The Webber thing is unforgivable I’m afraid

[nutty nigel 7,648]

I expect if we see a father and son on future boards it will be much more acceptable in a manly football club way.

 

[Davidlingfield 63]

6 minutes ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

There's a lot of thinly veiled misogyny in these threads as usual.

Personally, I couldn’t give a toss what sex the person is who is running the club - I just wish they were competent to do so.

[essex canary 508]

35 minutes ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

There's a lot of thinly veiled misogyny in these threads as usual.

Sorry, people with young families very often need to work out who the prime earner is going to be. Some operate with the house husband model, nothing wrong with that. There is something very much wrong with 2 people from the same family both taking high powered positions then failing to cover all bases in their jobs which the customer is paying heavily for and which isn't being done.

[Osborne17 11]

1 hour ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

There's a lot of thinly veiled misogyny in these threads as usual.

Absolutely agree with this statement.  

Comments suggesting she "leveraged Stuart’s position to work her way up" (a comment completely without any foundation or evidence, by the way) or even people on this thread referring to her simply as "Stuart's wife" or "his wife".... jeez. We can and should do better on this thread.

 

[essex canary 508]

10 minutes ago, Osborne17 said:

Absolutely agree with this statement.  

Comments suggesting she "leveraged Stuart’s position to work her way up" (a comment completely without any foundation or evidence, by the way) or even people on this thread referring to her simply as "Stuart's wife" or "his wife".... jeez. We can and should do better on this thread.

 

Perhaps you or @Wings of a Sparrow could clarify what is funny about my previous posting?

it would be very interesting to know exactly in what circumstances an ex-consultant came to be re-employed very shortly before, by her own admission, recommending her spouse for a high powered position at a time and place where it was very clearly personally convenient.

Are organisations usually in the position of accepting employment recommendations for senior positions from more junior staff?

I don't know many people who when writing about their spouse refer to them by their full name only which regularly happens in her Programme Notes.

[Capt. Pants 4,297]

On 26/10/2023 at 10:54, Coneys Knee said:

You’re joking? I’ve totally got my wires crossed here. I thought he was off a month later after Knapper arrives. This is even more ludicrous. I’m sorry but there’s is no justification or benefit to this.

Yes I thought that as well. I've no issues with SW remaining on the payroll if that's been agreed, but in my view he really musn't be shadowing or influencing Knapper.

Can't see why he should be involved in the handover anyway, after all when a manager is sacked there isn't one and often the whole coaching team gets the boot as well. New guy does it his way.

If Knapper needs his hand holding then we've appointed the wrong person. 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Capt. Pants

[Sufyellow 225]

33 minutes ago, Osborne17 said:

Absolutely agree with this statement.  

Comments suggesting she "leveraged Stuart’s position to work her way up" (a comment completely without any foundation or evidence, by the way) or even people on this thread referring to her simply as "Stuart's wife" or "his wife".... jeez. We can and should do better on this thread.

 

But nothing about the debt we are in and nothing to show for it!  I guess if you want to go down that route to shut up the argument,  then that's fine. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Most professional organisations do not allow relationships in senior management position because

1. It can lead to complications if the relationship goes sour

2. It leads to unrest in the workforce because it is perceived there is a bias going on due to the relationship

3. It undermines one or both of the management, it that people only think they got "there" because of the other one and respect is lost.

That's why most sensible well run organisations don't allow it.

Unfortunately I think too many talented people have left under Zoe's tenureship and that we need a fresh approach from top to bottom. That has nothing to do with her gender.

 

 

[Robert N. LiM 4,545]

.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Robert N. LiM
posted in error

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,442]

46 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Most professional organisations do not allow relationships in senior management position because

1. It can lead to complications if the relationship goes sour

2. It leads to unrest in the workforce because it is perceived there is a bias going on due to the relationship

3. It undermines one or both of the management, it that people only think they got "there" because of the other one and respect is lost.

That's why most sensible well run organisations don't allow it.

Unfortunately I think too many talented people have left under Zoe's tenureship and that we need a fresh approach from top to bottom. That has nothing to do with her gender.

 

 

Another post based on no facts whatsoever.

[Jim Smith 2,345]

On 26/10/2023 at 10:05, lake district canary said:

All this Webber bashing should be taken with a pinch of salt and drumming up hatred - which is what people start to do because of threads like this - should not be taken too seriously.  Zoe was part of the club before her husband and clearly likes it and is wanting to build on what she is doing. The danger is she will want to walk away too if things get too unpleasant - and she does come across very well whenever I've heard her speak and we would miss her more than perhaps her husband.

He's going, that should be enough and all this wailing "he should have gone before" "he should go now" is just because of bad results on the pitch. That Nunez shot goes in instead of hitting the bar and the Middsbro game might have been different - same as against Leeds, it's such fine margins that lead to bad results.  Goals change games and with a bit of confidence from a goal, the performance against Middsbro would look a whole lot better and this thread would not be so vitriolic.

So, I'm not happy clapping, I have no desire for SW to stay......just let things take their course as they are doing. Stirring does no-one any good.

Not sure I’d agree she cones across very well when she speaks. Not saying that means she’s bad at her job necessarily but she doesn’t come across as particularly comfortable communicating with the fans and media which is perhaps why there is so often silence from the club. There isn’t a Munby type figure there to act as the bridge between board and fans. 
 

My understanding is she was previously very much on the administrative side of things so probably the public facing elements of the role are something she has less experience of. 

[Osborne17 11]

1 hour ago, Sufyellow said:

But nothing about the debt we are in and nothing to show for it!  I guess if you want to go down that route to shut up the argument,  then that's fine. 

Me making the point that the unhealthy and borderline offensive way some on here frame a discussion or an individual (simply in terms of their marriage/relationship) is not attempting to "shut up the argument", @Sufyellow.  We can debate the merits of people's roles at the club on this thread without the air of a misogyny. 

 

[chicken 2,654]

5 hours ago, essex canary said:

We should ask our resident Mental Health expert @chicken

I dunno, maybe we should ask our resident marketing, public relations, stocks and shares, community focused, fans voice expert @essex canary?

Cheap shots make you look even more of a troll.

[essex canary 508]

2 minutes ago, chicken said:

I dunno, maybe we should ask our resident marketing, public relations, stocks and shares, community focused, fans voice expert @essex canary?

Cheap shots make you look even more of a troll.

Oh dear. At least @Midlands Yellow offered his professional friendly Friday Leicestershire Mental Health expertise.

[Indy 3,323]

On 26/10/2023 at 06:06, Coneys Knee said:

“They all need to go, every one of them, for this club to heal.”

This is exactly right. This limbo land of ownership and with sporting directors, even head coaches is killing this club in a far bigger way than they realise and, evidently care to. Only a true fresh start will do now or the bad feeling will just rumble on like they are.

Been saying this since May, there had to be a clean cut to move forwards and here we are with zero leadership again from top to bottom! So we drift along and who’s to say this season it won’t be the binners going up and us going down! Not a great position we find ourselves in with a run of difficult games leading to the derby in December! Not going to be a pleasant place unless something positive changes and quick!

[chicken 2,654]

2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Oh dear. At least @Midlands Yellow offered his professional friendly Friday Leicestershire Mental Health expertise.

Ah of course, yes, trying to be devisive again. Beyond predictable now.

You know everyone knows I am not a 'mental health expert'. And what you are referring to is a reflection I made upon how I'd be treated in my work place should I had treated a grieving employee that way.

Again, this is incredibly poor trolling that isn't helping you.

This isn't even a mental health issue.

[chicken 2,654]

On 26/10/2023 at 10:52, essex canary said:

Exactly because they are all suffering from an arrogant superiority complex.

Ah, the hypocricy here is running so thick you could spread it on toast...

Absolutely proves you have zero concept of how you paint yourself on here.

[chicken 2,654]

On 26/10/2023 at 11:07, shefcanary said:

He announced his resignation mid-March 2023,  but said he'd "help" the club by seeing out his 12 month notice period or as soon as his replacement was in place. However when Knapper was announced as that replacement the message was Webber would stay to handover to him. No timescale was put on that, so theoretically he could leave before the end of his notice period. But that doesn't seem to be the Norwich way at the moment.

Despite the furor, it does make sense. We know our signings involve a fair bit of groundwork usually. Months if not years in the build up in some cases.

Even if there are no plans to spend in January, god forbid, we will be monitoring potential signings for the summer, some of whom may become available sooner, as we have seen before.

Equally, potential replacement coaches etc. May well be that Webber departs at the end of Jan.

[essex canary 508]

7 minutes ago, chicken said:

Ah of course, yes, trying to be devisive again. Beyond predictable now.

You know everyone knows I am not a 'mental health expert'. And what you are referring to is a reflection I made upon how I'd be treated in my work place should I had treated a grieving employee that way.

Again, this is incredibly poor trolling that isn't helping you.

This isn't even a mental health issue.

The definition of a Sociopath as raised by @Davidlingfield.

[chicken 2,654]

18 minutes ago, essex canary said:

The definition of a Sociopath as raised by @Davidlingfield.

Ahh, yes that one. Even better, so you are trolling then and it wasn't aimed as being a nice comment as you poorly lied about before.

Thanks for clearing that up then. By all means, do continue to set fire to your own reputation. 

Edit: And to save Nutty's fingers - yet another thread you've somehow managed to twist into being about YOU.

Edited October 27, 2023 by chicken

[Coneys Knee 996]

41 minutes ago, chicken said:

Despite the furor, it does make sense. We know our signings involve a fair bit of groundwork usually. Months if not years in the build up in some cases.

Even if there are no plans to spend in January, god forbid, we will be monitoring potential signings for the summer, some of whom may become available sooner, as we have seen before.

Equally, potential replacement coaches etc. May well be that Webber departs at the end of Jan.

I’m sorry but it really doesn’t make sense at all. Will Kier Starmer need his hand held by Rishi for a few months after he wins the next election? (Silly comparison I know, but you get my point). There is far more risk of damage with this very strange transitional thing than there is prospect of reward.

Its wholly unnecessary and makes us look even more a laughing stock than we probably already are!

[shefcanary 2,468]

3 minutes ago, Coneys Knee said:

I’m sorry but it really doesn’t make sense at all. Will Kier Starmer need his hand held by Rishi for a few months after he wins the next election? (Silly comparison I know, but you get my point). There is far more risk of damage with this very strange transitional thing than there is prospect of reward.

Its wholly unnecessary and makes us look even more a laughing stock than we probably already are!

Agreed - Knapper might think the players Webber has lined up for January are worse than the ones he signed in August!

[Coneys Knee 996]

12 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Agreed - Knapper might think the players Webber has lined up for January are worse than the ones he signed in August!

That’s a sobering thought but would probably be true. The standards seem to lower every single window.

[DraytonBoy 165]

On first glance the Webber 'transition from the business' idea is odd but as this is a big step up for Knapper it does make sense provided Webber merely acts as a short term guide into how the club is run etc. 

[Capt. Pants 4,297]

1 minute ago, DraytonBoy said:

On first glance the Webber 'transition from the business' idea is odd but as this is a big step up for Knapper it does make sense provided Webber merely acts as a short term guide into how the club is run etc. 

Sure, but why can't Adams do that?

[essex canary 508]

1 minute ago, Capt. Pants said:

Sure, but why can't Adams do that?

Or Zoe (then again). Need to keep the paybill high.

[Sufyellow 225]

2 hours ago, shefcanary said:

Agreed - Knapper might think the players Webber has lined up for January are worse than the ones he signed in August!

More like he stays just to sell Sara and Rowe , we don't buy in January   

[Midlands Yellow 4,107]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

Oh dear. At least @Midlands Yellow offered his professional friendly Friday Leicestershire Mental Health expertise.

Leicestershire Mental Health Trust will not allow couples to work together. It’s common sense really, an obvious conflict of interests that could arise at any time. 

[......and Smith must score. 1,362]

6 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Most professional organisations do not allow relationships in senior management position because

1. It can lead to complications if the relationship goes sour

2. It leads to unrest in the workforce because it is perceived there is a bias going on due to the relationship

3. It undermines one or both of the management, it that people only think they got "there" because of the other one and respect is lost.

That's why most sensible well run organisations don't allow it.

Unfortunately I think too many talented people have left under Zoe's tenureship and that we need a fresh approach from top to bottom. That has nothing to do with her gender.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

Another post based on no facts whatsoever.

I don’t understand why you think Kenny Foggo’s post contains no facts whatsoever. Under Ms Ward’s tenure talented people have left and that is a fact. Whether or not they would have left anyway is speculation.

Regarding employing people in relationships with each other, especially in senior positions, many firms do not allow it because it can cause problems with other employees. That too is a fact.

 

[Midlands Yellow 4,107]

5 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

Another post based on no facts whatsoever.

Explain this point please.