Skip to Main Content
Members:   Log In  |  Sign Up
FAN ARTICLES

The Confession of a Kenwright Apologist

By David O'Keefe :  16/11/2010 :  Comments (70) :
The title will probably confuse my regular readers to whom I?m known for my frequent criticisms of Mr Kenwright and the Board; and a rather embarrassing attempt to organise a protest against them.

Sadly, my criticisms of Mr Kenwright, the board and his apologists are only recent criticisms. Since 2007, I have airbrushed my previous opinions of his reign from my memory, a period when I believed in Bill although his tales of the Boys? Pen grated with me even then.

I am making this confession for two reasons: to convince Bill?s remaining supporters to see the error Blue God for believing in and following this false prophet.

I welcomed him when he took over from Peter Johnson and promised to bring stability to the club. It was only in 2007 that I realised Bill?s definition of stability meant make things worse.

I choose to believe that the council were responsible for the failure of the Kings Dock move, believing that they favoured our red brethren after giving them permission to build on Stanley Park. It was only in 2007 that I realised this was a conspiracy theory lacking in any foundation, and the real reason the Kings Dock failed was because the club failed to meet its commitment to pay £30 million towards the development.

I choose to ignore the fiascos that were the NTL deal when Bill spent £20 million in the transfer market, before cashing the cheque that never was. The club had to sell Michael Ball and Francis Jeffers to cover the debts accrued by such folly. I choose to ignore his cynical use of the Fortress Sports Fund to see off the threat of Paul Gregg, who was a bit upset with Bill after the failure of the Kings Docks move. I wanted a blue in charge of the club, not Paul Gregg ? a man that didn?t even attend matches at Goodison.

I even over-looked the sale of Wayne Rooney on a £27 million instalment plan, I only criticised him for agreeing to such a poor deal. As for letting it drag-on until the deadline day, I blamed everyone except Bill.

Then along came Kirkby; it didn?t seem right. Moving a big city football club to a small town is not the ?Deal of the Century?. Keith Wyness couldn?t even get the details ? right they changed from day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute. It didn?t seem right; it was a con. The man had lied to me for reasons that I could not understand. Kirkby was a bad idea; the lies did not convince me... something was wrong.

I was right and I was also wrong. I was wrong about Bill: he had lied to me about Kirkby and I had been lying to myself because I wanted to believe that he was better than Peter Johnson. That the club was in a relatively good condition ? unlike (insert name of club). Kirkby blew that myth out of the water, the club was failing and was desperately in need of finance in order to compete.

In 2007, it became clear to me that I was wrong: I had made a conscious decision to believe in conspiracy theories, to ignore inconvenient truths about the NTL deal and Fortress Sport Fund, because he was a Blue. The penny only dropped when it became clear that the club was lying about Kirkby. I voted no, I renounced my faith in Bill and then to my shame I turned on those that still supported him, doing this while pretending that I had never supported him in the first place.

Things are not going to get better with Bill... it took me eight years to realise that in fact they have gotten worse. The club is skint, the only strategy that Bill and the board have had is one of asset-stripping and now there is nothing left to sell apart from the players. A regular feature of his regime has been selling off our quality young players to keep the banks happy. So don?t turn on Jack Rodwell when he signs for a Top Three club in the summer, as seems likely.

For many Blues the penny has dropped, change is needed to make the club a force in English and European football. My only concern is that things have to get worse before we all take action to force through the necessary changes for the better. Bill is a false prophet and I pray that the Blue God will forgive me for believing his lies, and will forgive those apologists that have chosen conspiracy theories and wilful ignorance in place of the truth.

Here endeth my confession.

Reader Comments

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


Jimmy Hacking
1   Posted 16/11/2010 at 15:54:15

Report abuse

He puts on a bloody good panto though.

(I'm struggling to come up with counter-arguments...) Erm, I like his glasses?
Tony J Williams
2   Posted 16/11/2010 at 16:05:22

Report abuse

I would still do his missus too!!!
John Ford
3   Posted 16/11/2010 at 16:15:43

Report abuse

I saw his missus at Sainsbury's the other day.
David Moore
4   Posted 16/11/2010 at 16:32:26

Report abuse

Mr O'Keefe, can you name your replacement please; if not, we are still stuck with Blue Bill.
Robert Daniels
5   Posted 16/11/2010 at 16:52:56

Report abuse

He's behind you!

Fuckin hope not.
Stephen Kenny
6   Posted 16/11/2010 at 17:51:24

Report abuse

Wood.. trees... see... people... can't... some... the... for... the...

Sadly, you are wasting your time. Denial is a wonderful thing.
Colin Potter
7   Posted 16/11/2010 at 17:50:10

Report abuse

David,
There are still plenty about, whose minds you will never change, post 4 for starters. Thank God, David, that some of these apologists are not on the Board. We really would be in shit street.
Martin Mason
8   Posted 16/11/2010 at 17:54:00

Report abuse

I'm an ordinary fan, no axes to grind. I support a mid- to low-sized club that has reached its limits. A club, however, that in terms of finance and quality, is better than it was before the current management took over.

No change of management offers any upside unless it also involves long-term investment, which is the most unlikely option. A change of manager is the ultimate risk, our current relative success could be down to him and firing him could be a route to the Championship.

Every argument I see against BK is full of conspiracy with little in the way of hard facts and not one credible alternative offered either for the current board or DM.

I'm not a shareholder and therefore don't have a say on how Everton should be managed but, until I see a credible alternative, I'll give my support to what we have and criticise only when I have facts to base criticism on.

David O'Keefe
9   Posted 16/11/2010 at 18:32:21

Report abuse

Martin, what we have in the boardroom is not worth your support or mine. As for the facts, Colin Fitzpatrick has supplied them Re: Kenwright's tenure.

The "give me an alternative" line is starting to get tiresome already as it's another excuse for BK and the board.
Guy Hastings
10   Posted 16/11/2010 at 20:13:11

Report abuse

And another thing, why is Prince William a Villa fan? Surely that's another EFC marketing opportunity we missed out on...
Oliver Molloy
11   Posted 16/11/2010 at 20:16:39

Report abuse

I believe Philip Green has BK by the balls, and it is he who controls the purse strings. Sooner or later, it will all come out.

If we are all fed-up, we should all unite and protest as to why we cannot after 5 years find a buyer for the club? Protest is the only thing that will give Kenwright and his buddies a kick up the arse. I would love to know for instance what the asking price is for Everton?

I'm a "better the devil you know" type of person, but must admit I am getting pissed off with the lack of anything going on with the club. Roll on January and let's see what happens!!

David Moore
12   Posted 16/11/2010 at 20:38:50

Report abuse

RE Colin Potter,

Your post was about as intelligent as Arteta was useful on Sunday.

I don't really give a toss about all this Kenwright crap that is always flying about on Toffeeweb. There are daily slanderings of Kenwright with "apologists" and "haters" having a good game of tennis. I was just asking who would we get to replace Kenwright? If we have no-one, it is like talking about a transfer wish-list, pointless as we haven't got a pot to piss in, which, yes may be down to Bill. If I appeared blunt, it is because I can't be arsed thinking about it, unless we had a viable replacement to choose from.
David Price
13   Posted 16/11/2010 at 20:51:22

Report abuse

Fucking hell, David, you've just made me put Ant and Dec on now.
Colin Fitzpatrick
14   Posted 16/11/2010 at 20:59:41

Report abuse

Martin [8], I'm with you about Moyes, a change of manager is the ultimate risk ? I unequivocally agree; with the magnitude of transfer budget available, season after season, we're never going to attract a better man than David Moyes.

What interests me about your post is when you state we're "a club that in terms of finance and quality is better than it was before the current management took over." and then, later, "every argument I see against BK is full of conspiracy with little in the way of hard facts."

Have you based that first statement on hard facts or is it just a reiteration of what journalists print, or something else?
Robert Dunckley
15   Posted 16/11/2010 at 21:26:08

Report abuse

I believe we are not going to see the back of Kenwright any time soon. Even protests would not move the man who has skin thicker than a Rhino's.

Who could take over from his role of Chairman?

Well, if it was external we would have to pay, so that is out of the question. Maybe another major shareholder, but who would the take the flack Bill gets?

So the only other way forward would be with new owners; however, these are very thin on the ground.

Suck it up, we are stuck with him for the long term.
Peter Laing
16   Posted 16/11/2010 at 21:28:43

Report abuse

We are getting to the point this season when stagnation is setting in, we have not improved whilst those around us have kicked on. The transfer budget given to Moyes close-season effectively sealed our fate, the remainder went on player contracts. Recent comments by Moyes would suggest that the situation isn't going to change anytime soon...

For the first season in many despite being a season ticket holder, I decided to give away my ticket and watch the game on Sky knowing depressingly that we would get fuck all out of the game.

Leon Perrin
17   Posted 16/11/2010 at 21:32:42

Report abuse

"No change of management offers any upside unless it also involves long term investment which is the most unlikely option." ? Martin Mason

"We're never going to attract a better man than David Moyes." ? Colin Fitzpatrick

Errrm, just one question lads, how do you know?
Robert Dunckley
18   Posted 16/11/2010 at 22:13:37

Report abuse

I believe Colin Fitzpatrick wrote in another article that at one point the board were looking to replace Moyes. The man rumoured to be approached for the job was Martin O'Neill; now he is free from Villa, this may well be the manager shake up that we need?
Colin Fitzpatrick
19   Posted 17/11/2010 at 00:16:57

Report abuse

Simple, Leon [18], read the full sentence! We'd end up with someone like Megson or another journeyman or have to take the chance with an up-and-coming manager the majority of which fall by the wayside due to the high attrition rate in football management.

Robert [19], Apart from the obvious problem that MON spat his dummy out over the refusal to provide him with more money, in the form of the proceeds of the Milner sale, I just don't see him as a step up.
Lee Kidd
20   Posted 17/11/2010 at 02:52:11

Report abuse

I read the article, I sort of knew what the article was two lines in, and I then knew exactly what the response would be like on here.

In short, "Blue Bill" is some sort of hero to some, to others "Bill Kenshite" is the worst thing since Pol Pot.

There's no middle ground, ever, so this discussion will always be the Groundhog Day of ToffeeWeb.
Dick Fearon
21   Posted 17/11/2010 at 02:03:21

Report abuse

Excuse me if another similar posting on this subject arrives under my name. After completing the original version I must have pressed delete instead of send. Anyhow... where was I? ... Erm, ah, yes... speak memory.

When used to identify Bill Kenwright in a derogatory way, I am tired of the term 'luvvy'. Yet I suppose this could be called "Confessions of a Luvvy's Luvvy". An old media tart he may well be, prone to exaggeration ? that also; economical with the truth... maybe.

What Bill has always tried to do is big us up in the eyes of the world. Never have I heard him say or been quoted speaking of Everton in other than a positive and affectionate manner. A bit like myself really and what is wrong with that? Any chairman would be derelict in his duty to talk down his company.

As far as lying to his own supporters, do we really expect him to tell the market place one thing and whisper something different to us?

It is all very well to say that the advent of Moyes saved us from possible oblivion as a football power but to ignore Bill?s role is not being fair to the man. Walter may have proposed Davey for the job but it was Bill who completed the deal and snared the best manager we have seen in recent decades. Whether it was Bill?s power of persuasion plus a bit of exaggeration or Moyes's ambition but there is absolutely no doubt that Kenwright was a major player.

There is nothing like a good conspiracy to excite fertile minds and the one about Bill beating away hordes of investors is a prime example. It is bloody ludicrous to waste a second on it but nonetheless it regularly raises its head. There will always be carpet baggers on the lookout for a quick buck. Our dear neighbors have found to their cost that, after sacrificing their pride and dignity, not to mention their soul, they were taken for a ride by those charlatans. The signs are already ominous that with the new lot they have jumped out of the frying pan and straight into the fire. I should be laughing at their plight but deep down I sympathise. There but for Blue Bill could go us.

When speaking with our RS pals we don?t need to shuffle our feet, we can stand four square and look them straight in the eye for we are Everton, our proud heritage is not a plaything of some foreign conglomerate. Nor are we a franchisee of a yank equity or leverage group.

When Z-Cars welcomes our team onto the field, we can stamp our feet with pride because it it is still OUR team. I recognize that mistakes have been made and you, Bill are not perfect... but for any part you have played in making this Evertonian proud, Thank very much.

Eric Myles
22   Posted 17/11/2010 at 06:43:16

Report abuse

"Here endeth my confession"
Say 10 Hail Mary's, 3 Our Father's and do 12 Stations of the Cross.
Christine Foster
23   Posted 17/11/2010 at 07:36:28

Report abuse

Dick, Sorry mate but I can't let that pass: "As far as lying to his own supporters, do we really expect him to tell the market place one thing and whisper something different to us?"

So... the club is for sale to us and no it isn't to the public Inquiry?

So Goodison Park is falling down and won't get another safety certificate?

"The money is in the bank"

"The money is ring-fenced"

I could go on but Colin did it so much better.

I have heard this defence before, So a direct lie regarding funding, sale, new Stadium, is ok and justified? Not in my book.

A single billionaire owner is unlikely given the world economic status, it's more likely a sporting organisation similar to that at Anfield, that to me is a more realistic purchaser (which will come with its own drawbacks).

As for sticking with Kenwright, unless he steps down, it's an academic question: his train set and he is not letting anyone else play unless he still owns the track... but support him until he goes? Sorry no. Trust gone.
Lars Eidissen
24   Posted 17/11/2010 at 07:56:16

Report abuse

I think most, if reading carefully through this thread, will see that #8 and #21 are the most sensible posts so far.

I can think of two clubs who have somehow punched above their weight due to having investment poured in during the PL years, and even that is a stretch: Chelsea were winning lots of trophies way before Roman... and City haven't really produced anything yet (although yes, the investment has been substantial).

Even so, Chelsea are a West London club and a trophy-winning at such at the time Roman came in, and City come from a bigger city and had a brand new stadium in place. And even if it could just as well (although I have pointed out differences....) have been us, Villa, West Ham or Leeds attracting the City investment, why does that make us entitled to be the one chosen?

#8 is wrong on branding us a lower- to mid-sized club. We are a mid- to big-sized club, but not a properly big to giant club such as a the big four, and I think most economic analysts would find us a weaker case for investment than City, Spurs and Villa at any point in the past ten to fifteen years as well.

With top 6 finishes we are punching above our weight, and consistent top half finishes is definitely pushing at least our weight.

Also, people love to point out how Sunderland or the likes ? whatever team that is making the "flavour of the month" signing can purchase this or that £10m player. Then the next two years, when said club is purchasing nowt, it's another big transfer for Bolton or West Ham that gets the rage going. We have made multiple £8m+ signings too.

And that's not even going into the serious mess some of the clubs in or slightly below our range have gotten themselves into by amassing huge debt ? Portsmouth, Leeds the most obvious ones and that list will surely get longer.

People just need to face up to the sad fact that that we're about 8th ? with a huge leap up to top 5-6 ? when it comes to resources, fanbase, stadium, brand name, world wide appeal, average attendance.

The good thing is that the recession in the football finance seems to be evening out the gaps. Three years ago, Andy Carroll for one would be NAILED ON for a transfer to a big four club in January to be their 3rd or 4th choice striker off the bench, weakening a potential rival in the process. Those kind of SWP, Damien Duff, Steve Sidwell, Robbie Keane in his Spurs prime, Berbatov transfers have dried up in recent years. That gives much better hope for the other clubs to upset the big guns on a given day or even during the course of the season. That makes the current season so far the most disappointing of Moyes's reign by a very long chalk.
Colin Potter
25   Posted 17/11/2010 at 09:10:10

Report abuse

David Moore,
I know Kenwright is a tiresome subject, if it upsets you so much don't read it or reply to anyone's opinion, just go and sit in a corner and mutter away to yourself. Nobody can tell you who they would like to be the next chairman, until that creep decides to sell.
Dick Fearon
26   Posted 17/11/2010 at 10:58:57

Report abuse

Why can't Toffeeweb do as other sites do by having specific blogs for specific topics. Just think, we could have one called kick a player another for Stadia etc and even one for conspiracy theorists. There also would be one about Everton...
Ernie Baywood
27   Posted 17/11/2010 at 12:12:06

Report abuse

I see that the new complex at the Park End has been approved. Can we at least give him a tick for that?

For the rest. He's lied, no doubt ? but so did that bugger who has convinced my wife to have our loft fumigated for $400. He's selling our club (in whatever sense of the word you are comfortable with) so give him some leeway there. We can't be privvy to everything.

Kings Dock. We just don't know the details. Would we have been happy coughing up £30M only to find that we could never afford it anyway? Why carry on down that road if that was the case?

Kirkby stands as BK's darkest hour. Evidenced, proven, little debate left. If he could sell up and walk away then he should, as long as it's the RIGHT buyer. Like others, I would love to know the asking price... I'm not sure why that can't be common knowledge?

Investment? We're mortgaged up to our eyebrows (not necessarily a terrible thing) and there's nothing left. Except income. And that depends heavily on how the team progresses. So let's worry about the team... fuck knows, there's enough to keep us going on that topic.
Peter Norris
28   Posted 17/11/2010 at 13:04:42

Report abuse

David ? emotive article which is a typically half full view indicating all you want to do is pull the club down. If you are feeling so strongly, isn't it about time for you to champion a "sack the board" and "sack the manager" chant?

~18 ? the day we have Martin O'Neill as our manager is the day to pack in. COYB

Robert Dunckley
29   Posted 17/11/2010 at 14:40:57

Report abuse

I guess supporters who feel the only place we should be is at GP would be happy with the new park end development as it ties us to GP for a few more years.
David O\'Keefe
30   Posted 17/11/2010 at 16:59:01

Report abuse

The use of "who would you have instead of" argument is not a legitimate debating tactic when discussing Bill Kenwright's record. It is a tiresome apologist deflection tactic (part of a never-ending series, I fear) that should be ignored by all.

[Also see: Johnson Joker, He's a blue, and the David Moyes Joker.]

Leon Perrin
31   Posted 17/11/2010 at 17:10:44

Report abuse

Colin Fitzpatrick

"Simple, Leon [18], read the full sentence!"

Read it a few times more to see if I'd missed something that would make it a fact... No, it's just an opinion which means you don't know, as is you're follow up.

"We'd end up with someone like Megson or another journeyman or have to take the chance with an up-and-coming manager the majority of which fall by the wayside due to the high attrition rate in football management".
David O'Keefe
32   Posted 17/11/2010 at 18:10:10

Report abuse

Peter Norris: "All I want to do is pull the club down" What's your point? Should I remain silent, while the board actually pull the club down? How about holding those that are accountable to account, unlike those that do so? Everything's backward with the apologists.
Ernie Baywood
33   Posted 17/11/2010 at 19:25:24

Report abuse

"I guess supporters who feel the only place we should be is at GP would be happy with the new Park End development as it ties us to GP for a few more years."

Let's face it, even if the unlikely happened and we were suddenly able to build a stadium, we're still at Goodison for a long time while it happens. We can't just sit still and keep pinning all our hopes on it ? we have to look at ways to increase our income.

What I don't buy is the "self-funding" argument. Nothing is self-funding ? someone always pays whether it is upfront or on the drip.
Robert Dunckley
34   Posted 17/11/2010 at 20:00:41

Report abuse

David ? Why attack your fellow supporters by tagging them as apologists? As stated by Oliver above, why not arrange a form of protest with a significant number of fans involved, this may not force any change at board level but will help highlight the fans' unrest with the board.
Martin Mason
35   Posted 17/11/2010 at 20:00:50

Report abuse

Colin, hopefully no conflict mate. What I meant was that, in terms of visible evidence (no opinion), Everton are a better side now and are running EFC as a business? Subjective but defendable? The comments on BK though do seem to be rich in personal attacks, innuendo, rumour, etc.

I believe that EFC has reached it's limit now and that we have peaked as a team. Is there an answer? Not without better long-term financial performance... and how do we get that?

I believe that we are competing with Blackburn now ? not Man United ? and I see no easy answer.
Peter Norris
36   Posted 17/11/2010 at 21:59:09

Report abuse

David 32. My point is you seem to have nothing good to say about the team or the club and there is little recognition of some of the better things that have happened under the BK/DM era. Some balance is needed surely?

You say should you just keep quiet and say nothing ? on the other hand should those who disagree with your view keep quiet. Sorry mate if my glass is more half-full - just think there is a need to recognise other opinions. Coyb.

David O'Keefe
37   Posted 18/11/2010 at 00:02:13

Report abuse

Peter, list the better things that Bill Kenwright and the board have done.

For the record: I don't believe in balance, Peter, or the false balance you want; why don't you provide a counter-balance by listing the positive aspects of BK's chairmanship? Nobody has done it thus far.
Ernie Baywood
38   Posted 18/11/2010 at 01:19:52

Report abuse

David, that's a tricky task. Anything good that he's done is just his job. It's like being a goalkeeper ? it's all bad press.

The best thing that you could say about Kenwright is that it could be much, much worse. It really could.

Think of a signed player in the current team. We might not have them if it wasn't for BK. He'll get no credit for it because its his job to give Moyes the funds to buy players.
David O'Keefe
39   Posted 18/11/2010 at 03:00:14

Report abuse

Ernie: if that's the best thing that can be said about Kenwright then there is no debate to be had. Unless they can provide something positive, and I hope Peter Norris can because he's calling for "balance" on this issue, then the anti-BKites have won the debate.
Ste Traverse
40   Posted 18/11/2010 at 03:17:40

Report abuse

2007? I've wanted out Kenwright since the turmoil we had during the summer of 2004, It was clear to me back then that this Joker is out of his depth and only in it for himself and his own kudos. Yet here we are over 6 years later and he's still clinging to power and despite cock-up after cock-up, lie after lie, disastrous soundbite after disastrous soundbite, and we STILL have fans defending him.

God help us.
Jay Harris
41   Posted 18/11/2010 at 03:57:16

Report abuse

Totally agree Ste.

I have given up trying to point out the dark side of Bill Kenwright and I am sure Colin will at some point.

When you have people like Ernie saying "We don't really know the details about KD" I totally despair.

Ignorance is no excuse. Read up on it, man.
Peter Norris
42   Posted 18/11/2010 at 08:52:11

Report abuse

David - so we are now into a "my dad's bigger than your dad" debate. To say you don't believe in balance is revealing.

You may want to reflect on a view that says Kenwright took on our club when we were in the shit and nobody wanted to know. Since he has been there, we have develpoed from avoiding the drop to being disappointed if we have not qualified for Europe.

Our football has improved incrementally as better assets have been bought, we have acquired state-of-the-art training facilities and (whether you love him or hate him) we have one of the most coveted managers in the game looking after the team.

As Ernie says, he put Moyes in charge and he has not sold the family silver to a bunch of money-grabbing Yanks ? or would you prefer we follow the path of Pompey, the RS, Birmingham, West Ham etc etc...???

We may not have millions to spend but we have relative stability which has allowed the club to at least be in a position to put in a decent effort year on year for a European shout.

He also under-accumulated a squad which, if needed, could be used to wipe out any debt tomorrow. Then there's the emergence and focus on youth: Rodwell, Rooney de da de da de da.....

At least these are facts as opposed to what we believe BK hasn't done ? none of which we have actual facts on.

Suspect whatever I or anyone else says you don't want balance so what's the point of airing a view!!

Martin Mason
43   Posted 18/11/2010 at 09:29:00

Report abuse

All I can say about Kenwright's supposed shenanigans is that they are just that. Nobody on here knows the complete picture, only snippets they read which support their own personal prejudices. Nobody who is not a shareholder has much right to criticise in any case and Kenwright as Director doesn't need to answer to fans with an agenda unless they represent a group with influence, it's his business.

We support a club which is struggling in terms of current form and its ability to get out of a rut in which it is likely to become permanently embedded. I'm glass half full and support the very hard work that the club are obviously doing to compete at the top level without the resources to do so. As a club, we would be infinitely better off without the irrational negativity and criticism that this board suffers so badly from. Constructive criticism yes but mindless prejudice, no thanks.
Peter Norris
44   Posted 18/11/2010 at 10:11:30

Report abuse

Well said Martin - that's exactly the type of balance we need. Yes things are not perfect and every Blue knows that but, as you say, we need to support the work that is going on.
David Thomas
45   Posted 18/11/2010 at 10:50:03

Report abuse

David O'Keefe,

You have mentioned previously that in your opinion fans protests can make a difference. If you believe this to be true and you feel so passionate about the poor job the board are doing at present, why do you not (as Peter Norris and Robert Dunckley have previously mentioned) champion a protest against the board (maybe through constant chanting against their regime, or banners / Flags etc) against Sunderland on Monday or the West Brom game at Goodison?

If the disdain for the current board is as common amongst the support as this website would suggest you would certainly not be in the minority. If you feel it will harm the performance of the players to protest during the game, maybe you could arrange a protest for before or after the game against West Brom or any future home game. You could use a website such as this to get your message out about the protest etc.

If you feel so passionate and you feel this sort of protest is effective, why don't you try and organise something?

Robert Dunckley
46   Posted 18/11/2010 at 13:21:14

Report abuse

David @ 45

I think that, no matter how many protests are held or where thay are held, they wouldn't have any effect.

Bill has shown he won't be swayed by this form of pressure, he has a Rhino thick skin.
David Thomas
47   Posted 18/11/2010 at 13:43:05

Report abuse

Robert,

I agree; I don't think protests will be effective in my opinion. However, David O'Keefe seemed certain on a previous thread that protests would make a difference. With that in mind maybe, he should try and organise something of his own back or with fellow blues of the same opinion about both protests and Kenwright.
Robert Dunckley
48   Posted 18/11/2010 at 14:19:43

Report abuse

I think you would be surprised by how many would attend any such march/protest. Would it do anything to change the board or direction of the club? In my opinion... No. But as it would not cause any harm to give it a try then why not?

But, as David and Colin have noted in previous posts, it would be like water off a ducks back with Bill and the board.
Michael Kenrick
49   Posted 18/11/2010 at 15:10:20

Report abuse

Martin (#43) ? it's not prejudiice, I think a more accurate term would be polarization. Although to reject the clear evidence for his "shenanigans" as you are doing, does perhaps verge on prejudice. Let me explain:

You can take two people on here ? say you and me, show them the same evidence (let's take the proven example that Kenwright lied to LCC and everyone else that the money for Kings Dock was ring-fenced). You will get two clearly distinct responses to this evidence.

I will say that was shameful, that there are no excuses for conducting himself in the way he did, which (combined with other known decisions like the rejection of finance offered by Paul Gregg) lost us the real Deal of the Century at an absolutely crucial point in the development of the club and its stadium, that it was a despicable way for the Chairman of Everton Football Club to behave, the club I support and am a shareholder in.

You will say, well... it doesn't really matter, there were obviously business imperatives, I'm sure it was a decision taken in the best interests of the club, I don''t really think you can call it lying anyway, he just didn't want Paul Gregg to gain more control of the club... and at the end of the day he's the Chairman of the club I support, so I support what he is doing in that role.

Is that balance? Or prejudice? Or polarization?

For some reason, we have completely different responses to what is essentially the same information. I absolutely assure you my response has nothing to do with prejudice toward or dislike of the man. I don't like what he did, but I'm sure he is a very affable bloke to be around and I'd get on with him just fine talking about the Boys' Pen, Eddie Kavanagh, and Dave Hickson.

We must have some psychologists reading this site who can explain and give a name to this bizarre dichotomy in human behavioral responses. We see it on almost every thread, whether we are talking about Kenwright or Osman.

I'm sure it's exactly the same gene in action that makes you see irrational negativity, unjust criticism and mindless prejudice on this forum, when what I see are Everton fans across a wide range of diversity expressing their differing opinions on things that concern them about every and any aspect of the football club they support.

This must be where I say we have to agree to disagree. But I don't accept that. I'd like to know what it is that causes this incredible, almost irrational spread of opinions and responses to what are essentially the same things.
Robert Daniels
50   Posted 18/11/2010 at 15:39:20

Report abuse

Aston Villa have invested in their stadium, year on year; Newcastle have rebuilt a fabulous ground; our board, and that includes the man at the top, have done fuck all.

At least Agent Johnson built the Park End and the megastore. Even he had the forsight to invest in the stadium, you know... speculate to accumulate.

They are now building a new structure at the Park End, after 10 years. Will this affect any ground improvements in the long-term? Will it effectively land-lock Goodison?

Why won't Bill Kenwright have a share rights issue to raise more funds? Why wont he let the fans invest or have a say in the ground development? Answers please, BK supporters.

The real answer is him and his cohorts, Green and Earl (those famous Spurs fans... like what the fuck are they doing anywhere near Everton???), aren't interested in any one of us. Retail development is all they're interested in. Whatever grip they have on Bill's quite considerable ball bag will not allow real progress take place.

Until these dark shadowy figures are exposed, we will remain under someone elses control. Why? Ask that lying bastard of a chairman. He sold us down the river... instead of putting us on the banks of it.
David O'Keefe
51   Posted 18/11/2010 at 21:41:28

Report abuse

Peter, Martin make a case for Bill or do one. Whats revealing is that the apologists don't want a debate ? they want to talk about anything else, but Bill Kenwright's record.

I've heard it all before, Peter, and it's boring as is your feigned outrage that at anyone that dares to question Bill Kenwright. Peter Johnson, at least we're not (insert name of club in crisis). Boring and negative.

Also did, any of you bother to read the article? It was rather concilliatory, unlike my previous offerings, in regards to the apologists as the article. If you did read the article, you would know that I have tried to organise a protest and failed.
David O'Keefe
52   Posted 18/11/2010 at 21:53:11

Report abuse

Martin, David, Peter, I believe in accountability and holding those to account, it is clear that you don't and that is very sad. Also, no appeal to a false balance is going to stop anyone criticising the board and their reign of error and inepititude, so I'm afraid your going to have to put up with it.

Let me give you an example of what I mean by false balance. In the 1970s the journalist John Pilger made a documentary for world in action that was critical of the Vietnam war, the broadcasting authorities ordered world in action oredered them to give the other spoint of view airtime. They didn't want to do this (understandably) as it would mean that they would have to mislead their viewers regarding the Vietnam War. So, how did they get round it, you may wonder? They made a programme about Ted Heath sailing.

So taking my cue from world in action, in order to provide balance; I will praise Bill Kenwrights production of Blood Brothers, after criticising BK.

So Bill is a bad chairman, will be followed by; but my mum enjoyed his production of blood brothers.

Happy now?
David Thomas
53   Posted 18/11/2010 at 22:15:54

Report abuse

David,

At what point do you talk about a failed protest attempt? Is there any particular reason why your protest attempt failed?
David O'Keefe
54   Posted 18/11/2010 at 22:33:18

Report abuse

David, must you really have the last word? Can't you let certain things lie?
Robert Dunckley
55   Posted 18/11/2010 at 22:36:00

Report abuse

I would like to hear your thoughts David @ 54 on any form of protest. maybe this would be the way to get the board to take notice?
David O'Keefe
56   Posted 18/11/2010 at 22:45:24

Report abuse

Robert, I'll give a considered view on this topic over the weekend.
David Thomas
57   Posted 18/11/2010 at 22:45:24

Report abuse

Robert,

To be honest, I have no feelings either way about any protests. If they were to happen, would i get involved? More than likely no. Would I have a problem with anyone protesting? No, it's their choice and if they feel in their opinion it will benefit the club in the long term that's their choice.

David O'Keefe,

You mentioned in your last post that "you tried to organise a protest and it failed". I think it is a fairly harmless question to ask why it failed?
David Thomas
58   Posted 18/11/2010 at 22:59:50

Report abuse

Robert,

Sorry about that, thought you were asking me.
Robert Dunckley
59   Posted 18/11/2010 at 23:29:36

Report abuse

David O'Keefe

I look forward to reading your post/article/blog entry.

Will be interesting to get a view on what could be done and what would be needed to ensure such an undertaking was a success.

Neil Pearse
60   Posted 19/11/2010 at 05:48:36

Report abuse

Well David, I am sure I am going to regret getting involved in this again. You and Michael will notice that few so called 'Kenwright Apologists' bother posting on Toffeeweb anymore ? so you haters are now mostly talking to yourselves. The abuse and the dogmatic irrationality just gets too much after a while.

Let's just take one point you make above. According to you, the Apologists don't want to talk about Kenwright's record. This is utterly and completely inaccurate.

Those who are not blindedly fanatical Kenwright haters are forever saying things like: the club is in a much better state than when he took over; we are regularly challenging for Europe; we are not near bankrupt or owned by crooks like so many of our rivals; we have retained a coveted manager; we have the best squad we have had for years, with most of our best players on long term contracts; we have state of the art training facilities; our merchandising and commercial activitiies are at last improving; we have done some excellent deals in the transfer market such as the Lescott deal; and in general we are now one of the most respected clubs in the Premiership.

But none of this counts for you, does it? Everything bad at the club is Kenwright's fault. Everything good is someone else's credit (yes, we all know, Walter Smith deserves all the credit for Moyes...). So it is like arguing with mad people who have already completely made up their minds, and will admit no deviations from their fanatical certainties.

David, 'balance' simply means saying this: Kenwright has made a lot of mistakes and worse (I can give you a list, the failure of Kings Dock being the most egregious), and many of his public statements make me cringe too. But he has also done some good things for this club, and under his stewardship we have fared much better than many of our rivals.

That you can never admit anything positive at all about Kenwright (and so descend to infantile comments about your mum liking Blood Brothers) is why you are regarded as a unbalanced fanatic that few bother to argue with.
Eric Myles
61   Posted 19/11/2010 at 08:19:06

Report abuse

Neil, all that's being asked from the so called 'apologists' is to point out where the likes of Colin Fitzpatrick or David O'keefe are wrong when they say things such as:

BK lied about King's Dock;
BK lied about Desperation Kirkby;
BK lied about the cheque in the post.

The only responses given are the ones you've made in your post above, ie. he's a True Blue from the boy's pen. Provide something of substance or admit that you are conveniently overlooking the truths that the so-called 'haters' are bringing up.

Richard Jones
62   Posted 19/11/2010 at 09:38:48

Report abuse

Neil, during one of our long debates in the past, I asked you if Kirkby failed should Kenwright be brought to task and you you said he should; have you changed your mind on this stance?
Peter Norris
63   Posted 19/11/2010 at 12:16:04

Report abuse

David 51. Do one eh? Nice to see there is a recognition of others views even if it doesn't match their own. Seems like you have tried to do one (rally the "Get BK Out" brigade) and the rest is history.

Interesting to hear Neil's view (60) and his final paragraph.

Enjoy your considerations over the weekend. To use a previous comment on this site it seems like this is all gong and no dinner.

John Daley
64   Posted 19/11/2010 at 17:05:32

Report abuse

"The club is in a much better state than when he took over; we are not near bankrupt or owned by crooks like so many of our rivals"

What were the debt levels at the club when Bill became Chairman and what does said debt stand at now? Why exactly did the club's debt jump dramatically immediately after Kenwright took control and what were the mysterious 'miscellaneous expenses' that suddenly appeared in the clubs accounts and made up a large chunk of this added debt?

"We have the best squad we have had for years"

That's open to debate (and current performances on the pitch certainly don't back this claim up) but how is this Kenwright's achievement?

"Merchandising and commercial activitiies are at last improving".

As of the last published accounts, the clubs income from these departments remain derisory.
Ste Traverse
65   Posted 19/11/2010 at 18:25:28

Report abuse

Neil Pearse shouldn't be taken too seriously. This is the guy who swollowed all the spin and lies the club put out regarding Kirkby.

The fact is Kenwright has been a complete failure in delivering the needs of this club and has made error after error. He deserves all the criticism going and if that makes fans like myself "haters" then so be it.
Neil Pearse
66   Posted 20/11/2010 at 07:33:38

Report abuse

Ste we can ignore, since this is just typical Hater abuse, completely misreporting what the other person actually said. I made up my own mind about Kirkby, disagreeing with much of the data provided by the club (eg I never ever believed it would be "virtually free" or "world class", and said so many times on this site). But hey, why not just abuse someone because they have a different view?

Eric - where do I ever, have I ever, said that we should support Bill because he is a Blue from the Boys Pen? Again, why the mindless caricaturing of those you disagree with? Actually I don't give a rat's ass about the Boys Pen. Kenrwight stands or falls on his record as Chairman of the club. All I am asking for is more of a balanced rather than the wildly fanatical view which is the dominant view on Toffeeweb (and why most of us don't post much here anymore).

Let's all be outraged about the lies shall we. Yes, I am bored. I would recommend that some of you get out a bit more into the real world where you will no doubt be surprised to find that quite often people don't tell the truth in the process of trying to get what they want and think best for their organisation. You can't make omelettes without breaking eggs.

Richard, I do indeed think that Kenwright has run his course after Kirkby, and should move on as soon as an accpetable buyer is found. (Actually, I posted on here BEFORE Kirkby suggesting that Kenwright should move on, and hoped that securing Kirkby would be a way of bringing that about.) Since the club is effectively up for sale, and if somone actually made a decent bid it would be hard for the current owners to resist, that is effectively where we are.

John, comparing our debts levels today and our debt levels over a decade ago is pretty irrelevant. Debt levels of ALL clubs have exploded in this time. Some bringing down their clubs. Our debt levels are currently uncomfortable but manageable in this context which is what matters.

But of course to those who have already decided that Kenwright is the devil incarnate, I am simply wasting my breath.

Personally I think it is almost always an error to personalise the analysis of a situation so it is all about one man. It never is. Gordon Brown was a poor Prime Minister, but he did not cause the global financial meltdown, and actually he did quite a good job in the rescue phase. That's a balanced view. Tories banging on about Brown having 'caused' our current situation are idiots, blind to the bigger picture and the more fundamental forces at work.

It's just not all about Kenwright, and it's infantile to keep banging on about him. Our club's problems are structural not personal. We have been in a fundamentally weak financial situation for at least two decades. We lack an effective financial, business model to compete in the upper half of the Premiership, and we are not attractive to buyers.

Unfortunately there are no easy answers, and simply getting rid of the Chairman is not one of them. All our problems would still remain, and indeed if we were unfortunate enough to get one of the recent owners of many of our rivals, our problems would get worse.

I urge everyone to take a broader view and stop obsessing about Kenwright. He just ain't that important. As ever, the Swiss Ramble piece (hardly favourable to Bill, and fairly so) will tell you more about the real problems facing our club than all the endless Bill hatchet jobs on this site.

Enjoy!

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2010/04/why-has-nobody-bought-everton.html
Richard Jones
67   Posted 20/11/2010 at 12:53:15

Report abuse

I believe at the Public Inquiry the club said that it wasn't up for sale though!! Yet that report says that it is.
Neil Pearse
68   Posted 20/11/2010 at 13:14:25

Report abuse

Richard ? You know as well as I do that in the Kirkby process it was necessary to give assurances that the club would not be sold. You also know as well as I do that since then the club has very publicly retained advisors to sell the club. You also know very well that Bill himslf has said that he would sell the club to the right buyer. What is your problem?
David O'Keefe
69   Posted 20/11/2010 at 22:31:06

Report abuse

Actually, Neil, if there is an unbalanced fanatic on here...oh look up psychological projection.
Richard Jones
70   Posted 21/11/2010 at 14:36:18

Report abuse

I thought we had already estabished that what Bill says and what he means are two different things Neil!!

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment to Fan Articles, 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 MailBag submissions across the site.



© ToffeeWeb


Latest News

Subscribe to The Athletic, Get 40% off

Online Football Betting with Betway

Bet on Everton and get a deposit bonus with bet365 at TheFreeBetGuide.com



Recent Articles





Talking Points & General Forum

Pinned Links

OK

We use cookies to enhance your experience on ToffeeWeb and to enable certain features. By using the website you are consenting to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.