banning

being reported on planet swans the person who sorted the protest has been banned from the club, if true deplorable that this could happen very like the blackpool situation
«1

Comments

  • Banned for satire apparently 

    who knew our Huw is the sensitive type ?
  • i think we all should be deeply concerned about this if true:   is the club now saying it wont tolerate different opinions? and if they are banning this sole who is only expressing his democratic right. what about the people who where chanting get out to the board at the last game? will they be banned

    if he is banned hope the local journos pick it iu/

    we are a football club, not a dictatorship
  • Planetswans is a home for misfits and fruitcakes. Most of them need councilling. A hard core of posters one shrewd poster on here called the Taliban
  • they may be all you say ,Ponty but suerly if true the clubs action is terrible and shows no one can disagree
  • He was a bit naive and stupid to photoshop an image of Jenkins onto a Hitler photo and post it on the Trust's Facebook page, especially around this time of the year.

    It makes his future arguments against Jenkins keeping his job much more difficult, as he's lost the PR was by this action.

    He has supposedly been banned for harassing Jenkins. HJ must have a really think skin if that photo has resulted in this however. 

    So I just see this as an excuse, and has more to do with the protest to get rid of Jenkins than anything else. 

    Harassment has a legal definition in the Equality Act 2010 and may be summarised as unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic which has the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of an individual, or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the individual.

    I guess we all need to watch our Ps & Qs now, or become anonymous if we post now - hide behind a name - or HJs mates on here will be reporting back to Papa and we'll be banned too!  :scream:  :joy:


    bigoak
  • Ponty

    Again you show how one-sided and how wrong you are.

    If you believe contributors to another forum are "misfits and fruitcakes" why don't
    you take them on?   My understanding is that the person who started the protest is
    a member of the Jack Army and part of their forum.
  • He was a bit naive and stupid to photoshop an image of Jenkins onto a Hitler photo and post it on the Trust's Facebook page, especially around this time of the year.

    It makes his future arguments against Jenkins keeping his job much more difficult, as he's lost the PR was by this action.

    He has supposedly been banned for harassing Jenkins. HJ must have a really think skin if that photo has resulted in this however. 

    So I just see this as an excuse, and has more to do with the protest to get rid of Jenkins than anything else. 

    Harassment has a legal definition in the Equality Act 2010 and may be summarised as unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic which has the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of an individual, or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the individual.

    I guess we all need to watch our Ps & Qs now, or become anonymous if we post now - hide behind a name - or HJs mates on here will be reporting back to Papa and we'll be banned too!  :scream:  :joy:



    Yes I agree Mark, this is tied in with organising the protest rather than the Facebook stuff but the latter gave HJ an excuse to do what he did. HJ has had much worse on here , let alone Planet Swans where the vitriol is even more pronounced.

    I really don't know what level our club has now sunk to behave like this but there is now an obvious disconnect between the supporters and the board. I think the tide has turned in terms of HJ support and it's only a matter of time now before he leaves. He should stay to see us through the next window but , sooner than that, also to participate in the appointment of a new DoF and oversee the transition. The new DoF can therefore take over from HJ in the Spring and be up to speed by next season. 

    It's an interesting point regarding minding our behaviour lest we get banned from the stadium. Legally they ( see, I don't use "we" anymore) can probably ban anybody. I can't see that any banned individual has any recourse in law to reverse the decision either - I think they can probably ban whoever they want without needing a good reason.

    Dreadful.

  • I think Flynn could easily be the person to identify DoF candidates.
  • I think Flynn could easily be the person to identify DoF candidates.

    Yep, that sounds ok to me
  • The abuse of the most influential figure in the rise of SCFC is a scandal and a repeat of what happened to Malcolm Struel years ago. He has made mistakes for sure, but is still SCFCs best bet. Sensible people lose their senses when it comes to Association football where being accepted by the boys on the North Bank overrides logic. Planetswans regularly is threatening in tone stirring up anger and the toxic atmosphere which is hindering the team development. 
  • Ponty, jenkins WAS an influential figure in our rise with several other influential figures BUT he has become a reviled figure! 

    His mere association at the club and presence at games has caused the angry and toxic atmosphere! 

    Mark_Jack_London
  • 100% agree Llanjack.

    He needs to stay away from the game for a while, until we start winning, at the very least.

    Whether or not he is wholly to blame for the signings - or lack of them. the fact is he is perceived to be, with the backdrop of lining his pockets with silver on the back of the sale of the club and Siggy and Llorente.

  • Ponty. i do wonder weather your simply playing devil's advocate or you really believe the tripe you post on here at times, in what way was HJ one of the most influential? did you see jack to a king, you know the advert that was created for the sale?  Is it true that HJ did not put his own money in but was loaned it providing he took the rains, is that true? i don't know. 

    Yes he played a role along with many others. the real hero the main man who at the outset put his own money at risk and worked tirelessly was Mel Nurse : he is the real hero for me. when he put his money in  the club was hours away from bankruptcy and he could have lost it

    whats your spin on that ponty old chap
  • From what I read Mr Nurse has been a rock for SCFC. I dont do spin but am prepared to cut Jenkins some slack in view of the position of the club financially. Relegation is an occupational hazard and even more so for SCFC who have been odds on favourites for the drop for the last 8 seasons. PL Status, no debt, academy infrastructure, stadium to be leased are all sound aspects. I see no evidence that the main shareholders are unsuitable people. Doubts over the playing staff and young manager exist as does problems with recruitment. Missing the fullback last minute and McBurnie staying was poor. Injection of 3 or 4 players will be required in January and Bony and Sanches must get moving. If they do not then the championship beckons. 
  • Relegation is not an 'occupational hazard'. In our case it is the result of, at best, seriously poor decision making over 3 or 4 seasons by those involved with and accountable for recruitment, both of players and managers.
    bigoak
  • Jenkins did not line his pocket with silver Mark he sold some shares and that is his right. They had risen in value on the back of his own work and others at the club. As a man of some intelligence who presumably works in London you must be familiar with buying and selling of equity and are comfortable with the process. London would lose trillions without it. You must know you would laughed out of the wine bar with the Corbyn rhetoric you use on here. 
  • There is no evidence, because there is no  transparency and therefore no accountability on what the main shareholder do.

    All we can ascertain is that Pearlman is front and centre of commercial revenues.  

    And there is some physical proof of what he is doing: New sponsors. New shop. More "quality" videos (I may differ in opinion with Chris on that); better website (not hard but the club were tied to a long term contract); more social media (but need to learn lessons on posts that highlight the current issues on the pitch - posting goals by Siggy and Llorente, or Bony when he's not fit; videos from the Laudrup or Rodgers era where we played Swanserola football. Pre-match entertainment - Fans Zone etc

    And we will be able to see, via the accounts, whether or not the outlay actually improves the bottom end, and not merely grows income but no change to the overall profit out those activities.

    But nobody actually know what Jenkins does for his filthy lucre.
    Is he still DoF?
    What are the responsibilities of said DoF?
    What else is in his remit?

    Without knowing any of this, how can anyone say that he is doing a good job, or one being rewarded by half-a-million per annum?

    If he isn't in charge of recruitment, then who the hell is? Someone has to be, and it has to be clear to all. 
  • Once again - nail on head Mark. Despite there being a few bitter individuals who resent the success of others - the majority of right thinking fans thank Huw for what he has done, and accept that he benefit from the explosion of revenue and status at the club.
    However, as a shareholder and invested customer all of us have the right to transparency with the running of the club. If someone commads a 500k salary then we need to see the role outline and be able to judge value. When things don't go well (transfer policy being the prime example) somebody needs to held accountable and explain the thinking. At the moment Huw has a 500k gig and is Teflon from criticism as he appears to have no responsibilities.
  • I think Flynn could easily be the person to identify DoF candidates.
    Behave, where's he going to spot talent Burnley and district  ;)
  • Jackareme said:
    Once again - nail on head Mark. Despite there being a few bitter individuals who resent the success of others - the majority of right thinking fans thank Huw for what he has done, and accept that he benefit from the explosion of revenue and status at the club.
    However, as a shareholder and invested customer all of us have the right to transparency with the running of the club. If someone commads a 500k salary then we need to see the role outline and be able to judge value. When things don't go well (transfer policy being the prime example) somebody needs to held accountable and explain the thinking. At the moment Huw has a 500k gig and is Teflon from criticism as he appears to have no responsibilities.
    irs irksome to note, that because someone raises criticism of the fact that they doubt the ability or candour or an individual who just happened to be extremely wealthy , its because they are jealous of them.   its the augment of the fool jack.  in my case i admire and respect the entrepreneur who risks all and who normally works hard to get where he/she is.they deserve everything they gain. are you truly saying that everyone who criticizes HJ is simply jealous of his wealth? sad if you are , on you buddy
  • Err Bigoak I think you will find we are violently agreeing - the point I make is that "the majority of right thinking fans" (including myself) are perfectly ok with an entrepreneur making money - read it again!

    All I am saying is that the lack of accountability and visibility is what causes the issues. Who does what and who calls the shots and is held accountable is what we all want to know. If it is never clear where mistakes are being made we have ZERO chance of steadying the ship
    bigoak
  • Jacktar said:
    I think Flynn could easily be the person to identify DoF candidates.
    Behave, where's he going to spot talent Burnley and district  ;)
    Flynn maybe in Burnley, but he knows enough people in the game, to identify and recommend a director of football.

    Why does him being in the north have anything to do with it? Are there a million more candidates in Swansea than Burnley.

    He wouldn't be looking there, like he wouldn't be looking in South Wales FFS.

    He'd be using his contacts not just directly, personally knowing candidates. But also top, top people to identify what is needed for success in the job. People who have done it. Top managers like Fergie, who can say what works and what doesn't to write out the Job Description.

    Would you prefer Kaplan, Levien or Donovan picking the man - because they did well with the choice of Bradley as manager!


  • 100% agree Llanjack.

    He needs to stay away from the game for a while, until we start winning, at the very least.

    Whether or not he is wholly to blame for the signings - or lack of them. the fact is he is perceived to be, with the backdrop of lining his pockets with silver on the back of the sale of the club and Siggy and Llorente.

    You said it yourself Mark. This is only to do with the team losing rather than winning. A few wins and all whiff of controversy and campaigns to destabilise the club will disappear. That's how easy it is to quell all this nonsense about HJ, who is and remains a Swansea man through and through and hasn't in my memory lined his pockets with silver as you slanderously put it. Just another scapegoat in a period when the team is on a losing streak. Fans have to find a culprit and at the moment it's HJ
  • not slanderous at all. He has profited hugely from Swansea City football club, giving himself a huge pay rise in the last couple of years too, while the performance of the club has deteriorated year after year, and there is no transparency on why he deserves such a huge pay rise, let alone pay packet.

    It will take more than a few wins for the anger to dissipate. It will only grow and grow while things continue.

    But his presence is toxic. It doesn't help the atmosphere in the ground when we are playing so poorly and losing, and will prove to be more and more divisive if things continue, with more and more fans joining in.

    The atmosphere last week almost certainly got to the players. When you have fans in the East stand scrapping, and chants of "you greedy bar stewards, get out of our club". The tension was the worst I have felt in a very long time.

    You say he is a Swansea man through and through. Well he may have been. And he can take his plaudits for the work he and others did up until 2013. He may still be - but there is little proof of this in his actions or words. He is conspicuous by his lack of comments to the criticism he has faced. Even the normally supportive Chris Watham has been scathing of what has happened.

    But since the summer of 2013, HJ has overseen 4 years of decline, nearly a third of the time he has been in charge of the club.

    All people can see now is him hugely profit by high wages and the share sale, while the club declines and is not taken to the "next level" as he claimed. Where is the performance related remuneration?

    Everyone has their sell-by-date. His looks to have reached his. It will take a miracle for him to rebuild his reputation with a big part of the fanbase, many of who were big admirers of him - me included.

    Haydn Eames called him out a long, long time ago. in amongst the bile, some of his points have proved to be correct.
    deejay
  • I don’t understand...All the original shareholders benefited hugely in financial terms EXCEPT ONE.

    If that’s not unfair prejudice then I don’t know what is.




  • Bif, check out the Trust website. In there there is clearly stated they did not want to sell. If fact the reverse it true. The aims of the Trust is to increase or maintain its stake. I therefore surmise the reason they missed out on selling is because they told everyone that they did not want to. Read it for yourself.   https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/trust-aims/
  • I don’t know what’s happened to us to be honest Ponty. You can stick up for the old sellers and the Trust all you want and you don’t need any encouragement from me to continue to do that (lol)...but I know fans and I mean true die-hard fans that have supported the club for decades...and the talk is of the club just not meaning quite the same after the way* we became an a speculative gamble for some hedge/pension fund financiers.

    *all the sellers had to do was include the Trust - The Trust may well have chosen not to sell your right.

    Last but not least, Your correct in that the Trust held a mission statement to retain a percentage ownership etc..
    ...but you have forgotten the true spirit from which the original takeover from Petty began. I’m sure HJ also issued  statements declaring never to put SCFC in danger of having another Petty again.

    So as I’m on one Ponty, I’ll tell you my greatest fears of what I see happening.
     When we are relegated we will see the cutbacks that you talk about. We will see asset stripping and we will see our hedge fund managers cut their ties and not care who buys us. We may well end up with another Petty.
    I know you will say Ponty  “how can I be so certain the Americans will do that”?...Well let me throw it back to you “how can you be certain they won’t”. But there lies the root of, I suspect, most fans (who are old enough to remember) frustration ie The great takeover, the fans ejection of Petty, was supposed to keep us safe from unscrupulous owners pretty much forever I would have thought. I’m pretty sure our sellers, if we had remained in the lower divisions, would have been happy to sell their shares to the Trust when their retirement beckoned.

    Final word, We were sold for personal gain only Ponty and if you like, I’ll bring this post back to life in 12 months and we can discuss who was right. If I’m wrong I’ll buy you drinks all night, we can get pI££ed and both cry into our beers !
  • and the Americans were to take us to the next level.

    what exactly is the next level? And how are they going to do that?

    We have seen nothing on either of those questions, and seen no investment either.
  • Just to clarify, the Supporters Trust has five aims, the fourth of which is:

    "To maintain and increase a stake in the club, in pursuance of the aims above".  It is not an end in itself, but in pursuance of other aims.

    https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/trust-aims/

    It also worth pointing out what the Supporters Trust chairman stated in an address to members in October 2016:

    "I will say that at NO point has the Trust ever said that we will never, under any circumstances, sell our stake in the football club.

    https://www.swanstrust.co.uk/2016/10/20/trust-members-forum-address/


    Mark_Jack_London
  • Precisely Jasfan. Were they ever keen to sell? . If I was a buyer and they said that to me I would never offer them anything as he is not a serious seller.
Sign In or Register to comment.