As a board member (non-exec chairman), and to a lesser extent Keith Peacock, continue to wish to have their name associated with the Belgium Naffia, and ongoing shambles?
Not slagging either off, just don't know how they can stay part of it
I made this point yesterday. First he sold us to the crooks Jiminez and Slater and insisted they were the best options for the club. Now he's standing by letting Roland destroy the club. I thought he was supposed to be a Charlton man. Does anyone know what his role is? He should be the one stepping in saying this is all wrong.
I've lost all respect for richard Murray, he can't honestly approve of the way we are being run but chooses to stay involved and in affect support the regim.
I've lost all respect for richard Murray, he can't honestly approve of the way we are being run but chooses to stay involved and in affect support the regim.
That is the thing for me, all the great work he did for us is being eroded away the longer he remains linked to this nonsense.
I suspect that RM is unable to relinquish his part in the club, perhaps because he needs to know what's going on but also because of his arrogant streak whereby he still wants to believe he is Mr. Charlton. Both are delusional but why would anyone want to knock an old man's dreams?
He will retire soon and there will be a big thing about his many years spent in service to Charlton when actually all he has done is be a 'yes' man and a walk over for different dictatorial owners.
Has he still got money tied up in the club? If he has then I suspect, like any one of us would, he wants his money back. So simply leaving isn't necessarily an option.
I suspect that RM is unable to relinquish his part in the club, perhaps because he needs to know what's going on but also because of his arrogant streak whereby he still wants to believe he is Mr. Charlton. Both are delusional but why would anyone want to knock an old man's dreams?
I was thinking that about Keith Peacock and that picture in votv of him sitting right next to KM.
In the infamous L'Echo article, it said that when we scored, KM fell into the arms of a "vedette pensionnee", which means literally pensioner star. Of course, she hasn't had much cause to fall into his arms since August.
Has he still got money tied up in the club? If he has then I suspect, like any one of us would, he wants his money back. So simply leaving isn't necessarily an option.
His situation is the same as the others owed money on promotion to the PL. They are not on the board and they certainly don't see him as their representative.
Has he still got money tied up in the club? If he has then I suspect, like any one of us would, he wants his money back. So simply leaving isn't necessarily an option.
His situation is the same as the others owed money on promotion to the PL. They are not on the board and they certainly don't see him as their representative.
So if he walked away from his postion and spoke out he would still get his money should we ever get back to the pl?
Has he still got money tied up in the club? If he has then I suspect, like any one of us would, he wants his money back. So simply leaving isn't necessarily an option.
His situation is the same as the others owed money on promotion to the PL. They are not on the board and they certainly don't see him as their representative.
So if he walked away from his postion and spoke out he would still get his money should we ever get back to the pl?
It's a legal charge over the assets and ranks above Staprix debt. Even if we were wound up, it takes priority from proceeds of the sale of The Valley.
It's a nice little number isn't it? He gets a fee, gets free food and drinks and a nice comfy seat, free West Stand car park pass (£800 for ordinary hard-working supporters) and can pretend he's still living the glory years. The old joke is probably apposite. Q. What's the difference between a non-exec chairman and a shopping trolly? A. The shopping trolley has a mind of its own but you can get more food and drink in the non-exec.
It's a nice little number isn't it? He gets a fee, gets free food and drinks and a nice comfy seat, free West Stand car park pass (£800 for ordinary hard-working supporters) and can pretend he's still living the glory years. The old joke is probably apposite. Q. What's the difference between a non-exec chairman and a shopping trolly? A. The shopping trolley has a mind of its own but you can get more food and drink in the non-exec.
The first part of your post is ridiculously unfair (and surprising coming from you). He's lost millions over the years he led Charlton, I think he's earned his car park pass. He's also painfully aware of the truth of your non-exec chairman joke.
I don't pretend to know why he sticks around, but he has done his best to help establish dialogue between the Trust and the ownership. It's not his fault that it has not got very far, but without him it would be even less.
As a board member (non-exec chairman), and to a lesser extent Keith Peacock, continue to wish to have their name associated with the Belgium Naffia, and ongoing shambles?
Not slagging either off, just don't know how they can stay part of it
Picking on Murray and Peacock is deflecting from the real culprit. Nothing to do with KM either this is down do Dutcherlet and him alone.
I can't see that the club and the situation inside the club would be improved by either of them walking away although I've no inside knowledge on which to base my opinion. KP walking away would certainly be more of a loss I think.
It's a nice little number isn't it? He gets a fee, gets free food and drinks and a nice comfy seat, free West Stand car park pass (£800 for ordinary hard-working supporters) and can pretend he's still living the glory years. The old joke is probably apposite. Q. What's the difference between a non-exec chairman and a shopping trolly? A. The shopping trolley has a mind of its own but you can get more food and drink in the non-exec.
The first part of your post is ridiculously unfair (and surprising coming from you). He's lost millions over the years he led Charlton, I think he's earned his car park pass. He's also painfully aware of the truth of your non-exec chairman joke.
I don't pretend to know why he sticks around, but he has done his best to help establish dialogue between the Trust and the ownership. It's not his fault that it has not got very far, but without him it would be even less.
As a board member (non-exec chairman), and to a lesser extent Keith Peacock, continue to wish to have their name associated with the Belgium Naffia, and ongoing shambles?
Not slagging either off, just don't know how they can stay part of it
Picking on Murray and Peacock is deflecting from the real culprit. Nothing to do with KM either this is down do Dutcherlet and him alone.
Not interested in KP or RM, but you are completely wrong about KM, in my view. She is paid to act as a buffer, and encouraging her to leave is the number one route to impact on RD.
Comments
Maybe they think as long as they are there they can exert some control over the nutters, maybe we'd somehow be worse off without their influence ?
By staying involved he is legitamising the way the club is run and the recruitment policy of the club with regards to Managers.
The old joke is probably apposite. Q. What's the difference between a non-exec chairman and a shopping trolly? A. The shopping trolley has a mind of its own but you can get more food and drink in the non-exec.
I don't pretend to know why he sticks around, but he has done his best to help establish dialogue between the Trust and the ownership. It's not his fault that it has not got very far, but without him it would be even less.