Gold and Sullivan ???

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, sicknote, -DL-, Rio, Gnome, chalks, the pink palermo

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby e-20 on Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:06 pm

GaryP wrote:
("Nesticles" - Tony Henry: West Ham's ex-head of recruitment banned for 12 months
What about the Director of Football who openly states his role in signing players who oversaw this whole recruitment strategy? :hush:)

How much was he paid by the board to take the rap entirely ?


Interestingly I asked the mouth piece who announced that ban if they had investigated the person copied in to the email(s) (who as I predicted when this investigation was started would be ignored completely by the FA) and whether he/she was implicated by the fact that they would have been aware of the situation, considered that they might even the instigator of the policy perhaps. Surprise, surprise I didn't get a reply. What is it they say about justice not only being done but being seen to be done. Someone and we all know who the likely candidate is, has been very lucky here, but the FA while needing to be seen to be doing something, are scared stiff to do anything beyond the superficial, unless there is massive outcry anyway forcing them to do so. Cant see the latter happening and didn't they play a blinder announcing it at a time when few will even have noticed, let alone consider the implications.
User avatar
e-20
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: London ish

Re: The owners - the case against (please keep live)

Postby e-20 on Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:20 pm

Up the Junction wrote:
("The Old Man of Storr"]We had a brilliant plan but Sullivan got the ICF on board and they in turn managed to cancel the march and threatened anyone who still wanted to .)

It was the ICF's demo - the still disenchanted protested inside the stadium instead and in turn generated far more publicity than could have ever have been possible with a march outside the stadium.

In terms of avoiding negative publicity, cancelling the march was the worst thing they could have done. And so here we are. :thup:


It is rather amusing that we find that whatever it is that our owners (and witch) attempt to do that the very opposite is so often the actual result. (In that regard Lady Brady is a perfect fit for the Tory Party.)

As another example the attempt to go for quality last summer (as they put it) actually only made things worse from the opposite moves of the season before, which also did the opposite of that intended... so its even doubled up into a whole new science of infinite variety. They truly are genius at this policy of unforeseen circumstances. Probably using young Jacks Infinite Improbability Drive...even if it has been on the predictable setting until now.
User avatar
e-20
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: London ish

Re: The owners - the case against (please keep live)

Postby The Old Man of Storr on Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:47 pm

Up the Junction wrote:How is that possible?

Do you really think the PL and FA would have given a toss about a few hearses driving around Stratford!? Of course they wouldn't!

But fans kicking off INSIDE a stadium, with the pictures being broadcast around the world? Now that's a story.


It really would have depended on the number of marchers I guess - there were 14,000 members of RWHFAG , many more would have come from other sites , perhaps I'm kidding myself on that all of those people would have turned up but the papers and the tv cameras would have picked up on it had that many turned up , who's to say the pitch invasions would not have happened as well ?

Anyway , the march didn't happen but the brave lads who risked jail and a huge fine by running on to the pitch and demonstrating against the Board will undoubtedly have helped David Sullivan change his mind on transfer policy and the choice of manager and for that we should all be forever thankful .
User avatar
The Old Man of Storr
 
Posts: 15036
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: Lost In the Recesses Of My Mind .

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby e-20 on Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:52 pm

artlin wrote:The murdering, lying, cheating, thieving piece of **** that own Chelski. .


I had to listen to that supreme Hypocrite Perter Hain being interviewed by that other supreme hypocrite Andy Jacobs some weeks back over the Abramovich visa situation. Both Chelsea fans of course so clearlyTalksport were going for the objective angle. This proud man of concience, the left and morality was criticising the move and claimed that this man has never been proved to have committed an offence in this country blah, blah, blah. Funny how that view rather contradicts his earlier actions regarding South Africa that so fuelled his whole career, but thats another story.

Fact is while what he says is superficially true you don't have to dig deep below the surface to have suspicions. His apparent innocence just might have something to do with the fact that despite various Parliamentary Committees demanding that he (though not named specifically) and his ilk should be investigated for potential criminal activities including money laundering, no Government has had the balls to do so (at least publicly) or even show any propensity to investigate him in his interestingly transforming life here. The fact that the City has been happy to turn a blind eye to the actions of so many Russian Billionaires/Oligarchs who having robbed their own country happily deposit it in the London markets with no questions asked may also be a factor in this, hey it superficially makes our economy look like its growing of course so who cares about where it comes from or how its used. The fact also that this man was in fear of his life from Putin as he was deeply involved with enemy number one in Putin's Russia, when he first came over here, while amazingly now has transformed into being his 'right hand man' in many respects has also seemingly not been questioned or investigated by the authorities. Maybe they just love semi naked horse riding so much it has brought them together. Though I am sure that inside the security services there just may be evidence of a differing relationship worth investigating.

So back to Mr Hain I say I am sure that had he not been the owner of your club with your history you would not be quite so much of a fan boy or at least would be arguing for all sorts of investigation into his activities, but then to some, football overcomes all other moral considerations even in the most chattery of the chattery liberal classes I might suggest.
User avatar
e-20
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: London ish

Re: The owners - the case against (please keep live)

Postby Up the Junction on Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:46 pm

The Old Man of Storr wrote: It really would have depended on the number of marchers I guess...

No. It wouldn't. Once again, there is no comparison.

The Old Man of Storr wrote:...the papers and the tv cameras would have picked up on it had that many turned up....

And 24 hours it would have been chip paper. No condemnation from the PL. No FA fine and order to keep fans in check. No threat of further sanction. I refer you to my previous point.

The Old Man of Storr wrote:...who's to say the pitch invasions would not have happened as well ?

There's a whole host of things that might have happened, but didn't.
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
 
Posts: 50146
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 1:03 am

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby warp on Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:49 pm

*****, assholes, i hope their cocks rot.
User avatar
warp
 
Posts: 12743
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:13 am
Location: I am everything about this site which is wrong... i don't give a toss about WHUFC.

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby The Old Man of Storr on Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:04 pm

Ok Ok , I'll bow to your better judgement on the matter - :)
User avatar
The Old Man of Storr
 
Posts: 15036
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: Lost In the Recesses Of My Mind .

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Kialos on Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:35 pm

Up the Junction wrote:Please do. I'm quite enjoying your list/s.


Yep, nothing list a list of names without anything to substantiate whatever point is being made.
Kialos
 
Posts: 7150
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:11 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Bamber Gascoigne on Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:20 pm

Thekorean wrote:Really?

I can think of at least 5.

Oystons, Venkys, Mike Ashley, the bloke that owns Charlton Athletic, bloke that owns Hull City.


Do you mean Mike "interest free loans to Newcastle United" Ashley?
User avatar
Bamber Gascoigne
 
Posts: 3937
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 7:12 pm
Location: 51° 31′ 55″ N, 0° 2′ 22″ E

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Samba on Fri Jul 13, 2018 12:18 am

warp wrote:*****, assholes, i hope their cocks rot.

Too late.......ballbags as well..
User avatar
Samba
 
Posts: 2491
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:36 pm
Location: Seriously dischuffed

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby goa127 on Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:29 pm

Mike Ashley often gets praise for his interest free loans. Looks good on paper but in reality this it's what's holding back the sale of the club. He is insisting that any sale includes paying back his loan in full (£120m?)
This is perfectly reasonable but adds a huge wedge of cash to the purchase price. If the loan was interest-bearing(sullies 4%) he could sell the club and leave the loans outstanding which would mean a much smaller outlay for a prospective buyer. The last prospective deal fell through on just this point. No doubt these loans could be outsourced but I imagine the interest rate to take on a dubious investment would be double digit. I know nothing about finance and it probably shows :)
goa127
 
Posts: 907
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Northern_Light on Sun Jul 15, 2018 10:44 pm

Well done to the owners for standing by their commitment to invest heavily, back the new manager, and let him build his own squad with the help of a DoF he also picked - credit where it's due.

Now to stand back and hear the echo :D
User avatar
Northern_Light
 
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:50 pm
Location: Where the Sun keeps on shining, even past the witching hour!

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby GaryP on Sun Jul 15, 2018 10:46 pm

Northern_Light wrote:Well done to the owners for standing by their commitment to invest heavily, back the new manager, and let him build his own squad with the help of a DoF he also picked - credit where it's due.

Now to stand back and hear the echo :D


May I suggest a tin hat ?
User avatar
GaryP
 
Posts: 10660
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 4:14 pm
Location: Broken Britain

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby goingunderground on Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:14 am

Northern_Light wrote:Well done to the owners for standing by their commitment to invest heavily, back the new manager, and let him build his own squad with the help of a DoF he also picked - credit where it's due.

Now to stand back and hear the echo :D


They had little choice not to. No investment would’ve finished them.

They’ve got a long way to go until I even consider forgiving them and acknowledge they’re got the club’s best intersts at hearts. A long time if ever.

Greedy *****
User avatar
goingunderground
 
Posts: 1073
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 11:30 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby dodger on Mon Jul 16, 2018 4:40 am

They deserve credit for this window for sure. I never thought I'd see us spend about 40 million pounds on a player with these two in charge. Credit where it's due.

Does it undo years of under-investment, the botched stadium move, countless embarrassments in the media and the lies to the fans? Of course not. It's a drop in the ocean, but at least it's a start.
User avatar
dodger
 
Posts: 11255
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2003 12:16 pm
Location: Scotland / London / Japan / somewhere in between the 3

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: andersonm2, dodgy dave, Google [Bot], hammerman11, mitford, steveherts66, stitchy, Tarte Encore, 'Appy 'Ammer and 54 guests