Webbers full interview, out now

[king canary 7,580]

22 minutes ago, Badger said:

News will be newspapers - these "polls"  to gauge opinion are nonsense but it is still not a good idea to start a battle with a local newspaper where most fans get most of their news.

In the final analysis it is likely to damage both parties. 

What is interesting is it isn't just Archant- reporters from local BBC and ITV news both say they've been denied interviews too. So he seems to be shutting the entire local media out.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

23 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

As on this occasion you gave me no alternative payment method when I requested one. You can be a little pedantic Nutty and I can only try to pay. 

That's not true and you know it. As it is you worked the alternative out yourself. You get a receipt if Hoggy wants to see it.

You're obviously going to double down on me being "my unhelpful best once again" despite what I have actually done concerning you and pledges. I don't know why I got upset about it TBH. It's not like anyone else has said it over all these years. So carry on regardless...

 

[king canary 7,580]

56 minutes ago, Yobocop said:

For me you can’t have it both ways, many of here accused him of hiding over the last few weeks but now he has come out and been honest as he always is that isn’t right either 

time to leave it now, enjoy your summers and see what next season brings 

I don't think anyone is asking to have it both ways though.

We asked him to give an interview and he did- doesn't mean those people can't criticise the content of said interview.

If you had the same people who demanded an interview saying 'why is he talking, he needs to shut up and get on with his job' then I might agree. Not seen that though.

[ricardo 7,349]

4 minutes ago, percy varco said:

Webber has tried to put lipstick on a pig of a season. 
 

If pigs are all you can afford then don't  cry when all you get is bacon sandwiches.

I love some brown sauce or mustard  but the cupboard is bare.

[Ken Hairy 3,760]

6 minutes ago, percy varco said:

Webber has tried to put lipstick on a pig of a season. 
clearly thinks little of fans with his dont like it dont renew line

arrogant vetted interview

A friend of mine at work, someone I've had a few heated debates with about Webber and the owners was absolutely livid after he listened to this earlier. He's been a staunch supporter of the board. That makes me wonder if this is yet another massive PR own goal, people like myself as Hoggy rightly says won't be swayed no matter what he's says now but if he's losing support from people like my friend that it really has to be the end for him now. 

[ricardo 7,349]

35 minutes ago, Myra Hawtree said:

Local media put out because Club given up talking to them.  Not surprised when all they do is stir things up, looking for a reaction to sell more papers etc.  Talk for the sake of talking and saying nothing that we don’t all see and know.  Always having polls which is undermining for the club and players.  Everything is cyclical and we’ve seen it all before over the years.  The season is over and we should move on.  OTBC!

Well said Myra, I think weve been here many times before. Perhaps Archant can sort us out a nice billionaire.

[Robert N. LiM 4,246]

3 hours ago, Virtual reality said:

I for one am absolutely flabbergasted to discover that PL points are available based on the fans enthusiasm within the stands. Who knew 🤷‍♂️

Take the point, but Everton's fans essentially kept them up. Unless you think it was Lampard's managerial genius.

[king canary 7,580]

3 hours ago, hogesar said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm expecting the same people who didn't like him before to still not like him. No interview he done, nothing he could have said to have actually changed that. For me it's about next season and certainly at that level I rate him.

Just going back to this point- you're right I don't think it will turn anyone who didn't like him into a fan but I think looking at the reaction on here and on twitter suggests it has turned a few more against him.

Certainly some people who are usually positive about the club have reacted negatively to this interview. I think trying to put blame on the fans and the media for not being supportive enough when we didn't win any of the first 10 games and have failed miserably to compete unsurprisingly is going down like a bag of cold sick with those who bother to attend.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

The interview we all knew he would make... not my fault..tick... fans were poor..tick... what do you expect with this money... tick... if you don't like it... don't go...tick... no signings unless we sell...tick.

Predictable. I really don't respect or support the failing employee one bit.

Like his other half, causing major problems at the club and doesn't care what we the fan base think. Attacking your customers never ends well...

[Duncan Edwards 2,223]

32 minutes ago, Badger said:

News will be newspapers - these "polls"  to gauge opinion are nonsense but it is still not a good idea to start a battle with a local newspaper where most fans get most of their news.

In the final analysis it is likely to damage both parties. 

Agree with this. It’s providing an entertaining distraction but it’s not painting anyone in a good light. Noticeable, certainly on the Twitter feed, how the PinkUn are looking to frame their output to stoke fires. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

4 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Take the point, but Everton's fans essentially kept them up. Unless you think it was Lampard's managerial genius.

Maybe because they had a team still in contention past March! Fans fault my ars...

[komakino 272]

Webber is a coward. While I didn't disagree with everything he said, to have a staged Q&A with an uncritical audience shows that the man can give it, but can't take it. 

Refusing to take any responsibility for the signings, slagging off the fans and media he's all me, me, me. 

He's an absolute PR disaster. 

[repman 634]

Just now, Kenny Foggo said:

Maybe because they had a team still in contention past March! Fans fault my ars...

Some fans were chanting the 'lets pretend we scored a goal' chant around christmas time, we weren't out of it then. Any time we are in this league it's going to be a massive slog, expecting it to be comfortable or fun seems naive to me.

[For the future 65]

Stuart Webber said they is not much money left what about the parachute payments from the premier league?

[repman 634]

3 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Agree with this. It’s providing an entertaining distraction but it’s not painting anyone in a good light. Noticeable, certainly on the Twitter feed, how the PinkUn are looking to frame their output to stoke fires. 

The funny thing to me is how they're doing this after seemingly losing their access to the club, if they were still being briefed by Webber or whoever would they be so critical?

I do accept this is a double sided coin and there should be better from both sides.

[Robert N. LiM 4,246]

1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

 

Our transfer business was “alright” apparently. We spread ourselves too thinly in terms of signings because we can't afford to take a risk? That makes no sense at all as we actually took more of a risk by relying on too many unproven players.

 

I thought he made a reasonable point here: that by signing young players with potential (and potential resale value) we're making sure the club is secure if we get relegated. Better than signing a bunch of 30-year-olds as he put it. Essentially, that's his job, the infinite game, trying to secure the club's long-term future. (And in my view, that's why he should speak publicly: to keep telling the fans what the long-term project is.)

The issue for me was that the sacking of DF flies against this idea: that was a short-term move aimed at keeping us up this season. An independent journalist might have probed that contradiction. I think it's a real shame he hasn't spoken to Archant or Michael Bailey. As TvB has said, it's a really bad sign when the club is at war with the local media. And our local media is hardly feral.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

2 hours ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

He's definitely being disingenuous when he acknowledges that fans are unhappy because we were relegated and because we can't compete with Liverpool. He knows damn well that's not the case, it's because we managed a paltry 22 points, roughly the same total as last time with a -61 goal difference and looked utterly inept in 80% of the games this year.

 

Indeed, if we'd have been relegated but gone down fighting, and we were proud of the players for their battling efforts it would be a totally different feeling to the current one following relegation. If we'd have given the clubs outside the top 6 a good game, or made the top 6 fight for their points from us, we'd all be totally ok with relegation and eager to get back to the Prem. But most of the time we've looked like we'd even struggle in the Championship - the team has gone backwards from last year in a year when we've needed to compete at a higher level

[Duncan Edwards 2,223]

1 minute ago, repman said:

The funny thing to me is how they're doing this after seemingly losing their access to the club, if they were still being briefed by Webber or whoever would they be so critical?

I do accept this is a double sided coin and there should be better from both sides.

Yep. Stems from the interview he gave to the Times, whether there was some collective umbrage taken that he spoke to Winter as opposed to them I don’t know (different audiences but 🤷🏻‍♂️). They then ran with the 90% thing which, in my opinion, has always been lifted out of context and weaponised (Webber should have been aware of this). From there, he won’t speak to them and the PinkUn lads have doubled down and have gone after him a bit (quite a bit). 

[hogesar 9,618]

13 minutes ago, king canary said:

Just going back to this point- you're right I don't think it will turn anyone who didn't like him into a fan but I think looking at the reaction on here and on twitter suggests it has turned a few more against him.

Certainly some people who are usually positive about the club have reacted negatively to this interview. I think trying to put blame on the fans and the media for not being supportive enough when we didn't win any of the first 10 games and have failed miserably to compete unsurprisingly is going down like a bag of cold sick with those who bother to attend.

I've not seen anyone who was pro-webber go the other way either on Twitter or on here. I've seen a couple on here who were anti-webber go pro-webber, on this thread, which seems to go against what you're saying.. So I'm not sure it's had the bad effect you think it might have done, or maybe it has in some sections and its just down to who we all surround ourselves with online.

 

[hogesar 9,618]

24 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

That's not true and you know it. As it is you worked the alternative out yourself. You get a receipt if Hoggy wants to see it.

You're obviously going to double down on me being "my unhelpful best once again" despite what I have actually done concerning you and pledges. I don't know why I got upset about it TBH. It's not like anyone else has said it over all these years. So carry on regardless...

 

I'm at ease. I wasn't fussed about the bet in the first place, but Midlands decided to bump it and made sure I hadn't forgotten it a month or so ago, which was the only reason I remembered it!

If he's happy with himself for whatever he has / hasn't donated then that's fine with me 🙂

 

[komakino 272]

3 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Yep. Stems from the interview he gave to the Times, whether there was some collective umbrage taken that he spoke to Winter as opposed to them I don’t know (different audiences but 🤷🏻‍♂️). They then ran with the 90% thing which, in my opinion, has always been lifted out of context and weaponised (Webber should have been aware of this). From there, he won’t speak to them and the PinkUn lads have doubled down and have gone after him a bit (quite a bit). 

The Pink Un lads such as Paddy and Connor have been more than fair. Webber won't take personally responsibility and by blaming the fans and media, has made a bad situation even worse and that deserves even further scrutiny. This won't end well.

It wasn't the fans that gave up, the club gave up. 

[Duncan Edwards 2,223]

Just now, komakino said:

The Pink Un lads such as Paddy and Connor have been more than fair. Webber won't take personally responsibility and by blaming the fans and media, has made a bad situation even worse and that deserves even further scrutiny. This won't end well.

It wasn't the fans that gave up, the club gave up. 

Oh. I’d expected you to be really positive! 😂😉

[Mello Yello 2,281]

Zoe may as well have conducted the interview....."and the final question Stu, what do you fancy for tea tonight hun?".....

[Inch High aka Inchy.. 405]

Everybody's fault but his own.  Obnoxious plum. 

 

Edited May 26, 2022 by Inch High aka Inchy..

[FenwayFrank 2,457]

On a positive note, Alice was looking lovely 

[king canary 7,580]

15 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I've not seen anyone who was pro-webber go the other way either on Twitter or on here. I've seen a couple on here who were anti-webber go pro-webber, on this thread, which seems to go against what you're saying.. So I'm not sure it's had the bad effect you think it might have done, or maybe it has in some sections and its just down to who we all surround ourselves with online.

 

I've certainly seen a few who I'd normally view as sitting more towards the 'happy clapper' end react negatively to this. 

[hogesar 9,618]

Just now, king canary said:

I've certainly seen a few who I'd normally view as sitting more towards the 'happy clapper' end react negatively to this. 

True, but from those i'm seeing, whilst generally been 'happy clapper' have been anti-webber for the past month or so anyway. Like I said, I could be missing some people though.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

15 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Yep. Stems from the interview he gave to the Times, whether there was some collective umbrage taken that he spoke to Winter as opposed to them I don’t know (different audiences but 🤷🏻‍♂️). They then ran with the 90% thing which, in my opinion, has always been lifted out of context and weaponised (Webber should have been aware of this). From there, he won’t speak to them and the PinkUn lads have doubled down and have gone after him a bit (quite a bit). 

I never read the Archant story, only the "Do you really want to be here; Mr Webber?" or whatever it was headline. So I don't know if they took the 90 per cent thing out of context (certainly some posters here did).

But Webber also said - and I don't have the quote to hand - something on the lines that he wasn't fussed about staying at Norwich City and was happy to leave but was persuaded to stay. Given that, the Archant headline at least was perfectly justified.

If he is happy to talk to the national press and say controversial stuff that he must have known would make headlines in the local media then to throw a hissy fit and refuse to give proper interviews, as opposed to be spoonfed questions from the PR department, is pathetic.

[Badger 2,405]

30 minutes ago, For the future said:

Stuart Webber said they is not much money left what about the parachute payments from the premier league?

Player's wages mainly.

[Danke bitte 965]

1 hour ago, shefcanary said:

@Danke bitte

Firstly I am not criticising Webber on specifics here, just the mechanisms that have led to the statement, albeit noting that the fans and the local media are not 100% supportive of what is going at the club at the moment. 

The contradictions made by Webber in this interview bear out why a CEO is necessary.  Webber is currently the front person in the media for Board and senior executive decisions; he is not from a PR background, coming across as an enthusiastic amateur.  It is great to hear from the club and that he has taken on this responsibility.  However I think it true to say that recent events and today's interview when added together show a lack of control over the message of the questions that fans and the local media want answering. Today's message does demonstrate what is on Webber's mind, be it his view of the past, Mount Everest or what happens to recruitment next. 

A CEO would help him to get across a clearer message.  More likely they would take the responsibility on themselves and importantly let Webber get on with the job of providing some ammunition to Deano. There are more issues at the moment that fans and the media want answers to other than Webber's position.  A CEO would take counsel from all the executive and report this in a more even handed way, not only showing they are in charge of all aspects of the club, but have challenged executives over what learning they take from a very disappointing season and hopefully presenting a clear action plan for what is going to happen next. 

With the best will in the world, can you see Zoe challenging Stuart over his recruitment policy, whilst he challenges her over the ticket pricing?  Can you also see Zoe reporting to the Board on Webber's behalf and taking responsibility for the decision he makes?  If that is what they discuss at work fine, but how does it affect thier homelife?  As I have said elsewhere her role on the Board is reportage and conduit of the Board's view, but does not provide an ability to ensure their views are implemented as in the current organisation she cannot instruct Webber what to do.  That is the role of a CEO!

This highlights the other main weakness of corporate governance at the club.  The acronym of PLC at the end of the organisation's name should be taken seriously.  The club is a public company with over 6,000 shareholders.  Sure, two of them (another married couple natch) jointly have 53% of the shares and thus control things, but if it is truly the "community club" that one of those two say it is, they need to demonstrate this by having Board accountability as well.  An independent Chairperson would provide this, ensuring that executives are held properly to account for their decisions, but also ensure the Board maintain a proper stewardship of the club.

The Chair would also ensure that the Board has a clear strategy for the CEO to follow (the five year plan no less), challenging the CEO and in turn the executive that they are doing everything possible to meet that strategy, and if not what resource is required to do so, wheter appropriate personnel or additional resource.  [As an aside here Webber today made out that this seasons' relegation was part of the plan, was it the Board's plan?]. The club has had good independent chairs in the past (e.g. Bowkett) so why it has ditched this role and the CEO baffles me. 

Given what has happened this season, I'm afraid the picture of Board meetings I have are unlikely to bring great comfort to those shareholders.  A couple on the Board effectively handing over running of the club to another couple just looks too darn cosy, with polite but inconsequential conversation around a pub table over pints and a pie springing to mind.  Meanwhile, we have a maverick who whenever he tries to right a position just seemingly makes a bigger hole for himself diverting his attention from the problem at hand, supported by someone who probably doesn't have the necessary skills but more importantly the true independence to challenge him on those mistakes.    

So a CEO allows executives to do what they are best at, challenging them to admit frailties' and highlight where they need help (which the CEO should provide), whilst seeking action plans that when pooled together ensure the Club meets its strategy.

Hope this helps.

Thanks so much for this. A really useful insight and explanation. That interview, thought honest (to a point) further demonstrates your notion of Webber as “maverick” in a land where he is law. Less Judge Dread though.. more Judge John Deed. 

For me, this is where the protestors are going wrong. Though I appreciate their efforts, simply yelling “Delia out” etc provides little; say she went tomorrow then what? What I’d love to see is protestors yelling “CEO in!” or “Infrastructure review!” Because that’s clearly what’s needed here. Throwing the baby out with the bath water isn’t going to get any of us what we want but if the protestors had clear and formed intent then potentially they might get listened to and we might see more structure implemented in the board room as your post points out.