Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
Maybe she avoided Fleetwood because she knows that their Chairman has a low opinion of her, and missed Wimbledon because of the fan involvement on their board?
Basically, she just didn't want to be there.
She usually relishes these situations. My bet is she's on holiday with a girlfriend dreaming of a more high profile job.
Is she a lesbian ?
Sorry to tell you this mate, that's not the reason she doesn't find you attractive
I have now been told by an authoritative source that she was not there yesterday and was indeed said to be on holiday.
She's been sat in these meetings listening to people talk about a mid-season break and has got completely the wrong end of the stick. Bless her. It's not her first language you know - competence.
Now I'd like to give KM stick over every thing BUT she is entitled to holiday and now is a better time to take it as opposed to the off season or the January transfer window. However if she feels like she should stay in North Korea for the rest of her life that's just fine by me.
Now I'd like to give KM stick over every thing BUT she is entitled to holiday and now is a better time to take it as opposed to the off season or the January transfer window. However if she feels like she should stay in North Korea for the rest of her life that's just fine by me.
Agreed and understandable she would take it after the transfer window. But it's still a bit odd that with two away fixtures scheduled on the 3rd and 10th, she would plan to be away for the home game on the 17th. It's just not the way chief executives do things, at least in my experience.
Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
I don't think any has an issue with that at all.
It's the fact that his wife is so publicly outspoken and critical of paying supporters,
That is the issue.
personally I don't think Sue is well advised to post what she does or at all but she is an adult so can post what she wants within the law.
This isn't the 1950s when husbands controlled their wives even if a few people on here seem to wish it were.
The issue, as you say, is what Sue says, not that her husband chooses to give her one of the two tickets he gets because of his role.
The real scandal is that Meire does so little work and that the little she does is done so badly.
It really has little to do with 1950s spousal relationships - Sue Parkes is party to inside information both by virtue of being married to Chris and because of the access she has to the boardroom etc.
It is quite obviously wrong - and reckless to Chris's reputation - for her to post publicly from that position and using information obtained in that way, whatever her motivation.
Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
I don't think any has an issue with that at all.
It's the fact that his wife is so publicly outspoken and critical of paying supporters,
That is the issue.
personally I don't think Sue is well advised to post what she does or at all but she is an adult so can post what she wants within the law.
This isn't the 1950s when husbands controlled their wives even if a few people on here seem to wish it were.
The issue, as you say, is what Sue says, not that her husband chooses to give her one of the two tickets he gets because of his role.
The real scandal is that Meire does so little work and that the little she does is done so badly.
A bit of an unfair implication to liken those who are unhappy to a sexist 1950s mentality.
I don't think it's sexist to suggest that the spouse of a senior member of the clubs management shouldn't be mouthing off social media.
Vice versa, if Katriens husband was posting similar on Twitter I'd be pretty vocal in my distaste. Or if Mandy's husband took to facebook to claim he knew the inner workings of ticket office last season, and all the fans were wrong about how they felt.. we'd all think he's a tosser and that it's not his place, wouldn't we?
It's just not done, gender aside - it's not her place and simply incites more drama in the fanbase.
The gender aspect is irrelevant. It argues to the professional standards of the organisation. If you were speaking to any organisation and you had the spouse of one of their officials mouthing off about any of the issues relating to that organisation its officials or any member of staff then you would have immediate concerns over the disciplines within that company.
It argues to the lack of competency of the organisation to manage its own communication.
How do you think other members of staff view her utterances? What if they had an issue with her husband or other officials in the organisation? Would you expect that to be discussed outside the confines of the professional environment in the knowledge there was some unofficial external influence ready to express "an opinion".
What if her comments were less supportive of the regime do you think they would be allowing her such free scope to "express her own opinions".
With her latest revelations she has indeed now positioned herself as a "quasi employee" of the club.
Her views can now be clearly viewed as protecting the interests of herself and her husband. Ultimately her views can now be seen as being tainted as little more than pursuing ingratiating self interest.
That any spouse in a senior professional position allows it continue I regret reflects poorly on their and the organisations' professional standards. I have known clubs a twentieth of the size of Charlton have more professional and organisational discipline.
The current situation more resembles the gatherings of a social coffee morning that a commercial business. The club appears to be determined to embrace provincial mediocrity. It is deeply regrettable at every level.
Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
I don't think any has an issue with that at all.
It's the fact that his wife is so publicly outspoken and critical of paying supporters,
That is the issue.
personally I don't think Sue is well advised to post what she does or at all but she is an adult so can post what she wants within the law.
This isn't the 1950s when husbands controlled their wives even if a few people on here seem to wish it were.
The issue, as you say, is what Sue says, not that her husband chooses to give her one of the two tickets he gets because of his role.
The real scandal is that Meire does so little work and that the little she does is done so badly.
It really has little to do with 1950s spousal relationships - Sue Parkes is party to inside information both by virtue of being married to Chris and because of the access she has to the boardroom etc.
It is quite obviously wrong - and reckless to Chris's reputation - for her to post publicly from that position and using information obtained in that way, whatever her motivation.
I agree totally and with what Grapevine has said.
I was countering the "who wears the trousers?" remarks.
I don't think Sue is doing the club or Chris any favours at all although clearly she doesn't see that or doesn't agree. As Grapevine says would it be tolerated if she were critical of the regime?, No, of course not.
But that is Sue's decision to post on social media and, as far as I know, not Chris's.
Posted this on another thread but to clarify Chris is the CLUB Secretary not the Company Secretary.
Essentially he runs the teams schedules, transport to games at all levels, draws up contracts for 120 odd players, gets the registrations done, liaises with other clubs over game dates and arrangements and god knows what else behind the scenes.
He puts in silly hours and will some times be the only Charlton rep at away games (wouldn't be surprised if he is that at Scunny on Tues) and league meetings etc.
That doesn't mean I agree with his, or Sue's, views on the regime. It's pretty clear where I stand but I do respect Chris as a fan whose put the hours and hard work in over nearly 3 decades for the club.
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
That's why I really don't get the fuss over him getting two tickets to games one of which he chooses to give to his wife. So what?
I don't think any has an issue with that at all.
It's the fact that his wife is so publicly outspoken and critical of paying supporters,
That is the issue.
personally I don't think Sue is well advised to post what she does or at all but she is an adult so can post what she wants within the law.
This isn't the 1950s when husbands controlled their wives even if a few people on here seem to wish it were.
The issue, as you say, is what Sue says, not that her husband chooses to give her one of the two tickets he gets because of his role.
The real scandal is that Meire does so little work and that the little she does is done so badly.
As someone who has criticised Chris Parkes for seemingly turning a blind eye to Sue's social media presence, I take umbrage with the comments about controlling wives and the 1950s. It's nothing to do with gender and it is nothing to do with being controlling-Sue's very public comments are not only putting the club in an even worst light than it is already held (if that's possible!) they are, more importantly on this argument, harming the reputation of her husband who has worked for the club for over 30 years.
The power of social media was proven on Saturday-he had a frank discussion with a couple of fans at Saturday's game-20 years ago that would have been the end of it, in the world in which we now live he is being polarised on here and elsewhere within five minutes of it by people who did not even witness the event. I would venture to say that many fans, prior to having their views clouded by his misguided missus, wouldn't even know who Chris Parkes is and I would also venture to say that he would much prefer that to be case-Mrs Parkes has seen to that and asking her to stop what she is doing is hardly akin to locking her in the kitchen with the dinner and dishes.
Different gravy, maybe, but if I'd either spoken with a journalist or published (because that's what it is) stuff on the interweb about my organisation I'd have been sacked.
The reason, therefore why Chris should be explaining to his wife that she needs to keep her own counsel is because she could easily step over the line and cost him his job because it could be perceived that he can't keep his gob shut. It has nothing to do with 50s' style sexism.
Now, Chris, if Sue hasn't given you her Xmas present list yet, here's an idea:
I assumed that people took holidays during the international breaks? ...Unless it's like the school holidays when the prices just shoot up as all the CEO's and chairmen bugger off to the Caribbean or Dubai for a couple of weeks?
As much as I dislike what she has done & is doing to our great club I was wondering if she is suffering some sort of breakdown. We have not heard much from her lately & she must be feeling the pressure as after all she is human.
VERY sensible to check the beach area first to see if she's topping up on her tan... I advise that you search the bar next?
You see this is why we've got Charlton fans who have their own Companies, we're smart thinkers!!
I've hard that she often frequents gentlemen's clubs. Now I understand that no upstanding Charlton fan would be seen dead in this kind of establishment, however I think for the purposes of this search they should be covered.
Comments
This isn't the 1950s when husbands controlled their wives even if a few people on here seem to wish it were.
The issue, as you say, is what Sue says, not that her husband chooses to give her one of the two tickets he gets because of his role.
The real scandal is that Meire does so little work and that the little she does is done so badly.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-2786687/the-10-worst-cities-world-holiday-revealed.html
It is quite obviously wrong - and reckless to Chris's reputation - for her to post publicly from that position and using information obtained in that way, whatever her motivation.
I don't think it's sexist to suggest that the spouse of a senior member of the clubs management shouldn't be mouthing off social media.
Vice versa, if Katriens husband was posting similar on Twitter I'd be pretty vocal in my distaste. Or if Mandy's husband took to facebook to claim he knew the inner workings of ticket office last season, and all the fans were wrong about how they felt.. we'd all think he's a tosser and that it's not his place, wouldn't we?
It's just not done, gender aside - it's not her place and simply incites more drama in the fanbase.
It argues to the lack of competency of the organisation to manage its own communication.
How do you think other members of staff view her utterances? What if they had an issue with her husband or other officials in the organisation? Would you expect that to be discussed outside the confines of the professional environment in the knowledge there was some unofficial external influence ready to express "an opinion".
What if her comments were less supportive of the regime do you think they would be allowing her such free scope to "express her own opinions".
With her latest revelations she has indeed now positioned herself as a "quasi employee" of the club.
Her views can now be clearly viewed as protecting the interests of herself and her husband. Ultimately her views can now be seen as being tainted as little more than pursuing ingratiating self interest.
That any spouse in a senior professional position allows it continue I regret reflects poorly on their and the organisations' professional standards. I have known clubs a twentieth of the size of Charlton have more professional and organisational discipline.
The current situation more resembles the gatherings of a social coffee morning that a commercial business. The club appears to be determined to embrace provincial mediocrity. It is deeply regrettable at every level.
I was countering the "who wears the trousers?" remarks.
I don't think Sue is doing the club or Chris any favours at all although clearly she doesn't see that or doesn't agree. As Grapevine says would it be tolerated if she were critical of the regime?, No, of course not.
But that is Sue's decision to post on social media and, as far as I know, not Chris's.
The power of social media was proven on Saturday-he had a frank discussion with a couple of fans at Saturday's game-20 years ago that would have been the end of it, in the world in which we now live he is being polarised on here and elsewhere within five minutes of it by people who did not even witness the event. I would venture to say that many fans, prior to having their views clouded by his misguided missus, wouldn't even know who Chris Parkes is and I would also venture to say that he would much prefer that to be case-Mrs Parkes has seen to that and asking her to stop what she is doing is hardly akin to locking her in the kitchen with the dinner and dishes.
The reason, therefore why Chris should be explaining to his wife that she needs to keep her own counsel is because she could easily step over the line and cost him his job because it could be perceived that he can't keep his gob shut. It has nothing to do with 50s' style sexism.
Now, Chris, if Sue hasn't given you her Xmas present list yet, here's an idea:
You see this is why we've got Charlton fans who have their own Companies, we're smart thinkers!!