Barrow Dropped Us In It, No Differnt Than Rickets

[wrexham forever]

Originally Posted by Quay Red

I thought the timeline was explained poorly but was basically:-
Barrow agreed a 1 year contract to see how things would go. He enjoyed the training ground atmosphere and enjoyed working with Rickets. Rickets was happy with Barrow and asked the board to extend Barrows contract to end at the same time as his.
The board approved the request, formalised a new contract and offered it to Barrow. The deal was verbally done before the Shrewsbury fiasco.
The board were then legally tied to the contract.
Whilst Barrow initially said he didn't want to manage he changed his mind and said he wanted the job. Easy decision for the board to make. Barrow then appoints Newell.
3 weeks into the job experiencing the highs and lows of a 7 day a week job rather than amore relaxing 3 / 4 day part time position Barrow speaks to Spencer to inform him that it wasn't working for him and he would like to step down. He would stay on until the process of finding a new man was completed. The board looked at previous candidates and conducted interviews keeping Barrow informed. Bryan Hughes was interviewed last Sunday and was appointed a few days later.
Bryan wanted Barrow to stay on as assistant but that would have meant Barrow replacing Newell who he'd appointed. I believe that it was at this point that Barrow decided to go completely.

Must admit I got confuse over the Data Protection stuff which apparently stopped the WAFC board telling the trust board what was happening. It seems it's down to employer / employee confidentiality.

Meeting basically panned out as I expected. Telling questions not asked as the initial statement / address covered most of the issues that have been discussed on here.

This is exactly as I remember the "time line" being explained last night.

One addition, however, SH did say GB changed his mind and asked to become manager after the excellent performances against Newport and Salford. As SH says how could you not be impressed with those performances and it was agreed by all board members that he was given the managers job

[TWREX]

Originally Posted by Quay Red

I thought the timeline was explained poorly but was basically:-
Barrow agreed a 1 year contract to see how things would go. He enjoyed the training ground atmosphere and enjoyed working with Rickets. Rickets was happy with Barrow and asked the board to extend Barrows contract to end at the same time as his.
The board approved the request, formalised a new contract and offered it to Barrow. The deal was verbally done before the Shrewsbury fiasco.
The board were then legally tied to the contract.
Whilst Barrow initially said he didn't want to manage he changed his mind and said he wanted the job. Easy decision for the board to make. Barrow then appoints Newell.
3 weeks into the job experiencing the highs and lows of a 7 day a week job rather than amore relaxing 3 / 4 day part time position Barrow speaks to Spencer to inform him that it wasn't working for him and he would like to step down. He would stay on until the process of finding a new man was completed. The board looked at previous candidates and conducted interviews keeping Barrow informed. Bryan Hughes was interviewed last Sunday and was appointed a few days later.
Bryan wanted Barrow to stay on as assistant but that would have meant Barrow replacing Newell who he'd appointed. I believe that it was at this point that Barrow decided to go completely.

Must admit I got confuse over the Data Protection stuff which apparently stopped the WAFC board telling the trust board what was happening. It seems it's down to employer / employee confidentiality.

Meeting basically panned out as I expected. Telling questions not asked as the initial statement / address covered most of the issues that have been discussed on here.

This is exactly how this was explained at the meeting.

[KingBuxton_Forever red]

Originally Posted by Phils-an-alki

Is there a video of last nights meeting online anywhere?

or could someone detail the boards explanation for the last 6 weeks mess?

To be fair some girl on facebook live streamed the lot, I watched it.

The big long post from Quay Red is pretty accurate. Barrow has p*ssed us about, no 2 ways about it.

[RED2309]

Originally Posted by Alan Attack

Why don’t you table a motion for a paid Chief Exec and apportion at least 100k from the playing budget to pay him.

I suggest if we had 2 less players, we’d be in the shit and not 4 points from the top.

Whilst a paid Chief Exec would pay for himself, in time, that could take a couple of years. Therefore, if you want to remove at least 100k from the playing budget, put the resolution to members to vote on.

Any CEO would on a day to day basis be carrying out the policies dictated to him by the board.
I'm pretty sure that on the subject of managerial appointments/resignations he would have to refer back to the board and not be in a position to make autonomous decisions.
What in effect he would be doing is micromanaging the non playing side of the business.

[jonesfach]

Originally Posted by KingBuxton_Forever red

To be fair some girl on facebook live streamed the lot, I watched it.

The big long post from Quay Red is pretty accurate. Barrow has p*ssed us about, no 2 ways about it.

We've been pissed about by Dean Keates-staying then going, Sam Ricketts-Engineered the move to Screws with Dave Edwards et al, Dennis Lawrence-who agreed a deal then got T&T to pay him more/offer new contract and then Graham Barrow-who took on the job he didn't really want and found it wasn't for him, who then asked could he go back to being a number 2. Board obliges and finds young coach who GB must of approved of. Then he jumps ship leaving us with Mike Newell who the players disliked apparently.

Not been an easy ride for the club board. Bit like a merry-go-round that you want to get off but keep getting dragged back on by someone.

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by 3pmsaturday

Perhaps we won’t know but perhaps Lawrence insisted on the barrow thing in line with his proposed contract? Yes to ‘back to back’ them would have been better although that does not excuse Barrows about turn or indeed Lawrence’s. Sounds like he used the club and Barrow, in a way, to feather his nest.

The board have continualy been let down over the last few months. I have great sympathy for them.

If anyone thinks making these decisions is easy look at virtually every football club in the world. A very small percentage get it right and even fewer go on to retain that talent.

I have great sympathy for the Board because they have been placed in awkward positions by forces often beyond their control, and then attacked unjustifiably for doing their job.

Unfortunately, some folk often misuse other folk to further their aims; Lawrence seemingly did this. However, the main learning point from this is to not assume things will automatically happen, and signatures on contracts are essential.

QR states that Barrow's initial contract extension was agreed prior to Ricketts's departure, but not signed until after Ricketts's had departed. He also states the Board claims they were legally obliged to honour the contract. I am not an expert, but that sounds a bit wooly to me; I am sure there are legal experts on here who could clarify.

As for Barrow changing his mind and wanting out, there is probably a valid reason for it. So, in conclusion, the Board has made some errors, having been hit by a host of unwanted events. That is no reason to demand either their heads or their resignations. We should move on, and if WST members are not happy with things they should follow process and bring about a vote of no confidence. Personally, I would support the Board, but they must learn from the past few months.

[jonesfach]

Originally Posted by Prodigal Dragon

I have great sympathy for the Board because they have been placed in awkward positions by forces often beyond their control, and then attacked unjustifiably for doing their job.

Unfortunately, some folk often misuse other folk to further their aims; Lawrence seemingly did this. However, the main learning point from this is to not assume things will automatically happen, and signatures on contracts are essential.

QR states that Barrow's initial contract extension was agreed prior to Ricketts's departure, but not signed until after Ricketts's had departed. He also states the Board claims they were legally obliged to honour the contract. I am not an expert, but that sounds a bit wooly to me; I am sure there are legal experts on here who could clarify.

As for Barrow changing his mind and wanting out, there is probably a valid reason for it. So, in conclusion, the Board has made some errors, having been hit by a host of unwanted events. That is no reason to demand either their heads or their resignations. We should move on, and if WST members are not happy with things they should follow process and bring about a vote of no confidence. Personally, I would support the Board, but they must learn from the past few months.

Quite right.

The only real mistake was extending GBs contract if that was the case to tally up with the DL arrival. To be fair seeing as DL was an ex-player not many would of thought that he would mess us about.

[Quay Red]

Originally Posted by Prodigal Dragon

I have great sympathy for the Board because they have been placed in awkward positions by forces often beyond their control, and then attacked unjustifiably for doing their job.

Unfortunately, some folk often misuse other folk to further their aims; Lawrence seemingly did this. However, the main learning point from this is to not assume things will automatically happen, and signatures on contracts are essential.

QR states that Barrow's initial contract extension was agreed prior to Ricketts's departure, but not signed until after Ricketts's had departed. He also states the Board claims they were legally obliged to honour the contract. I am not an expert, but that sounds a bit wooly to me; I am sure there are legal experts on here who could clarify.

As for Barrow changing his mind and wanting out, there is probably a valid reason for it. So, in conclusion, the Board has made some errors, having been hit by a host of unwanted events. That is no reason to demand either their heads or their resignations. We should move on, and if WST members are not happy with things they should follow process and bring about a vote of no confidence. Personally, I would support the Board, but they must learn from the past few months.

Would like to see another legal opinion on this but it was stated that contracts had been verbally agreed, documents drawn up and exchanged for signature. Then Rickets put the spanner in the works.

Some times you can't plan everything and need to firefight.. Appears that once the fire started someone kept fanning the flames.

[Quay Red]

Originally Posted by jonesfach

Quite right.

The only real mistake was extending GBs contract if that was the case to tally up with the DL arrival. To be fair seeing as DL was an ex-player not many would of thought that he would mess us about.

This is not true.

Rickets wanted Barrows contract extended to match his own.
The deal was done before Rickets flew the coop.
Lawrence was approached as he was willing to have Barrow alongside.

[KingBuxton_Forever red]

Originally Posted by jonesfach

We've been pissed about by Dean Keates-staying then going, Sam Ricketts-Engineered the move to Screws with Dave Edwards et al, Dennis Lawrence-who agreed a deal then got T&T to pay him more/offer new contract and then Graham Barrow-who took on the job he didn't really want and found it wasn't for him, who then asked could he go back to being a number 2. Board obliges and finds young coach who GB must of approved of. Then he jumps ship leaving us with Mike Newell who the players disliked apparently.

Not been an easy ride for the club board. Bit like a merry-go-round that you want to get off but keep getting dragged back on by someone.

We have just been damn unlucky. I think some of the critisism is ill educated and not based on the full story. Now I have taken the time to understand the full story I have alot of sympathy for the board.