FAO: Keith / Trust

Keith, can I give my honest humble opinion here. When the Trust came about I thought it a great thing and that's why I joined it, but in recent times it's taken one hell of a bashing. Much of that wasn't their fault to be fair, they were duped by Ridsdale and Flitcroft who were extremely economical with the truth. I don't think it would have mattered who had meetings with those two they would have been duped as well so I don't think anyone at the Trust should take it personally in any way.

Most of the damage to the Trust was done when things started to emerge and rather than act the Trust resembled the Judean Peoples Front, just making meeting after meeting which only decided to have another meeting. This climaxed in the same way where the JPF approached the crucified Brian and read him a strongly worded letter.

When the Ridsdale regime were outed, the Trust's credibility was in total tatters and had a lot of hard graft to do to start rebuilding that "Trust" if you like. Remembering that this is just my opinion of things but I think that a lot of people agree with me on this. Whether you agree or not doesn't really matter, it's the people like me that matter to your organisation.

Last Friday Gwyn, and I asked the Trust to ask the question about an embargo. To be fair the club was then asked in very good faith and they replied with a "NO". That response was put on here, again in very good faith. Now, again this is my opinion, but I think the only reason you are in denial about this embargo is because if there is one then the club lied to you and made you look like mugs - again! Not a good thing when you are trying to rebuild trust.

It also appears to me that you are in some ways afraid to confront the club in case you are forfeted in some way. You seem to care more about raising communications even if they are false ones. Again these are not just my feelings but feelings of others who've grown weiry of the Trust.

Look Keith, on this embargo, trust me there is an embargo. No ifs or whys, no official statements. There's an embargo, live with it. How do I know? The BBC are reporting it, the media are reporting it along with everyone else. Do you honestly think that the FA is that water tight? Anyway, if you are walking down the street and you look up to water droplets hitting you in the face then it's raining. You don't need a statement off Derek, it's rain plain and simple. Even if you go home and Derek says that it wasn't raining, it was because it hit you in the face.

As for your posts regarding Terry Phillips and Steve Tucker. Do you think they only get their articles off mb's? I would think they would find that rather insulting. What is probably closer to the truth is they take leads off these mb's and then make a few phone calls to see if there's any truth in it. Give Steve and Terry a call yourself and ask them personally how they are so sure there's an embargo. Regardless of that I don't think the BBC would make reports based solely on those two journos reports. I'll bet you a bacon sandwich that there is an embargo, but don't bother reaching for brown sauce Keith.

There is an embargo, not because it’s reported on the BBC (or this message board for that matter) but because the Football League rules state there will be one if a club falls behind with its tax liabilities. We have a winding up order from the HMRC dated for 11 August which means we have embargo and if we don't then the FL is not doing its job properly.

With regard to the Trust I really want it to succeed I really do, but I get so concerned when prominent members of the Trust Board start nit picking at fellow supporters in what appears to be a backdoor defence of club officials. If Since '62 really wants to pick up on inaccuracies then instead of asking fans 'where is that documented' he might be better off going to Mr Jenkins and asking him why he has documented a load of bollocks on the official website.

There is an embargo, not because it’s reported on the BBC (or this message board for that matter) but because the Football League rules state there will be one if a club falls behind with its tax liabilities. We have a winding up order from the HMRC dated for 11 August which means we have embargo and if we don't then the FL is not doing its job properly.

With regard to the Trust I really want it to succeed I really do, but I get so concerned when prominent members of the Trust Board start nit picking at fellow supporters in what appears to be a backdoor defence of club officials. If Since '62 really wants to pick up on inaccuracies then instead of asking fans 'where is that documented' he might be better off going to Mr Jenkins and asking him why he has documented a load of bollocks on the official website.

Tony I haven`t had chance to respond to The Outsider yet as its a post which raises some very valid points which deserve a proper reply and work commitments probably won`t allow me to do that until tomorrow.

If my "nitpicking" gives the impression of any kind of defence of the club , I apologise as this was not my intention. I will be one of the first to question the club`s CEO and Chairman if what they have said on the official club website turns out to be wrong or misleading. As I often did during the reign of P Ridsdale if he did the same thing.

Which bits of Gethin Jenkins` recent posts on the official website do you consider to be "a load of bollocks" (genuine question)?

Keith

The Trust has to succeed and is doing a good job in my opinion. It is the best approach to organising the fan base, and by a long way. One can always nitpick on specific issues and points, but one has to see the bigger picture. We should all join and get behind those who are working on our behalf for no reward and scant appreciation. Frankly, I would rather put my money in the Trust than the Club right now.

There is an embargo, not because it’s reported on the BBC (or this message board for that matter) but because the Football League rules state there will be one if a club falls behind with its tax liabilities. We have a winding up order from the HMRC dated for 11 August which means we have embargo and if we don't then the FL is not doing its job properly.

With regard to the Trust I really want it to succeed I really do, but I get so concerned when prominent members of the Trust Board start nit picking at fellow supporters in what appears to be a backdoor defence of club officials. If Since '62 really wants to pick up on inaccuracies then instead of asking fans 'where is that documented' he might be better off going to Mr Jenkins and asking him why he has documented a load of bollocks on the official website.

Tony I haven`t had chance to respond to The Outsider yet as its a post which raises some very valid points which deserve a proper reply and work commitments probably won`t allow me to do that until tomorrow.

If my "nitpicking" gives the impression of any kind of defence of the club , I apologise as this was not my intention. I will be one of the first to question the club`s CEO and Chairman if what they have said on the official club website turns out to be wrong or misleading. As I often did during the reign of P Ridsdale if he did the same thing.

Which bits of Gethin Jenkins` recent posts on the official website do you consider to be "a load of bollocks" (genuine question)?

Keith

There have been a number of occasions just recently where you have been critical of individual posters for repeating news reported on this website. The reports might not be 100% correct but I would wager that they are certainly in the right ball park and let’s be honest you have no evidence to the contrary to suggest that they are wrong.

Without wanting to drag up old problems, it does remind me of the disputes we had with the Trust over the Ridsdale problem where some members of the Trust were happy to knock some of our fans rather than the CEO. Without a doubt that episode greatly affected the credibility of the Trust (it made them look pro-club anti-fan) and the last thing we need is a repeat of that.

When I wrote the bit about G Jenkins I immediately knew I had wrote the wrong thing but the dam message board wouldn't allow me to edit it. What I meant to say was if G Jenkins has given the Trust duff information over the transfer embargo, then quite rightly you should be picking him up for that rather than concentrating on spotting minor factual errors on this board.

I accept the Trust cannot be held responsible for what you are told by the club, but if they have misled you then that is not a very good basis for mutual trust and that message should be relayed to them without delay.

I'm not saying these things because I hate the Trust; I'm saying them through shear frustration because I don't want the Trust to lose the good will it is beginning to build up again.

Tony

The Trust has to succeed and is doing a good job in my opinion. It is the best approach to organising the fan base, and by a long way. One can always nitpick on specific issues and points, but one has to see the bigger picture. We should all join and get behind those who are working on our behalf for no reward and scant appreciation. Frankly, I would rather put my money in the Trust than the Club right now.

I totally agree with you the Trust has to be the way ahead and those involved do work hard for little thanks but faith has to be earned by displaying that the Trust has the member’s best interests at heart.

Therefore those in charge of the Trust should understand that undermining their own is never going to achieve that even if it is well intentioned.

Also if G Jenkins is seen as getting away with telling the Trust a pack of lies over the embargo whilst Trust Board members are making nick picking remarks against posters on this MB then overnight the Trust will lose any good will it has worked hard to build up. I don't want to see that and I hope by making my fears known we can avoid another disaster.

Let’s not kid ourselves these are terrible times for our club and at such times we look to Supporters Trusts to step up to the mark and represent it’s members NOT THE FRIGGING CEO.

Keith, can I give my honest humble opinion here. When the Trust came about I thought it a great thing and that's why I joined it, but in recent times it's taken one hell of a bashing. Much of that wasn't their fault to be fair, they were duped by Ridsdale and Flitcroft who were extremely economical with the truth. I don't think it would have mattered who had meetings with those two they would have been duped as well so I don't think anyone at the Trust should take it personally in any way.

Most of the damage to the Trust was done when things started to emerge and rather than act the Trust resembled the Judean Peoples Front, just making meeting after meeting which only decided to have another meeting. This climaxed in the same way where the JPF approached the crucified Brian and read him a strongly worded letter.

When the Ridsdale regime were outed, the Trust's credibility was in total tatters and had a lot of hard graft to do to start rebuilding that "Trust" if you like. Remembering that this is just my opinion of things but I think that a lot of people agree with me on this. Whether you agree or not doesn't really matter, it's the people like me that matter to your organisation.

Last Friday Gwyn, and I asked the Trust to ask the question about an embargo. To be fair the club was then asked in very good faith and they replied with a "NO". That response was put on here, again in very good faith. Now, again this is my opinion, but I think the only reason you are in denial about this embargo is because if there is one then the club lied to you and made you look like mugs - again! Not a good thing when you are trying to rebuild trust.

It also appears to me that you are in some ways afraid to confront the club in case you are forfeted in some way. You seem to care more about raising communications even if they are false ones. Again these are not just my feelings but feelings of others who've grown weiry of the Trust.

Look Keith, on this embargo, trust me there is an embargo. No ifs or whys, no official statements. There's an embargo, live with it. How do I know? The BBC are reporting it, the media are reporting it along with everyone else. Do you honestly think that the FA is that water tight? Anyway, if you are walking down the street and you look up to water droplets hitting you in the face then it's raining. You don't need a statement off Derek, it's rain plain and simple. Even if you go home and Derek says that it wasn't raining, it was because it hit you in the face.

As for your posts regarding Terry Phillips and Steve Tucker. Do you think they only get their articles off mb's? I would think they would find that rather insulting. What is probably closer to the truth is they take leads off these mb's and then make a few phone calls to see if there's any truth in it. Give Steve and Terry a call yourself and ask them personally how they are so sure there's an embargo. Regardless of that I don't think the BBC would make reports based solely on those two journos reports. I'll bet you a bacon sandwich that there is an embargo, but don't bother reaching for brown sauce Keith.

Good points worthy of a proper and honest response. I did start answering earlier today , but got diverted by work (always gets in the way of CCFC matters ) and then lost the bloody response somewhere in the system when nearly completed


I don`t take it personally to point out that I and other Trust members were misled by Ridsdale , but I think "duped" suggests tacit acceptance of what he said. Ask Annis and others on this board if I am the type who would or did take this approach - I would hope they can confirm that I was one of his biggest critics (to his face) over many matters. I actually think there was far more "duping" at the fans meetings held in Merthyr and the Muni Club.And I think you are being too kind to Ridsdale by saying he was economical with the truth - he blatantly lied on more than one occasion.

I agree with you that the Trust was too indecisive at times in its early days while we were finding our feet , and we remain restricted to an extent by the legal rules within which we must operate.But , based on the meetings I have personally been at , I am sure that we are far from being too "cosy" with the club. I don`t think the Trust reputation has been in tatters , although I fully accept that a substantial number of fans think that our approach was (and still is) too formal and not aggressive enough.On the other hand , a large number of our less vociferous members want us to act in the more formal democratic way. Who was it who said about pleasing all of the people all of the time? All sides have an equally valid right to their view and approach.

I truly believe that it was a combination of the Trust approach , the more aggressive/proactive approach of protest marches (which I attended), and the accounting detective work of the new investors that caused the removal of Ridsdale from the club. No one individual group can or should claim the credit in my view.Lets just be thankful he can no longer do any lasting damage.

If the new senior management team has lied to the Trust (and I presume you are referring to the official press releases of both the CEO and the Chairman), then I can assure you that I will be doing all I can as a Trust board member to get them to publicly explain why.To help in this , could you point me to specific things they have said that you think are lies (genuine question).I am also not sure that the Trust has asked the club (yet) a specific question whether an embargo is in place let alone receive a "no" answer , but someone else on the board may have and I am just not aware of it.There is certainly no fear within the Trust of asking difficult important questions of the club`s management - we wish to maintain a dialogue to keep our members informed , but not at any cost to our independence or integrity.

The embargo. I am not by any means saying there isn`t one , just that there is no firm evidence that it is in place.But I agree that the circumstantial evidence suggests that it is and also feel that the club should have made a clear and unequivocal statement specifically on this point. The truth should out within the next few days.

As for Tery and Steve , yes I really do believe that they are often guilty of lazy journalism and rely far too much on messageboards without much further research. It is a conversation I have had with Terry in the past at a time when I accused him of too sycophantic an approach to P Ridsdale.

Keith

Keith,you obviously know your financial stuff and are also a true Bluebird,have you thought of offering your services in a consultancy role ?

Keith, can I give my honest humble opinion here. When the Trust came about I thought it a great thing and that's why I joined it, but in recent times it's taken one hell of a bashing. Much of that wasn't their fault to be fair, they were duped by Ridsdale and Flitcroft who were extremely economical with the truth. I don't think it would have mattered who had meetings with those two they would have been duped as well so I don't think anyone at the Trust should take it personally in any way.

Most of the damage to the Trust was done when things started to emerge and rather than act the Trust resembled the Judean Peoples Front, just making meeting after meeting which only decided to have another meeting. This climaxed in the same way where the JPF approached the crucified Brian and read him a strongly worded letter.

When the Ridsdale regime were outed, the Trust's credibility was in total tatters and had a lot of hard graft to do to start rebuilding that "Trust" if you like. Remembering that this is just my opinion of things but I think that a lot of people agree with me on this. Whether you agree or not doesn't really matter, it's the people like me that matter to your organisation.

Last Friday Gwyn, and I asked the Trust to ask the question about an embargo. To be fair the club was then asked in very good faith and they replied with a "NO". That response was put on here, again in very good faith. Now, again this is my opinion, but I think the only reason you are in denial about this embargo is because if there is one then the club lied to you and made you look like mugs - again! Not a good thing when you are trying to rebuild trust.

It also appears to me that you are in some ways afraid to confront the club in case you are forfeted in some way. You seem to care more about raising communications even if they are false ones. Again these are not just my feelings but feelings of others who've grown weiry of the Trust.

Look Keith, on this embargo, trust me there is an embargo. No ifs or whys, no official statements. There's an embargo, live with it. How do I know? The BBC are reporting it, the media are reporting it along with everyone else. Do you honestly think that the FA is that water tight? Anyway, if you are walking down the street and you look up to water droplets hitting you in the face then it's raining. You don't need a statement off Derek, it's rain plain and simple. Even if you go home and Derek says that it wasn't raining, it was because it hit you in the face.

As for your posts regarding Terry Phillips and Steve Tucker. Do you think they only get their articles off mb's? I would think they would find that rather insulting. What is probably closer to the truth is they take leads off these mb's and then make a few phone calls to see if there's any truth in it. Give Steve and Terry a call yourself and ask them personally how they are so sure there's an embargo. Regardless of that I don't think the BBC would make reports based solely on those two journos reports. I'll bet you a bacon sandwich that there is an embargo, but don't bother reaching for brown sauce Keith.

Good points worthy of a proper and honest response. I did start answering earlier today , but got diverted by work (always gets in the way of CCFC matters ) and then lost the bloody response somewhere in the system when nearly completed


I don`t take it personally to point out that I and other Trust members were misled by Ridsdale , but I think "duped" suggests tacit acceptance of what he said. Ask Annis and others on this board if I am the type who would or did take this approach - I would hope they can confirm that I was one of his biggest critics (to his face) over many matters. I actually think there was far more "duping" at the fans meetings held in Merthyr and the Muni Club.And I think you are being too kind to Ridsdale by saying he was economical with the truth - he blatantly lied on more than one occasion.

I agree with you that the Trust was too indecisive at times in its early days while we were finding our feet , and we remain restricted to an extent by the legal rules within which we must operate.But , based on the meetings I have personally been at , I am sure that we are far from being too "cosy" with the club. I don`t think the Trust reputation has been in tatters , although I fully accept that a substantial number of fans think that our approach was (and still is) too formal and not aggressive enough.On the other hand , a large number of our less vociferous members want us to act in the more formal democratic way. Who was it who said about pleasing all of the people all of the time? All sides have an equally valid right to their view and approach.

I truly believe that it was a combination of the Trust approach , the more aggressive/proactive approach of protest marches (which I attended), and the accounting detective work of the new investors that caused the removal of Ridsdale from the club. No one individual group can or should claim the credit in my view.Lets just be thankful he can no longer do any lasting damage.

If the new senior management team has lied to the Trust (and I presume you are referring to the official press releases of both the CEO and the Chairman), then I can assure you that I will be doing all I can as a Trust board member to get them to publicly explain why.To help in this , could you point me to specific things they have said that you think are lies (genuine question).I am also not sure that the Trust has asked the club (yet) a specific question whether an embargo is in place let alone receive a "no" answer , but someone else on the board may have and I am just not aware of it.There is certainly no fear within the Trust of asking difficult important questions of the club`s management - we wish to maintain a dialogue to keep our members informed , but not at any cost to our independence or integrity.

The embargo. I am not by any means saying there isn`t one , just that there is no firm evidence that it is in place.But I agree that the circumstantial evidence suggests that it is and also feel that the club should have made a clear and unequivocal statement specifically on this point. The truth should out within the next few days.

As for Tery and Steve , yes I really do believe that they are often guilty of lazy journalism and rely far too much on messageboards without much further research. It is a conversation I have had with Terry in the past at a time when I accused him of too sycophantic an approach to P Ridsdale.

Keith

Keith.

The embargo thing caught everyone by suprise -the first mention of the tax bill was on sunday in NOW, so its a bit premature to think anyone has been misled (also the club may not have thought it was a good idea given that they were likely to be engaged in negotiations to sell a player or 2 and now may have found the price has dropped !).

Given that, I think that if possible the Trust should ask the club a straight question on the embargo, now as the 'have we, haven't we' is frankly embarrassing for us as fans, and is another dent in the clubs reputation.

Keith, with regards to your question about the Trust asking the club about the embargo see:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16921&start=0

Thanks for your response Keith, as they say it's good to talk. With regards the Ridsdale "duping" yes I agree that there was a lot of duping by that man and he managed to convince everyone, not just the Trust. That's why I said not to take it personally. I also realise you were not part of those meetings back then, but saying that I think if you were then you too would have been won over by PR. It's okay to stand brave now and say you wouldn't have but I think he is very good at what he does. He's the best bullshit dealer in the business.

What you've got to do now though Keith is make sure that you are not a victim of any new attempts at bullshitting. And this latest embargo thing could be a massive deciding factor in the Trusts short history. Everyone knows there is an embargo and I fear that if you don't grab the bull by the horns then you'll suffer for it, even though you are taking left over flack from the last round of duping. Surely you can see that. I'm not asking you to ride down to the club in white sheets and drag GJ out before setting fire to him. What I would expect though is for the Trust to stick a firm foot down and make it known and very clear that you are not going to take any more bullshit from the club. They've lied to you this once, make sure it's the very last time.

The stance you've seemed to have taken is to not necessarily accept the embargo until it's confirmed, even though the whole world are reporting it as fact. But that stance gives the benefit of the doubt to the club over the fans who are also telling you different. You represent the fans and therefore should give them the benefit of the doubt, afterall embargo's and winding up orders are not really a monthly occurrence, well they shouldn't be. My point here is if this was the first winding up order, and transfer embargo that we'd ever seen at CCFC then it would be massive and I'm sure you would be up in arms about it. However because it's become a monthly occurrence at our club then everyone seems to be hardened to it and seem to fail to treat it with the importance it deserves.

I didn't buy the NOTW last weekend but I noticed that the winding up order didn't even make the back page. Not long ago they would have done a major story about it will pullouts and stuff.

What's worrying for me is whilst we are in this hardened state it makes it easier for people at our club to do what they want and get away with things they wouldn't normally get away with, thus living even closer to the edge. More worrying is we could be applauding them for not falling over the edge when to be fair we shouldn't be by the edge. Don't let them think this is where the bar is normally set, that's all I'm saying. I noticed that Nigel Harris threw away the winding up order with a comment of the courts hand these things out like confetti these days. I think that one comment sums it up for me.

Finally, one more thing I don't like is when you blame this on the previous regime. That's what governments do, blame the last one for our ills. Some blame the one before the one before. This is a fast moving business and I for one get very nervous with people who are struggling to keep up.

Keith, with regards to your question about the Trust asking the club about the embargo see:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16921&start=0

Thanks for your response Keith, as they say it's good to talk. With regards the Ridsdale "duping" yes I agree that there was a lot of duping by that man and he managed to convince everyone, not just the Trust. That's why I said not to take it personally. I also realise you were not part of those meetings back then, but saying that I think if you were then you too would have been won over by PR. It's okay to stand brave now and say you wouldn't have but I think he is very good at what he does. He's the best bullshit dealer in the business.

I ATTENDED 2 MEETINGS WITH PETER RIDSDALE WEARING MY TRUST HAT , INCLUDING ONE AROUND THE TIME OF THE PROTEST MARCH. AND IN NEITHER DID I JUST ACCEPT THE (PLAUSIBLE) ANSWERS THAT HE GAVE.THOSE WHO ATTENDED THE MUNI GATHERING (I WASN`T AT THE MERTHYR ONE) WILL KNOW THAT I RAISED SEVERAL FINANCIAL ISSUES , INCLUDING THE ONE THAT PR HAD SOLD HIMSELF THE £500K OF WH SPORTS "BONUS" SHARES FOR ONLY £20K.

RIDSDALE WAS AN EXCELLENT ORATOR AND ENTIRELY BELIEVABLE UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY CHECKED OUT WHETHER WHAT HE WAS SAYING HAD ANY BASIS IN FACT.OUR NEW CEO SEEMS TO BE TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND , ON EARLY EVIDENCE , TO LACK THOSE PEOPLE SKILLS.

What you've got to do now though Keith is make sure that you are not a victim of any new attempts at bullshitting. And this latest embargo thing could be a massive deciding factor in the Trusts short history. Everyone knows there is an embargo and I fear that if you don't grab the bull by the horns then you'll suffer for it, even though you are taking left over flack from the last round of duping. Surely you can see that. I'm not asking you to ride down to the club in white sheets and drag GJ out before setting fire to him. What I would expect though is for the Trust to stick a firm foot down and make it known and very clear that you are not going to take any more bullshit from the club. They've lied to you this once, make sure it's the very last time.

I AGREE.PARTICULARLY NOW YOU HAVE PROVIDED THE LINK (WHICH I HAD MISSED)TO MIKE RODERICK SPECIFICALLY ASKING THE CEO THE EMBARGO QUESTION.THAT NOW MAKES G JENKINS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHY HE SUGGESTED ONE WAS NOT IN PLACE.

The stance you've seemed to have taken is to not necessarily accept the embargo until it's confirmed, even though the whole world are reporting it as fact. But that stance gives the benefit of the doubt to the club over the fans who are also telling you different. You represent the fans and therefore should give them the benefit of the doubt, afterall embargo's and winding up orders are not really a monthly occurrence, well they shouldn't be. My point here is if this was the first winding up order, and transfer embargo that we'd ever seen at CCFC then it would be massive and I'm sure you would be up in arms about it. However because it's become a monthly occurrence at our club then everyone seems to be hardened to it and seem to fail to treat it with the importance it deserves.

WITH WHAT I DO ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS , I AM FULLY AWARE OF WHAT WINDING UP PETITIONS ARE ALL ABOUT AND THEIR SERIOUSNESS.
I ADMIT TO BEING LESS CRITICAL OF THE NEW REGIME THAN THE PREVIOUS 2 BUT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR SUCH A SHORT TIME AND HAVE SUCH A BIG FINANCIAL MESS TO SORT OUT. BUT THEIR "HONEYMOON PERIOD" IS COMING TO AN END NOW , IF IT HASN`T ALREADY.

I didn't buy the NOTW last weekend but I noticed that the winding up order didn't even make the back page. Not long ago they would have done a major story about it will pullouts and stuff.

I DIDN`T BUY IT EITHER. WHEN THEY BROKE THE STORY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION AND MISSED REPAYMENT PLAN , I DISCUSSED IT AT GREAT LENGTH WITH MARIO RISOLI WHO RAN THE STORY SO HE COULD CONSULT ON SOME OF THE MORE TECHNICAL ANGLES. I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO ANYONE AT NOTW ABOUT THE LATEST REVELATIONS(IT WAS NOT MARIO`S NAME ON THE ARTICLE AND I DON`T KNOW THE GUY WHO WROTE IT).

What's worrying for me is whilst we are in this hardened state it makes it easier for people at our club to do what they want and get away with things they wouldn't normally get away with, thus living even closer to the edge. More worrying is we could be applauding them for not falling over the edge when to be fair we shouldn't be by the edge. Don't let them think this is where the bar is normally set, that's all I'm saying. I noticed that Nigel Harris threw away the winding up order with a comment of the courts hand these things out like confetti these days. I think that one comment sums it up for me.

ITS HMRC WHO ISSUE THE WINDING UP PETITION.THE COURTS ONLY REALLY GET INVOLVED WHEN THE PETITION IS HEARD (11 AUGUST IN THIS CASE) AND THEY HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO CONVERT THE PETITION INTO A WINDING UP ORDER (I.E.THE COMPANY GOES INTO LIQUIDATION).I HAVE NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER THAT , SHOULD THIS PETITION REACH COURT , AN ORDER WILL BE GRANTED AS THE COURTS SEEM AS FED UP WITH CCFC`S FINANCIAL MISMANAGEMENT AS HMRC.

Finally, one more thing I don't like is when you blame this on the previous regime. That's what governments do, blame the last one for our ills. Some blame the one before the one before. This is a fast moving business and I for one get very nervous with people who are struggling to keep up.

I BLAME IT ON THE PREVIOUS REGIME AND , TO AN EXTENT, ON THE ONE BEFORE THAT BECAUSE IT WAS IN THEIR TENURE THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE DEBTS WERE INCURRED.WHERE A NUMBER OF THE CURRENT DIRECTORS ARE CULPABLE THOUGH IS THEY ALLOWED THE PREVIOUS MANAGEMENT TO "GET AWAY WITH IT" - I DON`T FULLY BUY IN TO THE EXCUSE THEY DIDN`T KNOW WHAT RIDSDALE WAS DOING , THEY SHOULD HAVE.

THANKS FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS , WHICH I HAVE TAKEN ON BOARD.THERE ARE MANY THINGS I GET WRONG IN MY OPINIONS ABOUT CCFC AND ITS ALWAYS NICE TO BE REMINDED OF THAT (AND , NO THAT`S NOT ME BEING SARCASTIC)

Keith

I BLAME IT ON THE PREVIOUS REGIME AND , TO AN EXTENT, ON THE ONE BEFORE THAT BECAUSE IT WAS IN THEIR TENURE THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE DEBTS WERE INCURRED.WHERE A NUMBER OF THE CURRENT DIRECTORS ARE CULPABLE THOUGH IS THEY ALLOWED THE PREVIOUS MANAGEMENT TO "GET AWAY WITH IT" - I DON`T FULLY BUY IN TO THE EXCUSE THEY DIDN`T KNOW WHAT RIDSDALE WAS DOING , THEY SHOULD HAVE.

THANKS FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS , WHICH I HAVE TAKEN ON BOARD.THERE ARE MANY THINGS I GET WRONG IN MY OPINIONS ABOUT CCFC AND ITS ALWAYS NICE TO BE REMINDED OF THAT (AND , NO THAT`S NOT ME BEING SARCASTIC)

Keith

Many people will agree with that viewpoint but at this particular time apportioning blame won't actually achieve much. I would prefer the Trust to now carrying out it's promise to seek out G Jenkins and ask him to explain why he misled you over the transfer embargo and seek to put in place measures which will prevent the same from happening again.

There are reasons why Clubs generally avoid announcing when a transfer embargo is imposed - e.g. arguably it weakens their hand when selling players. Until there is a requirement that the information is publicised, it does not benefit the Club to shout about it. However, the reality is that fans, the media, agents, etc are relatively effective in uncovering when a Club is likely to be subject to an embargo. Therefore, there is no easy conclusion on the subject.

Looking to the bigger picture, the sooner the rules on club financial management (costs to revenue ratios) are tightened, the better. If football cannot regulate itself, we should turn to our politicians to impose it on our behalf.

There are reasons why Clubs generally avoid announcing when a transfer embargo is imposed - e.g. arguably it weakens their hand when selling players. Until there is a requirement that the information is publicised, it does not benefit the Club to shout about it. However, the reality is that fans, the media, agents, etc are relatively effective in uncovering when a Club is likely to be subject to an embargo. Therefore, there is no easy conclusion on the subject.

Looking to the bigger picture, the sooner the rules on club financial management (costs to revenue ratios) are tightened, the better. If football cannot regulate itself, we should turn to our politicians to impose it on our behalf.

We all know the rules if a club has a HMRC winding up petition against it then there is a transfer embargo, therefore the excuse that a club doesn't want to weaken its hand when selling players by revealing that fact is totally irrelevant.

We all want the bigger picture but if that involves being dishonest when answering queries from an important supporter’s organisation then there is bound to be mutual distrust and scepticism from supporters well before that goal is achieved.

There are reasons why Clubs generally avoid announcing when a transfer embargo is imposed - e.g. arguably it weakens their hand when selling players. Until there is a requirement that the information is publicised, it does not benefit the Club to shout about it. However, the reality is that fans, the media, agents, etc are relatively effective in uncovering when a Club is likely to be subject to an embargo. Therefore, there is no easy conclusion on the subject.

Looking to the bigger picture, the sooner the rules on club financial management (costs to revenue ratios) are tightened, the better. If football cannot regulate itself, we should turn to our politicians to impose it on our behalf.

We all know the rules if a club has a HMRC winding up petition against it then there is a transfer embargo, therefore the excuse that a club doesn't want to weaken its hand when selling players by revealing that fact is totally irrelevant.

We all want the bigger picture but if that involves being dishonest when answering queries from an important supporter’s organisation then there is bound to be mutual distrust and scepticism from supporters well before that goal is achieved.

I agree, but the Club may see things differently. Personally, I am all for an approach that promotes transparency, but it may need League intervention to make that happen - at CCFC or any club for that matter.

I agree, but the Club may see things differently. Personally, I am all for an approach that promotes transparency, but it may need League intervention to make that happen - at CCFC or any club for that matter.

League intervention? I like the sound of that

I agree, but the Club may see things differently. Personally, I am all for an approach that promotes transparency, but it may need League intervention to make that happen - at CCFC or any club for that matter.

League intervention? I like the sound of that

The problem is that the FA and League do not see their purpose as serving fan interests. In essence, they act to represent the clubs and their owners' shared interests. About time fans expressed their frustrations with some protests outside their HQs in London. It's either that or bypass them and go straight to our politicians.

I agree, but the Club may see things differently. Personally, I am all for an approach that promotes transparency, but it may need League intervention to make that happen - at CCFC or any club for that matter.

League intervention? I like the sound of that

The problem is that the FA and League do not see their purpose as serving fan interests. In essence, they act to represent the clubs and their owners' shared interests. About time fans expressed their frustrations with some protests outside their HQs in London. It's either that or bypass them and go straight to our politicians.

Bloody Hell I like this keep it coming Uccello Azzurro fantastic stuff