0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: wing commander on June 03, 2014, 12:46:31 pm In the interests of equality, Wonders if some people need a history lesson on who sold there shares to a certain Ken Richardson in the first place ??Also in the interests of balance I'll add:Under pressure from certain sections of our fans
In the interests of equality, Wonders if some people need a history lesson on who sold there shares to a certain Ken Richardson in the first place ??
Nice attempt at rewriting history tho.
It turned nasty during the reign of Ken Richardson when he was abused by some misguided fans who had been brainwashed into thinking he was holding the club back by not selling his shares to the self-styled benefactor who was later jailed for conspiring to burn down the main stand.
Shouty Bags
Quote from: Iberian Red on June 03, 2014, 10:42:31 pmNice attempt at rewriting history tho.If it is an attempt it's a fairly widely accepted attempt:QuoteIt turned nasty during the reign of Ken Richardson when he was abused by some misguided fans who had been brainwashed into thinking he was holding the club back by not selling his shares to the self-styled benefactor who was later jailed for conspiring to burn down the main stand.http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/doncaster-rovers/comment-john-ryan-became-the-single-most-important-figure-in-rovers-history-says-peter-catt-1-6246494
Sad. You know that what Catt is reporting there is Ryan's own take? I assume you DO realise that?Ryan has been a master of nursing a grudge on the flimsiest pretext.He did it over the sale of shares to Richardson, "when he was abused by some misguided fans". How many? 1? 5? 20? Was it a concerted hate campaign, or the odd comment chucked his way after a defeat? Cos I was there most matches back then, and I cannot recall a big effort to throw vitriol his way at matches. And I don't recall press stories of Rovers fans besieging his house. Seems like a bit of over-egging? And then, he did it on the issue of buying out the club from Richardson. He's insisted that he had abuse from fans about his motives. I might have missed that, because all I saw was unadulterated love from the overwhelming majority of fans, with a few questions on embryonic internet sites.He did it over the humble pie issue the year we went up from L1, where he couldn't resist having a pop at his own customers for having doubted his support of O'Driscoll.He did it when he professed his astonishment last year that anyone could doubt his bona fides, at EXACTLY the same time that he was evading questions and throwing out half-truths about the SC takeover.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Look. I think Ryan has been an amazing chairman of this club. We have achieved things I never thought possible under his guidance. I am in awe of how he drove that through his own personality. But there's another side. He is an astonishingly sensitive soul for a successful businessman and football club owner. Why on earth should he still bring up the issue of a few fans chanting at him to sell out to Richardson 20 years ago? And why on earth should he need to spin a story that it was that experience that forced him into doing it? He seems to need to put up windmills to tilt at. Fair enough, if that gets him up in a morning and if that has driven him to push the club onwards.But put his comments into that perspective. He's not a deity. He's not infallible. He does not pronounce ex-cathedra. His comments are no more "facts" than anyone else's
i would be very disappointed if JR said "I'm not speaking to the VSC unless so and so is/isn't a director".The trust is independent of the club, has always been and and should always remain so, regardless of if any club directors do/don't "get on with" individual vsc directors.
Quote from: bobjimwilly on June 03, 2014, 07:18:01 pmi would be very disappointed if JR said "I'm not speaking to the VSC unless so and so is/isn't a director".The trust is independent of the club, has always been and and should always remain so, regardless of if any club directors do/don't "get on with" individual vsc directors.From my understanding it's one director in particular JR doesn't want to deal with. If that was the case, then I would hope the director in question would step back - whether he felt it right or wrong - for the good of the Trust.
What if JR had a problem with all directors? Should they all go, "for the good of the trust"? It's a shame you don't understand the idea of a supporters trust, and how it has to be 100% independent from the club, something which JR fiercely agreed with when the VSC was formed.
Quote from: bobjimwilly on June 04, 2014, 12:36:24 pmWhat if JR had a problem with all directors? Should they all go, "for the good of the trust"? It's a shame you don't understand the idea of a supporters trust, and how it has to be 100% independent from the club, something which JR fiercely agreed with when the VSC was formed.It's more of a shame that you can't read something properly without this standard knee-jerk reaction.Step-back, not stand down.Regardless, what purpose does a trust serve if the club won't speak to it and its shareholding is minimal?