Boardroom, Who does what?

[PlainmoorRoar]

Look back. I was complaining before then. As it turned out rightly so after we practically gave Buckle to Rovers yet allowed him to oversee a dismal and abject performance at Wembley which cost us the chance to scale the dizzy heights of League 1. Baker was telling anyone who would listen that we didn't want to gain promotion. Smalltime thinking that eventually ended up costing us our League status. It's this kind of amateurism that stinks and precisely the kind of thing DTG is complaining about. The majority of the Board are exempt from any criticism by me, the two responsible are Baker and Phillips. They stifled ideas put forward by other more positive thinking Board members, they have overseen a disastrous spell and they should be the ones to carry the can. Knill was shafted as was Ling before him, denied what was agreed and left to carry the can.

Matt can paint a pretty picture, he can divert away from what is really being said but ultimately he's just sitting with his head in the sand like many others and not grasping the facts because he's blinded by the spin bandied about by those nice fellows. If people can't see it or refuse to see it then carry on in ignorance, it's that ignorance that these nice fellows are counting on.

Spot on SG!!

[hector]

I am glad to see you are coming 'round to seeing that getting rid of Ling was disastrous for us, hector. It was their worst decision to date.

Other than when he was initially appointed, I was never against Ling. I sort of thought, that when he went, it was probably the best thing for him, as I do not think he would have ever have got a fair crack of the whip had he come back, as people had sort of fallen for Alan Knill but retrospectively, Martin Ling would have surely not done as badly as Knill.

[hector]

Look back. I was complaining before then. As it turned out rightly so after we practically gave Buckle to Rovers yet allowed him to oversee a dismal and abject performance at Wembley which cost us the chance to scale the dizzy heights of League 1. Baker was telling anyone who would listen that we didn't want to gain promotion. Smalltime thinking that eventually ended up costing us our League status. It's this kind of amateurism that stinks and precisely the kind of thing DTG is complaining about. The majority of the Board are exempt from any criticism by me, the two responsible are Baker and Phillips. They stifled ideas put forward by other more positive thinking Board members, they have overseen a disastrous spell and they should be the ones to carry the can. Knill was shafted as was Ling before him, denied what was agreed and left to carry the can.

Matt can paint a pretty picture, he can divert away from what is really being said but ultimately he's just sitting with his head in the sand like many others and not grasping the facts because he's blinded by the spin bandied about by those nice fellows. If people can't see it or refuse to see it then carry on in ignorance, it's that ignorance that these nice fellows are counting on.

Was that really Baker's fault that Buckle accepted a job elsewhere that then distracted him from the job in hand? Was Baker telling people they didn't want promotion? Really?

If you are correct, and I wouldn't know, then fair enough but there are 13 directors. Are you really suggesting that Baker rode roughshod over the wishes of 11 other people? That all 13 directors didn't want promotion, even though they are fans of the club?

So when Lathrope inadvertently passed the ball to the Stevenage player at Old Trafford, who then scored, were the directors all wiping their brow with relief? Or was it just Simon Baker, having apparently publicised his desire not to be promoted, who was jumping up and down in celebration, while the remaining directors were casting aspersions in his directions, having been powerless to stop Baker's plot to block promotion?

It is one thing to suggest the whole board have been collectively incompetent, yet you suggest the majority of the board are exempt from criticism, yet if that is the case, the whole board as a collective have sat back while diddy Simon Baker has gone on his wrecking spree of blocking promotion and overseeing relegation.

Can you not see how far-fetched that sounds?

[Dave_Pougher]

History is what it is and, with respect,what ever you think now or thought at the time is, whilst probably noteworthy, practically irrelevant now.

It has been quoted on here more than once that Phillips came in when we were in the play offs under Ling. I maybe wrong but I didn't see it announced on the OS or I didn't hear what he proposed to bring to the table in terms of investment or expertise. All I wish to know is

A. What does he do?
B. Is he accountable for relegation and associated loss of revenue?
C. What does he bring to the table that is or has been beneficial to the club?

As a supporter I don't feel those are unreasonable questions to ask at this time.

[tommyg]

Matt can paint a pretty picture, he can divert away from what is really being said but ultimately he's just sitting with his head in the sand like many others and not grasping the facts because he's blinded by the spin bandied about by those nice fellows. If people can't see it or refuse to see it then carry on in ignorance, it's that ignorance that these nice fellows are counting on.

I don't think I've read a single fact on this thread. Plenty of opinions which is obviously what the forum is about but there are no facts that Baker and Phillips are solely responsible for our demise. On another thread, I think it was Hector who asked what has Phillips actually done so wrong and nobody answered with any factual evidence. Here's a fact - Colin Lee left this club in a financial mess and ever since then the board have been trying to make up the difference. We overspent the last time we were in the Conference and now it's come back to bite us on the backside.

I'm not suggesting you're wrong. Baker and Phillips could be sucking the blood out of the club. But I have yet to read or hear a fact suggesting this is the case.

[Dave]

Was that really Baker's fault that Buckle accepted a job elsewhere that then distracted him from the job in hand? Was Baker telling people they didn't want promotion? Really?

Sorry Hector, but it was absolutely Baker's fault. Paul Buckle was contracted as the manager of Torquay United FC, Simon Baker was the then chairman of Torquay United FC. When Bristol Rovers approached to speak to Buckle, Baker as chairman had every right to tell Rovers to effectively sod off.

Off course Simon Baker would have been duty bound to tell Buckle of Rovers interest. But as chairman of our football club, he also would have had every right to tell Buckle the club had refused permission, and he (Buckle) is required to fulfil his duty to the club that employs him, but Baker didn't. Did he ? and ask yourself a question why not ? why would Baker allow Buckle to speak to Rovers, he even drove him there prior to our play-off campaign, leaving us in position where our players knew on the Thursday prior to the final Buckle was going, and some even knew they would be transfer targets.

Some unfortunately fail to see the woods from the trees. What do you think would have happened if, say Rovers had just qualified for the play-offs, and, say a championship club approached for their manager, simple answer, they would be told fork right off. When this board took over, I thought the days of old TUFC had gone, the days where our club rolled over like a sick little puppy dog for a piece of silver and a bag footballs were behind us forever, these last few season have sadly proved that theory wrong.

[Southampton Gull]

I don't think I've read a single fact on this thread. Plenty of opinions which is obviously what the forum is about but there are no facts that Baker and Phillips are solely responsible for our demise. On another thread, I think it was Hector who asked what has Phillips actually done so wrong and nobody answered with any factual evidence. Here's a fact - Colin Lee left this club in a financial mess and ever since then the board have been trying to make up the difference. We overspent the last time we were in the Conference and now it's come back to bite us on the backside.

I'm not suggesting you're wrong. Baker and Phillips could be sucking the blood out of the club. But I have yet to read or hear a fact suggesting this is the case.

Sorry mate but there are plenty of facts, you and others just choose to ignore them as I mentioned previously. Hector answers his own questions and I have neither the willpower nor inclination to carry on trying to point out facts which are common knowledge to plenty of people. Colin Lee didn't leave the club in a financial mess, he had a contract and fought for what was his, I've no wish to stick up for him but you've just stated your opinion and tried to pass that off as fact.

[tomogull]

Now I'm the first to admit that I've got a poor memory SG but I have to go along with Hector and TommyG that I haven't seen any facts posted on the Forum, apart from Forever's description of Paul Buckle's move to Bristol Rovers. That I can believe because I was told before the Old Trafford match that Buckle had already agreed to move to Rovers and like many at the time, I could not understand why he had been allowed to speak to Rovers before the Play Off final when he was still under contract at Plainmoor.

The only other fact that I know of is the amateurish and shabby way Martin Ling's dismissal was done. You know more of what goes on behind closed Boardroom doors so for the sake of those with poor memories like myself, tell us again what Simon Baker and Bill Phillips have or have not done. In a previous posting, you said that Baker and Phillips stifled progressive ideas proposed by other Board members. I'm not doubting you're right (now here comes the but !!) .... but how can they override ten or so other members ? I do perceive there is a lack of leadership on the Board, though. I doubt that Thea Bristow really wanted to be thrust into the position of chairperson. It appears that Alex Rowe is taking on more of the spokesman for the Board. Alex was, I think, the driving force behind the consortium that rescued the club from Roberts but if my memory is correct (doubtful !) he suffered heart problems a few years back and didn't want to take on the chairman's role.

[tommyg]

We suffered record losses whilst Colin Lee served as chief executive - almost £1.4m if memory serves me correctly. That was a staggering amount over three years which simply couldn't be sustained. That's why he was placed on gardening leave. He did some very good things for this club such as hiring Paul Buckle and helping to re-establish the youth team but we overspent during that period and as chief executive, Lee has to be held accountable. I'm not saying the rest of the board were blameless. They probably put too much trust in Lee because they didn't know the first thing about running a football club when they took it over.

[hector]

Sorry Hector, but it was absolutely Baker's fault. Paul Buckle was contracted as the manager of Torquay United FC, Simon Baker was the then chairman of Torquay United FC. When Bristol Rovers approached to speak to Buckle, Baker as chairman had every right to tell Rovers to effectively sod off.

Off course Simon Baker would have been duty bound to tell Buckle of Rovers interest. But as chairman of our football club, he also would have had every right to tell Buckle the club had refused permission, and he (Buckle) is required to fulfil his duty to the club that employs him, but Baker didn't. Did he ? and ask yourself a question why not ? why would Baker allow Buckle to speak to Rovers, he even drove him there prior to our play-off campaign, leaving us in position where our players knew on the Thursday prior to the final Buckle was going, and some even knew they would be transfer targets.

Some unfortunately fail to see the woods from the trees. What do you think would have happened if, say Rovers had just qualified for the play-offs, and, say a championship club approached for their manager, simple answer, they would be told fork right off. When this board took over, I thought the days of old TUFC had gone, the days where our club rolled over like a sick little puppy dog for a piece of silver and a bag footballs were behind us forever, these last few season have sadly proved that theory wrong.

Because of course, an ambitious Paul Buckle, would have just said to Baker 'That's Ok, Simon, I'll stay here, I have no interest in furthering my career. Thanks for letting me know!'

You see that reaction all the time when bigger clubs come looking to poach managers. Of course you do!

[Scott Brehaut]

Because of course, an ambitious Paul Buckle, would have just said to Baker 'That's Ok, Simon, I'll stay here, I have no interest in furthering my career. Thanks for letting me know!'

You see that reaction all the time when bigger clubs come looking to poach managers. Of course you do!

True, but how many chairman drive their manager to the club where he is having an interview?!

[Dave]

That's not the point Hector. When a professional person is under a contract of employment, it is up to them to fulfil that contract unless they are released from it, pound to a penny when a contracted manager moves from one top club to another the approached club does not wave a white flag and open the door, the manager may eventually be allowed to leave, but I will guarantee you it's under the terms and conditions and timing of the approached club.

Whether we as fans loved Buckle or hated him, he was one of our most successful managers, we didn't actually put up any fight what so ever. Our club rightly would never stand in any manger or players way in terms of getting a job higher up the league ladder, but if you remember Rovers had just been relegated to a league we were in line for promotion out of, Simon Baker as our clubs chairman, could and should have played hard ball with both Rovers and Buckle, Baker was only to happy to let Buckle speak to Rovers before the play-off's, did he have an altera motive by doing so ? of course he did, only fool would fail to see that, and this case the cap really does fit.

We could have let Buckle speak to Rovers down the line. As Dave (SG) and others have suggested their were some at the club who didn't want promotion, as seen just a year later when Martin Ling was given no backing to add to the squad in January with a thin tiring squad, just a couple of reinforcements would have seen us go to Hereford a celebrate only our second automatic promotion in god knows how many years, it may have only lasted a season, but who cares, one season we would have been sat in higher league than both Plymouth and Exeter, how would than have felt Hector, well we'll never bleedin know now will we. If you think none of this is Baker's fault, I would suggest he's done you up like a kipper.

[Kit_robin]

It has been quoted on here more than once that Phillips came in when we were in the play offs under Ling.
.

Hmm... Pretty sure i remember seeing Phillips come down mid-game vs Hereford to tell Paul Buckle that Jake Robinson hadn't been registered probably, so I'm pretty sure he joined the board the year we made the play off final under buckle.

Since typed above just been to google and indeed found this confirming it: http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Phi ... story.html

[Kernowgull]

He should have said "Paul, we have the Play Offs to win. Get us up and then we'll talk to Rovers, if they want you that much then they'll wait two weeks, and I'll even drive you there if we get promoted"

[hector]

Do you really think that Baker saying to Buckle that he couldn't speak to Rovers (if the opposite is indeed the case) would have stopped someone like Paul Buckle? He had already been linked with Colchester and also with Rovers a few months before. Whether Rovers were in the same division, they were still a bigger club, in the same way Plymouth were when Hodges left a play-off finalist losing team to go there, after they had been relegated to the same division.

Was it seriously part of Baker's anti-promotion grand scheme, that he thought by unsettling the team (that had outplayed Shrewsbury in the semis), by allowing the manager to speak to another club, the ugly prospect of promotion would be averted? Did Buckle play no part in this at all? Was he an innocent pawn, manipulated into applying for a different job, so it would derail the promotion bandwagon we were on?

This incompetent Simon Baker people talk about must be misleadingly cunning if he was able to orchestrate all of that.

So a year later, when Ling's team looked odds on for automatic promotion, was Baker sat at Plainmoor, casting curses and magic spells, like Severus Snape at a Quidditch Match, and that is why the teams form dropped off.

We didn't turn up at Old Trafford and neither did we against Cheltenham. Different managers, different players but somehow, Simon Baker has triumphed again, in his quest to stop us getting promoted, although I guess you could argue that by appointing Alan Knill they really did intend for us not to go up!