them in the PL

 

All three - even if they attract 30k crowds - are light years behind us in terms of recognition, profile,  latent fanbase,.social media, media coverage, profile outside of UK. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes we are now but for the 6 years before the owners arrived we were mainly a very poor Championship side and at that stage we wouldn’t have been ahead of those other teams in terms of media coverage, profile etc.

[MattFox]

10 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

Yes we are now but for the 6 years before the owners arrived we were mainly a very poor Championship side and at that stage we wouldn’t have been ahead of those other teams in terms of media coverage, profile etc.

6 years before the current owners came in was the lowest point in our history so not really sure it’s a fair data point to go off

 

We were on the up and in the playoffs before they came in too

[fox in the sox]

3 minutes ago, MattFox said:

6 years before the current owners came in was the lowest point in our history so not really sure it’s a fair data point to go off

 

We were on the up and in the playoffs before they came in too

But there was quite a leap from losing in the play offs and 6 years of Championship struggles to eventually winning big titles. 
We were stuck in the Championship with the likes of Derby and Coventry, I can’t see why our profile would have been higher than them at that stage.

[Paninistickers]

1 hour ago, fox in the sox said:

But there was quite a leap from losing in the play offs and 6 years of Championship struggles to eventually winning big titles. 
We were stuck in the Championship with the likes of Derby and Coventry, I can’t see why our profile would have been higher than them at that stage.

Yeah mid 2000s we had an edge on those clubs but wasn't the night and day like it is  now. 

 

But even then, our City is bigger, we'd won trophies, played in Europe, had England players in the 10 years preceding that. 

 

But, if Sheff weds in the next 10 years win the league, the cup and have world class players like Vards, Mahrez, Kante, sell defenders for 90m and get to European semis, yup they'd be about the same as us 😛

 

 

[bovril]

The debate about what club is 'bigger' is pretty meaningless. The fact remains that only 5 clubs have won more than us in the last 30 years. Three whole decades. 

[bovril]

Actually it's probably nearer 40 years. In that period Everton won 2 league titles and one cup. Leeds won one league trophy only I think (did they win a cup in that time?). Villa 2 league cups? 

Edited 27 January by bovril

[Clever Fox]

This is deluson gone mad. The Owners are not the problem. Though I agree the DOF position certainly seems to be. Calling for that position to be changed has a lot of merit.

 

Top and family own the Club. Thay have advanced the Club beyond most Fans wildest dreams.

 

He spends his own money like last week paying off debt. As well as supporting several needy causes in the City.

 

What if he shut the Gates and said we don't need the Fans, Which he has every right to do. What do Fans do then.

 

Give him some credit, He's learning on the Job just like Susan and the KP family are learning about Football. 

 

Time takes care of everything, Give it a while and I'm sure we'll be stabilized and moving forward again.

[SemperEadem]

3 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

This is deluson gone mad. The Owners are not the problem. Though I agree the DOF position certainly seems to be. Calling for that position to be changed has a lot of merit.

 

Top and family own the Club. Thay have advanced the Club beyond most Fans wildest dreams.

 

He spends his own money like last week paying off debt. As well as supporting several needy causes in the City.

 

What if he shut the Gates and said we don't need the Fans, Which he has every right to do. What do Fans do then.

 

Give him some credit, He's learning on the Job just like Susan and the KP family are learning about Football. 

 

Time takes care of everything, Give it a while and I'm sure we'll be stabilized and moving forward again.

Sorry what?

[whoareyaaa]

Piper made a good point yesterday about us bringing in some new faces alongside Rudkin and co.

[Trekerz]

7 minutes ago, Clever Fox said:

This is deluson gone mad. The Owners are not the problem. Though I agree the DOF position certainly seems to be. Calling for that position to be changed has a lot of merit.

 

Top and family own the Club. Thay have advanced the Club beyond most Fans wildest dreams.

 

He spends his own money like last week paying off debt. As well as supporting several needy causes in the City.

 

What if he shut the Gates and said we don't need the Fans, Which he has every right to do. What do Fans do then.

 

Give him some credit, He's learning on the Job just like Susan and the KP family are learning about Football. 

 

Time takes care of everything, Give it a while and I'm sure we'll be stabilized and moving forward again.

Surely you're taking the piss you were definitely one of them on his knees in Eindhoven at Top's feet bowing down to him