Bournemouth chairman "not welcome" directors box (sigh)

[Clifford Nelson]

After the wild stuff that has been written on this thread I have made a decision. There is one or two things NC has done which surprised me, and I have commented on it at the time, but I don't want to be associated with much of what has been said, and I don't want to inadvertently fan the flames. It is something that we don't need and I will therefore not comment on it for a very long while.

 

We are supporters of a debt free club, a good team and a manager to be proud of, and a plan for bringing us upwards in the league system. I think I will be grateful for that for some time. All this "love" and "hate" nonsense is at best for kids.

[hypochondriac]

I have no doubt that some people booed but it was far from stadium wide. There was not a peep of a boo round where I was!

 

I never said it was. But people were booing Cortese.

[NickG]

Howe on solent couldn't quite bring himself to back his chairman, lot of "water under the bridge" type talk

[hypochondriac]

After the wild stuff that has been written on this thread I have made a decision. There is one or two things NC has done which surprised me, and I have commented on it at the time, but I don't want to be associated with much of what has been said, and I don't want to inadvertently fan the flames. It is something that we don't need and I will therefore not comment on it for a very long while.

 

We are supporters of a debt free club, a good team and a manager to be proud of, and a plan for bringing us upwards in the league system. I think I will be grateful for that for some time. All this "love" and "hate" nonsense is at best for kids.

 

In my experience, it is the people who are very supportive of Cortese who tend to polarise the debate and make out the people who disagree with a lot of his decisions to be people who 'hate' Cortese or who believe everything bad said about him without question. I think that generally I find this very rarely to be the case.

[hypochondriac]

How many? Roughly

 

Well I heard quite a loud boo from all around me. I would say roughly 20-30 people but others have said they heard boos from other areas of the stadium as well.

[hypochondriac]

Yes.

 

Absolutely. Nothing to gain by trying to find a story in the sacking. I don't care now, I'm only interested in moving forward and supporting NA. Good shout getting Chappie back too.

As is continually stated, supporting Cortese is very different from agreeing with everything he does.

[buctootim]

There have been a number of occasions when i have disagreed with something Cortese has done, only to find out later there were good reasons for his actions. As a fan base we would all benefit from cutting each other some slack and step back from being instantly judgemental.

[JustMike]

People booed on two separate occasions when Cortese appeared on the screen. Others have confirmed this to be the case and the commentator also made a remark according to Steve. Bit of a coincidence if they were not booing Cortese.

 

sorry but i heard booing once and that was when the screen showed NC, ML and the football league chairman in the same shot. I booed too but it wasnt at NC. So maybe you are assuming a little too much

[hypochondriac]

sorry but i heard booing once and that was when the screen showed NC, ML and the football league chairman in the same shot. I booed too but it wasnt at NC. So maybe you are assuming a little too much

 

Erm no because I heard two separate instances of booing when Cortese was shown on the screen. I'm not assuming anything, I know what I heard. The fact that you heard something different is irrelevant. I'm not sure how you can argue and I can't believe I'm getting into this.

[hypochondriac]

There have been a number of occasions when i have disagreed with something Cortese has done, only to find out later there were good reasons for his actions. As a fan base we would all benefit from cutting each other some slack and step back from being instantly judgemental.

 

I don't think there is anything wrong with people writing their initial reactions about a decision when it is taken. It is also natural that people will assume things if no explanation is given for a decision. If anything, my main gripe with Cortese is that too many 'controversial' decisions have been taken with little or no explanation given for them and all this when we were promised more transparency.

[The Kraken]

sorry but i heard booing once and that was when the screen showed NC, ML and the football league chairman in the same shot. I booed too but it wasnt at NC. So maybe you are assuming a little too much

 

You booed when Markus Liebherr was in shot? Shame on you.

 

But hang on NC was in there too? And Mawhinney as well? What were they doing, squeezing together for a cheesey Wembley photo?

 

You're making it up, aren't you?

[sfc4prem]

Lol. Arguing about whether people booed Cortese at Wembley. Does it really matter??? I heard no one around me, but there were boos. Quite pathetic really, especially as the Pardew rumour was later deemed untrue by Cortese.

[Joensuu]

In my experience, it is the people who are very supportive of Cortese who tend to polarise the debate and make out the people who disagree with a lot of his decisions to be people who 'hate' Cortese or who believe everything bad said about him without question. I think that generally I find this very rarely to be the case.

 

That's a lot of posts in a short time. The videos of the game should settle to booing debate, as already discussed, so no point revisiting that. But this comment deserves a response. IMO the total opposite is true. Those backing Cortese are calling for the benefit of the doubt to be given, especially in the absense of evidence. We just want Cortese to be given a chance, and not perpetually undermined. In my experience, your polarisation is very much the other way round. People considering the evidence are cutting him some slack, whereas people jumping to conclusions seem desperate to keep slating him.

 

I'm most interested in why some of our better informed posters have turned against Cortese. Is is just on the basis of the rather dubious rumours that are circulating, or is there some substance behind the negativity? Perhaps it can't be reported publically?

[hypochondriac]

That's a lot of posts in a short time. The videos of the game should settle to booing debate, as already discussed, so no point revisiting that. But this comment deserves a response. IMO the total opposite is true. Those backing Cortese are calling for the benefit of the doubt to be given, especially in the absense of evidence. We just want Cortese to be given a chance, and not perpetually undermined. In my experience, your polarisation is very much the other way round. People considering the evidence are cutting him some slack, whereas people jumping to conclusions seem desperate to keep slating him.

 

I'm most interested in why some of our better informed posters have turned against Cortese. Is is just on the basis of the rather dubious rumours that are circulating, or is there some substance behind the negativity? Perhaps it can't be reported publically?

 

In all the time you have been posting here, have you known the likes of Steve Grant to be rash with his posting or say stupid and unsubstantiated things? I can only speak for myself but I have always found him to be a very considered and sensible poster and one worth listening to. Do you honestly think that the likes of Steve are desperate to keep slating Cortese? I was actually a very strong supporter of Cortese initially (go and check my posting history if you like) but my opinion changed after a succession of what I would consider poor or misguided choices when no explanations were offered.

 

I hate how the perfectly legitimate views of the likes of Steve and I are dismissed and we are portrayed as some sort of simple idiots who believe everything we are told and who have some sort of vendetta against Cortese. This is honestly not even close to the truth and I would like nothing better than for Cortese to reverse some of his more bizarre decisions or at the very least have some more openness and honesty with the fans.

[The Kraken]

That's a lot of posts in a short time. The videos of the game should settle to booing debate, as already discussed, so no point revisiting that. But this comment deserves a response. IMO the total opposite is true. Those backing Cortese are calling for the benefit of the doubt to be given, especially in the absense of evidence. We just want Cortese to be given a chance, and not perpetually undermined. In my experience, your polarisation is very much the other way round. People considering the evidence are cutting him some slack, whereas people jumping to conclusions seem desperate to keep slating him.

 

I'm most interested in why some of our better informed posters have turned against Cortese. Is is just on the basis of the rather dubious rumours that are circulating, or is there some substance behind the negativity? Perhaps it can't be reported publically?

 

I think you're seeing what you want to see. Most people are capable of judging Cortese on individual decisions, rather than some unknown agenda you ascribe them to. The fact he attracts a lot of criticism is down to the significant number of avoidable mistakes he has made, admittedly though they are all relatively minor in nature.

 

The man, while I'm sure having many plus points, is simply a walking PR disaster who exudes the image of a lack of care for his customer.

[Joensuu]

No Hypo, I'm not dismissing your views or Steve's. I'm willing to accept that there may be more going on than is publically known. But the evidence for it that is known just doesn't stack up.

 

Reminds me of when politicians asked the country to trust them that the secret evidence they had seen was compelling proof that a foreign nation posed a direct threat to us within 45 minutes. I questioned the lack of evidence then, and continue to find that a sensible policy to base decisions on. There is a verygood reason why the law assumes innocence until proven guilty. I will treat Cortese in exactly the same way. Evidence not rumour.

[hypochondriac]

I think you're seeing what you want to see. Most people are capable of judging Cortese on individual decisions, rather than some unknown agenda you ascribe them to. The fact he attracts a lot of criticism is down to the significant number of avoidable mistakes he has made, admittedly though they are all relatively minor in nature.

 

The man, while I'm sure having many plus points, is simply a walking PR disaster who exudes the image of a lack of care for his customer.

 

Sums up my feelings perfectly.

[shurlock]

I think you're seeing what you want to see. Most people are capable of judging Cortese on individual decisions, rather than some unknown agenda you ascribe them to. The fact he attracts a lot of criticism is down to the significant number of avoidable mistakes he has made, admittedly though they are all relatively minor in nature.

 

The man, while I'm sure having many plus points, is simply a walking PR disaster who exudes the image of a lack of care for his customer.

 

Yes and yet the reactions seem totally out of proportion with what NC has actually done. 7 pages in and no doubt the same distracting nonsense will be played again and again on other threads in the future. If you want an example of a wayward chairman, just look at Mandaric down at Leicester. People have to lighten up or become tougher skinned. Otherwise save the melodrama for your boyfriends.

Edited 1 October, 2010 by shurlock

[doddisalegend]

Yes and yet the reactions seem totally out of proportion with what NC has actually done. 7 pages in and no doubt the same distracting nonsense will be played again and again on other threads in the future. If you want an example of a wayward chairman, just look at Mandaric down at Leicester. People have to lighten up or become tougher skinned. Otherwise save the melodrama for your boyfriends.

 

I'd call venting on an internet forum a minor reaction, a totally out of proportion reaction to NC would be fire bombing SMS or something similair. Making your feeling known on an internet forum seems the right reaction to being annoyed by the chairman or club, beats building a nail bomb anyway.

[The Kraken]

Yes and yet the reactions seem totally out of proportion with what NC has actually done. 7 pages in and no doubt the same distracting nonsense will be played again and again on other threads in the future. If you want an example of a wayward chairman, just look at Mandaric down at Leicester. People have to lighten up or become tougher skinned. Otherwise save the melodrama for your boyfriends.

 

And look at you getting all defensive about it. It's almost as if you're trying to put your fingers in your ears to block out any bad words said about your illustrious leader.

 

Try reading the words a bit more; most people are not intent on attacking the man, but the completely avoidable mistakes he continues to make. The veil of secrecy around the club is at most times an air of professionalism, but it also betrays an obvious naievity in certain decision making, which obviously comes from the very top. Criticising those poor decisions is absolutely fair game, as is lauding Cortese in the numerous things for which he has clearly done well with on behalf behalf of the club.

[Lets B Avenue]

Well I heard quite a loud boo from all around me. I would say roughly 20-30 people but others have said they heard boos from other areas of the stadium as well.

 

Perhaps they were booing you. I would have been.

[cellone]

I hope the whole club are made to feel unwelcome on the day.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Perhaps they were booing you. I would have been.

 

Totally unhelpful comment.

[Wes Tender]

Surely now that there are far more posts regarding our trip to Wembley and whether boos were directed at Cortese, than there are posts about the Chairman of Bournemouth not being welcome in the Directors' Box, the time is long overdue to close the thread.

 

That other matter has already been discussed ad nauseum previously and some are in danger of going round and round in circles over it and eventually disappearing up their posterior orifices.

[shurlock]

And look at you getting all defensive about it. It's almost as if you're trying to put your fingers in your ears to block out any bad words said about your illustrious leader.

 

Try reading the words a bit more; most people are not intent on attacking the man, but the completely avoidable mistakes he continues to make. The veil of secrecy around the club is at most times an air of professionalism, but it also betrays an obvious naievity in certain decision making, which obviously comes from the very top. Criticising those poor decisions is absolutely fair game, as is lauding Cortese in the numerous things for which he has clearly done well with on behalf behalf of the club.

 

Got no problem with that - just hairsplitting over whether or not the guy was booed on the back of a fleeting camera shot six months ago is surreal, obssessive and totally irrelevant to what is important in the here and now.

[hypochondriac]

Got no problem with that - just hairsplitting over whether or not the guy was booed on the back of a fleeting camera shot six months ago is surreal, obssessive and totally irrelevant to what is important in the here and now.

 

I do agree, I was just irritated that people were dismissing it when I know it happened. I shall leave it now though!

[rocknrollman no2]

The chairman of Bournemouth is apparantly banned from our directors box.

Good as far as im concerned.

Rumour has it,he lied about us offering Howe the Saints job.Im glad we didnt offer the job to him,because we wouldnt want him here anyway.

Let their little club come to St Marys and let Saints beat them 5-0.

They are a tiny little club without any history.

[Red and White Army]

Erm no because I heard two separate instances of booing when Cortese was shown on the screen. I'm not assuming anything, I know what I heard. The fact that you heard something different is irrelevant. I'm not sure how you can argue and I can't believe I'm getting into this.

 

The trouble with you is your credibility ranking is zero and the vast majority of readers of this forum don't believe anything you say as you are an overly-opinionated piece of poo. Hope this helps explain why so many people are disregarding you.

[hypochondriac]

The trouble with you is your credibility ranking is zero and the vast majority of readers of this forum don't believe anything you say as you are an overly-opinionated piece of poo. Hope this helps explain why so many people are disregarding you.

 

I think your post says more about you than it does me. Thankfully I'm not going to stoop to your level.

[Chin Strain]

As is continually stated, supporting Cortese is very different from agreeing with everything he does.

 

I don't think I mentioned supporting Cortese. I didn't even say whether I agreed with APs sacking or not. It's simply a case of water under the bridge and moving on - AP is yesterdays news...thanks for your efforts, but the new man is in and he's what's important now.

[NickG]

I am surprised that the cherries didn't make more of disputing the clear written report on our OS, (stating Howe had not been offered the job,) if they were confident he had. I don't think they are sure he was.

 

Their chairman stuck to his guns on solent but only went as fat as saying -"based on the information I had". Blaming someone else for false info?

 

Howe said yesterday that it was water under the bridge and seemed reluctant to back his chairman.

 

I suspect this was part of longer interview so he may say more today before the game and confirm he was offered but at the moment think their chairman is looking a mug - but sure their fans will love his anti-saints rhetoric.

[Alain Perrin]

I think we need to map this. It seems obvious from the videos, and from many posters, that the booing was in isolated pockets. We should get a plan of the seating up, and try to pin-point which small sections of the stands heard booing. We might find that fans were reacting to something else, you know, like when a different part of St Mary's has seen something wrong, say, a handball or something, that nobody near you has seen.

 

I only suggest that the fans were reacting to 'something else' in small pocket(s), because it seems to be the only sensible explaination. It's obvious from the videos that there is nothing but applause audible where the camera is. I, and other posters have confirmed the same from our postions around the stadium. As such the vast, vast, majority were clearly supportive of Cortese. Statistically the small percentage of fans with negative opinions towards Cortese should statistically be spread fairly evenly throughout the stadium. However, they only seem to have been heard in isolated pockets. As such, it would seem that people booing Cortese were somehow drawn to similar areas of Wembley. Perhaps there is some relationship with ticket price, or preferred view and disliking Cortese? Otherwise, statistically, the fact that booing occured in small pockets, makes little sense, unless of course Cortese wasn't the target of the booing, and in fact the small pockets were booing something else that only their section of the stadium could clearly see: perhaps an on-pitch event, or perhaps something an opposition fan was doing.

 

I'm not saying that the booing didn't occur, just that statisically it makes no sense, unless either something attracted like-minded people to sit together (possilbe), or the booing was targetted at something other than Cortese (probable).

 

We could map it. Or we could move on....

[Miltonaggro]

Whatever your position on Cortese, Leibherr put him in place, between himself and the fans as a shield. He is very well paid to make difficult decisions, and ultimately will be judged on the club's success. I'm sure that he was well aware of the volatile and passionate nature of taking over a football club and ultimately taking on its fans in the run up to the takeover. There are signs lately that he is 'learning' and that is more than Lowe ever did!

 

As for the subject matter of the thread, I've criticised Cortese in the past but on this issue; banning the beery, blubbery, duplicitous no-mark who currently occupies the plastic throne at Bournemuff - I'm with him 100%...

[aintforever]

I am surprised that the cherries didn't make more of disputing the clear written report on our OS, (stating Howe had not been offered the job,) if they were confident he had. I don't think they are sure he was.

 

Their chairman stuck to his guns on solent but only went as fat as saying -"based on the information I had". Blaming someone else for false info?

 

Howe said yesterday that it was water under the bridge and seemed reluctant to back his chairman.

 

I suspect this was part of longer interview so he may say more today before the game and confirm he was offered but at the moment think their chairman is looking a mug - but sure their fans will love his anti-saints rhetoric.

 

From the info I have I think he had the interview and decided he didn't want it. Wether he was offered it or not only Howe and Cortese would know.

 

Even if Mitchell is saying the truth I expect Howe would be embarrassed about the info being aired so wouldn't read too much into him being cagey.

 

Either way I don't se why Cortese has let it get to him, a bit pathetic really.

[Miltonaggro]

Cortese made a clear statement that only Adkins was offered the job, but it was no secret that a number of candidates were seen. Reading between the lines when the Adkins move stalled over compensation it seems that Howe was rather too quick to offer his services, and did not think out his response to his erstwhile Chairman when asked for an explanation, an explanation then leaked to the press.

 

Given the Leibherr family's insistance on ethical conduct in business I would trust Cortese to tell the truth on this matter over Fast Eddie the Skate, and the Tub 'o Lard every day of the week!...

[aintforever]

Given the Leibherr family's insistance on ethical conduct in business I would trust Cortese to tell the truth on this matter over Fast Eddie the Skate, and the Tub 'o Lard every day of the week!...

 

I tend to agree, but from Bournemouth's perspective when Saints approached them and Eddie went for an interview they were probably resigned to losing him. You can't blame their chairman for being over the moon when for whatever reason he ends up staying. A good manager is worth his weight in gold and him staying could mean Championship football instead of League 2 football next year.

 

If Mitchell was lying then our chairman should just find it funny that he should resort to such petty behaviour and just have a chat next time he sees him. Saying he is not welcome is just petty schoolboy behaviour and doesn't achieve anything. Maybe one of this Bournemouth team turns out to be a top player who Adkins wants to sign, making an enemy of their chairman is not going to help.

[OldNick]

Somewhat condescending.

 

why? i think it is a very fair assumption. I have been to games and some fans confused Mills for BWP. Do you not recall the amount of times people in the directors box were supposdly David Dein etc and it turned out it was joe Bolggs.

The fans on here who in the main are politicised or very up on things saints would kno who he was but most dont give 2 hoots

[Wes Tender]

I tend to agree, but from Bournemouth's perspective when Saints approached them and Eddie went for an interview they were probably resigned to losing him. You can't blame their chairman for being over the moon when for whatever reason he ends up staying. A good manager is worth his weight in gold and him staying could mean Championship football instead of League 2 football next year.

 

If Mitchell was lying then our chairman should just find it funny that he should resort to such petty behaviour and just have a chat next time he sees him. Saying he is not welcome is just petty schoolboy behaviour and doesn't achieve anything. Maybe one of this Bournemouth team turns out to be a top player who Adkins wants to sign, making an enemy of their chairman is not going to help.

 

You seem to have overlooked the possibility that the Howe situation could have potentially messed up the appointment of Adkins as has already been explained earlier, much in the same way that the Pinnacle debacle almost put paid to the Liebherr ownership. Although you would have just shrugged your shoulders and laughed it off, it could have had more serious repercussions, so if others did not find it a laughing matter, they have good reason.

 

As for the possibility of a potential signing of a Bournemouth player being screwed up because the two chairmen are not on speaking terms, get real. Are you saying that they wouldn't do business with us? They are a small club with financial worries. They might bargain hard to get the best price, but then so they would otherwise. Do you think for one moment that they might be prepared to accept a lower price because the two chairmen are bosom buddies? OK, if two clubs offered the same for that player, they might take the other offer rather than ours. But if one of their players wanted to play for us, again there is little they could do about it. You only need to look at the Kenwyn-Jones case to see that.

[saint_mears]

Any truth in the rumour that the finance director Dave Jones was sacked on Monday ?

[miserableoldgit]

In all the time you have been posting here, have you known the likes of Steve Grant to be rash with his posting or say stupid and unsubstantiated things? I can only speak for myself but I have always found him to be a very considered and sensible poster and one worth listening to. Do you honestly think that the likes of Steve are desperate to keep slating Cortese? I was actually a very strong supporter of Cortese initially (go and check my posting history if you like) but my opinion changed after a succession of what I would consider poor or misguided choices when no explanations were offered.

 

I hate how the perfectly legitimate views of the likes of Steve and I are dismissed and we are portrayed as some sort of simple idiots who believe everything we are told and who have some sort of vendetta against Cortese. This is honestly not even close to the truth and I would like nothing better than for Cortese to reverse some of his more bizarre decisions or at the very least have some more openness and honesty with the fans.

The problem is that there a clutch of people on here will criticise NC for whatever he does and will look for the negative in every move that he makes. Equally there are those on the other side of the fence who see no bad in him at all, although I sometimes think that this is just a reaction against the "eeyores". The fact is that because NC tends not to make public statements, we always only hear the opposing side to any incident that involves him. I agree that NC should be criticised when it can be proved that he has made mistakes, but he should also be praised when he gets thing right. Even Ed Milliband indicated that the coalition will get some things right.

[trousers]

Any truth in the rumour that the finance director Dave Jones was sacked on Monday ?

 

I'm surprised he survived as long as he has TBH. One would have thought an obvious candidate for a golden handshake when the new owners took over would have been the finance director at the helm when the club went into administration.

 

Not an opinion, just an observation.

[trousers]

Any truth in the rumour that the finance director Dave Jones was sacked on Monday ?

 

P.s. Tell us where you got the rumour from and we'll tell you whether there's any truth in it... ;-)

[up and away]

I tend to agree, but from Bournemouth's perspective when Saints approached them and Eddie went for an interview they were probably resigned to losing him. You can't blame their chairman for being over the moon when for whatever reason he ends up staying. A good manager is worth his weight in gold and him staying could mean Championship football instead of League 2 football next year.

 

If Mitchell was lying then our chairman should just find it funny that he should resort to such petty behaviour and just have a chat next time he sees him. Saying he is not welcome is just petty schoolboy behaviour and doesn't achieve anything. Maybe one of this Bournemouth team turns out to be a top player who Adkins wants to sign, making an enemy of their chairman is not going to help.

 

I don't know why Cortese should find this funny? Just cast your mind back to the timing of Mitchells remarks and the effect that could have had on Adkins. If we had to start again at that point we would be in far worse shape with a further long delay. Luckily the contact with Adkins insured that did not happen and in his own words days before he signed, "Saints behaved impeccably".

 

So your advice is to have a quiet word with Mitchell the next time Cortese sees him. Well that opportunity arose when Mitchell phoned the club and that quiet word was had. Whether this became public or not is down to Mitchell and why the fook should he be welcome if he is telling lies that can damage the club.

[NickG]

http://yfrog.com/f/0i23vzj/

 

today.

[jam]

The problem is that there a clutch of people on here will criticise NC for whatever he does and will look for the negative in every move that he makes. Equally there are those on the other side of the fence who see no bad in him at all, although I sometimes think that this is just a reaction against the "eeyores". The fact is that because NC tends not to make public statements, we always only hear the opposing side to any incident that involves him. I agree that NC should be criticised when it can be proved that he has made mistakes, but he should also be praised when he gets thing right. Even Ed Milliband indicated that the coalition will get some things right.

 

The only reason there are people on here who have become quick to criticise Cortese is that there have been a succession of things coming out of the club that have been controversial and not explained very well. And as these things have happened there has been a response often along the lines of 'Cortese saved our club ffs and you're worried about an installment plan??'

 

It's all very good taking the 'we'll conduct our business in private' attitude - I like this way of doing things - but I think it's not always appropriate in a business like football that lives on goodwill and repeat custom. Hopefully the fans forum will happen and fans will get the chance to get a feel for Cortese as I think that will make a lot of people more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[jam]

http://yfrog.com/f/0i23vzj/

 

today.

 

 

 

Two days ago?

[moon monkey]

Another guy who won't be in the directors box is David Jones who has left.

[miserableoldgit]

Another guy who won't be in the directors box is David Jones who has left.

He`s left?? The Monkees will never be the same!!

[saint_mears]

P.s. Tell us where you got the rumour from and we'll tell you whether there's any truth in it... ;-)

 

Well its no secret he became increasingly fed up with how the club was being run and i suspect he was pro pardew.

[Fowllyd]

Well its no secret he became increasingly fed up with how the club was being run and i suspect he was pro pardew.

 

Well, the first bit may or may not be true; I guess you'd have to know David Jones to know that - do you? The second part is just daft - he is (or perhaps was, depending on the truth or otherwise of this rumour) the financial director. What would he have to do with the appointment and management of football staff?