A Good Article

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Let's hope the individuals can justify their comments eh?  I'd like to know what I 'cheated' at to get on the VSC board.

Anyhow, it's perfectly fine for people to say these things, it goes over my head.  I think it's far more important that we do things that benefit the football club and the charities we work with than care for things such as this, it's a little sad.

Explain how co-opting works, Andrew.

It involves bringing a person in to do a specific job and provide a specific skill that brings benefits to the trust.  The board currently has one co-opted member who is doing that and bringing many benefits.  It's a very good thing, I'm not sure how that's "cheating".

[Sad-Rovers]

Let's hope the individuals can justify their comments eh?  I'd like to know what I 'cheated' at to get on the VSC board.

Anyhow, it's perfectly fine for people to say these things, it goes over my head.  I think it's far more important that we do things that benefit the football club and the charities we work with than care for things such as this, it's a little sad.

Explain how co-opting works, Andrew.

It involves bringing a person in to do a specific job and provide a specific skill that brings benefits to the trust.  The board currently has one co-opted member who is doing that and bringing many benefits.  It's a very good thing, I'm not sure how that's "cheating".

Thanks Andrew, would you mind answering the following?

How many people can the board members co-opt? Is there a limit? How many members have been co-opted in the past? Are co-opted members of the board subject to a vote after a certain period? Do you have systems in place to deal with any accusations of nepotism?

Thanks,

Neil.

[Sad-Rovers]

Also, I'd like to know why two VSC members have dragged this and the other TO thread off topic into a VSC thread?

Aren't they aware that there is a VSC matters sub forum? Could they be accused of "baiting"?

[Jenny]

Co-opted members of the board have to be ratified at the next AGM meaning that if members have any objections to that person being co-opted, they can air them and that person may not have their position ratified.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Paraphrasing TB?

Aye, well, I'm not sure how else to sum up Wesley's comments. They are there for you to see.

Not a mention of the effect that the takeover will have on the Rovers' prospects. Not one. And yet he states that it will be his finest day on the forum.

How strange, some folks' priorities. And you reckon it is ME that is all ego, eh spadger?

[Sad-Rovers]

How strange, some folks' priorities. And you reckon it is ME that is all ego, eh spadger?

Everyone is egocentric to a degree William, but it's a very fine line between narcissism and egocentrism.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sad.

But YOU have higher standards. You believe that stuff that is posted in the public domain is fair game.

So, anyway, what's YOUR take Sad? Do you agree with Wesley that the primary thing coming out of this is not the fantastic opportunities it opens up for the Rovers, but the settling of scores with VSC folk?

I'm very excited for the imminent return of JR and further investment in the playing squad BST but I'm only human so I do derive a small amount of schadenfreude from it.

Human nature, eh?

Sad

Of course it is well established that Ryan doesn't have the wherewithal to make huge investments in the playing side. And unless Tomlinson has got a bit stashed under the mattress, the figures quoted for his wealth are not sufficient either.

Let's hope the ones who have the real money are good guys then, eh?

As for schadenfreude, I hope you enjoy it. You must be delighted.

[Tokyos Boot]

Paraphrasing TB?

Aye, well, I'm not sure how else to sum up Wesley's comments. They are there for you to see.

Not a mention of the effect that the takeover will have on the Rovers' prospects. Not one. And yet he states that it will be his finest day on the forum.

How strange, some folks' priorities. And you reckon it is ME that is all ego, eh spadger?

Well the primary gain is obvious to see, a footballing man, supporter and a man who laid the foundation for everything we have at the club returns - WITH more cash than he could afford. The primary gains are so obvious they are boring, theres no use everyone on here waffling endlessly about the boardroom business of the club because:

A) It will make no difference to the outcome

B) Nobody knows anything about whats going on behind closed doors

C) Literally everyone ever involved with a football club is so because they believe they'll see a financial gain from it somewhere.

I think after the last takeover debate and the JR vs The VSC (Battle of Bannockburn shall we call it?) everyone was rapid to jump on the bandwagon, to run their mouth's and slag off 'the enemy', to publicly insult the integrity of JR as both a businessman and Rovers fan. Most of you still are!

Those who felt disenfranchised and misrepresented by the VSCs misjudged and outspoken stance ( in my opinion nothing short of a bitter 'retaliation' to being told to stop sticking their noses in) are entitled to bang the drum now, because they were chased away by a lot of the forum posters on here for believing in JR.

[BigColSutherland]

Co-opted members of the board have to be ratified at the next AGM meaning that if members have any objections to that person being co-opted, they can air them and that person may not have their position ratified.

So a co-opted individual could, theoretically, serve for 364 days, without members ever having a say about it?

[wing commander]

    Well if it happens then so be it and as long as its in the best interests of Rovers .great..It should never be about them and us..it should be about whats best for Doncaster Rovers....However if some on the fb side want to make it a battle of wits..I've not seen much to frighten me so far ;-)

[BillyStubbsTears]

C) Literally everyone ever involved with a football club is so because they believe they'll see a financial gain from it somewhere.

I'm confused. Does "Literally everyone" include Ryan?

[Sad-Rovers]

Co-opted members of the board have to be ratified at the next AGM meaning that if members have any objections to that person being co-opted, they can air them and that person may not have their position ratified.

So a co-opted individual could, theoretically, serve for 364 days, without members ever having a say about it?

And then could they stand down for a few days before being re-co-opted?

This has been dragged too far OT now (you should know better TBH Filo) Shall we retire to VSC matters so as not to offend "keepmoatfaithful"?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Yes if you've got an issue take it there, or better still, read the rules.

[Jenny]

Co-opted members of the board have to be ratified at the next AGM meaning that if members have any objections to that person being co-opted, they can air them and that person may not have their position ratified.

So a co-opted individual could, theoretically, serve for 364 days, without members ever having a say about it?

My understanding is that is correct.

Directors are usually co-opted when their is a specific need for a specific resource/expertise, it would be detramental to the trust in some instances if that person had to wait until the AGM to join the board.

I fail to see an issue with this, or how it is 'cheating', but y'know, each to their own.

[wing commander]

   Sad......I've got to be honest with you fella..Your obviously an intelligent guy even though I agree with very little you say but In a strange way I hope to come across you one day in the boozer as a few friendly pints and a good open debate would be quite enjoyable...;-)

[Welling Rover]

Paraphrasing TB?

Aye, well, I'm not sure how else to sum up Wesley's comments. They are there for you to see.

Not a mention of the effect that the takeover will have on the Rovers' prospects. Not one. And yet he states that it will be his finest day on the forum.

How strange, some folks' priorities. And you reckon it is ME that is all ego, eh spadger?

Well the primary gain is obvious to see, a footballing man, supporter and a man who laid the foundation for everything we have at the club returns - WITH more cash than he could afford. The primary gains are so obvious they are boring, theres no use everyone on here waffling endlessly about the boardroom business of the club because:

A) It will make no difference to the outcome

B) Nobody knows anything about whats going on behind closed doors

C) Literally everyone ever involved with a football club is so because they believe they'll see a financial gain from it somewhere.

I think after the last takeover debate and the JR vs The VSC (Battle of Bannockburn shall we call it?) everyone was rapid to jump on the bandwagon, to run their mouth's and slag off 'the enemy', to publicly insult the integrity of JR as both a businessman and Rovers fan. Most of you still are!

Those who felt disenfranchised and misrepresented by the VSCs misjudged and outspoken stance ( in my opinion nothing short of a bitter 'retaliation' to being told to stop sticking their noses in) are entitled to bang the drum now, because they were chased away by a lot of the forum posters on here for believing in JR.

If the finances/wealth of JR and LT are added together they do not have the means on their own to drive the club forward.
Where is the "MORE CASH THAN HE CAN AFFORD" coming from ?

[Tokyos Boot]

C) Literally everyone ever involved with a football club is so because they believe they'll see a financial gain from it somewhere.

I'm confused. Does "Literally everyone" include Ryan?

Definitely.

You must remember how football, as much as its our (and JRs) passion - it is still a business.

I can't imagine the kind of money JRs lost to DRFC, and of course if you were to ask me would i have put that much in, chased (and funded) the dream like he did, the sensible man would say "Hell no!".

But we're here because of his personal sacrifice, he's addicted to playing the roulette and he'll go down as the biggest and best roulette player in our history - even if he blows all his chips on it!

[BigColSutherland]

Co-opted members of the board have to be ratified at the next AGM meaning that if members have any objections to that person being co-opted, they can air them and that person may not have their position ratified.

So a co-opted individual could, theoretically, serve for 364 days, without members ever having a say about it?

My understanding is that is correct.

Directors are usually co-opted when their is a specific need for a specific resource/expertise, it would be detramental to the trust in some instances if that person had to wait until the AGM to join the board.

I fail to see an issue with this, or how it is 'cheating', but y'know, each to their own.

Do directors have to justify themselves to members as to why they have co-opted someone? Is there any way for members to evaluate if the co-opted member was/is necessary?

[Sad-Rovers]

   Sad......I've got to be honest with you fella..Your obviously an intelligent guy even though I agree with very little you say but In a strange way I hope to come across you one day in the boozer as a few friendly pints and a good open debate would be quite enjoyable...;-)

I'll never shy away from reasoned debate WingCo, I've met SM at Belle Vue bar for a quick pint and discussion before, we don't see eye to eye on quite a few things but that's life, being able to accept that people have differing opinions is an important part of being a rational human!

I'm just glad that this TO hasn't descended into bannings and personal insults like the last one did.

[River Don]

I don't believe football is a business.

If it is a business, it's a very strange business where people are prepared to lose millions and not care.

[Not Now Kato]

Those who felt disenfranchised and misrepresented by the VSCs misjudged and outspoken stance ( in my opinion nothing short of a bitter 'retaliation' to being told to stop sticking their noses in) are entitled to bang the drum now, because they were chased away by a lot of the forum posters on here for believing in JR.

You mean those posters who are not members of the VSC?  Like yourself?

[Sad-Rovers]

Those who felt disenfranchised and misrepresented by the VSCs misjudged and outspoken stance ( in my opinion nothing short of a bitter 'retaliation' to being told to stop sticking their noses in) are entitled to bang the drum now, because they were chased away by a lot of the forum posters on here for believing in JR.

You mean those posters who are not members of the VSC?  Like yourself?

What about the ones who ARE in the VSC? What about the ones that have subsequently left the VSC?

[Tokyos Boot]

Those who felt disenfranchised and misrepresented by the VSCs misjudged and outspoken stance ( in my opinion nothing short of a bitter 'retaliation' to being told to stop sticking their noses in) are entitled to bang the drum now, because they were chased away by a lot of the forum posters on here for believing in JR.

You mean those posters who are not members of the VSC?  Like yourself?

You should work in recruitment... The self entitlement that comes with VSC Membership seems so appealing...

[Not Now Kato]

Those who felt disenfranchised and misrepresented by the VSCs misjudged and outspoken stance ( in my opinion nothing short of a bitter 'retaliation' to being told to stop sticking their noses in) are entitled to bang the drum now, because they were chased away by a lot of the forum posters on here for believing in JR.

You mean those posters who are not members of the VSC?  Like yourself?

You should work in recruitment... The self entitlement that comes with VSC Membership seems so appealing...

Pehaps you should join then?
 
Complaints from outside any organisation are never as powerful as those from within.

[Sad-Rovers]

Gents, I've started a new thread over in VSC Matters for, errm, matters concerning the VSC... 

http://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=246946.0

Could we try to drag this thread back to the TO, please.

[Alickismyhero]

I would like to make one request before the attempt to get back on topic

TOKYO.

Can you tell me.......

          DID RYAN TELL LIES ABOUT SELLING HIS SHARES IN THE LAST TO?

[Tokyos Boot]

I have no idea....

I'm assuming thats a rhetorical question?

I am not THAT interested in the T/O detailings because of the ABC reasons stated above.

[Wild Rover]

AS far as I remember he AGREED to sell his shares to SC. I don't remember him saying he had.

As Below.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/doncaster-rovers/doncaster-rovers-sequentia-capital-not-interested-without-john-ryan-1-6256023

[BillyStubbsTears]

C) Literally everyone ever involved with a football club is so because they believe they'll see a financial gain from it somewhere.

I'm confused. Does "Literally everyone" include Ryan?

Definitely.

You must remember how football, as much as its our (and JRs) passion - it is still a business.

I can't imagine the kind of money JRs lost to DRFC, and of course if you were to ask me would i have put that much in, chased (and funded) the dream like he did, the sensible man would say "Hell no!".

But we're here because of his personal sacrifice, he's addicted to playing the roulette and he'll go down as the biggest and best roulette player in our history - even if he blows all his chips on it!

I'm still confused. Are you saying that he originally got involved because he thought he would make a shed load of money from the club?

[Alickismyhero]

I have no idea....

I'm assuming thats a rhetorical question?

I am not THAT interested in the T/O detailings because of the ABC reasons stated above.

AS far as I remember he AGREED to sell his shares to SC. I don't remember him saying he had.

As Below.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/doncaster-rovers/doncaster-rovers-sequentia-capital-not-interested-without-john-ryan-1-6256023

Take it from me HE LIED and you know it.

 Perhaps he can organise some humble pie for himself if this TO goes through as a way of apologising for getting in to bad company.