Realistic Changes to Our Club

[ugarte007]

Originally Posted by WrexhamO

A paid CEO too take real day to day charge and responsibility would be best imho.

Responsibility is spread 5 ways, with 5 different line managers. We need one person in charge.

Been saying this for years , but only now did I realise why it won’t happen. The Elite couldn’t handle it.

[WrexhamO]

Originally Posted by Socrates

Totally agree with you O. We need one person to take overall day to day running of the off field activities of the club who then answers into the board, I know this could eat into the playing budget but something has got to change.

On the football side is Dixie really a DoF or a figurehead / stooge for the current board. We should be asking

What are his roles and responsibilities?
What targets have been set?
Does he have any power to change things, whether it be from changing the colour of the bibs to changing personnel?
If the manager highlights a player we should be signing does Dixie have the final decision or the board?
Who does he answer to?

The board totally dodged the question of Dixie's role in the recent Q&A, referring back instead to the last definition of board member roles that they could come up with.
If they could not define his role then they are basically saying that they appointed Dixie without identifying what his role and responsibilities are.

[eosceiriog]

[QUOTE=basdragon;2334291


So assuming that the aim would be to replace the current board and structure this summer, what ideas do people have to fill the void left if the board resign/get sacked or whatever ?


We know some are looking to the sugar daddy solution. Are there any realistic options for this in the pipeline ? What safeguards could we put in place to ensure we don't go back to the dark days of 10 years ago ?


There is a lot of flack for fan based ownership on here but there are places where it has worked, AFC Wimbledon and Wycombe Wanderers both in league one spring to mind, so when done properly it seems that fan owned clubs can work. Would we be able to shadow or study the structure of these well run clubs to find out what they are doing well that we aren't.

Just as importantly who would be willing to step in and replace the board if/when they went ?

I'll admit I have far more questions than answers, but what do we have collectively as alternatives ?[/QUOTE]

We have a very deep problem.

I can forgive most of errors the board have made but the crap about having all the skills etc make Nero look fantastic.

The position now is:

1. No resignations and carry on as is.

2. They belatedly recognize the mess they have created resign and leave others to sort out the mess if the can.

I suspect they will stick out. Not because it because it suits the club but their personal agenda's as, in their minds at least sticking gives leaves them in control and some sort of a chance of recovery.

The longer they stick the more difficult scenario 2 becomes for others to sort out. In fact it might be too late anyway for anyone to effectively influence the outcome of this season.

Can the be replaced with better? Certainly. It would be hard to do worse.

It seems there are still people thinking simply just changing the cast will do the trick.

In my view it is odds on they will be cast in the same mould.

The constitution and nature of the beast guarantee beuarocaracy and extreme risk aversion.

Better people but still the system will fail us.

I support changing the cast but as a first step to be lees risk averse and more welcoming of potential outside interests.

[Wiltshire_Red]

RACI is an acronym that stands for responsible, accountable, consulted and informed.

It’s been mentioned in the Q&A by the board, but unfortunately the board appears to be acting in the exact opposite way.

[Welsh Kiwi]

Originally Posted by eosceiriog

We have a very deep problem.

I can forgive most of errors the board have made but the crap about having all the skills etc make Nero look fantastic.

The position now is:

1. No resignations and carry on as is.

2. They belatedly recognize the mess they have created resign and leave others to sort out the mess if the can.

I suspect they will stick out. Not because it because it suits the club but their personal agenda's as, in their minds at least sticking gives leaves them in control and some sort of a chance of recovery.

The longer they stick the more difficult scenario 2 becomes for others to sort out. In fact it might be too late anyway for anyone to effectively influence the outcome of this season.

Can the be replaced with better? Certainly. It would be hard to do worse.

It seems there are still people thinking simply just changing the cast will do the trick.

In my view it is odds on they will be cast in the same mould.

The constitution and nature of the beast guarantee beuarocaracy and extreme risk aversion.

Better people but still the system will fail us.

I support changing the cast but as a first step to be lees risk averse and more welcoming of potential outside interests.

Sadly, I agree with this. The structure and set up is wrong. It's a defensive territorial culture that exists amongst the two boards. It doesn't embrace outside interests or even encourage talent from within the wider fan base, it obstinates and it resists change.

You can not be 100% risk adverse when running a football club and still hope for success. Football is a risk as soon as the ref blows the whistle.

Supporters Direct (SD) have already merged with Football Supporters Federation (FSF) to become the Football Supporters Association (FSA) and it would be helpful if this strategy inspired the WST board and WAFC board to do similar, so between them they could figure out the priorities of ownership and responsibility to trust members and the priorities of running a successful football club as a core business activity and principal income generator.

We all know too many cooks spoil the broth. And our club broth is sadly hard to stomach at the moment.

[EnglishRed]

Originally Posted by WrexhamO

A paid CEO too take real day to day charge and responsibility would be best imho.

Responsibility is spread 5 ways, with 5 different line managers. We need one person in charge.

I think you are probably right, but I'm not sure I'd trust the current board to appoint the right person. You only have to look down the road to see what can happen if you appoint the wrong person into that position.

[Inside Left]

Originally Posted by Wiltshire_Red

RACI is an acronym that stands for responsible, accountable, consulted and informed.

It’s been mentioned in the Q&A by the board, but unfortunately the board appears to be acting in the exact opposite way.

Does this need a 'Q' at the end. ? So I am told by a PH D assessor.
Oh am i out of my depth

[dixienormous]

Ffs when are they going to do the right thing and go? When will this nightmare end?

[standman]

Originally Posted by WrexhamO

The board totally dodged the question of Dixie's role in the recent Q&A, referring back instead to the last definition of board member roles that they could come up with.
If they could not define his role then they are basically saying that they appointed Dixie without identifying what his role and responsibilities are.

He’s been described by a board member as someone to take the flak off Spencer, so I’m guessing his role is Club Scapegoat.