Strafford - Why I quit

[Wise_Owl]

His problem always was that he held no shares and put no money in (to my knowledge) so was never an equal to anyone on the board. If he had actually invested some cash maybe he could of secured his position and had more of a say in things but as he was he was easly going to be overuled by the current board. The first things him and Nick Parker should of done when they came in if they wanted to make a difference to the club was to buy a stake together they would of been able to force things through at boardroom level and proably have helped the club move forward.

By the same argument, the only way for a manager to make a difference at the club would be to invest in it himself.

At the end of the day, if the owners of any company behave like obstructive dicks, and prevent people doing their jobs, it's a monumental challenge to accomplish anything constructive.

Nobody should have to buy a company in order to have a positive influence there. Not Lee Strafford. Not Nick Parker. Not Francis Jeffers. Not Alan Irvine. If the board didn't trust LS to do his job, they shouldn't have appointed him. If they did, they should have let him do what he was paid to do, and clearly defined the scope of his position.

Despite what was said, I can't help wondering whether Strafford's departure was a direct result of the failure of the Club 0 bid, or of discussions/arguments following it. I don't buy lack of resources. Not for a minute. We have been lacking resources from day one, and that never looked like changing. BS.

In the end, maybe LS was just another stooge, appointed by the same old people, and given an unprecedentedly wide remit, but still a mouthpiece for the remaining board members - Hulley, Grierson and Cooke. They could pull the plug at any time, and his occupying an apparently unsalaried post made it even easier and cheaper to open the trapdoor when the time came. I feel for LS. A good man who clearly wanted to play a part in making the club great again. Just a shame that he and the rest of the board had such different interpretations of the phrase "we've got your back"...

Perhaps...

No lawsuits please.

Regards,

Wise Owl

The Saloon Bar

Waikikamukau

[nebneeb]

His problem always was that he held no shares and put no money in (to my knowledge) so was never an equal to anyone on the board. If he had actually invested some cash maybe he could of secured his position and had more of a say in things but as he was he was easly going to be overuled by the current board. The first things him and Nick Parker should of done when they came in if they wanted to make a difference to the club was to buy a stake together they would of been able to force things through at boardroom level and proably have helped the club move forward.

I think you are spot on there.

I never understood why the board felt Strafford should have to have a financial interest in order to prove himself to them.

He said all along he didn't want to make money out of us, i.e. invest in his own shares or give the club loans. Which is fair enough imo.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

He never actually delivered anything he promised apart from the pies etc which anyone with any common sense could have achieved.

Oh, and here is me under the impression that he delivered investment, but the Board turned it down last week. Must have dreamt it.

[nebneeb]

Again how can you expect to tell a board who have cash in the club what to do when you don't?

I'm pro Lee and what he has done for the club but he was always going to be up againts it without putting some money in.

Because the board who have the cash in had been there for 15 years and clearly not got a clue what the hell to do to try to take this club forwards rather than backwards. They were out of idea about what to do to even try and take the club forward themselves and needed some outside help. If there had been someone willing to come in and buy some shares for a place on the board I'm sure they would have gone that route originally. But there wasn't. The only option was continue up shi1t creek without a paddle or let someone else have a go without the need to buy shares.

So in the end they were willing to take a chance on a man willing to work for free to see if he could fix the mess for them so they could get some money back. Given the only reason they did this is because they felt it was the only option, the least they could have done would be to have given him a fair crack at it without always getting caught up in the cash issue.

[Guest DSC_UK]

Because the board who have the cash in had been there for 15 years and clearly not got a clue what the hell to do to try to take this club forwards rather than backwards. They were out of idea about what to do to even try and take the club forward themselves and needed some outside help. If there had been someone willing to come in and buy some shares for a place on the board I'm sure they would have gone that route originally. But there wasn't. The only option was continue up shi1t creek without a paddle or let someone else have a go without the need to buy shares.

So in the end they were willing to take a chance on a man willing to work for free to see if he could fix the mess for them so they could get some money back. Given the only reason they did this is because they felt it was the only option, the least they could have done would be to have given him a fair crack at it without always getting caught up in the cash issue.

But what I'm saying is this was proably bound to happen as soon as Lee wanted to implement something that they were against they would just shoot him down without him really being able to do anything about it.

Is there any point trying to run the club with you hands tied? I'd say no.

[Anthndav]

If I was to speculate on that article I'd say that it sounds to me as if someone wanted their money out of the club in any way possible (read Club Tropicanna 0% deal), which caused problems when said bid was rejected.

[Silkstone Owl]

I think you are spot on there.

I never understood why the board felt Strafford should have to have a financial interest in order to prove himself to them.

He said all along he didn't want to make money out of us, i.e. invest in his own shares or give the club loans. Which is fair enough imo.

I Agree, LS has done more in his time as chairman to promote the club and manage our finances than I've seen or heard the 3 stooges do in my 26 years as a wednesdayite

[nebneeb]

But what I'm saying is this was proably bound to happen as soon as Lee wanted to implement something that they were against they would just shoot him down without him really being able to do anything about it.

Is there any point trying to run the club with you hands tied? I'd say no.

With the boardroom we have it was always bound to happen. I suppose in an ideal world the board would have been open to giving things they didn't necessarily agree with a chance, seeing as they have had 10+ years of doing things their way and monumentally failed. Then again, if we had a board that listened then we might not be in this situation anyway.

To your final question about running the club with your hands tied, in the situation of SWFC I'd say there has been a point. Lee still managed to achieve much for the good of the club through making many behind the scenes changes. Ticketing, merchandising, brand, kit, medical, internet, food have all improved.

Gone are the days when I think to myself, "I fancy going to the game"... only to be faced with the difficult task of getting a ticket via 1920s methods. Then when it gets to match day and I go to put my shirt on, only to see it has fallen apart due to being such poor quality. On finally getting to the match, being denied from giving the club more money by purchasing a pie and beer.

Now all the above might be obvious to a lot of people, and had even been suggested to the board by people on here and Wednesdayite for years. But it was Lee who got himself in there and implemented them. There is no way I would have a season ticket if things were still the way they were before Lee came.

Edited May 18, 2010 by nebneeb

[Plonk]

Couple of points:

For those who say "why didnt LS put his own money in?"> Will you all now please remortgage your homes and put the funds into WTID? No thought not, probably wont even put £50 in will you?

For those that say "only the pies got better" would you really like to go back to how the club was being run 2 years ago, with no direction no leadership no ideas and no hope? No thought not.

Ive criticised (constructively I hope) some of the things LS has done. Mostly due to my massive disapointment that the muppets on the pitch failed to live up to what was promised. But my God we are up poo poo creek now.

[SiJ]

Rudderless once again.

No doubt this whole shitstorm will be swept under the carpet.

Those three old or more people born out of wedlock will gladly see us fall down to League Two.

He (Strafford) might have not been perfect, far from it - but at least he gave the club some sense of purpose and direction.

Very worrying times.

[marshy]

Rudderless once again.

No doubt this whole shitstorm will be swept under the carpet.

Those three old or more people born out of wedlock will gladly see us fall down to League Two.

He (Strafford) might have not been perfect, far from it - but at least he gave the club some sense of purpose and direction.

Very worrying times.

Not sure about that. LS said the board has some important decisions to makein the next week or so!!! RS were reporting that further discussions will take place later this week re investment, possibly with CS9???

LS said it was like being tied to 2 horses both pulling in different directions. Having considered all that I don't think this will just get swept uinder the carpet.

I wonder if one of the horses wanted to accept the deal from CS9 in the first instance & the other didn't.

[BRUCE LEE]

I have a funny feeling the club has an ultimatum on the table.

[latemodelchild]

I have a funny feeling the club has an ultimatum on the table.

+1

Wouldn't be surprised. Hope its not one of them Hobsons choice things.

[SiJ]

I have a funny feeling the club has an ultimatum on the table.

Something is up.

Even by Wednesday standards, these last few days have been ridiculous.

What kind of ultimatum are you alluding to though?

Investment?

Board room shake up?

Or something not so good?

[themaskedowl]

That's the best thing about hitting your head against a wall...stopping.

[latemodelchild]

I reckon its a 'take this offer or we walk and your club will wither and die as you well know' type ultimatum. If it is I doubt they'll choose the latter. After all, thats what an absolute nobhead would choose isnt it? Hopefully WTID etc will provide a cushion.

[Furious George]

+1

Wouldn't be surprised. Hope its not one of them Hobsons choice things.

Dennis Hobson???

[dorian gray]

I have a feeling there is a lot more to come out about this story. And I hope it does come out, the fans deserve to know the truth.

undoubtably there is a lot more that could come out...but will it?

[Guest totemowl]

I suspect the reaction to the first offer was considered too aggressive, when the club and C9S wanted to keep negotiating despite that initial rejection. There are several reasons to keep on with those negotiations.

That reaction may well explain why LS left.

[Guest aphextwins]

Dennis Hobson???

Dennis is a good lad but there's no way I want him to have anything to do with Wed when it comes to money.