Fan Forum (not this one)

[YorkshireRam]

1 hour ago, angieram said:

I disagree.

He had made his statement at the beginning of the Forum and he must be very cautious about stating anything that would cause legal trouble for the Club.

There are a certain section of the fanbase that will never move on from using him as the scapegoat and are just looking to criticise him at every opportunity. It says more about them than it does about Pearce to be honest. 

 

I disagree with this. Carefully-worded statements fine, but he is complicit with what happened with Mel, like it or not; fans being distrustful of him is more than understandable. To my knowledge he's never directly made comment on level of involvement, so for all we know him and Mel could have been hand-in-hand walking the club towards oblivion. Until this information is known, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him- he was the CEO of a business that went into administration, that's not exactly a ringing endorsement he's good at his job, and he's said nothing to sway opinion otherwise. 

[Tamworthram]

40 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

"the finance guy"? He's the CEO of the club! Chief Executive Officer is the highest ranking employee. He's been the CEO for 5 years.

I've been at loads of these things before and I remember people queuing to have  their photos taken with Tom Glick & Sam Rush

 

 

 

Despite his title, CEO, highest ranking employee (who cares if he's the highest ranking employee?) he's never going to be box office and that's probably the way he wants it. Rush and Glick may only have had the same titles but I think there is little doubt that they were much more charismatic and in the public eye than Pearce ever has been or will be.

Glick was also the face of the owners and the closest any of us could get to them. 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Tamworthram

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

Despite his title, CEO, highest ranking employee (who cares if he's the highest ranking employee?) he's never going to be box office and that's probably the way he wants it. Rush and Glick may only have had the same titles but I think there is little doubt that they were much more charismatic and in the public eye than Pearce ever has been or will be.

Glick was also the face of the owners and the closest any of us could get to them. 

OK - I accept your point.

It's just that he looked so sad 😂

[NottsRam]

2 hours ago, angieram said:

Yes, I saw his tweets.

It's a shame his listening skills don't match his journalistic ambition. 

He got several things either wrong, or he put a slant on them that matched his views.

Not good reporting, imo.

 

True, half the things tweeted were not actually said and a lot of the rest was tweeted without context which is very misleading.  Why people would choose to analyse vague tweeted reports is beyond me when the whole thing will be aired today.

[Rev]

3 minutes ago, NottsRam said:

True, half the things tweeted were not actually said and a lot of the rest was tweeted without context which is very misleading.  Why people would choose to analyse vague tweeted reports is beyond me when the whole thing will be aired today.

Probably best to go back to covering these events live, it would save all this aggro.

[Curtains]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0gd61sy

[Nuwtfly]

6 hours ago, angieram said:

There are a certain section of the fanbase that will never move on from using him as the scapegoat and are just looking to criticise him at every opportunity. It says more about them than it does about Pearce to be honest. 

Appreciate the point you are trying to make but I think it would be worth asking some people who were working at the club during that time, or over the Mel era, whether the Pearce criticism is justified or not. From what I have heard, i am surprised that he hasn't been moved on. 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

17 hours ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Because it’s a difficult and emotive subject, going over it won’t change anything, and he’s got a chance to put it right so is focusing on the future rather than dwelling on the past? 

 

8 hours ago, angieram said:

I disagree.

He had made his statement at the beginning of the Forum and he must be very cautious about stating anything that would cause legal trouble for the Club.

There are a certain section of the fanbase that will never move on from using him as the scapegoat and are just looking to criticise him at every opportunity. It says more about them than it does about Pearce to be honest. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Nuwtfly said:

Appreciate the point you are trying to make but I think it would be worth asking some people who were working at the club during that time, or over the Mel era, whether the Pearce criticism is justified or not. From what I have heard, i am surprised that he hasn't been moved on. 

I think there’s a difference between treating him as a scapegoat and wanting him to acknowledge that mistakes were made during the Morris era. And “mistakes” is putting it extremely generously. 

I understand being cautious about legal implications, but that doesn’t mean some kind of regret can’t be expressed.

It’s not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but I don’t like it when people don’t take accountability. 

What was the statement he made at the beginning of the forum, Angie?

Edited September 13, 2023 by DarkFruitsRam7

[MackworthRamIsGod]

7 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Why not? What great truths do you think will be garnered from a media event like last night? 😄

I remember sitting there drinking my free pint whilst Mel and Stevie P told us we would be close, but would be fine in respect of FFP.

I sat there whilst 2 men, one of which was still there, answering questions at another forum last night, bare face lied to me..

You wonder why people do jump to conclusions..there was a time Stevie P was trying to convince us the sky was green and marmite is made of chocolate and we fell for it.

Edited September 13, 2023 by MackworthRamIsGod

[RoyMac5]

18 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

I remember sitting there drinking my free pint whilst Mel and Stevie P told us we would be close, but would be fine in respect of FFP.

I sat there whilst 2 men, one of which was still there, answering questions at another forum last night, bare face lied to me..

You wonder why people do jump to conclusions..there was a time Stevie P was trying to convince us the sky was green and marmite is made of chocolate and we fell for it.

Wasn’t SP often ‘chief spokesman’ of the attempted FFP shenanigans at the fans forums? He never gave us any reason to worry about the Clubs finances. I find it difficult to see him as anything but a yes man. 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Wasn’t SP often ‘chief spokesman’ of the attempted FFP shenanigans at the fans forums? He never gave us any reason to worry about the Clubs finances. I find it difficult to see him as anything but a yes man. 

He was the financial director and the adviser who was in tandem with the owner down the precipice into administration. He signed off every cheque and the application to file for administration. He was at the very least a party to the facts and loyal to Mel until the bitter end. There's little else to say other than it's incredible he's still here. CEOs and finance directors don't usually survive in such catastrophic collapses. Many of us will never change our opinion on that and why should we? And if that says more about us than Stephen Pearce, well I'm all for that and take it as a compliment.

[Loughborough Ram]

If you trust David Clowes and he wants Pearce around, then what is there to moan about?

Mel Morris made every decision, that seems to be the accepted wisdom, so what do we think Pearces responsibility in our troubles was?

Let's just get on with becoming a successful club again, and if that is with Pearce involved, then great, I couldn't care less.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

After listening to the Derby podcast from Radio Derby is it right that nobody asked Warne or the players about the stye of play? As in not much passing, not much possession and not much control of the games? As in is it by design or ineptitude?

[RoyMac5]

32 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

After listening to the Derby podcast from Radio Derby is it right that nobody asked Warne or the players about the stye of play? As in not much passing, not much possession and not much control of the games? As in is it by design or ineptitude?

There was a tweet I read last night from the chat with Hourihane, and it suggested he said that when the change from Rosenior to Warne happened it was a case of changing his style of play or not playing - this is paraphrasing a tweet from a guy I quoted on here last night, you could maybe find the tweet or maybe there’s some of the chat that will be available later.

But who would be keen enough to stand up and make themselves a target? I think  there will be bits to be gleaned about Warnes intentions style-wise and then its a case of waiting to see how the land will lie! If you see what I mean.

Edited September 13, 2023 by RoyMac5

[Carnero]

8 hours ago, Carnero said:

Why wait when we can use 2nd & 3rd hand information to spout off based on our pre-concieved mindset?

 

8 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Why not? What great truths do you think will be garnered from a media event like last night? 😄

1. How is that any way relevant to what I said?

2. You're one of the ones trying to to attach "great truths" to comments somebody has told you someone has said, not me!

3. Do you always have to respond to a post with a non-related question to try and change the direction of travel?

4. <Insert a meaningless non-related question here before RoyMac does>

5. <Insert another meaningless non-related question here before RoyMac does>

---

👍

[Tyler Durden]

9 hours ago, Carnero said:

Ridiculous that once again certain people who didn't attend the forum are already criticising aspects of what was "said" before they've even had the chance to watch the forum themselves.

I wouldn't call it ridiculous, I would call it grindingly predictable.

[Kathcairns]

8 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

Despite his title, CEO, highest ranking employee (who cares if he's the highest ranking employee?) he's never going to be box office and that's probably the way he wants it. Rush and Glick may only have had the same titles but I think there is little doubt that they were much more charismatic and in the public eye than Pearce ever has been or will be.

Glick was also the face of the owners and the closest any of us could get to them. 

I never trusted rush, there was just something not quite right about him i didnt like, but thats just my opinion.

[Day]

Having been Twitter clean for over a month now, I haven't seen any of the tweets regarding the forum, only glanced at those posted on this forum.

I think it's fair to say that once the footage does come out, any opinions that have already expressed on what has and hasn't been said in this thread will remain unchanged.

Reason being, opinions have been formed and fully entrenched now where only a decent run of results will soften or run of bad results flip.

It's already been seen in this thread with accusations back and fourth over comments taken out of context, misquoted and general bickering back and fourth. 

Reason being, the content being shared will have the authors own half full or half empty slant on things. 

I will follow @Owen87ITK great advice, wait, watch it myself and probably not engage in this particular topic as it would be a monumental waste of time.

Sooner Saturday rolls around and we have a game of football to discuss the better, I will be watching from Sunny Spain sipping on a Pina Colada, win or lose I will not be logging on here 😂

[Caerphilly Ram]

 

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, Carnero said:

 

1. How is that any way relevant to what I said?

2. You're one of the ones trying to to attach "great truths" to comments somebody has told you someone has said, not me!

3. Do you always have to respond to a post with a non-related question to try and change the direction of travel?

4. <Insert a meaningless non-related question here before RoyMac does>

5. <Insert another meaningless non-related question here before RoyMac does>

---

👍

What? I have no idea what you are going on about.

I replied to why ‘spout off now’ as opposed to waiting, as there would be no ‘great truths’ spoken anyway.

So why not comment any time at all really. 😄

Edited September 13, 2023 by RoyMac5