NSPE, I hereby confirm I do not mind you looking up and taking a photo with my parents, I do not mind you writing a letter and handing it to them explaining why you are doing so.
NSPE, I hereby confirm I do not mind you looking up and taking a photo with my parents, I do not mind you writing a letter and handing it to them explaining why you are doing so.
How about this for an idea. How about we go back to rhe original thread topic. Ive expressed an opinon its not been well recieved but this thread is not about my opinion its about. WARS letter to the FA. I have disagreed with the mode of attack but that does not take away from thw effort put in by the ladies of WAR. They have had a response how about everyone goes back to talking about that.
That being said my opinion on the KM doorstep challenge seems to have sparked fury. This can be addressed, what i suggest is anyone who wants to talk to me about that dig up their original defence of the incident from the original thread and pm me directly. When i see that people have been prepared to defend the doorstep incident when most on the original thread felt it went to far i will be happy to discuss further via pm.
Now how about we get the thread back on topic ive already said i wont comment further on the letter. So how about the thread returns to talking about the letter and the effort put in my the ladies of WAR.
If anybody is able to access Katrien Meire's interview on talksport she describes the parental visit herself. Her description is straightforward. The debate is not about the very mild nature of the encounter, but whether it should have happened at all in terms of principle. The encounter may well be described as wrong, but the event of it was not disgraceful or shocking or outrageous or threatening in any way. I read it as somebody checking they were delivering a letter to the right address.
How about this for an idea. How about we go back to rhe original thread topic. I've expressed an opinon its not been well received but this thread is not about my opinion its about. WARS letter to the FA. I have disagreed with the mode of attack but that does not take away from thw effort put in by the ladies of WAR. They have had a response how about everyone goes back to talking about that.
I'm joining the debate late Northstandpieeater so please excuse anything which may be repeating that which has been said before.
Your very first post on the subject stated: I think things should stay on a non personal level, how many on here would be up in arms if someone wrote a letter to a prospective employer such as this.
Surely, all that the WAR letter provides is an unsolicited 'reference'. It points out in a very business-like way why Katrien Meire is unsuited for a role on the FA Board and the letter provides the reasons why.
It is not a personal attack on Meire as you claim. It does point out that the error would be to appoint Meire to the Board to tick a box (female) without taking into account her track record in administration at Charlton which many, perhaps even you, would class as a disaster. Appointments must be made on merit and performance not purely for gender specific purposes as the letter makes clear.
So your whole 'opinion' whatever you want to call it fails in your very first sentence. I gather you have apologised for other matters you have raised subsequently. Perhaps you would like to apologise now for your initial spurious comment and wasting everyone's time. >
For me, the most unfortunate aspect of the leafletting incident was the PR opportunities it offered to Katrien to paint protesters in a poor light by partial relating of the tale to those in the media who had not heard the whole story. She has, understandably, taken advantage of this – as I’m sure would the protesters if the boot had been on the other foot.
Diversity. Box ticking without any other consideration?
To return to the subject of the thread, I can understand why the Sport England statements are so bland and vague, as they have to be applicable to all sports. We are a diverse democratic society, so I support the concept that any organisation receiving public funding needs to reflect that situation.
In the same way I would not wish to be ruled by a parliament entirely composed of hereditary peers, I do not think it healthy for our national game which incorporates players and supporters of both sexes, many skin colours, able and disabled, amateur and professional, etc, etc, to be governed by an old boys’ network of “white men in suits” who are self-perpetuating and accountable to no-one. As with anti-discrimination legislation, it shouldn’t be necessary to spell these things out, but the reality is that diversity has to be promoted or it will be ignored.
What I want to know is how the FA will turn the generic requirements of Sport England into an able, accountable, representative management of English football.
Box-ticking is not the answer; those who are joining Committees or the Board wearing diversity hats must in my opinion also have professional qualities which could equally earn them a non-diversity seat. There can be very few Charlton fans who genuinely believe Katrien passes that test, based on her performance as our CEO. I do not know enough about the other 7 women currently with seats at the FA to offer informed comment.
Once reform has been achieved, perhaps there may be some small chance of the FA addressing the threats facing the future of our game, be it the inequalities caused by TV money, the problems of assembling a competitive national team, or the growing issue of “bad” owners of football clubs and the inadequacies of the current “fit & proper” owners’ test. Although I won’t be holding my breath!
For me its making the protest personal and also serves no purpose in forcing rhw owner out. I upset a lot of people in my line of work a lot of people and if one of those wrote to a prospectice employer. Whilst i would never begrudge them complainjng about my conduct if one of those wrote to a prospextice employer im sorry i would not be alright with that.
Havent you ever been asked to give an honest reference for somebody.
Almost everything I've been able to think of lists stuff in order of importance. Even ingredients posted on the side of foodstuffs have the most important bit first. But here we have: "Organisations shall recruit and engage people with appropriate diversity, independence, skills, experience and knowledge to take effective decisions that further the organisation’s goals." Surely they should be looking at the "knowledge, skills, experience" bit first (although that three-header could all be rolled into one word "capabilities" before thinking about independence and, finally, diversity? If diversity is the primary test and the rest follows you could end up with some right dodgy selections........
Comments
That being said my opinion on the KM doorstep challenge seems to have sparked fury. This can be addressed, what i suggest is anyone who wants to talk to me about that dig up their original defence of the incident from the original thread and pm me directly. When i see that people have been prepared to defend the doorstep incident when most on the original thread felt it went to far i will be happy to discuss further via pm.
Now how about we get the thread back on topic ive already said i wont comment further on the letter. So how about the thread returns to talking about the letter and the effort put in my the ladies of WAR.
Her description is straightforward.
The debate is not about the very mild nature of the encounter, but whether it should have happened at all in terms of principle.
The encounter may well be described as wrong, but the event of it was not disgraceful or shocking or outrageous or threatening in any way. I read it as somebody checking they were delivering a letter to the right address.
How about this for an idea. How about we go back to rhe original thread topic. I've expressed an opinon its not been well received but this thread is not about my opinion its about. WARS letter to the FA. I have disagreed with the mode of attack but that does not take away from thw effort put in by the ladies of WAR. They have had a response how about everyone goes back to talking about that.
I'm joining the debate late Northstandpieeater so please excuse anything which may be repeating that which has been said before.
Your very first post on the subject stated:
I think things should stay on a non personal level, how many on here would be up in arms if someone wrote a letter to a prospective employer such as this.
Surely, all that the WAR letter provides is an unsolicited 'reference'. It points out in a very business-like way why Katrien Meire is unsuited for a role on the FA Board and the letter provides the reasons why.
It is not a personal attack on Meire as you claim. It does point out that the error would be to appoint Meire to the Board to tick a box (female) without taking into account her track record in administration at Charlton which many, perhaps even you, would class as a disaster. Appointments must be made on merit and performance not purely for gender specific purposes as the letter makes clear.
So your whole 'opinion' whatever you want to call it fails in your very first sentence. I gather you have apologised for other matters you have raised subsequently. Perhaps you would like to apologise now for your initial spurious comment and wasting everyone's time.
>
In the same way I would not wish to be ruled by a parliament entirely composed of hereditary peers, I do not think it healthy for our national game which incorporates players and supporters of both sexes, many skin colours, able and disabled, amateur and professional, etc, etc, to be governed by an old boys’ network of “white men in suits” who are self-perpetuating and accountable to no-one. As with anti-discrimination legislation, it shouldn’t be necessary to spell these things out, but the reality is that diversity has to be promoted or it will be ignored.
What I want to know is how the FA will turn the generic requirements of Sport England into an able, accountable, representative management of English football.
Box-ticking is not the answer; those who are joining Committees or the Board wearing diversity hats must in my opinion also have professional qualities which could equally earn them a non-diversity seat. There can be very few Charlton fans who genuinely believe Katrien passes that test, based on her performance as our CEO. I do not know enough about the other 7 women currently with seats at the FA to offer informed comment.
Once reform has been achieved, perhaps there may be some small chance of the FA addressing the threats facing the future of our game, be it the inequalities caused by TV money, the problems of assembling a competitive national team, or the growing issue of “bad” owners of football clubs and the inadequacies of the current “fit & proper” owners’ test. Although I won’t be holding my breath!
Surely they should be looking at the "knowledge, skills, experience" bit first (although that three-header could all be rolled into one word "capabilities" before thinking about independence and, finally, diversity? If diversity is the primary test and the rest follows you could end up with some right dodgy selections........
https://www.tvl.be/programmas/fan-van-limburg-portret-van-marieke-hofte-30953
I believe there is photographic evidence of the 'meet'.
You also need to be aware that Mr President would struggle to make an eight year old Brownie feel intimidated.