Your initial reply rather betrayed your subsequent claim
Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:33
that you don't know the identity of "HW" but I shall take you at your word.
A new regime may well be on the way in, but it is not there yet. Furthermore you a second guessing much of the detail. Far worse is your eagerness to attack the Trust which suggests you have an ulterior motive. You don't seem prepared to even give it a chance.
... though I have no idea who he/she - or indeed any of you - are. I assumed your first question was just your usual facetiousness. There is clearly a new regime on the way in, which in my opinion... more
and challenging power but you are being unfair on the Trust. They have no power at the moment as far as ownership of WWFC in concerned. I don't recall you challenging the power of Steve Hayes over... more
... but, to be trite for a second, two wrongs don't make a right. I also accept your charge of being impatient. But I will gently remind you of a point I made elsewhere on this thread... the very... more
I don't accept your point about criticism of your impatience coming from those that were ignored in the summer 2009. I am not sure I see any correlation / relevance in the two positions. The Trust... more
Bearing in mind their existence is solely concerned with the long-term well being of the club? Let's say they don't accept Hayes' work, and they decide to spill all, come out and say exactly what is... more
your points, and to an extent I sympathise with some of them, particularly with your assertion that any role for Ivor Beeks, as chairman for example, would be potentially damaging. However, I'm not... more