Bangor friendly - Director response to questions

[Rob]

The fixture will show " 'solidarity' with Bangor's fan base "


Anyone able to explain that one?

[Omni]

Originally Posted by short_gog

To be fair the Vaughans will not benefit from this friendly, my understanding is that HMRC will be the main beneficiary from the gate moneys !!!

But it's the Vaughan's debt that HMRC are calling in. It all depends on how comfortable you are paying their tax bill for them.

[fezbob]

Originally Posted by Hamilton Pathetic

So was the pun at the end of my post.

I may have to retire my crown as King of Puns after missing that!
Posted via mobile theme

[RED2309]

Doesn't sit that comfortably with me but I won't be going anyway.

Obviously an old pals act between Harrison & Darlington for footballing reasons and I can appreciate the boards reluctance to start interfering in football matters.

Also you could open a can of worms I mean should the likes of Blackpool and West Ham with their shady owners be blacklisted?

[wafc1926]

Originally Posted by RED2309

Doesn't sit that comfortably with me but I won't be going anyway.

Obviously an old pals act between Harrison & Darlington for footballing reasons and I can appreciate the boards reluctance to start interfering in football matters.

Also you could open a can of worms I mean should the likes of Blackpool and West Ham with their shady owners be blacklisted?

Should we fortunate enough to regain our FL status , or be drawn against either of the clubs you mention in a cup-tie , then we would be obliged to fulfil the fixture. Arranging a "friendly " game against a club owned by the Vaughans ....who killed Chester FC and tried to get their hands on our Club ....is quite another matter. Abdicating any moral responsibility and laying the blame on " management" reflects very poorly on the Board.

[Inside Left]

Originally Posted by wafc1926

Should we fortunate enough to regain our FL status , or be drawn against either of the clubs you mention in a cup-tie , then we would be obliged to fulfil the fixture. Arranging a "friendly " game against a club owned by the Vaughans ....who killed Chester FC and tried to get their hands on our Club ....is quite another matter. Abdicating any moral responsibility and laying the blame on " management" reflects very poorly on the Board.

Simply agree. Still time to change direction.

[RED2309]

Originally Posted by wafc1926

Should we fortunate enough to regain our FL status , or be drawn against either of the clubs you mention in a cup-tie , then we would be obliged to fulfil the fixture. Arranging a "friendly " game against a club owned by the Vaughans ....who killed Chester FC and tried to get their hands on our Club ....is quite another matter. Abdicating any moral responsibility and laying the blame on " management" reflects very poorly on the Board.

I don't believe they laid blame on the management just indicated they did not want to interfere in footballing matters which arranging a friendly game is.

Any income derived by Bangor may help in stopping HMRC winding them up next month not playing them could be said to speed up their demise.

Surely the underlying issue here is how they were able to become owners of Bangor in the first place.

[Haruki]

Originally Posted by Omni

But it's the Vaughan's debt that HMRC are calling in. It all depends on how comfortable you are paying their tax bill for them.

especially as entrance will be cash on the turnstilles, no guarantee at all that it gets to Bangor's bank never mind to HMRC!!

[Haruki]

Originally Posted by RED2309

Doesn't sit that comfortably with me but I won't be going anyway.

Obviously an old pals act between Harrison & Darlington for footballing reasons and I can appreciate the boards reluctance to start interfering in football matters.

Also you could open a can of worms I mean should the likes of Blackpool and West Ham with their shady owners be blacklisted?

I think it is a different case with the Vaughan's. They crippled our neighbours and tried to buy us. It is much closer to home which is why it is getting such a negative and emotive response.
The board have messed up on this one I am afraid, as a principle of not interfering in footballing affairs i normally agree with but i think this issue should have superseded that