Glenn Oliver

[Coskickabo]

He won't go.He will want to stay even if only to get up everyone's nose.He's like something you can't quite scrape off the bottom of your shoe.

[Shoney]

He reminds me very much of Derby_Valiant. Always in the background leaving a bad feeling over everyone, but never prepared to show his face at the games.

[Away Days]

Why did shareholders vote him back in at the EGM you've only got yourselves to blame

[Derby_Valiant]

He reminds me very much of Derby_Valiant. Always in the background leaving a bad feeling over everyone, but never prepared to show his face at the games.

 

Ok i'll be the second person to ever reply to you on Onevalers! If thats the case me and my mate Jacko51 want to know, where were you at Darlington a couple of seasons ago?

[Jacko51]

Why did shareholders vote him back in at the EGM you've only got yourselves to blame

 

The question you should be asking is how much did it cost Mr Oliver to get himself voted back in at the EGM?

[Andyregs]

Why did shareholders vote him back in at the EGM you've only got yourselves to blame

 

To the 15 or so people who did, I agree.

[Bea Smith]

This poll clearly shows that G O is unpopular and has become the focus of discontent.

I expect it will attact abuse, but feel I am entitled to an opinion, which is basically that it is nearly impossible for some fans to vote given those categories. The reason I say that is because to make a rational decision you need to know what the alternative is.

If you are happy that Mr Chaudry will take over and feel that GO has not done a good job, then it is easy to vote.

It becomes more difficult if you think (as I do) that GO and the rest of V2001 still deserve to be remembered with credit for their initial efforts, could have done better in many ways - especially marketing - between say 2004 and 2010, and things have made some progress in the last few months.

Still time to go ? - depends on what will come instead.

There is no doubt that there has been a feeling that they must lash out back at some protesting fans, which hasn't helped. But it is still commonplace on here even for the more intelligent posters like C Oakes to be childish and refer to Glenda, and others write Bill Pratt whilst complaining about the use of Mohammed instead of Mo for Mr Chaudry. Not to mention the more severe personal abuse.

Normal respect for all parties would be a good thing, there are always going to be a few idiots on both sides who show their lack of intellect but nobody is going to be swayed by intimidation and Rob's rules about personal abuse don't always seem to be heeded.

To complicate it further, some of that recent progress I referred to earlier may ironically be because the board were pushed by the BG and SEO efforts .

So maybe a poll asking 'Would you like to see Bratt.Lloyd and Oliver replaced by Mr Chaudry running the club' would be interesting. Many non-Tories would like to see the back of Cameron but not if UKIP or someone worse took over the government.

 

Whatever happens, my biggest hope is that it does not interefere with the prospect of a decent season on the field.

[fairportnick]

You could replace Cameron and Oliver with a small pool of brown liquid and most would be happy.

[Andyregs]

This poll clearly shows that G O is unpopular and has become the focus of discontent.

I expect it will attact abuse, but feel I am entitled to an opinion, which is basically that it is nearly impossible for some fans to vote given those categories. The reason I say that is because to make a rational decision you need to know what the alternative is.

If you are happy that Mr Chaudry will take over and feel that GO has not done a good job, then it is easy to vote.

It becomes more difficult if you think (as I do) that GO and the rest of V2001 still deserve to be remembered with credit for their initial efforts, could have done better in many ways - especially marketing - between say 2004 and 2010, and things have made some progress in the last few months.

Still time to go ? - depends on what will come instead.

There is no doubt that there has been a feeling that they must lash out back at some protesting fans, which hasn't helped. But it is still commonplace on here even for the more intelligent posters like C Oakes to be childish and refer to Glenda, and others write Bill Pratt whilst complaining about the use of Mohammed instead of Mo for Mr Chaudry. Not to mention the more severe personal abuse.

Normal respect for all parties would be a good thing, there are always going to be a few idiots on both sides who show their lack of intellect but nobody is going to be swayed by intimidation and Rob's rules about personal abuse don't always seem to be heeded.

To complicate it further, some of that recent progress I referred to earlier may ironically be because the board were pushed by the BG and SEO efforts .

So maybe a poll asking 'Would you like to see Bratt.Lloyd and Oliver replaced by Mr Chaudry running the club' would be interesting. Many non-Tories would like to see the back of Cameron but not if UKIP or someone worse took over the government.

 

Whatever happens, my biggest hope is that it does not interefere with the prospect of a decent season on the field.

 

THey have lost what little respect I had for a couple of them. And perhaps a better poll would be the option of them handing over to an interim board (which they were meant to be) led by Mark sims in order to find the best investment to take the club forward. Whether that is chaudry or someone else.

[Jacko51]

This poll clearly shows that G O is unpopular and has become the focus of discontent.

I expect it will attact abuse, but feel I am entitled to an opinion, which is basically that it is nearly impossible for some fans to vote given those categories. The reason I say that is because to make a rational decision you need to know what the alternative is.

If you are happy that Mr Chaudry will take over and feel that GO has not done a good job, then it is easy to vote.

It becomes more difficult if you think (as I do) that GO and the rest of V2001 still deserve to be remembered with credit for their initial efforts, could have done better in many ways - especially marketing - between say 2004 and 2010, and things have made some progress in the last few months.

Still time to go ? - depends on what will come instead.

There is no doubt that there has been a feeling that they must lash out back at some protesting fans, which hasn't helped. But it is still commonplace on here even for the more intelligent posters like C Oakes to be childish and refer to Glenda, and others write Bill Pratt whilst complaining about the use of Mohammed instead of Mo for Mr Chaudry. Not to mention the more severe personal abuse.

Normal respect for all parties would be a good thing, there are always going to be a few idiots on both sides who show their lack of intellect but nobody is going to be swayed by intimidation and Rob's rules about personal abuse don't always seem to be heeded.

To complicate it further, some of that recent progress I referred to earlier may ironically be because the board were pushed by the BG and SEO efforts .

So maybe a poll asking 'Would you like to see Bratt.Lloyd and Oliver replaced by Mr Chaudry running the club' would be interesting. Many non-Tories would like to see the back of Cameron but not if UKIP or someone worse took over the government.

 

Whatever happens, my biggest hope is that it does not interefere with the prospect of a decent season on the field.

 

With respect, Bea, I can't see what Mr Chaudry has to do with this. The current deal on the table according to the club is nothing to do with Mo Chaudry. We are told it is the best thing since sliced bread for the club. The question is, do we want Mr Oliver to be part of ANY new future for the club. It is not, do you prefer GO or MC.

 

You mention the efforts of V2001 in the buy out from administration. I told Glenn Oliver on Thursday that I will always be grateful for what they did then but they cannot live on past glories forever when their efforts since then have been less than brilliant. Would you still want Stephen McPhee in our team now - he was brilliant in 2003 as well?!!

[VantaaVale]

THey have lost what little respect I had for a couple of them. And perhaps a better poll would be the option of them handing over to an interim board (which they were meant to be) led by Mark sims in order to find the best investment to take the club forward. Whether that is chaudry or someone else.

 

Everyone knows that the interim board would simply accept Mo Chaudry's bid unless some serious flaw is discovered.

 

As far as I recall, everyone who has discussed Mo's bid at length with him, with the exception of the Jackson 5 board, is enthusiastic about it. The J5 board simply resorted to a smear campaign against Mo prior to the EGM, which in my view meant they too could not find a real issue with the business plan.

[markymark]

The problem is that any board should judge on merits each bid and not take the first on the table. The fact they would just accept Mo's bid is bad because there will be weaknesses and areas of concern in it - as a result these should be picked up and addressed. I get the feeling this wouldn't be as they would want this deal done ASAP.

[fairportnick]

The problem is that any board should judge on merits each bid and not take the first on the table. The fact they would just accept Mo's bid is bad because there will be weaknesses and areas of concern in it - as a result these should be picked up and addressed. I get the feeling this wouldn't be as they would want this deal done ASAP.

 

What weakness and areas of concern would those be then?

You will probably answer that you dont know, well nobody else does either.===

[Andyregs]

The problem is that any board should judge on merits each bid and not take the first on the table. The fact they would just accept Mo's bid is bad because there will be weaknesses and areas of concern in it - as a result these should be picked up and addressed. I get the feeling this wouldn't be as they would want this deal done ASAP.

 

So only one bid has been on the table?

[VantaaVale]

The problem is that any board should judge on merits each bid and not take the first on the table. The fact they would just accept Mo's bid is bad because there will be weaknesses and areas of concern in it - as a result these should be picked up and addressed. I get the feeling this wouldn't be as they would want this deal done ASAP.

 

Weaknesses compared to the way the current board are running the club?

 

I think Mo's business plan has a good chance of success and is being turned down purely for personal reasons. An argument their pre-EGM literature supports.