Ricardo's report AGM 2014

[? 0]

As to the bonuses perhaps a grown up could explain to you that as "the rest of the non playing football staff " do not make the decisions it would be unfair to penalise them for someone else''s failings.

That''s exactly my point dimwit! The non playing staff WERE penalised by having their bonuses scrapped whilst the man with the greatest amount of influence proceeds over a team that gets relegated and still gets a bonus. Apart from banks I can''t think of any company that pays bonuses on failure!!!

The only reason I note your posts is because of the drivel that you post with know it all attitude. By the way how''s your favourite team doing!

[nutty nigel 7,534]

As far as I''m aware the 6.4m? was money put aside to pay bonuses for retaining PL status which of course wasn''t paid. But this doesn''t mean that no bonuses are paid. I should imagine some of the contracts at the football club, including the CE''s, are extremely complex with bonuses payable for many other things apart from retaining PL status. As the PL is so important financially I should think there were a lot of folk at the club who would have been in line for a cut of that particular bonus including the CE. But those who had bonuses unrelated to that would still have been paid regardless of relegation. Also including the CE.

 

To be honest I think people are after a pound of flesh in McNally''s case and the guy gets paid enough to put up with a bit of that. There was one shareholder last night who wanted to know the details of the pension payments where there was apparently a huge increase last year. Sam Gordon told him she wasn''t allowed to disclose such information. The guy wasn''t particularly happy with that because of the huge increase. But where do we draw the line on knowing peoples personal business? My renumeration used to be discussed at an AGM and I found it extremely difficult to tolerate people having uninformed opinions about it. But at least they didn''t go home and discuss it on a message board afterwards[;)]

 

Anyway, after all the fuss this week about the manager followed by the AGM there''s hardly been a murmur about this : -

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkkd7l5dJI8&list=UUzdkZv6--BWsUQ9rKUtQ1TQ

 

We''ll remember that long after the other stuff.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Ron Manager"]As to the bonuses perhaps a grown up could explain to you that as "the rest of the non playing football staff " do not make the decisions it would be unfair to penalise them for someone else''s failings.

That''s exactly my point dimwit! The non playing staff WERE penalised by having their bonuses scrapped whilst the man with the greatest amount of influence proceeds over a team that gets relegated and still gets a bonus. Apart from banks I can''t think of any company that pays bonuses on failure!!!

The only reason I note your posts is because of the drivel that you post with know it all attitude. By the way how''s your favourite team doing![/quote]

slowly .... just .... for ... youMcNally will be paid a seperate bonus for each area he is responsible forergo some of the areas we ''succeeded'' in he will have received a bonus for ie off field incomeother areas that we failed ie PL status he will not have been paid a bonus for

......... that''s why his bonus dropped a massive £500,000

it is not about knowing stuff either, more that you haven''t a ruddy clue !

so why not stop spouting out this stupid sh ite about how wicked it all is and stop attacking the cluband if you don''t like it why not head off to poorman road where such dodgy stuff does go on and grizzly whingers like you would fit in well

[? 0]

Oh ffs dimwit, you really can''t see the point can you? Have you stopped taking you ADHD tablets? My point is that the non-playing staff had aspects of their bonuses which were not related to the teams performance as well (are you keeping up or do I need to repeat anything, maybe if I could text a bit louder it might help you understand). Ergo, whilst I appreciate that the CEO''s contract will have separate targets, so did the non-playing staffs but there bonus was scraped!

In your tiny brain can you now understand it?

OTBC

[Tumbleweed 106]

Thanks for the report ricardo.

I am interested in one seemingly throwaway comment which seems more significant to me. That is the point about playing the "Norwich way" and the type of football played under Hughton.

I just wonder whether that philosophy is part of the problem that NA now has- he has been given a brief to entertain, but the re-calibration required to entertain but still be cautious in defence and possession is very difficult. So there has been much criticism of defensive frailties and at Forest not sitting back and holding onto what we have, but this might be a consequence of a deliberate culture being reintroduced of playing a more attacking style, i.e. a brief from on-high. So, perhaps not quite all NA''s fault, but presumably it will take a while for that balance to be obtained, and hopefully sooner rather than later. This could be encouraging if it suggests that the strength of the team itself is not quite as much of a problem as we have been fearing. Or maybe I am over-analysing!

[nutty nigel 7,534]

Ron, I don''t know about City1st but I''ve taken all my meds this morning. I think if people have qualified for bonuses that weren''t dependent on the club remaining in the PL they should have been paid if the relevant conditions had been met. Its amazing what people don''t realise though. I had a mate who was sacked from his position on the dodgems and he didn''teven realise it was funfair dismissal....

Tumbleweed, Adams spoke about starting every game to win but also about game management. He felt that when we went 2-1 ahead against Brighton it was too early to shut up shop. I can''t remember what he said about Forest....

McNally spoke about all the supporters who had contacted him about negative football and it not being the Norwich way. We know that''s true because some of them posted on here. I get the impression the ''Norwich way'' is in response to that. However I never really believed all the rhetoric on here about the result not being as important as the spectacle and rather suspect some of the same people are moaning now. Surely the boardrealise they cant win unless the team win....

[ricardo 7,395]

Tubleweeed

See Nigel s explanation above. McNally presented the Norwich DNA as a six point wheel, listing the attributes of how we intend to play. According to his conversations with fans this is what we want and what the Board are aiming to deliver. Make of it what you will.

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Ron, I don''t know about City1st but I''ve taken all my meds this morning. I think if people have qualified for bonuses that weren''t dependent on the club remaining in the PL they should have been paid if the relevant conditions had been met. Its amazing what people don''t realise though. I had a mate who was sacked from his position on the dodgems and he didn''teven realise it was funfair dismissal....

Tumbleweed, Adams spoke about starting every game to win but also about game management. He felt that when we went 2-1 ahead against Brighton it was too early to shut up shop. I can''t remember what he said about Forest....

McNally spoke about all the supporters who had contacted him about negative football and it not being the Norwich way. We know that''s true because some of them posted on here. I get the impression the ''Norwich way'' is in response to that. However I never really believed all the rhetoric on here about the result not being as important as the spectacle and rather suspect some of the same people are moaning now. Surely the boardrealise they cant win unless the team win....[/quote]No, nutty, you are right. It was a load of tosh. If we had been playing like Inter-Milan of the 1960s, coma-inducing but effective, with the emphasis on effective, and winning home games 1-0 and drawing 0-0 away fans would have been perfectly happy. And we would have stayed up. And Hughton would still be the manager.If there ever was a Norwich City way it was brought to the club by John Bond, refined to its apogee under Stringer and Williams and pragmatised by Walker before fading from view.If Adams has been instructed, or at least urged, to try to reproduce that golden age that may partly explain the coaching confusion there seems to be at the moment, with a lack of continuity in tactics and team selection.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Ron Manager"]Oh ffs dimwit, you really can''t see the point can you? Have you stopped taking you ADHD tablets? My point is that the non-playing staff had aspects of their bonuses which were not related to the teams performance as well (are you keeping up or do I need to repeat anything, maybe if I could text a bit louder it might help you understand). Ergo, whilst I appreciate that the CEO''s contract will have separate targets, so did the non-playing staffs but there bonus was scraped!

In your tiny brain can you now understand it?

OTBC[/quote]

But you didn''tYesterday you were squeaking " whilst the man with the greatest amount of influence proceeds over a

team that gets relegated and still gets a bonus. Apart from banks I

can''t think of any company that pays bonuses on failure!! "Which suggests his bonus payment was paid in spite of the club being relegated ie failure. It was not, as the figures demonstrate.The bonus amount would have been related to other areas.As to your other claim that "so did the non-playing staffs but there bonus was scraped!". I have to presume you are talking about the staff, not sticks or bull dogs and their bonus being scrapped not scraped - unless the club was really skint and it had to scrap together the money.However in the real world (away from your paper round) the club cannot simply refuse to pay an agreed bonus, if the targets have been achieved. So again you are talking nonsense.Something that I should imagine most others can understand, as well as me.

[? 0]

However in the real world (away from your paper round) the club cannot simply refuse to pay an agreed bonus, if the targets have been achieved. So again you are talking nonsense.

I can assure you they were, but then again you know everything, so I bow down to your greater knowledge! Keep taking them tablets you really aren''t worth the effort to argue with!

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Ron Manager"].

I can assure you they were, but then again you know everything, so I bow down to your greater knowledge! Keep taking them tablets you really aren''t worth the effort to argue with![/quote]you haven''t really got the hang of this have you ?

[? 0]

Obviously not your Lord and Master.

[Bill 1,788]

a bit of punctuation might help

[? 0]

Lol, go check your post on the Wigan thread. No punctuation or caps! You really are a sad person!

[danielsroundabout 9]

For me, Ricardo''s excellent coverage of events at the AGM served to dispel doubts I had about the comprehensiveness of Archant''s reporting.

Without Ricardo''s report, I would not have believed that not one of the 300 or so attendees was prepared to put the directors under the spotlight on the subject of appointing Hughton''s successor. Its all very well for them to repeat their apology for the mistakes in the timing of the sacking of Hughton but nothing is said about the calamitous appointment of Adams.

Nor is there any public recognition of the current sleepwalking as they seem to be repeating the errors that occurred a year ago.

Most people I speak to at the matches or generally through the week, feel broadly the same on the Adams subject and yet, not one person at the AGM saw fit to mention it.

Was this because Adams was quite literally the elephant in the room?

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="Ron Manager"]Lol, go check your post on the Wigan thread. No punctuation or caps! You really are a sad person![/quote]

because that post could not be construed two different ways, as yours could be

now why not tell us about these supposed contracts that the ''staffs'' had which guaranteed bonuses but the club refused to pay and why has this not been mentioned anywhere elsewhy has none of the ''staffs'' taken this to the press ?or are they taking this to an industrial tribunal, or the courts ?

[? 0]

No, in all seriousness, they''re too scared to stand up to McNally, why they haven''t taken a collective stand is beyond me. There were at least 4 catering managers though that did resign, the others just seem to have excepted it. But, having seen that McNally received a bonus, albeit not the full amount, I know of a couple of people not best pleased. McNally is regarded as someone to fear at the club unfortunately, although you don''t get to be a CEO as a totally nice person in my opinion!

Look I''m not making this up, just felt the fact that McNally got a bonuses for overseeing relegation and the staff who work their b*llocks off were shafted and was totally unfair!

I also am led to believe that 50% of the bonus was reliant on City staying in the Prem, the other 50% was performance related much like McNally''s!

Is the punctuation OK in this post!

[? 0]

A couple of further points. This years bonus is based partially on City getting back to the promised land. Unfortunately it is looking more likely that this isn''t going to be achieved due to the ridiculous appointment as Manager. People there are very frustrated because they can do little about the playing side and yet are constantly penalised because of it!

Anyway, City I am really fed up of people who always question someone or something they no nothing about!

I have probably posted far to much info in these posts I just hope that it works out OK but felt something needed to be said!

I guess there is one thing in common with us and that is we want the best for City irrespective of our childish name calling!

OTBC

[chicken 0]

How did the Fry protest go?As for any managers we have at the moment - opinion seems to sway like a ship in stormy seas. And quite honestly it can be really pathetic watching people go from a lynch mob one week to hearty back slaps the next.

[militantcanary 0]

Thanks Ricardo

I shouldn''t think they were, wasn''t having a go at you just the insufferable arrogant idiot. You all know who i mean. My point still stands and a vocal minority are hopping mad about it, see the Youtube Video tonight.

McNally is one of the highest paid directors in Football and after a very good start, you can now see why he was booted out of his last two jobs.

Can anyone after from the laughably monikered City 1st really defend a salary of circa 1M in the circumstances...