The board got it badly wrong

[Waveney Canary 0]

Kept hold of hapless to long replaced him with another gunny.

They must now fall on their swords

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="Waveney Canary"]Kept hold of hapless to long replaced him with another gunny.

They must now fall on their swords[/quote]Major prize for observation Waveney..................but they won''t.

[CanaryOne 0]

No what they will most probably do is appoint the new Gunny as manager for next season .

[OldRobert 38]

[quote user="CanaryOne"]No what they will most probably do is appoint the new Gunny as manager for next season .[/quote]God help us.....................mediocrity beckons.

[Making Plans 957]

I wonder how many times this season McNally thought about getting rid of Hughton & then bottled it.Some of those dreadful away days must have made him seriously consider it often.You just got the feeling that it was always "just one more game" but in the end, one more game quickly became one more game too many

[Mr Brownstone 0]

I think the real question is how many times was it proposed to the board that Hughton be removed before a majority agreed?

[Waveney Canary 0]

Today I am calling for the immediate and unconditional resignation of the entire Board of Directors of NCFC

[The Great Mass Debater 1,202]

From the rumourings, it would seem the board was split for a long time, with some wanting him gone and others blocking his removal.

Those who blocked his removal should take ultimate responsibility. Anyone know which board members ''kept the faith''?

Was the lack of spending in January, when the situation was far from irretrievable a direct consequence of the lack of complete confidence in Hughton? If so, that decision also needs to be scrutinised

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]I think the real question is how many times was it proposed to the board that Hughton be removed before a majority agreed?[/quote]

 

Proposed by who Brownie?

 

 

[Mr Brownstone 0]

No idea Nutty, just think it might be a tad presumptuous to assume it''s all McNally''s fault. Just pointing out that even if he hypothetically wanted to replace Hughton in December he wouldn''t be able to make that decision on his own.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

That isn''t what you said Brownie. You said  the real question was how many times was it proposed to the board that Hughton be removed before a majority agreed?                  

 

So who proposed it?

 

 

[JF 694]

If anyone believes that sacking Hughton hasn''t been discussed at board level many times this season then they are very naive. For some reason it was always decided to keep him, what those reasons were and who made them we will never know.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

As I said above Nutty, I don''t know.

And as I also said above, for all we know McNally may actually have wanted to replace Hughton much earlier but been outvoted. He also may have wanted him to stay.

As we have absolutely no idea, I think it''s a tad unfair to lay the blame for not acting squarely at his feet.

[chrisr1606 19]

Does a change in management need a majority vote or unanimous? Seem to remember McNally saying both at the time of Hughton''s appointment and sacking that it was a unanimous decision.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]As I said above Nutty, I don''t know.

And as I also said above, for all we know McNally may actually have wanted to replace Hughton much earlier but been outvoted. He also may have wanted him to stay.

As we have absolutely no idea, I think it''s a tad unfair to lay the blame for not acting squarely at his feet.[/quote]

 

That isn''t what you said Brownie. But there''s no point persuing it any further. People will find the scapegoat that suits their personal agenda. Me? I''m not convinced that sacking Hughton earlier would have made any difference. It''s not a certainty by any stretch because if it was Cardiff would have stayed up. And Fulham certainly after doing the ''right thing'' twice.

 

We are not down yet. But if we are relegated it will be because we are one of the three worst sides.

 

 

[Duncan Edwards 2,424]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]No idea Nutty, just think it might be a tad presumptuous to assume it''s all McNally''s fault. Just pointing out that even if he hypothetically wanted to replace Hughton in December he wouldn''t be able to make that decision on his own.[/quote]

Having spoken to him about this issue he made it quite clear that until the fans reaction after the WBA game he had been satisfied with where we were under Hughton, although sometimes confused by team selection. However, with regard to selection it isn''t his place to interfere as that''s why they employ a manager. Playing Wes on the left was an example he mentioned.

He also maintained that Hughton''s record in the Premier League was directly comparable to that of his peers, was at least the equal of Lambert''s at Villa amongst others.

He went on to say that following the reaction at the end of the WBA game it was clear that the relationship between supporters and the regime at the time was broken beyond repair and that something had to give.

It was then that they decided to gamble. It hasn''t paid off. So far.

I think the "sensible" decision would have been to give Hughton until the end of the season, but I can also see that if they had done that and we''d gone down anyway, far more criticism could have been levelled at the board for not trying something, for not rolling the dice. He was right with what he said about the WBA reaction and at least the change meant that the fans stayed behind the team for the Fulham and Liverpool games. Had Hughton still been in charge for either of those defeats the reaction would have been very different. In that respect, they''ve been right. In terms of results, were we really MORE likely to achieve the points we needed under the guy that had a proven record of pulling a win out of the bag when needed and under whom we had beaten Man City, Man United, Tottenham and Arsenal or under the guy that had never managed a team at League level, let alone Premier League level?

Of course, we''ll never know. We couldn''t have had less points than we have now if Hughton HAD stayed though. We just have to hope that Adams can pull a couple of very big rabbits out of the hat.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Sometimes I think you wilfully miss the point Nutty. I''ll say it once more just to be clear, my comment was designed to provoke the thought that we don''t know what goes on behind the boardroom door, who wanted change, when, and who didn''t. Blaming one individual board member with nothing to back it up seems a touch unfair to me.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

That isn''t what you said Brownie. That''s what you''re saying now. However I''ll answer your question as best I can. The executive directors are charged with running the club so if there''d been any proposal to sack Hughton it would have come from them. If they were unanimous and the non executive directors out voted them their positions would become untenable. You''d do well to real Paul''s post for a bit more insight. The only other thing I heard was from Matt Juler who reckoned Wynnie wanted Hoots out last season.

 

 

[Mr Brownstone 0]

I know what I said Nutty! I also know what I meant by it!

Talking to you is like smashing your face against a brick wall repeatedly sometimes. What is it you are getting at Nutty? What is it you think I was implying? Just come out with it.

So are you saying that the non executive directors don''t get a vote in the boardroom, or that they do an they just don''t count?

[morty 0]

All very easy with hindsight though, isn''t it?Not one person on here predicted we''d lost at home to West Brom, so I should imagine the board felt pretty much the same, and had we won that game we would have been all but safe. Hughton would have done just about enough to limp over the line, and they would have sacked him at the end of the season.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]I think the real question is how many times was it proposed to the board that Hughton be removed before a majority agreed?[/quote]

 

This is what you said Brownie. If you meant someting different you should perhaps say what it was.

 

As far as I''m aware it''s one vote one person in the board room. Each director''s vote counts the same. If you cast your mind back to 2009 you will remember that Bowkett, and associiate director at the time, wrote to criticise those charged with running the club.  Much was made of this and after relegation the executive directors were sacked. Some say they left but that was just to pout a veneer on it. They were sacked and their places taken by McNally and ironically enough Bowkett.

 

What I am saying was that if the executive directors, who are charged with running the club, are out voted in the boardroom it makes their position untenable.

 

 

[......and Smith must score. 1,597]

With so much speculation swirling around I''d be interested to know how the Board actually arrive at the decisions they make. Do they all have equal voting rights or do the two majority shareholders have the final say ?If the latter''s the case then I''ll bet that''s been a stumbling block on more than one occasion over the years.

[Bury Yellow 2]

Hey Brownie I''m not sure what you said or what you didn''t say but for the purpose of extending this thread and Nutty''s message count could you clarify?

Is that a siren I hear in the distance?

[Mr Brownstone 0]

FFS Nutty, I know what I said. And as I''ve attempted to explain to you, I was saying that that was the real question that should be asked, rather than how many times McNally thought to himself that he''d give Hughton one more game, because ultimately it''s not his decision to make alone.

I don''t think I can make that any clearer.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Bury Yellow"]Hey Brownie I''m not sure what you said or what you didn''t say but for the purpose of extending this thread and Nutty''s message count could you clarify?

Is that a siren I hear in the distance?[/quote]

 

There''s some good points on this thread and good debate. And then there''s meaningless twaddle from you and I''m sorry to say in this case Brownie.

 

Brownie, in your post you mentioned nothing about how many time McNally thought to himself or whatever.

 

There''s no need to go looking for a scapegoat. If Hughton had been sacked in Oct/Nov/Dec/Jan/Feb/Mar/Apr or not at all there is no reason to believe we''d have been Sunderland rather than Fulham or Cardiff.

 

 

[CanaryOne 0]

[quote user="morty"]All very easy with hindsight though, isn''t it?Not one person on here predicted we''d lost at home to West Brom, so I should imagine the board felt pretty much the same, and had we won that game we would have been all but safe. Hughton would have done just about enough to limp over the line, and they would have sacked him at the end of the season.

[/quote]Hindsight ? you could be as blind as a bat and still see we had been utter 5hite for a season and a half . The only reasons people wanted to keep him is because he was seen as a nice little man .

[Mr Brownstone 0]

No I didn''t Nutty, but the post above mine to which I was replying (can''t quote from phone) did.

I''m not going to waste any more of my Saturday evening saying the same thing to you.

[morty 0]

[quote user="CanaryOne"][quote user="morty"]All very easy with hindsight though, isn''t it?Not one person on here predicted we''d lost at home to West Brom, so I should imagine the board felt pretty much the same, and had we won that game we would have been all but safe. Hughton would have done just about enough to limp over the line, and they would have sacked him at the end of the season.

[/quote]Hindsight ? you could be as blind as a bat and still see we had been utter 5hite for a season and a half . The only reasons people wanted to keep him is because he was seen as a nice little man .[/quote]Rubbish.Like I said, no one predicted we would lose to West Brom, unless you want to claim you did perhaps?Ah, the nice man argument, yes, well played. You truly are a master debator[Y]

[JF 694]

I wouldn''t bother entering into a conversation with Nutty, Mr Brownstone. Nutty could start an arguement in a empty phone box!

[CanaryOne 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="CanaryOne"][quote user="morty"]All very easy with hindsight though, isn''t it?Not one person on here predicted we''d lost at home to West Brom, so I should imagine the board felt pretty much the same, and had we won that game we would have been all but safe. Hughton would have done just about enough to limp over the line, and they would have sacked him at the end of the season.

[/quote]Hindsight ? you could be as blind as a bat and still see we had been utter 5hite for a season and a half . The only reasons people wanted to keep him is because he was seen as a nice little man .[/quote]Rubbish.Like I said, no one predicted we would lose to West Brom, unless you want to claim you did perhaps?Ah, the nice man argument, yes, well played. You truly are a master debator[Y]

[/quote]I claimed we were going down all season , while you were just coming out with your tired old pant wetter 5hit , master debater ? maybe not but then i am not a master (unt like you .