Top Money Man can't help The Blues!

, 12 February, 163comments  |  Jump to most recent
Everton fan to become Governor of the Bank of England
Mark Carney, currently governor of the Bank of Canada, is set to become the controller of Britain's vast wealth when he takes up the position of Governor of the Bank of England in July... but that won't be of much help to the club he supports, as Everton continue to suffer a mysterious lack of investment despite the Chairman's now infamous 24/7 search for investment.

Carney will become the head of the Bank of England in July, and revealed on Tuesday he is a supporter of Everton Football Club. He disclosed his allegiance to The Toffees when asked at a Canadian parliamentary committee whether he followed Manchester United or Chelsea.

"I am an Everton supporter ... I have got some cousins in Liverpool," said the governor, a Canadian who played ice hockey at university and who also follows the National Hockey League's Edmonton Oilers.

"It's been more enjoyable being an Edmonton Oilers supporter than it has been being an Everton supporter of late, but since the Oilers are coming back strong this year let's hope the Toffees (do). In fact, Everton's doing okay," he said.

Carney will take over from Mervyn King as Bank of England governor on July 1 this year.

Quotes or other material sourced from Yahoo.com



Reader Comments (163)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


James Morgan
1 Posted 12/02/2013 at 18:29:42
We could use someone with his nous on the board, instead we have to put up with The Muppets!
Doug Hast
2 Posted 12/02/2013 at 18:34:20
If he could just take 0.01% from all those wealthy banks and put it into Everton, we would be okay!
Phil Walling
3 Posted 12/02/2013 at 18:46:52
I once sat next to the present Governor, Professor Mervyn King, at a Lancs CC cricket match. He told me he was a keen Villa supporter but greatly admired the Everton chairman, Bill Kenwright, who, he said, `ran a tight ship!`

No wonder our country`s in such a mess!

James Morgan
4 Posted 12/02/2013 at 19:16:58
Phil, that 'ship' must be the Mary Celeste!
Brendan McLaughlin
5 Posted 12/02/2013 at 19:31:05
"In fact Everton's doing OK"..........just what we need on Toffeeweb....yet another fecking apologist banker!
Peter Thistle
6 Posted 12/02/2013 at 19:35:07
Rob us some money from the Bank Of England please. Nobody will notice.
Nick Armitage
7 Posted 12/02/2013 at 19:40:11
No point robbing from the Bank of England. Gordon Brown and then the Tory sponsored bankers have already emptied it.
Phil McKeown
8 Posted 12/02/2013 at 19:44:43
Mark Carney, use your substantial Christmas bonus to pay Elstone's wages for a year, fucking useless puppet.
Patrick Murphy
9 Posted 12/02/2013 at 20:06:46
Well we were once known as the Bank of England club, so surely some money can be redirected in the general direction of Goodison Park, legitimately of course.

Maybe Bill Kenwright should be on the phone to Mr Carney asap, if he doesn't have contacts with the dosh, then nobody does.

Tony Marsh
10 Posted 12/02/2013 at 20:20:10
Stop moaning about Kenwright, the last time his smarmy grid appeared on the Jumbotron at Goodison Park, he received a rapturous round of applause from the sea lions scattered about the ground.

No matter what this twat Kenwright does or doesn't do he never takes any proper flak. Kings Dock, Kirkby, Phantom bids for players, Gobshite talk about investment — the man spews crap out by the minute yet still gets adulation from the fans.

As for "no-one is buying football clubs these days" — it would be interesting to know how many clubs have changed hands since. I know Forest have and Leeds; also, there's a power struggle at Arsenal and the RedShite have been sold twice in recent years. There are plenty more yet we cannot find any interest at all.

What a great board we have at this club that they cling to it like a tramp with a bottle of Sherry yet have no money to keep it running properly... Jokers the lot of them.

Barry Rathbone
11 Posted 12/02/2013 at 20:26:07
Think of the contacts this fella must have surely worth an invite, ask him up for a game and tap him up.

Put the word out among all his billionaire pals ..... oh hang on, are we really for sale?

Robin Cannon
12 Posted 12/02/2013 at 20:33:14
Everton fan gets job...
Steven Telford
13 Posted 12/02/2013 at 20:56:10
Pity that the interest rate on our debt seems not to be variable.
Gerry Quinn
14 Posted 12/02/2013 at 21:02:32
Our board are a Wunch of Bankers anyway!
Nick Armitage
16 Posted 12/02/2013 at 21:23:57
Tony Marsh - for the first time I totally agree with everything you say. Should I be worried??
Robin Cannon
17 Posted 12/02/2013 at 21:26:20
@Tony (793) - Far as I can tell, Kenwright wants someone to throw a load of cash at us, but still let Bill be "in charge" and the figurehead who gets all the credit. Amazing there aren't more takers!

He's totally overprotected by the press, as well. Look at how journalists like David Conn and others have written in-depth and highly critical pieces of the management and finances of multiple clubs over the past decade. But I've *never* seen an article like that about Everton; it's all about how plucky we are, and how Bill's trying really hard.

Honestly, he must be some amazingly talented self-publicist, or else he's got blackmail material over the editors of every media outlet in the UK.

Actually sometimes leaves me sympathizing with Elstone a little. He's completely hamstrung because he's a Chief Executive with no actual executive power. But Bill, while being totally unwilling to let anyone else run the club, is also totally unwilling to spend the time to run the club himself...

Nick Waters
18 Posted 12/02/2013 at 21:55:22
At the very least Mr Carney should be invited to Goodison to be able to explain to the top luvvie what 'operating costs' are. And while he's there he can offer sound advice about the danger of payday loan companies whilst reminding him that his Bank has interest rates at 0.5%.
Nick Waters
19 Posted 12/02/2013 at 22:03:37
Incidentally weren't we supposed to have another business expert in Terry Leahy use his nous to guide the club in its branding and contract issues, etc etc? Does anyone know if he is still involved or what contribution he has made? Or was this another PR bullshit stunt by Ken-il-Wrong to deceive the masses?
Ian Bennett
20 Posted 12/02/2013 at 22:15:13
The Terry Leahy point reminds me of Clifford Finch. Brought the world DJ Spuddles, instrumental in screwing up the Nigel Martyn signing, and promised us cup holders for our Bovril.

Welcome to Everton 101.

Patrick Murphy
21 Posted 12/02/2013 at 22:16:29
Mr Leahy has become an ambassador for Everton in the Community charity
Patrick Murphy
22 Posted 12/02/2013 at 22:21:35
Oh and he was also campaigning to move to Kirkby and told us to let our heads rule our hearts in an open letter to the fans in August 2007
Eugene Ruane
24 Posted 12/02/2013 at 22:18:34
Tony, you say...

"What a great board we have at this club that they cling to it like a tramp with a bottle of Sherry yet have no money to keep it running properly"

As soon as I read that, I pictured a bladdered blue alky tramp on a bench in Stanley Park mumbling EXACTLY the same mad shite BK says when the cameras are on him.

"Aghhh mate...MATE.... Davie Hickson,.. the cannonball kid....Boys Pen I used to go in... used to go on me uncle's bike... arse hanging out me kecks....Alan Ball..AGGGGYERFUGGINTWATFACEDFUGGIN..."

[Well ok, not that last bit but..]

Yet as you say, they show BK's fat, spoofing, smirking head on a big screen and Pavlov's Blues applaud.

In-fucking-CREDIBLE!

PT Barnum was spot on – 'there's a sucker born every minute'.

Phil Walling
25 Posted 12/02/2013 at 23:43:20
You've got to give the man credit though, BK has totally disproved the adage that "you can't fool all of the people all of the time". Apart from a few on here, he's made a bloody good job of it. Even the country's leading economist swallowed the bullshit.

Worrying, really!

Colin Glassar
26 Posted 13/02/2013 at 00:49:34
Didn't that fella, Keith Harris, who was supposed to find us an investor just buy a club?
Callum Wilson
27 Posted 13/02/2013 at 00:50:55
Strange that they would ask Chelsea or Man Utd and just ignored all the others. Why would they presume it was one of those and not just ask what football club?
David Moore
29 Posted 13/02/2013 at 01:35:04
This Muppet must be a smart lad! Oilers and the Blues! I left for the backwoods of Canada in the dark days if 93! Oilers and the Blues are on the way back! COYB!
Brian Hill
32 Posted 13/02/2013 at 05:25:32
Kenwright supporters bring to mind the expression coined by Karl Marx to describe his own followers: "Useful idiots."
Martin Mason
33 Posted 13/02/2013 at 05:48:24
Isn't it amazing how all of these clever people who understand both football and finance class Everton as a soundly run club? What do the fools know compared to our resident experts?

Brian, Kenwright supporters don't exist, a straw man I'm afraid. There are just a lot of Evertonians (the vast majority) who don't see him in the same light as people like you who spout bile against the man without actually having a reason apart from the fact that he hasn't put his own money into the club to give people like you the reflected success you crave.

Kenwright is a personable and honest man who has been very successful in his field, who was praised to the rafters when he replaced the last kicking boy who didn't bring us success and an Evertonian to boot. He has been guilty only of being over optimistic regarding what we could achieve and telling us what he thought we wanted to hear and in that respect he is only human. He's accused of a lot of skulduggery for which there is not a shred of evidence, by a kangaroo court of a tiny minority of fans that he has no opportunity to defend himself against. A minority that he has correctly blanked out and refuses to communicate with and who have accordingly lost any influence they could possibly have. The cringingly embarrassing suicide note of the car park confrontation anybody?

Can nobody understand that the club went into deep debt and sold assets to try to attain success by buying players? Why is it that this is such a difficult concept to grasp? Why is it difficult to see that directors pumping money into loss making ventures is not a sustainable business model and that the only such model is the one that EFC has adopted, living within its means.

Rather than Marx I like the one that I think Lenin made when he said that if the electorate didn't give the right response then change the electorate. Everton do not need and get absolutely no benefit from the destructive minority of its fans that seek to undermine it rather than support it at such a critical and difficult time in its history, Everton's current situation could be classed as existential if nothing is done under fair play to help clubs like us compete again. FFS support the club and have some positivity, I've always seen Everton fans as being knowledgeable and fair but to wade through this f*cking moaning page after page seems to show that to be false nowadays at least for again a minority of people who frequent this forum. Our matchgoing fans especially our away support are absolutely fantastic of course

James Stewart
35 Posted 13/02/2013 at 07:40:04
@793

Right on the money there. Our board are an utter disgrace in every possible way.

Richard Jones
36 Posted 13/02/2013 at 07:45:20
I can't believe that you can mention the word "honest" and Bill Kenwright in the same sentence Martin, that is utterly delusional Martin even for you're disposition.

ps: I love the way you defend positions you don't hold. Fascinating!!

Thomas Lennon
37 Posted 13/02/2013 at 07:40:58
Another source of interesting, compulsive nonsense: HALF TRUE MORE OR LESS 100% OF THE TIME.
http://betterbadnews.com/

But chatting on a fans forum has to be about something and bad news tends to dominate http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201012/why-we-love-bad-news

Adam Fenlon
38 Posted 13/02/2013 at 09:24:57
On a non-football note – I'm amazed that this isn't a job where an Englishman wouldn't be preferred. Or at the very least someone who has worked at the top levels of the English economy.

Is this bloke the Sven Goran Erikkson of bankers?

Alan Williams
39 Posted 13/02/2013 at 09:29:38
Tony (793) we didn’t clap BK we chose to make a statement against the Blue Union, not that we don’t have the clubs interests at heart but about the way the opposition was made against the club, it was designed more like an Industrial dispute than a fans protest. The Blue Union and others have valid questions to ask but went about it the wrong way and divided the fan base accordingly.

I sometimes question some fans' reality on this site and you mention clubs being sold like Leeds and Forest — can you not understand that Everton's plight isn’t on the same level as these clubs and the RS takeover was a frustrated sale to avoid liquidation... come on, get in the real world.

Martin (864) is right in many ways with his post as BK's biggest failure is his naivety in wanting EFC to succeed, he is making stupid short term business deals to solve a long term problems and in time it will catch him out but it's obvious why he is doing it, to advance the dream of EFC on the pitch.

EFC to date haven’t had one public buyer come out and frustrate the status quo, which tells me there isn’t a queue of people serious about the cub. Until we find the correct buyer, we are better off as it stands at present — believe me, it can get far worse than our current situation. I know two bidders who went close to due diligence with EFC and thankfully they moved on to other clubs and subsequently made a hack of them.

BK isn’t the problem, he is just part of it and hitting out at him personally achieves nothing. We all want new owners — including BK — but it has to be the correct ones otherwise you will drive him out to any buyer which is far worse than what we have.

The Blue Union needed to be far more inclusive in their disagreements about the board and respect who actually owns it in business terms but I guess they have burnt their bridges now and the in-fighting in their own camp has left their cause spent.

BK if he so decides could sell his shares and run just like the Moore’s did for the RS; don’t be fooled otherwise. The difference is we don’t have a businessmen wanting to bail us out as Brand EFC isn’t worth much globally; to us, it is everything but, in the business world, we are just another club.

Richard Jones
40 Posted 13/02/2013 at 10:05:44
One of the most naive posts I've ever read, Alan. Bless you, I think you are typical of the happy clappers!! You really have swallowed the club line, "Hook line and Sinker!!
Noel Early
41 Posted 13/02/2013 at 10:00:18
Nothing is going to change at Everton, the status quo will continue as long as we keep our place in Premier League, the "we have no money" line and "punching above our weight" are wearing thin with me.

The fact is we are a poorly run club regards merchandising and many other aspects that we all know about. We have been lied to as regards ground moves and finances, we don't have AGMs as Kenwright is afraid to be questioned.

One piece of praise I'll throw his way is that we has the press eating out of his hands, none of them dare question finances or ask him the hard questions. The 24/7 search will prove fruitless – who in their right mind wants a club where they have debt and the person responsible for that wants to remain the figurehead?Our ground is – for want of a better word – a dump, attendances are down and Kitbag take all the money from shirt sales.

The people that support this chairman need a good shake-out; it wont change and there is nothing we can do about it.

Kev Johnson
42 Posted 13/02/2013 at 10:24:58
Talking of money men, isn't Bill Gates a massive Everton fan?

I can just see us with an apple logo on the front of our shirts....

Martin Mason
43 Posted 13/02/2013 at 10:12:10
Richard, and yours is probably the most stupid. As soon as you use terms like "happy clappers" and "swallowed the club's line" then you have lost the argument or, most likely, you've demonstrated that you don't have the intelligence to be in it. Can you not cope with the idea that many don't see the issues at the club in your bitter way?

Andy explained his views to you very clearly, his views are the views of the vast majority of Evertonians who are in the main very sensible and smart enough to see the issues in a far broader and more balanced sense than yourself.

Gavin Ramejkis
44 Posted 13/02/2013 at 11:08:07
Adam 886, the appointment is a brave one for the Bank of England, the previous incumbents have all been very much old school staid chaps well into their 50s from a narrow group. Given the whole of the UK banking system needs a thorough good thrashing and new ideas, this guy still in his 40s without the blinkered and socially programmed ways of his predecessors is hoped to bring new ideas and new ways to what is after all a global financial world. He has achieved worthy praise in his homeland and earned his promotion there.
Eugene Ruane
45 Posted 13/02/2013 at 10:49:21
The following comes from Martin Mason (864).

"Kenwright is a personable and honest man who has been very successful in his field, who was praised to the rafters when he replaced the last kicking boy who didn't bring us success and an Evertonian to boot. He has been guilty only of being over optimistic regarding what we could achieve and telling us what he thought we wanted to hear and in that respect he is only human. He's accused of a lot of skulduggery for which there is not a shred of evidence".

Now let me go through that...Honest...Not a shred of evidence for skulduggery....Yeah that all seems about right.

Phil Walling
46 Posted 13/02/2013 at 11:53:49
Gavin,your description of the new Governor sounds like the perfect profile for a new man at the helm at Everton.Wonder if he`ll have any spare time?
Dominic Bobadilla
47 Posted 13/02/2013 at 11:36:42
Bill Kenwright heads UK's largest theatre and film production company. He should think of creative ways to earn money on Everton's behalf. Why not produce a few movies and plays about Everton in the hope that one or two might turn out to be blockbusters?

A few ideas:

(i) A movie about Blues' Union rebellion called "The Grudge".
(ii) "The Manchurian Candidate" about the reign of Mike Walker.
(iv) "The Comedy of Errors" - a farcical play about Everton's transfer policies.

Gavin Ramejkis
48 Posted 13/02/2013 at 12:13:49
You should put Kenwright's business success in context, it was lauded when he made £1.5m for the year, boys and girls he pays David Moyes, one single employee at Everton more than double that a year. BKs ticket touting spiv day job is a completely different business model and significantly smaller than running a football club
Martin Mason
49 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:00:17
Eugene, your getting it. There's hope for you yet mate.
Eugene Ruane
50 Posted 13/02/2013 at 12:49:10
Dominic (920) - This movies idea, I like it.

How about a Dumb & Dumber-style comedy about two hapless dupe Evertonians who encounter BK (played by Terry Thomas)

The story could be that no matter how glaring and obvious the con-man is and no matter how many times he fucks them, they can't see it and think he's wonderful.

Now....what to call them?

Eugene Ruane
51 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:04:47
Martin 'your' apparently never getting 'you're'.

Dolt!

Brian Waring
52 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:12:56
Martin (#864) could you let me know how you came to your 'Vast majority' conclusion? Have you carried out some kind of poll? Or is it that a few people agree with you and thats enough in your eyes to be the vast majority?
Ste Traverse
53 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:12:38
So the utterly delusional Martin Mason claims Kenwright is an 'honest man'.

So the claims made by Kenwright in this video from 2007 when he said we must leave Goodison ASAP as it will "soon lose it's safety certificate" are the views of an 'honest man'?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7HQFLkxr2g

The man has been nothing but a despicable, self-serving liar for the last 13 years.

Ben Dyke
54 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:17:33
Why is there so much bile towards those of us see Bill as unable to deliver what he/we wants as opposed to unwilling/maliciously choosing not to deliver what we want?

I know forums are a good place to rant when we feel powerless to effect real change but come on how does shooting fellow Blues with different opinions help any cause.

I am pretty intelligent and I do not subscribe to conspiracy theories about some of the ways people perceive Bill to have let us down. The bottom line is he's just not rich enough to deliver the success we want and all the issues stem from that.

I personally would like to see new investment and perhaps even a new manager soon but if it doesn't happen I won't rant at fellow blues who disagree. In the meantime I am grateful for Bill steadying the sinking ship by the skin of his not wealthy enough teeth, and grateful for some raised expectations, good memories and much better football under David Moyes.

I hope for better but have to accept we are a poor relation nowadays and I think it is a combination of factors as to why we were left behind in the Sky era, but mainly as a result of historical issues that only a billionaire can overcome.

Richard Jones
55 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:28:38
Ste Martin has the ability to ignore the truth and facts and is able to convince himself that black is white, its extraordinary also I still see is defending ground he doesn't hold!!
Patrick Murphy
56 Posted 13/02/2013 at 14:10:48
Jim Carey could play Bill Kenwright after all he did ok with the Fletcher Reade character in Liar Liar.
Steavey Buckley
57 Posted 13/02/2013 at 14:10:33
It is very hard to understand why Everton are not an attractive proposition to buy or sponsor when everyone is saying that the EPL is the best league in the world.
Kevin Tully
58 Posted 13/02/2013 at 13:59:56
Ben #943, to be quite honest, your post summed up the way I used to think about Kenwright, and the club in general, about 5 years ago.

I thought he was demonised because he basically had no money, but he was fan, and had the club's best interests at heart.

Then I read some pieces on here, by the likes of Tom Hughes, Colin Fitzpatrick and a few others. I also go to the game with a few well connected blues, who have told me some horror stories, none of which I would ever put into print, as some of these lads are ex-players, who still work for the club.

Read all the evidence Ben, and make your own mind up as I did.

If you still think this board ( it's not all about B.K. ) have the best interests of the club at heart, and that we could do no better in terms of ownership, that is your choice - but I would be amazed if any sensible supporter could not see; a) what the motives are behind the current ownership and ; b) That the Chairman is completely out of his depth, both in a financial sense, and as a businessman.

You will probably find the club is actually not being run by Kenwright at all, and that is where all our problems start.

Patrick Murphy
59 Posted 13/02/2013 at 14:14:00
Steavey, I just think it is a matter of profile. All our success apart from 1995 FA Cup came before the big-bang of global audiences. All the past glories may as well have happened in 1785.
Don't forget that these global clubs have a vested interest in keeping themselves high-profile and they don't want competition, as the response to Chelsea and Man City proves.
We have become Merseyside's version of Torino in relation to Juventus, there is very little we can do about that, unless by some miracle we were to win the PL and that ain't gonna happen if the foreseeable.

That being the case we are going to have to adopt a new business model, probably with the emphasis on youth and although it will be painful another assault on the wage structure, meaning we will have to endure lower placings in the league and even more patience in the future.

BK staked the future of the club on Kirkby and he lost, so we are where we are until something akin to a miracle occurs.


That is why it has been so frustrating this season, with all the main rivals for CL in transition, we had a golden opportunity and it looks like we have failed to take it.

Patrick Murphy
60 Posted 13/02/2013 at 14:27:06
Kevin if you are right about the club being run by someone other than BK, then the special relationship between BK and DM doesn't count for much does it? I am beginning to think that the FA should begin asking questions about the way the club is run and how it accounts to its shareholders.

I have always believed since day one of BK acquiring the club that he was a patsy for A.N. Other but who that mystery person or family is, is anyone's guess.

Philip Quilliam
61 Posted 13/02/2013 at 14:31:27
Brian #940. I am sure Mr Mason does not need my support but this website is full of people who don't like BK complaining that whenever his face is shown on the big screen "it is greeted rapturous applause from the crowd " from supporters who have had the wool pulled over their eyes. If this is correct then it would suggest that he is supported by a majority if it isn't correct then why has it been included it in various threads?
Just saying, that's all.......................
Colin Wainwright
62 Posted 13/02/2013 at 16:34:36
It's only happened once, Phillip.
Patrick Murphy
63 Posted 13/02/2013 at 17:00:54
I know it's slightly off topic, but it does make you wonder, sometimes.

Patrick Murphy
64 Posted 13/02/2013 at 17:02:26
Sorry about that here's the link again:
http://www.mail.com/int/sports/soccer/1888720-turkish-trial-soccer-corruption-top.html#.1258-stage-subhero1-1
Steavey Buckley
65 Posted 13/02/2013 at 17:17:53
"Steavey, I just think it is a matter of profile." Man City's profile before taken over by sheikhs with loads of money was pretty low. Before being taken over, no league title in 40 years or any other notable silverware and always on the verge of relegation then promotion back to the Premier League. Everton really need someone to scour the world where someone else could be found who wants to combine their business empire with a football club like Everton on Merseyside.
Ben Dyke
66 Posted 13/02/2013 at 17:26:06
Thanks Kevin for a sensible reply. I am worried about behind the scenes at the club, it's just it isn't all Bill Kenwright's fault in my opinion. He's part of a bigger problem and I cant say I've ever felt comfortable with Everton in the Sky era.

Enlighten me some more. I do read all the stuff on here and KEIOC etc and Blue Union stuff. Are you saying there is someone in the background who is waiting for a big pay out after helping Bill out, hence the intransigence about any sale?

What do you mean about stuff insiders have said? Are you pointing to some general incompetence? I know a bit about Elstone from my days working at The Rugby Football League. He was a decent sports administrator, with commercial awareness at the appropriate level. He's no big time man with huge commercial clout but he fits with Everton's commercial standing and I can't imagine him being blind to some super conspiracy as he was a decent human being.

John Keating
67 Posted 13/02/2013 at 21:58:26
Bill Kenwright - an honest man.
Unbelievable, absolutely unbelievable !!
Andy Crooks
68 Posted 13/02/2013 at 22:21:04
Martin Mason is to be admired. I have, from time to time, put up a few asinine posts. There is some comfort to be taken from the fact that no matter how asinine there is a fair chance that Martin,, if you are in a tiny minority, will defend you.

He is the patron saint of lost causes and cretinous comments. Martin, sometimes the majority are right.

Ken Morgan
69 Posted 14/02/2013 at 01:43:07
I'm sure Mr. Moye's is a nice enough chap, but would a fresh, positive manager give the club a better chance of finding a buyer?
Ken Morgan
70 Posted 14/02/2013 at 01:45:29
Sorry, Moyes that should be. I'm from Greenland, so my spelling isn't too good.
Martin Mason
71 Posted 14/02/2013 at 02:46:03
Andy, have you lost the plot mate? I am part of the silent majority. I believe my post was in error btw, it should have said "Alan" not Andy I think?

I live and work with lots of rational normal Evertonians and I go to as many games as I can and have been watching Everton for many decades. I have yet to meet one Evertonian who has the same view as some of the headbangers on here especially the conspiracy theorists. Believe me the headbangers aren't numerous enough to qualify as a minority never mind have any significance.

One thing that is a common thread amongst them is that they don't understand the issues and they have no solutions except Kenwright and Moyes out they are also shrill and intolerant of the valid views of others. They are the laughing stock not only of the Everton fraternity but of the football world.

The board and Management team has without any doubt run the club well in recent years, we have a good group of players and we continuously exceed the expectations of those who actually understand football. Where they have let the club down, if it is possible to say that, is that they have not attracted inward money to the club or managed to sell the club. My opinion on this though is that we are asking the impossible in either case. Everton are not an investment and patently not a buy. We are a basket case of a business. The current board want to sell at a decent profit and there's nothing wrong with that but they can't and won't. They are absolutely up shit creek without a paddle and all they can do is tread water keeping the club afloat which is where we are at now.


Richard Jones
72 Posted 14/02/2013 at 08:26:17
Martin Mason accusing other Evertonians of being a laughing stock, my god Martin you are as deluded as the man you follow, your arrogance is astonishing I marched down Goodison Road and remember at least 3000 of us on the day the sealions responded to their leader!! here a link for you Martin just in case it was one of the numerous games you didnt go to. http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/liverpoolecho/nov2011/9/0/blue-union-everton-fc-protest-march-image-2-84142013.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/everton-fc/everton-fc-news/2011/11/19/the-blue-union-hold-second-everton-fc-protest-march-to-goodison-park-100252-29806174/&h=300&w=620&sz=72&tbnid=uBg-7n1lDOb2dM:&tbnh=59&tbnw=122&zoom=1&usg=__TKtaWxbmZ2nR4-dgOEC6aItdQ9k=&docid=sr0X-_z0sGLo0M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9qAcUd2fBMaX0QXZ84C4Cg&ved=0CEkQ9QEwAw&dur=73
Dave Lynch
73 Posted 14/02/2013 at 09:06:41
"The board and management team has without any doubt run the club well in recent years."

Followed by.

"We are a basket case of a buisness."

"They are absolutely up shit creek without a paddle."

Run that by me again ????????????

Kevin Tully
74 Posted 14/02/2013 at 09:11:29
You guys need to some training in WUM spotting.
Phil Walling
75 Posted 14/02/2013 at 10:49:37
Been trying to fathom out whether Martin Mason is a pseudenim for Elstone or Mervyn King.They both have economics degrees so can`t be wrong,surely?
Christine Foster
76 Posted 14/02/2013 at 10:59:01
Martin, hard to know where to start, so I won't bother. Some of us do get the situation the club is in, what the motives are of a chairman and a board and always have been, understand what a lie is, I for one am still searching for the missing £52 million reasons to believe him. Naive? No; calculating? Yes.
In search of a big pay day?

Let me ask you this then Martin. Straight question:

The chairman has said the club is for sale, the club is looking for investment. (It doesn't matter which you believe because neither is correct.) Whose shares are for sale, Martin? Not one board member has admitted to being willing to sell any shares, so what's for sale? We have hocked even the pies.

Our shadow fraternity Earl and Green (the old men from the muppets) are pulling the chairman's strings; being an Evertonian doesn't qualify you to be a chairman.

The board of Everton FC have failed in their duty of care to ALL the shareholders in the club. They are charged by LAW with ensuring the future funding of the business IN PREFERENCE to their own interests, they have failed to do this over a period of years that has led to them selling all assets and future revenues of the club.

They cancelled AGMs in their own interest. Not in the interests of the other shareholders; they have ignored repeated please from the Shareholders Association to reinstate them; they haven't, again in their own interests.

The sale of the club, when it does come, will be in their own interests, not the club's. If any one doubts that, they should look to the findings of the enquiry into Kirkby which stated that as a finding.

Some of us aren't as naive as others, if there are headbangers (sic) at one end of the spectrum, there are fools at the other. Not one shred of evidence, Martin?

Love to debate the point in person with Bill, I wouldn't need to take notes because it would be a very short conversation.

Martin Mason
77 Posted 14/02/2013 at 11:29:25
Before we go any further remember that anything that personalises the issue doesn't warrant a response. OK?
Nick Waters
78 Posted 14/02/2013 at 11:27:48
Martin Mason says he is one of the 'SILENT' majority. I wonder if he kept a straight face as he typed that in?
Actually credit to you Martin; there's no statement you won't make to provoke a reaction in a debate, (as I have just demonstrated) or to remain the centre of it.
Martin Mason
79 Posted 14/02/2013 at 11:30:58
Christine you need to be specific regarding the first paragraph, I can’t decipher hand waving.

Regarding the second paragraph, please provide some kind of back up for what you say. The Kirkby enquiry determined that the club had been for sale for years. Therefore the club is for sale unless you can show that not to be the case. And what if it isn't for sale?

The fourth paragraph isn’t deserving of a reply.

Your fifth paragraph is absolute rubbish and again doesn’t warrant a response. As I have said many times, if you can show any breaking of Company law then I’ll finance you to prosecute the board as long as you repay me when you lose. Go for it.

They cancelled the AGMs because idiotic shareholders had set up proxies to disturb the meetings for their own agendas. If you or I had been subjected to that then we’d do the same. Again show evidence of malpractice or that goes into the rubbish bin with the rest.

Re para 7. I have read the Kirkby report several times and don’t believe that what you say is correct. Please tell me the paragraph that says this. Of course the sale will be in their interests, absolutely correct in a business sense. EFC is a business not a registered charity.

Re para 8, I have asked for evidence of malpractice by the board on many occasions and been given not a shred – only idiotic conspiracy theory. Either back up what you say or we go back to the null hypothesis which is that they are not guilty of any malpractice.

What are you going to debate with Bill Christine? People like you have lost all right to debate anything with the board. I would defeat you easily in any face-to-face debate on these issues, BK and his mob would eat you and spit you out.

Facts or good logic please and no hand waving.

John Keating
80 Posted 14/02/2013 at 11:58:54
Now Martin has started the "show me" "prove to me" argument it's best to end the thread now.
He's been shown numerous times in the past, articles etc where Bill has been shown to lie but still won't accept it.
I note he hasn't replied to Dave @ 179. Probably won't.
It wasn't a bad thread until Martin hijacked it.
Andrew Ellams
81 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:08:13
At least we can point to the Governor of the Bank of England next time a bunch of deluded, stuck in the eighties bunch of morons sing the 'Sign On' song
James Martin
82 Posted 14/02/2013 at 11:51:13
Whatever your opinion of the board, BK, or whatever, some of the arguments on here are ridiculous. I am ambivalent towards this current board, they cocked up Kings Dock but I don't think that they've actively dissuaded appropriate buyers either. You can't just make unsupported claims, however, that they made phantom bids for players. There is no proof of this anywhere, and until some comes out it must be considered absolutely untrue. Do you really think Moyes, a man of his integrity, would still be standing by BK if he'd made a fake bid for Fer? Absolutely ridiculous notion.

Equally ridiculous is this branding of Everton fans as seals or pavlov's dogs. These people paid good money to be at that game and judging by some of the comments on here are as equally in the dark about the movings of the board as most of you are. If they want to clap they're equally as entitled to as those who march with the BU. There's a difference in opinion there but it doesn't make one side some sort of intellectual elite and the other side an animalistic mob incapable of an independent thought when BKs face flashed up. That just shows a ridiculous lack of respect for a large swathe of match going Evertonians.

Christine you have accused Martin of not having one shred of evidence yet have based an entire argument purely around your own opinion and your own interpretation of the cancellation of the AGMs. Just because the club hasn't been sold is not proof that its not up for sale, you have no proof that Earl and Green run anything in this club (surface appearances would seem to suggest they don't really do anything but I seemingly like you couldn't possibly know). To accuse Everton of breaking company law without any evidence is also a rather bewildering claim.

Lastly Martin is articulating what he believes to be his version of events. None of us have any concrete eveidence or knowledge of what is going on behind the scenes. With this in mind why do some people find the need to personally attack him as some sort of lunatic? An incapability to respond to Martin without personally belittling him only strenghtens his claim that some people have no idea what they're talking about. Sadly none of us do but its a sad day when different views aren't allowed to be expressed without fear of personal ridicule. I've seen some of the most outrageous, completely fabricated, biased, tripe posted on this site and been applauded to the rafters.....Pavlov's dogs indeed.

Christine Foster
83 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:00:47
Martin, interesting reply, "if people like me" have lost the right to debate anything with the board, then who are they answerable to? No one?

With respect to my comments regarding the duties of a Director, go to UK company law and see for yourself. That a duty to put the interests of the business ahead of personal interest. They are charged with ensuring the finance of a business for the long and short term viability, in your own comments you have stated that they have failed to do so.

Self interest? In the Kirkby inquiry, Elstone was asked who would be selling their shares to which he replied not one member of the board, which blew the 24/7 scenario to bits didn;t it? so I ask you again Martin, WHAT is for sale if no one wants to sell? Kenwright has already stated that he wants to stay on, so he isn't... any other takers? Whose share are for sale?

So you see that the shareholders association are a pack of idiots too? Yes they used a law that was meant to relieve the administration to SME's not £100m companies, but they could and did take advantage of it. But the reason they did so was to prevent having to listen to awkward questions about Kirkby, long dead, so why do they ignore The Shareholders Association?

Dialogue is two way communication, Directors are answerable to shareholders, irrespective if it makes them uncomfortable.

Tell you what Martin.. I will be over in the UK in a few months time, I will sit down face to face with you and take your argument apart, piece by piece.

I have resisted the temptation to be as derogatory and personally insulting as you have been, but then its the sign of a poor argument when you attack the debater isn't it?

John Keating
84 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:20:51
James, you're right everyone is entitled to their opinion. Unfortunately the reason Martin gets stick on here is due to his total refusal to accept anything bad said about Bill and the board.

The facts that came out of the Kirkby enquiry weren't opinions or interpretations, they were facts – actual facts. Had we been given the full facts before the DK bid, I doubt any shareholder would have supported the Board.

Regarding the cancellation of the AGMs, it is a fact that Bill was pissed off with awkward questions put to him and one of the reasons it was cancelled. Not opinion, fact.

There are many documented facts regarding the Board that Martin will not accept and that is a reason threads degenerate to personalities. Honestly, I think by now most of us could write Martin's replies before he could!

Christine Foster
85 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:19:16
James allow me to respond to your comments:
"Not one shred of evidence?" was in response to Martins statement of the same I responded to rather than accuse him of not giving any, I was actually refering to evidence given to the inquiry by Elstone to be precise.

Refering to the AGM please read Elstonce responses recently when asked about the reinstatement of the AGMs in which he blames others for trying to hijack the debate and asking questions that directors would not answer. Therefore it follows,it was NOT done because the change in law, but because shareholders demanded answers which made the directors uncomfortable.

Nowhere have I accused Everton of breaking company law. I have stated the duties of a Director, not the club responsibilties under company law. That clearly requires directors in any business to put the interests of the business ahead of personal gain. In whose interests is it to sell the shares in the club which has few assets, lose making and a poor stadium for an oft quoted price of 100 / 200+ million. Not one penny of which would find its way into the coffers of the club.

Lastly, Martin winded up with a personal attack, I didn't denegrate him personally like many have done but it didn't stop his response. I did not personally belittle him, or anyone else for that matter.. I don't have to.

James Martin
86 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:45:41
They are charged by LAW with ensuring the future funding of the business IN PREFERENCE to their own interests, they have failed to do this over a period of years that has led to them selling all assetts and future revenues of the club.

Im sorry Christine but this implies that you think they broke the law. They were charged by the law to do something, you assert they didn't, they therefore broke the law. It is obviously far more complex than this but that is a danger both sides of this arguemnt get into (not that I am on either yours or Martin's side).

Earl and Green? Directors selling the club for their own interests not for the clubs (putting aside the business vs charity argument for one second). This often quoted asking price, quoted where? (I don't doubt your claim it exists, I'd just like to see for myself this often mentioned quote).

To be honest Christine most of my complaint about personal attacks wasn't directed at you as you do argue well, unlike a lot on this thread.

Martin Mason
87 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:47:20
Answer Dave's question@179? there isn't a question to answer for anybody who understands our mother tongue. The two events are mutually exclusive.

Christine, there is no personal attack in my post.

I will respond to all of you in due course or would you prefer that I don't "hijack" the thread with a bit of sense? Come on guys.

Martin Mason
88 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:00:54
Christine first@222.

The AGM issue is dead, EFC decided to stop holding them as they are entitled to do. You may not like it but that’s tough. It was Bill’s call and it’s his train set.

Absolutely incorrect on the Directors' duties and I’ll send you the text of the relevant section if you’d like. For the rest of this paragraph please stop hand waving and say what you have to say in clear English and I’ll answer it.

As I said, no personalization at all in my post and regarding debate? I only have to say one word and it would be end of case. :-)

Martin Mason
89 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:06:23
John Keating @ 221
I will accept anything from anybody when it is shown to be probably correct. If it isn’t shown to be correct then it isn’t correct. Assuming that opinion is correct is incorrect. Correct?

As I said I have read every word in the Kirkby enquiry several times and if you can show yourself to be correct by reference to paragraph I’ll unconditionally accept your view.

If any fact is documented then you can point me to it. It isn’t a case of me demanding court standard proof of any conspiracy theory, all I ask is some kind of justification. Why is that such a difficult concept. I believe that what I say is correct because - - - - - - . Simples

Christine Foster
90 Posted 14/02/2013 at 12:57:07
James, I think it's worthwhile remembering what ToffeeWeb is, its a forum of news and views where people can give their opinion.

Opinion is a subjective thing, indeed the definition is worth reading!

In general, an opinion is a belief about matters commonly considered to be subjective, i.e., it is based on that which is less than absolutely certain, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts. Opinions rarely change without new arguments being presented. It can be reasoned that one opinion is better supported by the facts than another by analyzing the supporting arguments. In casual use, the term 'opinion' may be the result of a person's perspective, understanding, particular feelings, beliefs, and desires. It may refer to unsubstantiated information, in contrast to knowledge and fact-based beliefs.
So, that is what we do; it's subjective based on interpretation of facts. Anyone can have a view based on their level of knowledge or understanding.

Because there is NO divulged and complete set of facts, it means a jigsaw of comment and fact are combined to give a view of status and most likely facts.

Pretty obvious, but unfortunately many do not gather to make an opinion on good ground and attack the poster rather than the argument. It's always easy to say "prove it"; despite many glaring facts and comments, proving 1 + 1 = 2 is still subjective.

This works on both sides of the argument, it's not a response to ask a poster to prove an opinion, the response is to give your own and not shoot the poster.

When there are a number of facts that suggest issues are present, you don't have to have the Wisdom of Solomon to make an assessment or an opinion. That's what we all do, some better than others but we should defend our right to have an opinion. (Unless of course it requires an AGM...)

My apologies if this seems a little off topic but I think its worthwhile to state the obvious now and again.

Patrick Murphy
92 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:13:17
If Everton FC have no assets apart from the value of the squad, is that enough collateral for the banks?
Would the banks be able to hold the shares of the company as collateral?
Could this be a reason for the club to be so hamstrung when it comes to adding to the playing staff?
More importantly would the bank holding the shares - if this was possible - be a barrier to the board selling the club?

John Keating
93 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:17:01
Martin, in the past you have been quoted chapter and verse on the boards lies and misrepresentations. From the money will be in the Bank tomorrow to a state of the art stadium with Tesco putting up 50+ mill, to the money is ringfenced.
The list is endless.
You believe what you choose to believe regardless.
I am not going to waste my time yet again going over this.
It's a pointless discussion.
Ste Traverse
94 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:14:49
I notice this beaut Mason has give a wide berth to my post #941 when what he refers to an 'honest man' in Kenwright blatantly telling lies live on TV regarding Goodison losing it's safety certificate 'soon' way back in 2007.


Here it is again Mason, BK this so-called 'honest man'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7HQFLkxr2g

Brian Waring
95 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:34:41
Philip (#960)

Philip, a few thousand out of a crowd of 34 /35,000 doesn't add up to the 'vast majority.'

Trevor Lynes
96 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:18:50
Personally as a fan my interests lie with the football side of the club.
What I see on the pitch is what I pay my money for.
I don't know or fully understand all the legalities of running the club so I cannot comment on those issues.

However, I just notice things that go on compared to other clubs and my frustrations and questions that occur to me I put into print on this site.

My questions are Why do we always wait before we move in the transfer market until the last couple od days ?
Why are we not loaning players IN at the moment when its obvious that our first eleven need decent cover.
If we had the money to fund the loaning IN of Ofoe, and missed him because the paperwork was not completed in time, why are we not loaning him IN now ?
If we had over 8 million in our transfer budget and had earmarked FER as a good buy, why did we not move for him earlier in the window so that we would have time to bid for an alternative player ?

For myself as a paying fan for donkeys years, these questions are far more impoprtant to me than a discussion on the clubs business.

I just think like a man who has dabbled in business in the past, part of which was having a budget to be able to buy stock for selling at a profit.
Surely the players are the club assets/stock and replenishment is required from time to time.

I pay to watch football and hope that my club EVERTON are succesful.
This seasons start was the best for years and up to now only the Manchester clubs have lost less games in the premiership.
For the first time for years I was being entertained and it seemed we were on the verge of building a decent squad.
The transfer window seemed an opportune time to cash in on our great start by strengthening the squad.
I watched in frustration as almost every club did some thing to bolster their squads, but we did NOTHING !

I just feel badly let down by this dismal board of misdirectors and my interest at the moment is on the wane.. quite .similar to the clubs champion league prospects.
These are questions I would like answered.

Martin Mason
97 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:37:27
Steve

Can you not understand the very simple concept of somebody saying something that he believed to be true at one time, something that he may have been advised to be true, and then finding out that it wasn't correct or that they'd otherwise found a solution to the problem? Do people in PR and political positions tell the absolute truth at all times?

Seriously, if this is all you have against BK then you should give up mate

Phil Bellis
98 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:41:01
All sensible questions, Trevor, and ones I have heard countless Blues ask before and since the January transfer window quietly and gently closed.

I will put them to the Board of Directors of the Everton Football Club Limited at the next AGM.

Oh... hang about.

Christine Foster
99 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:52:26
Martin, sorry that doesn't wash at all. If a chairman of a public company made, and keeps on making incorrect or unsubstantiated comments he would be tossed out of office, the share price would tumble and shareholders would be after his head.
Its one thing to make an honest mistake. If you keep doing it, it borders on incompetance.
Christine Foster
100 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:55:08

Martin, not sure what happened to theis post but this is taken from the Gov website on Company Law Basics:

Part 1: Directors' responsibilities

As a director of a limited company, the law says you must:
try to make the company a success, using your skills, experience and judgment

follow the company’s rules, shown in its articles of association
make decisions for the benefit of the company, not yourself

tell other shareholders if you might personally benefit from a transaction the company makes

keep company records and report changes to Companies House and HM Revenue & Customs

make sure the company’s accounts are a ‘true and fair view’ of the business’ finances

register for Self Assessment and send a personal Self Assessment tax return every year

I did also have 3 interpetations for Duty of care given by Law lords, but seems they were lost in the ether.. Besides if my memory is correct I have given you all this before. If memory serves me correct its clause 172 of the act but I may be mistaken and its midnight!! Bedtime...

Christine Foster
101 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:59:56
Brian, Thats funny, I didn't see 35000 marching to get rid of the owners of the RS, by your definition all the fans were happy with them ?
Phil Bellis
102 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:58:34
Martin - wonderful and cleverly cute entertainment
"When our advertising stated `our burgers are made from 100% Aberdeen Angus beef with added seasoning' we, albeit without empircal data, were stating what we believed to be true at the time of the statement"
Dennis Shaw
103 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:44:32
Martin Mason - Instead of quoting the law and loop holes in relation to AGM's etc can I ask you to answer -
1/ Why are you defending Kenwright, is he a personal friend?
2/ What are your views on the Kings Dock fiasco and who was to blame?
3/ What are your views on the Kirkby fiasco and who was to blame?
4/ What would attract an investor if no shares are up for sale and all our assests have been sold to knock the tip off our mountain of debts?
I would rather he did just sell to anyone because then at least the buyer would be accountable and have a sound business plan.

At the moment there is no openness and no honesty we cannot believe a word that is said by the Board and yet some still defend them. Cast your mind back 2 weeks did you ever believe that we were spending 8m on a midfielder without selling..........no neither did we but we at least campaigned for change.

Eric Myles
104 Posted 14/02/2013 at 13:18:34
John #217, MMs other favourite ploys are to be insulting and then to claim HE is suffering personal attacks.

Yet another is to play the "Kirby inquiry stated that the Club is for sale so it must be true" card but when asked who was it who testified under oath that the Club is NOT for sale and why did the inquiry conclude that person was lying and the reason why, he refuses to anwer.

Brian Waring
105 Posted 14/02/2013 at 14:07:11
Christine, I was trying to figure out how Martin (#864) came to his conclusion of "there are just a lot of Evertonians the (VAST MAJORITY) who don't see BK in the same light as you who spout bile." He seems to say the vast majority back Bk, that's something I disagree with.

Also, as I say, a few thousand clapping BK out of 34/35,000 in the stadium doesn't prove that the vast majority support BK. That was in response to Philip (#960).

Philip Quilliam
106 Posted 14/02/2013 at 14:15:54
As a simple supporter with no experience of company law, accounting, debating etiquette or semantics can I just say that this thread is highly entertaining although it is getting more esoteric as it goes on?
Colin Wainwright
107 Posted 14/02/2013 at 14:26:21
Martin @243.
"Can you not understand the very simple concept of somebody saying something that he believed to be true at one time, something that he may have been advised to be true, and then finding out that it wasn't correct or that they'd otherwise found a solution to the problem? Do people in PR and political positions tell the absolute truth at all times?"

Which is it Martin? Was he misled/mis-informed before blurting this falsehood on live TV? Or was he, like the PR people and politicians you mention, deliberately lying?

Either way, along with many other debacles from the man, it points to a Chairman who is incompetent and severely out of his depth.

Christine Foster
108 Posted 14/02/2013 at 14:47:29
Sorry Brian, past my bedtime.. It's Valentines day and I am lying in bed with just my bloody iPad! Arrgghhhh
John Keating
109 Posted 14/02/2013 at 14:38:00
The McDonalds at Aintree said their burgers were 100% beef. As I passed the racecourse going into town the grandsons burger jumped over Beachers Brook.
McDonalds weren't lying cos when they told me it was 100% beef and asked me if I wanted a fiver each way on it rather than ketchup I said yes.
Martin sometimes you cannot defend the obvious, sometimes you just have to admit someone is telling lies.
Dave Lynch
110 Posted 14/02/2013 at 14:50:30
Happy Valentines Day Christine.
Phil Bellis
111 Posted 14/02/2013 at 15:37:25
Philip(258)
It's grand fun when Martin has little work on and graces us with his presence. I find Martin's contributions the literary equivalent of an out-of-body experience. He's brilliant; could cause a nark in a chapel of rest.
Brian Hill
112 Posted 14/02/2013 at 15:57:23
So, if Kenwright was misled/misinformed over the safety certificate, why has he not publicly put the record straight? The original false statement made by him is a matter of public record. Over to you, Mr Mason..........
Steve Brown
113 Posted 14/02/2013 at 16:03:48
Another masterclass from King wind-up merchant Martin Mason. He only has to tug the chains and the dogs bark...
Martin Mason
114 Posted 14/02/2013 at 16:14:30
Fantastic responses you beautiful people. You're definitely determined to keep me honest! I'm in Kazakhstan at the moment though and just got home via the local hostelry and ready for bed, hope you don't mind if I pick the thread again tomorrow? Seriously, I respect your views and enjoy discussing them.
Dennis Shaw
115 Posted 14/02/2013 at 16:35:12
Aha now we know Martin has been drinking... Phew! I actually thought for one minute they were his actual views.
Phil Bellis
116 Posted 14/02/2013 at 16:57:31
Still not a lot to do in Kazakhstan, then, Martin?
David Heaton
117 Posted 14/02/2013 at 20:21:30
I totally agree with Martin and funnily enough I think I can speak for all of my mates. The facts seem to point that Everton is a very well run club and is the envy of most of the other Premier League clubs. Most of them would be keen to adopt the same business model.

Why Bill gets so much hatred, I've no idea. Would you prefer the club was owned by a Yank that hasn't been to the ground since last May or a bloke who lives and breaths Everton?

Gavin Ramejkis
118 Posted 14/02/2013 at 20:33:49
David, seriously? Well run? Best bit of Pravda twaddle for some time.
Dave Lynch
119 Posted 14/02/2013 at 20:37:42
Dave.

Please enlighten us as to why you think it's well run ?

Phil Bellis
120 Posted 14/02/2013 at 20:44:35
...and what are the facts?
Dennis Shaw
121 Posted 14/02/2013 at 20:39:10
David, I couldn't care less if Kenwright watches every game he gets to do it for free with huge hospitality and luxurous travel and accommodation thrown in to keep him comfortable it's not as if he actually has to work for a living or is struggling to balance family with football.

I personally would rather have someone who is open, honest, ambitious and willing to invest in the Club someone who relies on them being a success to get a return on their hard earned cash and not just some old Romantic who is keeping hold of his trainset because he has nothing better to do.

I don't know anyone who actually goes to the games who has a good word to say about him his admirers appear to be those who watch us from a distance through rose tinted specs looking at how we skimp and save and lie in 4th place. The people who hate the foreign investment and who despise the success other clubs have through investment.

Bill should hold a referendum to see what the fans really think.

Gavin Ramejkis
122 Posted 14/02/2013 at 20:35:00
David in case you are serious do a little homework about the Spurs supporting yank major shareholder Bill Jong Ill and Green brought to the club and how often he comes to Goodison, even more galling given BK's inspired Trinity Press slating of Gregg not coming to Goodison Park before he shafted him.
John Audsley
123 Posted 14/02/2013 at 21:49:30
Hmm

Mr Earl the "Yank" hasn't been to Goodison in years and he is part of the core team at EFC so.............

Love the bit about how other teams would love to adopt our business model, that's a gem of a comment

I guess your taking the piss so I will leave it at that

Colin Wainwright
124 Posted 14/02/2013 at 22:04:13
Jeez David Heaton! Astounding lack of...........everything, in that post. Hope I never have the misfortune to bump into you and your mates.
Ste Traverse
125 Posted 14/02/2013 at 23:35:59
Nearly 20 years without a trophy and we have someone telling us we are the 'envy' of the Premier League.

And I constantly call Liverpool fans 'deluded'!

Phil Bellis
126 Posted 15/02/2013 at 01:41:12
David Heaton (#319)
I realise you may well be formulating and articulating your ripostes to the dissenters (no doubt well thought-out) but, in the absence of any response, may I suggest you are, at best, a gullible, naive tit or, at worst, a club Bizzie Lizzie.

Apologies if I've got your motive/intelligence wrong.

Martin Mason
127 Posted 15/02/2013 at 02:56:15
Dennis/Phil

I'm really busy here but I do a 12 hour day and the few minutes it takes me to put you guys right are just breaks for me.

I finish at 1900hrs and then go for a beer with my Evertonian mates. I don't go near a keyboard to write comments when I've had a drink. It's my buddies here who label you lot as "headbangers", seriously. I try to tell them what a great bunch you are but the problem is they can come and read the stuff.

Martin Mason
128 Posted 15/02/2013 at 03:00:54
Dave Heaton, you are absolutely correct and very brave of you to come on here and state the views of the vast majority of kowledgeable Evertonians.

Phil, here's a few facts

There is nobody in the football world outside of a tiny but very bitter activist bunch of our own fans FFS who believe anything other than that EFC is well run and who have anything but good words for our board, management, team and fans.

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary the board are running the club well and have done nothing that in good faith was not for the benefit of the club.

EFC does exceptionally well given its resources. The notion that us not winning trophies shows this to be false is naive. Football changed with the introduction of the EPL and now only maybe 2 teams in any season can win the EPL, the FA Cup opens it up to maybe 4-5 and the League cup is possible but 20 teams have a chance. The odds against Everton winning anything in a given year are tiny. Our squad is not strong enough to compete on all fronts so are chances of success based on trophies is naturally very low.

The vast majority of Evertonians support the board and manager.

Opinion isn't fact, rumour isn't fact, conspiracy theories are just that.

No statement can be taken as high probability of correctness unless there is a correspondingly high degree of back-up given to support it.

Thank you

Eric Myles
129 Posted 15/02/2013 at 05:21:40
"No statement can be taken as high probability of correctness unless there is a correspondingly high degree of back-up given to support it."

So what you're saying then, Martin, is that what you wrote is a whole load of rubbish!

Martin Mason
130 Posted 15/02/2013 at 05:49:31
Eric, I state it as fact and stick by every point. Let's discuss if you're up for it?
Ciaran Duff
131 Posted 15/02/2013 at 06:40:26
If this new Govenor of the BOI cannot give us money directly surely he could introduce a tax on any team wearing red!
Phil Bellis
132 Posted 15/02/2013 at 09:40:23
Martin
I don't respect the opinions of non-Everton supporting pundits and hacks; EFC is not a huge part of their lives
It's like lookers-on commenting on a marriage - they have no idea what goes on in the relationship
Don't confuse supporting the Board with supporting the team
Without Moyes, we would have sunk without trace; now that's a fact
Stay safe and go easy on the Efes
Martin Mason
133 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:01:31
Phil, of course you are right. I just make the point that we are very well thought of by punters, managers and even fans of other clubs as something that is basically good.

Go easy on the Efes? Some chance mate

Tony McNulty
134 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:04:49
Are Everton a “well run club”?

Someone once asked James Thurber, “what do you think of your wife?” He answered: “compared with what?”

That is the nub of the issue. In comparison with the “model” of the Seventies and Eighties, Everton were arguably “well run.” On planet earth, in 2013 in England, if you take our performance overall on matters such as: financial backing; the state of the ground; transfer budget; long term security; image; marketing etc. we have fallen well behind the competition.

Richard Jones
135 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:34:53
Laughable Martin, laughable, well run indeed !! failed ground moves failed shop on the back of the ground, we didn't even know that we couldn't build on the back of our own ground !!
Chris Morris
136 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:37:05
Are Everton a well run club?

Certainly better than QPR, Forest, Portsmouth and Villa. We still are a Premier League team and are now considered European contender; which is something you wouldn't have believed 10 years ago. People keep saying "We need a proper businessman at the helm"; but then Tony Fernandes is an excellent businessman, as I'm sure Mandaric was too.

Man City are punching well above their weight (considering the debt and financial fair play may see them struggle). Liverpool have spent somewhere around £350m since 2006 and gone backwards. Chelsea aren't the same club of 5 years ago. Villa massively overspent and are suddenly in relegation fights. Arsenal are just profiteers and would sooner finish in CL place than win a trophy. They all had/have "businessmen" in charge. Spurs is probably the ideal model now. Levy doesn't take crap and when he sells, he sells big.

So I'm not sure how you fix Everton's problem and to be truthful I don't actually know what Everton's problem is. But people moaning that we don't have a "proper businessman" in charge is somewhat ridiculous. We can all pull statistics out to prove our point but it's getting nowhere.

Are Everton a well run club?

Probably the best answer is, not bad

Brian Waring
137 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:55:27
Martin "No statement can be taken as high probability of correctness unless there is a correspondingly high degree of back-up given to support it."

How do you back - up you claim Martin, that the 'vast majority' of Evertonians back the board?

Dennis Shaw
138 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:42:25
Martin #376 'The odds against Everton winning anything in a given year are tiny. Our squad is not strong enough to compete on all fronts so are chances of success based on trophies is naturally very low'

And with that quote or FACT you just lost the argument. Whose fault do you think it is that we cannot invest in the squad and purchase quality players to help boost our chances that's right your old friend Blue Bill.

Kenwright is holding us back from ever achieving anything and fans who support him allow it to happen.

Chris Morris
139 Posted 15/02/2013 at 11:01:23
JUST PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE FOR A SECOND

If a statement came from the club today that said Bill Kenwright has stepped down as Chairman, who would take control and what would you expect from them?

Phil Walling
140 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:21:13
One way and another, these threads always turn to a discussion on BKs tenure. Surely if the Club is "well run", it implies that its Board "gets most things right" and is able to deliver on its business plan. Now it has to be said that it HAS delivered on its No 1 priority – to see Everton SURVIVE as a Premier club without the need for either inside or outside investment. So credit due there.

However, on virtually every other project it has encountered abject failure, particularly ANYTHING related to stadium development either at Goodison or elsewhere. Its only strategy on the commercial front is 'oursourcing' (quick but low money up front, please!) and I am still waiting for the announcement of any initiative to improve the financial position other than borrowing against future income.

So, in brief, to those who follow the team rather than the club, BK`s board are doing okay. But, to those of us who live our lives hoping for a bit more than okay and have the temerity to 'call ourselves supporters' whilst daring to probe the reasons why that is never going to happen, this Board is not fit to govern an institution of Everton`s standing.

"Kings of Cock-Up" would be a more appropriate appellation for them!

Derek Thomas
141 Posted 15/02/2013 at 10:48:43
The GOT Forum seem to have any number of ( self ?) appointed ' Moderators ' who, at the drop of a hat ( even if they have to go to the shop, buy a hat, come home and drop it ) and for no other reason than....because I say so, they just close threads willy nilly...it does my crust in.

But on this occasion I cry ...brother, ( in our case Mr M. Kenrick ) where art thou, he's at it again.

It's all about opinions but all this ' show me ' ' prove to me ' and other masonisms ad infinitum

Well??

Martin Mason
142 Posted 15/02/2013 at 11:38:41
Derek, you need to read what's said please. I have said that no "proof" is needed only that any statement has to have sufficient backbone to make it likely to be true.

Are you trying to get me censored too? I seriously hope that you aren't mate.

Just appreciate one thing and that is that I create more interest on here than probably anybody and there are many good and non-insulting challenges made to me above which I think is great and which I'll respond to when I can. I don't like the idea of some school sneak asking the prefects to keep me in after school though. You're a disgrace mate, no less.

Martin Mason
143 Posted 15/02/2013 at 11:48:27
Tony@409

What you say is true but it has a logical fault. It is possible that a club can be very well run and yet still fall well behind its competition. The reality for EFC is that we are now a small club from a deprived area of a small city living in the shadow of three very successful rich Brand name clubs and competing against leisure pursuits other than socceer. We are in a terrible state financially because our relative income has dropped and we have borrowed to try to maintain our place at the top table. All of our peers from the 60s like Sheffield Wed, Wolves, Burnley, Bolton, etc., have gone down the pan but at least we are still there.
I contend that we are where we are despite being run well over the years rather than because we have not. There is no magic wand that will produce revenue and or success. It is not a fault of the board that they have not put their own money in only that they have not managed to do the impossible and find somebody daft enough to put theirs in.

Kevin Tully
144 Posted 15/02/2013 at 12:01:47
Martin Mason - "Just appreciate one thing and that is that I create more interest on here than probably anybody."

Here is all the evidence you need that this guy is a WUM - please don't reply to this idiot, he is only on here to provoke real supporters.

He is probably part of the Sky generation - I bet he has never set foot inside Goodison!

Derek Thomas
145 Posted 15/02/2013 at 11:57:07
I stand by what I said, you're at it again, many of the others may think that they can ' convert ' you by the power of their arguements, this is a compliment to you if you could but see it...but you won't.

You maybe observing the letter of the Law ( as you see it ) as regards to TW. But not the spirit.

And name calling is just so many sticks and stones water off this ducks back. I've been called far worse by far bigger and better...I rate you in the ' inspire shock and awe ' stakes as just below a balloon on a stick.

You've been away for some months ( for what reason I don't know ) and have gradually, softly softly, played your way quietly back in, but you are back to your old ways, well performed to a high standard ways it may be said, but all just a reprise of the previous B*ll*cks.

Sticks and Stones...as I've told you before, away and f*ck spiders.

Derek Thomas
146 Posted 15/02/2013 at 12:32:48
* waiting for M Mason to, yet again, ' retire undefeated ' ( for the Nth time )
Dave Lynch
147 Posted 15/02/2013 at 12:28:24
martin @ 435.
That post was rational, now keep it up and stop winding people up.
Martin Mason
148 Posted 15/02/2013 at 12:42:48
Dave@445

Being wound up is something that people do to themselves not what somebody like me can do to them. If you can provide evidence that I'm deliberately provoking people then show me clear examples and I'll stop. I believe that what you mean that by "winding people up" I'm just not singing with the choir? I'm not a herd animal mate and all of my posts are rational.

Martin Mason
149 Posted 15/02/2013 at 12:47:36
Some of you are losing the plot again; cut the agression and calm down. Believe me, you'll convince me of anything by sensible argument and as soon as I see any I will acept it graciously. If you don't want to respond to me then better that you just don't.

Derek, are you feeling OK mate? What exactly do you mean that I'm not observing the spirit of TW?

Kevin Tulley, I'm 62 and I've been a very active fan home and away since the early 60s despite not being from the area and working out of the UK for many years. I can't match my mate Bill as the greatest Evertonian ever but I've always done my best to support the team.

Dennis Shaw
150 Posted 15/02/2013 at 13:34:17
Your friend Bill the Greatest Evertonian ever? Martin when you're next back in the Country Give us a shout I will take you to Goodison (it's not changed much since you were last there in the 60's) and its a better atmosphere than your live, stream or MotD indicates.

When we get in there you can actually ask other Evertonians what they think of the board and the way the club is being run – just unbiased opinion from the real fans.

Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
151 Posted 15/02/2013 at 15:13:47
Martin, you've done it again with this nonsense of demanding proof. No more, please. This is a discussion forum, where people provide opinions. See relevant posts above.
Eric Myles
152 Posted 15/02/2013 at 16:15:24
Martin #382, if you want to discuss something let's discuss the question you refuse to answer.

At the Kirkby Inquiry who said "The Club is not for sale" and why did the findings conclude that he was lying? and who did the Inquiry board believe?

Eric Myles
153 Posted 15/02/2013 at 16:25:56
Martin #431 "Derek, you need to read what's said please. I have said that no "proof" is needed only that any statement has to have sufficient backbone to make it likely to be true."

Again you are indicating that the majority of what you say is complete garbage.

Eric Myles
154 Posted 15/02/2013 at 16:29:15
"Just appreciate one thing and that is that I create more interest on here than probably anybody"

So Martin you;re just doing this for the notoriety, a trait of a WUM.

If you're trying to take Richard Dodds place you're failing miserably.

Gavin Ramejkis
155 Posted 15/02/2013 at 17:24:44
At least Doddy is amusing, the twaddle on this thread is more worn out and debunked than a Jimmy Saville legal defence.
Tony McNulty
156 Posted 15/02/2013 at 19:00:53
Martin (435)

I wasn’t writing another PhD thesis, just making a quick fire point.

I understand your logic, although I don’t agree. A vegetable market stall selling its tired fruit can still be well run on its own, limited, terms, even if Costo and Waitrose have moved in next door and are progressively killing it. And as the great grandson finally closes the pitch owing to lack of customers, he can still argue that the contents of the till always tally and that he does invariably sweep up the tired cabbage peelings from the road before heading for home.

I was at a presentation by Bill a few years ago in London. A questioner from the floor complained about the response from the club when he was trying to buy a kit for his son (or some such thing). ‘It’s not my problem’, was the gist of the reply. He told the questioner to, ‘call the club’: ‘I’m the Chairman, I’m not involved in that’, was his message.

To take this as the sole example (and as I say, I don’t have the time or energy to go through examples under each of the areas I have cited above, point by point) people on this site constantly cite these sorts of failures on the part of the club.

I see us as more ‘amateur hour’ than ‘well run.’ And I am never fooled by the patronising pat on the head we get from other fans about, “well run Everton.”

Dave Griffiths
157 Posted 15/02/2013 at 22:10:26
Tony 793

Hang on, hang on. You say "the Red Shite have been sold twice in recent years" as if their recent flirtation with disaster was something to aspire to rather just being the amusing soap opera it was. What do you really want? BK to flog us off to a consortium headed up by Mr T and Face Man?

Enjoy us for what we are. Be proud of how our club acts because silverware is a rare commodity and shouldn't be the be-all and end-all.

Richard Jones
158 Posted 16/02/2013 at 00:43:40
Proud of the way we act Dave? I'm ashamed of the way our club acts and I'm embarrassed that we as fans have let it happen, it will be a sad day when Moyes leaves in the summer having had no backing whatsoever by Blue Bill , it will all fall down like a pack of cards and by not putting pressure on this charlatan of a chairman we will be complicate in our own downfall.
Si Cooper
159 Posted 16/02/2013 at 01:45:03
"Opinion isn't fact, rumour isn't fact, conspiracy theories are just that."

Hang on Martin. Those things can still be CORRECT, even if people haven't got the 'proof' to demonstrate it.

Seems like you have a bad case of the 'rationals' there Martin, where only what can be demonstrated has any credibility. Real life isn't a carefully controlled experiment and so will not necessarily come with tangible evidence included.

FACT is, in his imperfect world, sometimes you just have to look at all the circumstantial evidence you can muster and decide for yourself.

Martin Mason
160 Posted 16/02/2013 at 02:39:43
Si, correct, then it is called "opinion" so we are then back to square one. Rumour can be correct if it is from a good source (backbone) but is often tttle-tattle, consiracy theory can be true but the probability is always low (Occam's Razor). Opinion can be very valid but it is worth nothing unless it has background. Everybody has a right to hold an opinion but they are not sacrosanct, they should not be respected unless they have some justification?

Can you imagine where science and law and other key parts of our developed civilisation would be if its proponents weren't rational?

Martin Mason
161 Posted 16/02/2013 at 02:52:11
Tony, if Bill said that to a fan about the shirts then he should be slapped for it. Having said that, he is absolutely correct in what he said but said it in a very stupid way.

I'm often asked about the "shirt" issue and it is often used as yet another plank to beat the club with. For me, it is nothing, if I want to buy a shirt it takes me 5 minutes online.

Martin Mason
162 Posted 16/02/2013 at 02:56:21
Michael@477, incorrect, I have not demanded "proof" of anything. I have said that I will not accept any opinion that doesn't have a reasonable basis and there is a massive difference. If your criteria is that I should accept any old piece of unsubstantiated garbage just because it is somebody's opinion then ban me now. Are you saying that the board rules should be that nothing can be challenged? Perhaps only be challenged if they show any support for the board and manager?

Do you want this board to be a single issue echo chamber where people shout the same hackneyed old bile against anything that comes from the club or manager or do you want it to be a vibrant discussion chamber where people discuss opposing views under the general rules of sensible debate. One rule is that you don't make any point unless you can defend it under challenge.

"The board is a bunch of criminals with no interest of the club at heart", is an unjustified opinion and is only valid if preceded with "In my opinion – ", or followed by " – because".

Martin Mason
163 Posted 16/02/2013 at 03:34:24
Sorry to keep going this morning but promise it's my last. I don't think that I have asked anybody for proof of anything?
Brent Stephens
164 Posted 16/02/2013 at 03:28:02
Martin, you say that a statement such as "The board is a bunch of criminals with no interest of the club at heart", is an unjustified opinion and is only valid if preceded with "In my opinion – ", or followed by " – because".

Following your own rule, in my opinion, you are talking crap. Now then, that's a valid, justified opinion?

Eric Myles
165 Posted 16/02/2013 at 04:10:47
Gavin #547 at least Richard Dodd came across as a passionate Evertonian who cares for the Club even if you didn't agree with his views.

MM just comes across as a WUM who is the only person that presents facts while everyone else just has opinion that cannot be supported by proof.

Paul Rimmer
166 Posted 16/02/2013 at 05:22:11
As much as we love our club, who in their right mind would want to buy it? Debt and decrepit stadium, shares and transfer fees. Whilst I'm no fan of the board as they've made mistakes and seem naive, there is no white knight.

Would I want a Sheikh or Oligarch in charge hiring and firing? It just doesn't seem the Everton Way. Would I like to see Messi in an Everton shirt – of course. Moyes pig-headed and stubborn, safe but with loyalty and integrity and bringing decent footy. We're miles behind the others we're trying to compete with.

Modern football is flawed... it died a while back. In many senses I have my season ticket for the chance to spend quality time with my dad, brothers and son but know that all we'll ever see in terms of success is a trip to Wembley. I'm 5th generation Blue (legend has it!) – I love Everton for its history and tradition – a new board/chairman will make little difference without £500 million. A new manager may change the style of play or formation but we won't win the league.

Am I happy with Moyes and Kenwright... at the current time, they'll do. Until that white knight comes or the arse drops out of this crazy league we play in, a change will make little difference. In the meantime, we're respected, safe from the drop, a quaint reminder of how football used to be.

John Ford
167 Posted 16/02/2013 at 05:58:31
Have I missed sommat, but we're is Mr Dodd these days?
Si Cooper
169 Posted 16/02/2013 at 22:14:28
"Opinion can be very valid but it is worth nothing unless it has background. Everybody has a right to hold an opinion but they are not sacrosanct, they should not be respected unless they have some justification?"

Wrong, Martin. Opinions may not be sacrosanct but they are neither worthless nor beneath respect unless you have strong evidence to the contrary. Your starting point seems to be to dismiss out of hand opposing opinions whilst expecting others to be impressed by your equally unsubstantiated slant on things.

"Can you imagine where science and law and other key parts of our developed civilisation would be if its proponents weren't rational?"

Apart from being a ridiculous standard to apply to a fans forum, I don't think this point is particularly robust in any case.

It is a very poor scientist who doesn't understand the risks of over-extrapolation, and the driving force behind any innovator is the natural tendency to enquire and look beyond the obvious.

The law and society as a whole are not actually rooted in scientific rationality as a lot of what people would recognise as the best of human nature is actually irrational (a lot of vulnerable members of our society would be in great peril if we were to stick to what is rational). The implementation of such strictures is also highly subjective, though intended to be objective, as it is implicitly understood that you cannot expect to have irrefutable proof in every case.

Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
170 Posted 17/02/2013 at 00:27:46
Good observations, Si.

I'm torn on Martin. He writes well and he's obviously reasonably smart. I accept that people can be provided with the same information and reach conclusions — that's just part of human nature... difficult to comprehend because I suspect many of us would find it hard to embrace an alternative analysis that we fundamentally disagreed with. But it's that dichotomy that underlies a lot of what we spend our time batting back and forth on here.

And my sense is that's the kind of exchange most people appreciate and want to read. They don't want to be brow-beaten by a supercilious and self-possessed 'superior intellect' like Martin presents himself. Which pushes me a little reluctantly toward the camp that labels him as a Wind-Up Merchant.

I've been in those work camps miles away from anywhere. So much time on your hands and no 'normal' interactions with the rest of the world who aren't your workmates. The temptation to go on an elaborate wind-up must be a massive. (Assuming of course the Kazakhstan stuff is actually true, and not simply part of the WUM thing...)

I find some of his posts are so fucking annoying, and that's where I think Derek nails it in terms of the ill-defined 'spirit of discussion'. Martin is definitely flouting that. But for a WUM, that's meat and potatoes... and the reactions would no doubt only encourage him.

I don't really want to vet all his posts — it means I'd actually have to read them all when I have better things to do — but I don't really want to let him go off on his old rampages like he has on this thread. He knows well enough not to ask for 'proof' anymore, as I warmed him about that last time... but his very first post on this one throws out the "not a shred of evidence" line and it doesn't stop him coming out with shit like post #230, where he's basically recycling his rejectionist nonsense while claiming to talk for "the vast majority of Evertonians". That alone should be enough to require monitoring: we each post as individuals, and no-one can claim to speak for this mysterious vast majority as, in all likelihood, they don't actually all agree on any one thing to do with Everton.

So Martin, if you read this, take it as an indication that you have gone on your last rampage. We've heard it all before. Few agree with your warped take on things, at least judging by the number of posts in your favour. So, exercise a little restraint and spend a bit of time thinking about the spirit of discussion you claim to not understand.

Si Cooper
171 Posted 17/02/2013 at 01:32:55
Michael - I tend to think that Martin is what I would term a 'black and white' personality with a purely linear way of thinking (eminently suited to a career in engineering but actually quite limiting in some scientific disciplines) allied with a huge amount of self-confidence (or simply the desire to seem so).

Unfortunately, he appears to lack sufficient empathy to be able to appreciate what 'opponents' bring to the table and be completely unable to accept that his conclusions could be wrong. That in itself is fair enough (we all draw the line somewhere) except that it seems inevitably to lead to apparent condescension, and whilst he often comes across as knowledgeable he then posts comments that show a very one dimensional appreciation of some complex scenarios.

I am happy to debate with anyone and enjoy pitting my knowledge / understanding / appreciation of our club and the game in general against / alongside what I consider to be a passionate group of people, but just getting told you are wrong over and over quickly wears thin.

I would hate to think that anyone who enjoys the cut and thrust of TW was prevented from participating erroneously. I am hoping Martin can somehow demonstrate he is not simply a WUM, as the apparent permanent loss of Doddy already weighs heavily.


Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads

© ToffeeWeb