Bournemouth chairman "not welcome" directors box (sigh)

[Wes Tender]

Our fans are no different to fans of any other club in the country, and there hasn't been a sudden change to a number of people picking up on anything to have a moan - lest we forget, any time Rupert Lowe wiped his arse, there was someone waiting to have a go at him. It's not something that's just suddenly happened now Cortese's the chairman.

 

Lowe left us with little to be grateful to him for, which is not the same case with Cortese, in view of the fact that without him we wouldn't have had Liebherr and without him we would be in a much worse situation than now. But if you wish to bracket the two of them together as equally worthy of derision, then fine.

[doddisalegend]

Our fans are no different to fans of any other club in the country, and there hasn't been a sudden change to a number of people picking up on anything to have a moan - lest we forget, any time Rupert Lowe wiped his arse, there was someone waiting to have a go at him. It's not something that's just suddenly happened now Cortese's the chairman.

 

This^^^^

 

football fans are the same every where. Look at Man U fans they've had nothing but good times for years. Yet they're are still those who want to get rid of their owners. go and read some other fans forums you'll find the same sort of comments you find on here all over the place. Saints fans are no worse.

[landford.saint]

So what are the facts in this case:- As far as I can ascertain, Mr. Mitchell (bournemouth Chairman) who has previously stated things on radio that turn out to be false. Now states that he is banned from St. Mary's, Directors box. NC states that he is not banned but is not altogether welcome due to misinformation spouted by Mitchell during the Manager interview process.

However several posters on here whom to others would seem to have an adgenda against NC, have taken the words of a truely unreliable person and used them in a continued attack on their clubs own Chairman.

[Wes Tender]

And my friend, it took you jut 40 posts to blindly jump on someone who dared to criticise your hero.

 

No it didn't. I had already jumped on s mears at post 28. Pay attention.

[Wes Tender]

This^^^^

 

football fans are the same every where. Look at Man U fans they've had nothing but good times for years. Yet they're are still those who want to get rid of their owners. go and read some other fans forums you'll find the same sort of comments you find on here all over the place. Saints fans are no worse.

 

Well, of course they want to get rid of their owners, who have saddled them with hundreds of millions of £s in leveraged debt.

[holepuncture]

Well done club, legitimately and professionally exposing the AFCB chairman for lieing to his supporter base.

 

The bar tab thing is just poor form from AFCB, getting hammered and ducking the bill afterwards... classy

[doddisalegend]

Well, of course they want to get rid of their owners, who have saddled them with hundreds of millions of £s in leveraged debt.

 

So what? tell me how many saints fans wouldn't want to be where man U are now debts or no? They win trophies year in year out and some of there fans still aren't happy. If the some fans of club like that can't be happy is it any suprise some fans of a club like ours aren't happy? Some fans will always be unhappy no matter what club. To try and claim that saints fans have brought the club to it's present postion becuase some don't appluad everything our chairman does is laughable.

[buctootim]

Bournemouth Chairman lied, or at best spouted off without knowing the facts. As a result he endangered the Adkins negotiations - would you really want to continue negotiations if it was being reported they had already offered the job to someone else? He almost did real damage to our club, and did actual damage to our media image. A slight cold shoulder on Saturday is a pretty mild and measured response imo.

[Toomer]

All this will do is spice up the banter between the fans on Saturday:)

[buctootim]

So what? tell me how many saints fans wouldn't want to be where man U are now debts or no? They win trophies year in year out and some of there fans still aren't happy. If the some fans of club like that can't be happy is it any suprise some fans of a club like ours aren't happy? Some fans will always be unhappy no matter what club. To try and claim that saints fans have brought the club to it's present postion becuase some don't appluad everything our chairman does is laughable.

 

The difference is that Man U generate huge income from merchandising, attendances and tv rights. The Glazers have taken a large slice of that money out of the club to pay the interest bill on the money they borrowed in order to buy the club. Saints generate little. The Glazers take money out. The Liebherrs put money in. Big difference.

[Sour Mash]

on Saturday due to his comments saying Howe offered job when he wasn't.

 

I've criticised Cortese for plenty of stuff in the past, but I think fair play for him for doing this, shows some principles, if the Bournemouth chairmen has basically lied and taken the p**s, then why have anything to do with him.

[The9]

A petty action that speaks more about Cortese. Add to the list of petty actions that Cortese has taken.

 

I've been very critical of Cortese, but I can't really complain about this one. I daresay if we'd played S****horpe at any point he'd have done the same thing, and he's within his rights to do so - the bloke's still going to the game at an exec box, he's just not getting special treatment.

 

Whether he's telling the truth or not isn't really relevant.

[The9]

did you notice how quickly the NC bashers pounced.

 

I noticed ONE person say they thought Cortese was in the wrong, which is probably more in the minority than you'd expect in any given thread on most subjects on here.

[Colinjb]

I've been very critical of Cortese, but I can't really complain about this one. I daresay if we'd played S****horpe at any point he'd have done the same thing, and he's within his rights to do so - the bloke's still going to the game at an exec box, he's just not getting special treatment.

 

Whether he's telling the truth or not isn't really relevant.

 

 

If anything the Bournemouth Chairman will now be putting even more money into us by purchasing that box.

 

Good lad!!!!

[norwaysaint]

I can't see any official club statement on this, yet people are reacting to it like it's another definite piece of damning evidence for or against Cortese. Why do people believe every rumour as long as it's in favour of what they already believe? Even the details given about this alleged story don't give enough evidence for anyone to make an informed comment on it. Nearly every post on here is pretty lame kneejerk reaction.

 

Can you have a lame kneejerk reaction?

[doddisalegend]

The difference is that Man U generate huge income from merchandising, attendances and tv rights. The Glazers have taken a large slice of that money out of the club to pay the interest bill on the money they borrowed in order to buy the club. Saints generate little. The Glazers take money out. The Liebherrs put money in. Big difference.

 

You're missing the point. If the fans of a club like man U can be unhappy why can't some fans at our club? This idea that only saints fans are upset about things that happen at their club and have brought the club to it's knees through moaning is quite frankly laughable. Every club has fans who aren't happy even ManU possibly the most succsessful club in the country.

[The9]

I can't see any official club statement on this, yet people are reacting to it like it's another definite piece of damning evidence for or against Cortese. Why do people believe every rumour as long as it's in favour of what they already believe? Even the details given about this alleged story don't give enough evidence for anyone to make an informed comment on it. Nearly every post on here is pretty lame kneejerk reaction.

 

Can you have a lame kneejerk reaction?

 

There's not likely to be an official story on something that potentially makes everyone involved on both sides look a bit silly, is there ? And honestly, I'm not remotely bothered, and most importantly, I seriously doubt it will have any effect whatsoever on the Bournemouth players' attitute.

 

We already beat them comfortably once, can't say I'm too worried about Saturday either, it's always been in Saints' nature to raise themselves for teams higher up the league.

[PokingFun]

Let us get this into context.

 

Mitchell contacted Saints to ask if children were allowed in the boardroom. He was told a decision had not been made yet but that he was unwelcome in the boardroom.

 

It is understood that this relates to Mr Mitchell's comments in public that Howe had been offerred the Saints job and had turned it down. Solent say Mr Mitchells comment regarding the job offer were unfounded. Mr Mitchell says he was telling the truth from what he was told!

 

There was a bar bill unpaid until last week for £300 relating to Champagne at the cup game earlier this season but I think that is a side issue.

 

Mr Mitchell was not banned, just unwelcome. He has now purchased a box for the day.

 

Storm in a teacup caused by a mouthy Mitchell. Enough said.

 

And we get revenue for a Box .... win win lol

[buctootim]

You're missing the point. If the fans of a club like man U can be unhappy why can't some fans at our club? This idea that only saints fans are upset about things that happen at their club and have brought the club to it's knees through moaning is quite frankly laughable. Every club has fans who aren't happy even ManU possibly the most succsessful club in the country.

 

You're right, I missed the point. Must read whole thread.

[iansums]

Interesting in the Bmth Echo article where the Don Mitchell states “We assumed the drinks would be complimentary, just like at every other club, including ours, hence the reason we didn’t pay for them." I would assume this is the club policy for all matches, has any other club complained. Sounds like NC is running the club like a business, how radical.

[doddisalegend]

There's not likely to be an official story on something that potentially makes everyone involved on both sides look a bit silly, is there ? And honestly, I'm not remotely bothered, and most importantly, I seriously doubt it will have any effect whatsoever on the Bournemouth players' attitute.

 

We already beat them comfortably once, can't say I'm too worried about Saturday either, it's always been in Saints' nature to raise themselves for teams higher up the league.

 

I never thought it would be bournemouth though................

[buctootim]

And we get revenue for a Box .... win win lol

 

We should make him wash up afterwards till that £300 is paid off.

[fish fingers]

Interesting in the Bmth Echo article where the Don Mitchell states “We assumed the drinks would be complimentary, just like at every other club, including ours, hence the reason we didn’t pay for them." I would assume this is the club policy for all matches, has any other club complained. Sounds like NC is running the club like a business, how radical.

 

must be the reason they keep going into administration.

[simo]

Good he's a mouthy ****

[Wes Tender]

MODS. Time that the thread title is altered, surely. Apparently the Bournemouth Chairman is NOT banned from the Directors' Box. Perhaps it ought to read instead "Bournemouth Chairman not welcome in Directors' Box".

 

Some on here have read the title and got hold of the wrong end of the stick through not reading what has ensued.

[iansums]

must be the reason they keep going into administration.

 

Yeah, iirc the last time they went into admin it was Threshers who issued the WUP.

[aintforever]

Not as good as the Lowe - Mandric duck thing. Did Lowe ban Mandrick, I can't remember?

 

I assume Cortese will be sat with us at Dean Court for the away game - should be fun.

[Hatch]

Saints should instruct the stewards to watch this Mitchell bloke like a hawk, to be honest I've never heard of him, and if he steps out of line even slightly then they should throw him out.

 

Even if he stands up, which is against ground regulations. Take his money for the box, then throw him out after 2 minutes. Would make me laugh anyway.

[iansums]

There may be a little surprise for Nicola on saturday morning:

 

[ChrisPY]

Let's hope his box is towards the itchen north.

[MarkSFC]

Once again a thread that descends into "hate him" or "love him" and a few who are rational enough to realise that once again an Echo story is in my view deliberately inflamatory.

[MarkSFC]

Saints should instruct the stewards to watch this Mitchell bloke like a hawk, to be honest I've never heard of him, and if he steps out of line even slightly then they should throw him out.

 

Even if he stands up, which is against ground regulations. Take his money for the box, then throw him out after 2 minutes. Would make me laugh anyway.

 

Like this!!

[dronskisaint]

This.

Is there a living person quicker to throw a tantrum and all the toys out of the pram. He's an embarrassment to himself and our club.

 

And your reply would be what having read the facts surrounding this?

[trousers]

Where has this "unpaid bar bill" stuff come from? The last (and indeed only) time I've been in the directors lounge before a game, it was a cash bar, i.e. if you don't pay at the point of purchase, you don't get the drink.

 

I'm not really that fussed about Mitchell, he's a complete gob****e, but it does seem somewhat contrary that all the club's official statements bang the "we will continue to run the club in a professional manner" drum, when I would imagine the "professional" thing to do on this occasion is to rise above his comments and simply ignore them.

 

Shouldn't you be updating the homepage news with your spare time Steve....? ;-))

[The9]

Interesting in the Bmth Echo article where the Don Mitchell states “We assumed the drinks would be complimentary, just like at every other club, including ours, hence the reason we didn’t pay for them." I would assume this is the club policy for all matches, has any other club complained. Sounds like NC is running the club like a business, how radical.

 

But again, he's running it like a business rather than a football club, which seems to be the problem in 90% of the issues (downgrading the importance of ST holders in favour of by-match pricing, photographer and media "ban", media rows with other chairmen, charging travelling fans for parking etc). They all show a stubborn refusal to accept everyone else's best practice, build up over years of numerous different clubs and a variety of business models and financial situations.

 

He can't change everything unilaterally, and there are too many of "them" that have been going on fine without the likes of him rocking the boat, and not enough of "us" (just Saints) to make the changes Cortese clearly thinks are logical.

 

Personally I think I'd be inclined to fall into line with the rest of the league and then suggest changes through the appropriate channels - the protocol of not charging for boardroom drinks is clearly in place because it's a mutually beneficial arrangement - what happens now when Saints representatives go to a club with a free bar ? Doesn't it look just a little, what's the word... "grasping" ?

 

I actually think it's more of an issue than any rumoured "ban" of Mitchell - which is not to say it's anything resembling a big deal anyway. But it is further indication that Cortese does things his way, for better or worse.

[Joensuu]

Once again a thread that descends into "hate him" or "love him" and a few who are rational enough to realise that once again an Echo story is in my view deliberately inflamatory.

 

I don't see anyone saying they love Cortese. Just lots of rational posters who are defending him because they recognised that the Echo story is indeed inflamatory, and that Bompey chairman is not exactly the most trustworthy of sources. Defence of Cortese against the mud slingers, and rumour mongers doesn't mean you 'love him', more that you want to see evidence before you leap to conclusions.

[Big John]

he has now hired a box - good some extra money for us!

 

still better than what he's used to.

[Joey-deacons-left-nut]

Christ, this is just spoiling tactics byMitchell,that's all..

[Barry the Badger]

Interesting in the Bmth Echo article where the Don Mitchell states “We assumed the drinks would be complimentary."

 

...which is why we drank £300 worth.

[hypochondriac]

Lowe left us with little to be grateful to him for, which is not the same case with Cortese, in view of the fact that without him we wouldn't have had Liebherr and without him we would be in a much worse situation than now. But if you wish to bracket the two of them together as equally worthy of derision, then fine.

 

Equally worthy of having their actions judged because they are chairman of this club.

[OldNick]

But again, he's running it like a business rather than a football club, which seems to be the problem in 90% of the issues (downgrading the importance of ST holders in favour of by-match pricing, photographer and media "ban", media rows with other chairmen, charging travelling fans for parking etc). They all show a stubborn refusal to accept everyone else's best practice, build up over years of numerous different clubs and a variety of business models and financial situations.

 

He can't change everything unilaterally, and there are too many of "them" that have been going on fine without the likes of him rocking the boat, and not enough of "us" (just Saints) to make the changes Cortese clearly thinks are logical.

 

Personally I think I'd be inclined to fall into line with the rest of the league and then suggest changes through the appropriate channels - the protocol of not charging for boardroom drinks is clearly in place because it's a mutually beneficial arrangement - what happens now when Saints representatives go to a club with a free bar ? Doesn't it look just a little, what's the word... "grasping" ?

 

I actually think it's more of an issue than any rumoured "ban" of Mitchell - which is not to say it's anything resembling a big deal anyway. But it is further indication that Cortese does things his way, for better or worse.

 

Old practices that to an non-footballing person seem mad. I doubt he has much in common with most Chairman of the lower league clubs, he probably thinks they are not worth much of his time, and small change as they voted for the PL extra parachute money to get few thousand more every year. That in the long run will cost clubs with ambition like ours from getting back to the PL.

I know 100% that the Bournemouth people are very unhappy at the way they were treated earlier in the season, they were put in one of the normal matchday lounges (Mick Channon suite ??? carvery) and were not given the normal nicities that are normally provided. The bar bill was a massive surprise (£138 not the reported amount)

idont wish for our club to look like pariahs and Im sure that Saints new ethos of paying your own tab will not be shied away from when our people are charged likewise when we travel away.ML paid for his tickets and the business model seems to be 'no freebies'period

[Wes Tender]

Equally worthy of having their actions judged because they are chairman of this club.

 

But not worthy of having their actions judged equally. Do you detect the difference?

[hypochondriac]

But not worthy of having their actions judged equally. Do you detect the difference?

 

I think where we differ is how much good grace we are prepared to give Cortese.

[Big John]

This bar bill?

 

I was a guest at a match a little while back, not saints but a non league outfit, and even though their tiny director's lounge was serving beer out of cans and coke from 2 litre bottles it was all FOC as were the cheese rolls and prawn vol-au-vents.

 

Now then, if a non league club can stretch their very tight budget to make a guest welcome then why do we not? After all it would be a reciprocal arrangement wouldn't it.

[derry]

I suspect that the biggest issue is the lack of confidentiality by the Bournemouth Chairman during the ongoing negotiations with S****horpe. Due to the timescale alone, Nigel Atkins was offered the job and agreed terms which was the easy bit, it was the compensation negotiations that took the time. It is highly likely that alternatives were explored should the employment of Adkins be impossible.

 

There is no doubt that Howe was interviewed by Saints with the blessing of Bournemouth. It would also be likely that Howe was contacted to see if he was interested in the job if the negotiations broke down. It may well be that Howe then ruled himself out. That doesn't mean that he was offered the job, apart from his real intentions being ascertained as contingency planning. Neither Howe or Mitchell needed to comment at that stage as Howe had ruled himself out and delicate negotiations were ongoing elsewhere. The fact that Mitchell chose to go public and announce that Howe had turned down Southampton, had more to do with trying to get one over Southampton, an inferiority complex, ego, spite over the bar bill/hospitality issues, etc than letting his own supporters know the good news.

 

It is behaviour that reflects badly on the barrow boy mentality rather than on the confidentiality that is adhered to in all the business dealings of SFC.

[Graffito]

This just isn't on. A man's got to buy his round. He can't come into our club, order drinks for everyone and then swan off without paying, just because we've got billionaire owners. That's just plain wrong.

[trousers]

Any chance of changing the thread title so it's accurate?

[Victor]

Seems more a total lack of style by NC. A pattern is emerging; prefers to hide in his fortress feigning contempt and tossing banning orders over the parapet rather than face anyone who's upset him. Surely better to invite him in and then have a 'chat' with him where all can hear what is said. Everyone has their own agenda and version of the truth.

 

What is fact, though, is that Bournemouth are doing so much better than us having had an even bigger points deduction, far, far less money,a squad so inadequate that school commitments of one of them meant they could not always have enough subs on the bench.

 

Maybe NC was not up to facing someone whose club was doing so much better on a borrowed shoestring. Despite all our alleged millions we are looking increasingly small-time and adopting small-time attitudes.

[buctootim]

This bar bill?

 

I was a guest at a match a little while back, not saints but a non league outfit, and even though their tiny director's lounge was serving beer out of cans and coke from 2 litre bottles it was all FOC as were the cheese rolls and prawn vol-au-vents.

 

Now then, if a non league club can stretch their very tight budget to make a guest welcome then why do we not? After all it would be a reciprocal arrangement wouldn't it.

 

I don't know whether Saints routinely offer free hospitality to visiting directors and guests, but I suspect they do. In common with other clubs Saints would not expect the hospitality to be abused. A couple of pints or glasses of wine, not £300 of champagne. Id imagine he was asked to pay because its basically taking the ****.

[Wes Tender]

I think where we differ is how much good grace we are prepared to give Cortese.

 

Or how much bad grace we are prepared to give Mitchell. I had not heard of the guy before, but a little digging on Google has unearthed several articles on him and his former connections as chairman of Dorchester (where he received death threats) and his property development company. He managed to inveigle himself onto that programme by Piers Morgan about Sandbanks, although properties featured as being developed by his company were not on Sandbanks. That leads me to believe that the guy is a self-publicist with an ego that needs to be stroked. Comments under that article describe him as a cowboy and a crook.

 

But if you're prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt over our chairman, good luck to you.