onevalefan.co.uk Present Past Specials About Forum
Jump to content
onevalefan.co.uk forum

Advert


Advert


MOLD do the Dirty on Jeff Kent


old sage

Recommended Posts

Advert

I spoke to Jeff a few days ago and he told me about the books fiasco. He also said that he had faced dogs abuse from a number of fans for expressing his opinion at the EGM. I had stood up and voiced a contrary opinion but he had no problem with me doing that because he is perfectly happy for people to have the right to an opinion. It was sad to hear about some of the stuff he has faced from Vale supporters. I'm ashamed of some of our fans at times.

 

Jean,i agree with in some part BUT i think the abuse he has had wasn't to do with his opinion,it was more to do with rubbing everyone's nose in it at the EGM with his smiling,smirking face and victory salute.

 

I bet he still thinks we shouldn't be owned by one person and should still have a 24.9% ruling:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree totally we really do have a lunatic element that are pitiful when it comes to abusing loyal supporters, players and most recently Micky.

 

That said I feel absolutely no pity for the man over his loss given the way he goaded us at the EGM last year. Sometimes in life you reap what you sew.

 

:yes::yes::yes::clap::clap::clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those of you who are gloating about Jeff Kent losing money are part of the problem - you are more interested in petty point scoring than in genuinely taking things forward, and you should be ashamed of yourselves. You really ought to have a good look at your own views and whether you need to get a balance......you'd think that what he did actually made a major difference......he wasn't responsible for us losing the EGM.

 

Jean is spot on about what Jeff's V sign was about - about the 24.9% rule, not about the Board, and he explained to me in no uncertain terms why he felt the need to do it - and those of you who are slagging him off on here are quite probably the ones who are to blame for him doing it. He was getting booed all the way through his speech for daring to express a view that's different from the zealots and the V sign was as much a response to the boos as it was to the result.

 

As for the posters who asked if he is still against sole ownership of the Vale, the answer is Yes - he has a political view on the subject, and the fact that V2001 failed is neither here nor there in whether sole ownership is or is not better then what was being proposed.

 

You all ought to go and talk to him and maybe some of you should apologise for what you say......and that's without exception. I bumped into him in Sainsbury's in Stoke and we had an exchange of views, which is why I know what he was thinking about.....and why he did what he did. He holds no brief for the Board or Bill Bratt.....

 

I think the whole vindictive tone here is particularly disappointing, considering that we are trying to unite a disparate fanbase behind the club...and those of you who think it's good that a long-term Vale fan lost a lot of money are driving a wedge between us.

 

I don't care what you think, you're wrong. Get yourselves sorted!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those of you who are gloating about Jeff Kent losing money are part of the problem - you are more interested in petty point scoring than in genuinely taking things forward, and you should be ashamed of yourselves. You really ought to have a good look at your own views and whether you need to get a balance......you'd think that what he did actually made a major difference......he wasn't responsible for us losing the EGM.

 

Jean is spot on about what Jeff's V sign was about - about the 24.9% rule, not about the Board, and he explained to me in no uncertain terms why he felt the need to do it - and those of you who are slagging him off on here are quite probably the ones who are to blame for him doing it. He was getting booed all the way through his speech for daring to express a view that's different from the zealots and the V sign was as much a response to the boos as it was to the result.

 

As for the posters who asked if he is still against sole ownership of the Vale, the answer is Yes - he has a political view on the subject, and the fact that V2001 failed is neither here nor there in whether sole ownership is or is not better then what was being proposed.

 

You all ought to go and talk to him and maybe some of you should apologise for what you say......and that's without exception. I bumped into him in Sainsbury's in Stoke and we had an exchange of views, which is why I know what he was thinking about.....and why he did what he did. He holds no brief for the Board or Bill Bratt.....

 

I think the whole vindictive tone here is particularly disappointing, considering that we are trying to unite a disparate fanbase behind the club...and those of you who think it's good that a long-term Vale fan lost a lot of money are driving a wedge between us.

 

I don't care what you think, you're wrong. Get yourselves sorted!!

 

What a good post, well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those of you who are gloating about Jeff Kent losing money are part of the problem - you are more interested in petty point scoring than in genuinely taking things forward, and you should be ashamed of yourselves. You really ought to have a good look at your own views and whether you need to get a balance......you'd think that what he did actually made a major difference......he wasn't responsible for us losing the EGM.

 

Jean is spot on about what Jeff's V sign was about - about the 24.9% rule, not about the Board, and he explained to me in no uncertain terms why he felt the need to do it - and those of you who are slagging him off on here are quite probably the ones who are to blame for him doing it. He was getting booed all the way through his speech for daring to express a view that's different from the zealots and the V sign was as much a response to the boos as it was to the result.

 

As for the posters who asked if he is still against sole ownership of the Vale, the answer is Yes - he has a political view on the subject, and the fact that V2001 failed is neither here nor there in whether sole ownership is or is not better then what was being proposed.

 

You all ought to go and talk to him and maybe some of you should apologise for what you say......and that's without exception. I bumped into him in Sainsbury's in Stoke and we had an exchange of views, which is why I know what he was thinking about.....and why he did what he did. He holds no brief for the Board or Bill Bratt.....

 

I think the whole vindictive tone here is particularly disappointing, considering that we are trying to unite a disparate fanbase behind the club...and those of you who think it's good that a long-term Vale fan lost a lot of money are driving a wedge between us.

 

I don't care what you think, you're wrong. Get yourselves sorted!!

 

Well said.........:yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Reporting Posts and other information

    Rules - This forum is moderated but the admin team don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking and alert us by reporting content. Logged in users can hover over the post and click the orange button. Guests can contact us here. If you don't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Click this link, type in their username and click save. Please check with the admin team if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first.

    Use - This forum may not be suitable for all as it may contain words or phrases not considered appropriate for some. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and could face legal action should it contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. Please do not reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: phone number, address or email address). This forum is not in any way affiliated with Port Vale FC. OVF reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. If you spot an offensive post please report it to the admin team (instructions are above).

    Adverts - This site occasionally a) has adverts and sponsored features about gambling b) accepts sponsored posts from third parties. If you require help and advice on gambling read these links: Information on protecting young people | Addiction help from gambleaware.co.uk
  • Friends of OVF


Advert



×
×
  • Create New...