So if I understand you correctly Scott and Rodwell agreed together to sack Holden (by text?) but did not need to ask the ownership first…but might have told 5+%Methven as a formality as he is local. I wonder if Scott and Rodwell texted all the 5+% ‘owners’ about their decision to sack Dean Holden.
Seth, a decision to sack someone doesn't have to, and normally wouldn't, be made by shareholders - it is part of executive duty for those appointed by the owners to run the business. In this case Scott and/or Rodwell would have delegated powers to make such a decision, irrespective of the shit way they apparently communicated that decision.
Yes but the word is that at least one shareholder, Methven, would have been part of, or even the main decision maker in, the move to sack Dean Holden.
In his role as part of the SMT. Which is separate to his role as a shareholder. Methven is both a shareholder and an executive. Friedman, Brener, etc are NOT.
I agree but in that case his role should come with a job title, shouldn’t it? Otherwise it lacks definition, which is obviously the intention.
Totally. I don't for a minute like the idea of him essentially having executive powers without any of the responsibilities, it stinks to high heaven and is extremely suspicious.
But as you say, he's obviously deliberately created this position for himself, probably for situations like this one.
I asked Cawley directly if he'd approached either of them for comment on their involvement and got the radio silence treatment.
I also asked @PragueAddick on more info regarding his Methven piece mentioning both of them worked together at another football club?
And got the same treatment!
You wot?
Richard Cawley is a journalist. I'm just a mug punter. So 'treatment' is a bit presumptuous, old son.
The Head of Dossiers has files on both but a quick look at the Friedman one has no solid info on his sports involvement. However I seem to recall reference on CL to both being involved with Houston Dynamo, an MLS club. That's all I know at present.
Generally, when it comes to the Dossiers it is difficult to build up solid stuff on US people because there is such a welter of on-line shite about anything and everything. Additionally Cayman Islands or similar registration makes it difficult to verify any ownership. That is exactly why people use off-shore reg. If you consider that type of registration to be unacceptable for a football club, please help by dropping a line to the EFL, copying your MP, demanding that all owners provide the same level of disclosure as they would for a UK registered ownership.
Comments
But as you say, he's obviously deliberately created this position for himself, probably for situations like this one.
Richard Cawley is a journalist. I'm just a mug punter. So 'treatment' is a bit presumptuous, old son.
The Head of Dossiers has files on both but a quick look at the Friedman one has no solid info on his sports involvement. However I seem to recall reference on CL to both being involved with Houston Dynamo, an MLS club. That's all I know at present.
Generally, when it comes to the Dossiers it is difficult to build up solid stuff on US people because there is such a welter of on-line shite about anything and everything. Additionally Cayman Islands or similar registration makes it difficult to verify any ownership. That is exactly why people use off-shore reg. If you consider that type of registration to be unacceptable for a football club, please help by dropping a line to the EFL, copying your MP, demanding that all owners provide the same level of disclosure as they would for a UK registered ownership.