Trust board snippets

[John Neals Dynasty]

Originally Posted by Haruki

Even following Pete's version of events. Barrow was still a very poor decision. - He has a questionable managerial record
- He hadn't managed for over 10 years
- He had very recently intimated he didn't want the job. Despite changing his mind that should have rung alarm bells
- At the risk of being seen as "ageist" his age would have been an issue for me, an elder statesman doing what is a younger mans job
- He was currently our number 2, very rarely does the step up to the top job work as it is a different relationship with the players that cannot be switched on and off over night. Worrying Pete quotes the "continuity" argument which is the exact same wording used with the failed appointment of Davies just 6 months earlier. It seems the board learnt nothing

It is apparent that the board went after Big Den and he pulled out. At that point they panicked and appointed Barrow as the "easiest" option rather than keeping him in caretaker control and finding the right man. That decision was catastrophic in meaning we hired and fired Mike Newell and ended up with a man who didn't want to be here spending a £200k budget in a crucial transfer window. Pete can cloud this with "abuse of volunteers" all he likes but it was a disaster series of decision making from those in charge and we are yet to see any evidence that they acknowledge those mistakes and will learn from them going forwards.

Excellent post
Posted via mobile theme

[John Neals Dynasty]

Originally Posted by Quay Red

It's all very well being cynical and you may have a valid point but if the board is made up of the most popular facebook users, I dread to think of the mess the club would be in within 6 months.
Seems to me that the more responsible people leave facebook and twitter etc alone.
I believe that the only way is to organise hustings. Each candidate is given 5 minutes to outline his / her vision and attributes and can then be questioned.
Never easy to get 6 or 7 people in the room at the same time / date but got to be worth a try.

Must be responsible then I don't do Facebook or Twitter 😀
Posted via mobile theme

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by cardiffred

Agreed. But in the short term - that can help get someone different in as it doesn't require a lot of votes.

Only if you can get a block to vote the same way.

Having blocks voting one way or the other isn't great, extremes aren't great. If greater voting can be achieved, based on better data from candidates, then hopefully good change can happen.

[John Neals Dynasty]

Originally Posted by cardiffred

Can I have an apology from Moss so I can move on too?

Give him a twitter message and don't be abusive.... See you are one who can't move forwards from years ago. But regarding 2 yrs on the trot by those in charge still their is no excuse.
Posted via mobile theme

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by fezbob

It's been pointed out to me that Pete's comment about Barrow letting the board know at the end of January could be seen as misleading.

I've been told it's a fact that he informed them on 12th January before the Meet the Manager event was held on the 16th.

So he is basically lying.

[Quay Red]

Originally Posted by John Neals Dynasty

Must be responsible then I don't do Facebook or Twitter 😀
Posted via mobile theme

There's always the exception to the rule

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by cardiffred

Can I have an apology from Moss so I can move on too?

Moss has nothing to do with the club anymore though

[NedStarksGhost]

Abuse is wrong, as has been said by many people on here. But using that to hide behind the fair criticism that both boards received is quite poor. Every club, in fact I would say every organisation that has a fairly high profile in the public will have nasty people giving abuse over social media (this is an issue that is not exclusive to Wrexham AFC). It's an unfortunate side of social media that can't be avoided.

The appointment of Barrow was a terrible decision and one they should own up to. Just because Barrow wanted the job, doesn't mean he should have got it. Try and twist it as Barrow changing his mind all you want, the club still hired him as first team manager. And as already mentioned, holding a meet the manager event was laughable.

The PR from the club is quite poor. The general tone of these statements give me the impression there is no culpability. To even accuse fans of putting players off joining is absolutely crazy to publicly state.

As a fan owned club, attacking your fan base like this is a seriously bad move and only serves to create a divide.

[benwilliams]

Originally Posted by NedStarksGhost

Abuse is wrong, as has been said by many people on here. But using that to hide behind the fair criticism that both boards received is quite poor. Every club, in fact I would say every organisation that has a fairly high profile in the public will have nasty people giving abuse over social media (this is an issue that is not exclusive to Wrexham AFC). It's an unfortunate side of social media that can't be avoided.

The appointment of Barrow was a terrible decision and one they should own up to. Just because Barrow wanted the job, doesn't mean he should have got it. Try and twist it as Barrow changing his mind all you want, the club still hired him as first team manager. And as already mentioned, holding a meet the manager event was laughable.

The PR from the club is quite poor. The general tone of these statements give me the impression there is no culpability. To even accuse fans of putting players off joining is absolutely crazy to publicly state.

As a fan owned club, attacking your fan base like this is a seriously bad move and only serves to create a divide.

I think the board get unfair stick a lot of the time but have to say you’re right here, the statement included in the accounts strikes completely the wrong tone and I’m very disappointed people have seen fit to issue it.
Posted via mobile theme