[Archived] Venkys Exclusive on BBC1 @ 12.15

[Glenn]

  On 17/10/2011 at 20:18, roverandout said:

so at least they are thinking of potential replacements, thanks for the info glenn.

See and that's why we're reluctant to answer questions, it's so easy to be misinterpreted. I didn't say they were thinking of potential replacements (and I didn't say they weren't), only that at some point, possibly only as an example, a managers name was mentioned. I've no idea if they were thinking of him (or any other manager) or if it was used to illustrate an unconnected point. All it really proves is they knew the name of somebody many would view as a viable alternative.

Now for all I know, they could have sounded out 50 candidates, or they may not have considered a replacement at all.

(That's not a dig by the way, I'm just trying not to start any rumours or get anyone's hopes up).

[roverandout]

ok fair enough, i misinterpreted it.

[Paul]

  On 17/10/2011 at 20:11, Glenn said:

I was there. I don't remember the exact words, but the sentiment was as long the line of, uh? of course, we have to don't we?

If you PM Tris he may have a clearer recollection (it was his question and it was over a week ago now, my mind fades fast).

That, "we have to don't we" is not what I have been given to understand was the response to the question of published accounts.

[CAPT KAYOS]

  On 17/10/2011 at 16:52, Glenn said:

It was 2 days before our meeting.

There was little need to drum home how the fans feelings on Kean, the second it was brought up, they showed they knew the strength of feeling (and the precise details of our own poll) far more accurately that I ever expected. In both meetings they made it clear that nobody is irreplaceable if they didn't deliver the goods (or the points in his case) although in Kean's case they obviously didn't give specific points/dates targets.

Cheers Glen

Think this just sums it up for me though - they may know the strength but don't understand the simple reason which is staring them in the face ( and telling them b/s).

They just do not get it which is the point that needed drumming home imo.

[Glenn]

  On 18/10/2011 at 02:44, Paul said:

That, "we have to don't we" is not what I have been given to understand was the response to the question of published accounts.

which was why I was reluctant to reply. The question was asked by somebody directly on your behalf, so I'm sure the version you got is more accurate than how I remember it.

[Paul]

I think you're right there Glenn, apologies.

[trueblue]

  On 18/10/2011 at 02:44, Paul said:

That, "we have to don't we" is not what I have been given to understand was the response to the question of published accounts.

So what was the response then Paul?

[PLJPB]

  On 18/10/2011 at 10:50, Paul said:

I think you're right there Glenn, apologies.

What was the reply you were given?

[Paul]

Basically no one available at the meeting where this was asked knew the definitive answer - which is a concern for me.

[John]

Venky's probably don't know the definitive answers themselves and I am not joking! When it comes to finances, let's just say there was slight confusion over the summer....

[PLJPB]

  On 18/10/2011 at 13:51, Paul said:

Basically no one available at the meeting where this was asked knew the definitive answer - which is a concern for me.

Thanks for the reply. Its also a concern to me and unfortunately adds to the mountain of concerns surrounding the running of our club.

[Tom]

I think it's possible the guys we talk to don't deal with the finance side of things too much and they would probably have to ask someone further down the line.

I would imagine it's quite normal for the guys at the very top not to know all about the finances to the nth degree but don't quote me on that as it is purely guesswork.

[Paul]

  On 18/10/2011 at 16:23, Tom M said:

I think it's possible the guys we talk to don't deal with the finance side of things too much and they would probably have to ask someone further down the line.

I would imagine it's quite normal for the guys at the very top not to know all about the finances to the nth degree but don't quote me on that as it is purely guesswork.

Too much guessing there Tom. I know you did a great job in Pune but be careful not to give the benefit of doubt too often.

[Tom]

Apologies Paul you are right there

[Paul]

No need for an apology Tom. Just keep up the good work.

[Tom]

Cheers mate but we just had a unique opportunity to put some fans concerns over and took it the best we could as anyone would have done.

The work put in to get that chance was elsewhere, it's heartening to know there's some fantastic guys working at Ewood who now seem to have much better working links to Pune, hopefully the knowledge and passion these guys have are utilised to the max.

Although until bigger issues are sorted these kind of things will be of no consolation.