|
Post by march4 on Apr 12, 2018 19:39:54 GMT
We will not be promoted while either are associated with the club.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Apr 12, 2018 19:57:08 GMT
We will not be promoted while either are associated with the club. Wasn't Scholes here when we went up 10 years ago?
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Apr 12, 2018 19:59:56 GMT
Tony Scholes has the best job on the planet. If most of us did our job as bad as he did his, then we'd be sacked. However, he's made Saint Peter shed loads of cash..... those yachts don't buy themselves..... so maybe he's done a great job? Exactly - what we constitute as Scholes doing a great job is rather different to what the Coates family may do! Their views may change somewhat when they see the massive reduction in income that relegation brings. Or saint Peter will cut and run inexplicably leaving Stoke in a worse position that he left us post Coates mk1 era. He genuinely could do that....
|
|
|
Post by ashleyscfc on Apr 12, 2018 20:01:25 GMT
Cheers for the feedback, I feel these are all questions that the club have failed to answer having been asked repeatedly Who are we and where are we heading?
The club needs a "Traditional" manager who runs the club from top to bottom, I'm not sure who is about to do that? I did get the impression that Gary Rowett may of been that person. We need someone to come in and stamp an modern identity on the club as the club hierarchy clearly aren't up to it.
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Apr 12, 2018 20:14:27 GMT
By sacking Mark Hughes, Peter Coates has already decided who in the main is responsible for the decline in results this season, it would be a massive surprise to me if the CEO was also to be removed as well.
|
|
|
Post by wozzerthepotter on Apr 13, 2018 7:51:21 GMT
Not sure I agree with that Coates is old school and gives people time to succeed unlike the modern trend giving people time to fail. He acted when he had seen enough of TP and the rumour is that there are going to significant changes in the summer at least that's what was said on the radio on Saturday. Who said it? Not sure I was working in the shed during my self imposed exile and we were the commentary match, one of the commentators said it when they were reflecting on our fall from grace
|
|
|
Post by wozzerthepotter on Apr 13, 2018 7:53:27 GMT
By sacking Mark Hughes, Peter Coates has already decided who in the main is responsible for the decline in results this season, it would be a massive surprise to me if the CEO was also to be removed as well. PC didn't sack MH the board did to cover their own poor decision making!
|
|
|
Post by flea79 on Apr 13, 2018 9:22:29 GMT
Exactly - what we constitute as Scholes doing a great job is rather different to what the Coates family may do! Their views may change somewhat when they see the massive reduction in income that relegation brings. Or saint Peter will cut and run inexplicably leaving Stoke in a worse position that he left us post Coates mk1 era. He genuinely could do that.... probably not far from the truth here, we have already seen Bet365 stop using stoke on its adverts
|
|
|
Post by riproaring on Apr 13, 2018 9:25:09 GMT
By sacking Mark Hughes, Peter Coates has already decided who in the main is responsible for the decline in results this season, it would be a massive surprise to me if the CEO was also to be removed as well. PC didn't sack MH the board did to cover their own poor decision making! The total silence from the club is deafening, they probably tossed a coin to if Hughes was sacked or not. We seem to be heading back to the dark days of the late 80s
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 10:10:11 GMT
At least three should go come what may at the end if the season.
|
|
|
Post by TrentValePotter96 on Apr 13, 2018 12:01:45 GMT
They need to go as their needs to be new staff in many places at the club. What we can't, and I repeat *Can't* do is to just let them continue and blame everything on Hughes & the players.
|
|
|
Post by philstoke on Apr 13, 2018 12:27:14 GMT
By sacking Mark Hughes, Peter Coates has already decided who in the main is responsible for the decline in results this season, it would be a massive surprise to me if the CEO was also to be removed as well. The board, which includes Scholes are not going to sack the CEO, who has steered this club through the most successful 10 years in its history. The CEO is a commercial role and not technical, as in identifying, scouting and recommending players. Ts&Cs maybe in contracts he would be responsible for, however that doesn’t seem to be the argument being put forward in this thread for the sacking of Scholes
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Apr 13, 2018 12:49:29 GMT
By sacking Mark Hughes, Peter Coates has already decided who in the main is responsible for the decline in results this season, it would be a massive surprise to me if the CEO was also to be removed as well. The board, which includes Scholes are not going to sack the CEO, who has steered this club through the most successful 10 years in its history. The CEO is a commercial role and not technical, as in identifying, scouting and recommending players. Ts&Cs maybe in contracts he would be responsible for, however that doesn’t seem to be the argument being put forward in this thread for the sacking of Scholes The logic for sacking scholes is . 1 He is paid £1m to oversee the runing of the club , we have just lost 90% of our revenue on his watch 2 He is responsible as part of his role for key recruitment player and manager wise it’s been appalling 3 He is responsible for Match day revenue it’s 15% down in our last results . 4 The investments we have made have seen an appallng return on investment , Wimmer, berahino , Imbula 5 As ceo he is responsible for performance managing direct reports Cartwright and Hughes were are cleatl6 failing 6 As Ceo he is responsible fir the clubs public relations , sign of ambition , what fuss , loss of control,of berahino story all more failures 7 He is responsible for successful implementation of board strategy , sustainable has been an unmitigated disaster . 8 He is responsible for safe guarding key assets , we’ve lost our best two to hostile bids in his watch and replaced neither . 9 He is responsible fir 5 years of under investment v our competitor set , Bournemouth , palace , Leicester , West Ham all delivered more investment and actually decent financial results . No other CEO in a commercial environment would survive that crime sheet point 1 alone would see them gone we’re there any institutional shareholders involved
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 13, 2018 13:09:53 GMT
Whatever the arguments are it's simply not realistic to expect Scholes to be sacked. He's on the board. Not going to sack himself is he.
|
|
|
Post by stokeyank on Apr 13, 2018 14:12:53 GMT
Whatever the arguments are it's simply not realistic to expect Scholes to be sacked. He's on the board. Not going to sack himself is he. No, but the rest of the board could force him out if they see him as one of the problems. It's very unlikely but possible.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 13, 2018 16:55:18 GMT
Whatever the arguments are it's simply not realistic to expect Scholes to be sacked. He's on the board. Not going to sack himself is he. And people don't think there are big problems are this club! 😂😂
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Apr 13, 2018 17:30:06 GMT
Whatever the arguments are it's simply not realistic to expect Scholes to be sacked. He's on the board. Not going to sack himself is he. If the shareholders of the Club want him out there is nothing to stop them. The structure of the limited company has been set out on here before. I'm assuming the family own all the shares??
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 17:39:55 GMT
"I hereby raise the notion of my removal from the board and company."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 18:09:00 GMT
We will not be promoted while either are associated with the club. Their recruitment policy reeks of ineptitude
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 18:09:44 GMT
"I hereby raise the notion of my removal from the board and company." I second that eeeee motion 😬
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Apr 13, 2018 18:25:36 GMT
The board, which includes Scholes are not going to sack the CEO, who has steered this club through the most successful 10 years in its history. The CEO is a commercial role and not technical, as in identifying, scouting and recommending players. Ts&Cs maybe in contracts he would be responsible for, however that doesn’t seem to be the argument being put forward in this thread for the sacking of Scholes The logic for sacking scholes is . 1 He is paid £1m to oversee the runing of the club , we have just lost 90% of our revenue on his watch 2 He is responsible as part of his role for key recruitment player and manager wise it’s been appalling 3 He is responsible for Match day revenue it’s 15% down in our last results . 4 The investments we have made have seen an appallng return on investment , Wimmer, berahino , Imbula 5 As ceo he is responsible for performance managing direct reports Cartwright and Hughes were are cleatl6 failing 6 As Ceo he is responsible fir the clubs public relations , sign of ambition , what fuss , loss of control,of berahino story all more failures 7 He is responsible for successful implementation of board strategy , sustainable has been an unmitigated disaster . 8 He is responsible for safe guarding key assets , we’ve lost our best two to hostile bids in his watch and replaced neither . 9 He is responsible fir 5 years of under investment v our competitor set , Bournemouth , palace , Leicester , West Ham all delivered more investment and actually decent financial results . No other CEO in a commercial environment would survive that crime sheet point 1 alone would see them gone we’re there any institutional shareholders involved You have not got a clue who is responsible for our demise. It could be a number of people that have had their fingerprints on the abysmal recruitment policy and contractural agreements over the last few years. Cartwright Hughes Scholes Coates Junior Coates Senior Who knows.? I do know you have a scary obsession with the CEO. He may be as much use as a pork chop in a Lebanese restaurant but he's certainly not the main culprit in our sad decline.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Apr 13, 2018 18:37:42 GMT
Whatever the arguments are it's simply not realistic to expect Scholes to be sacked. He's on the board. Not going to sack himself is he. He is the CEO and is on the board because of that position, not because he is a shareholder. His employment contract should contain a provision that, should his employment as CEO be terminated, he will resign as director. In any event the company articles will allow the shareholders, ie Bet365, to remove him from the board if they so choose.
|
|
|
Post by jarvinski on Apr 13, 2018 18:48:22 GMT
I would also love to see that letter go to the board and to demand a response to it
|
|
|
Post by jarvinski on Apr 13, 2018 18:50:17 GMT
I’ve finished with bet365 it won’t break them but it’s my little protest
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 13, 2018 19:29:53 GMT
Whatever the arguments are it's simply not realistic to expect Scholes to be sacked. He's on the board. Not going to sack himself is he. He is the CEO and is on the board because of that position, not because he is a shareholder. His employment contract should contain a provision that, should his employment as CEO be terminated, he will resign as director. In any event the company articles will allow the shareholders, ie Bet365, to remove him from the board if they so choose. Do you see any indication that is on the cards?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 19:35:44 GMT
Relegation to the championship could cost the club £100m, the local area even more. On top of that hundreds of jobs both directly connected to the club and in the area. Even worse our local pride will take a massive knock when things just seemed to be turning a corner. These two men, one head of recruitment and the other the man who appointed him have presided over this mess. Whilst being overseen and trusted by a board seemingly sleep at the wheel. I fully appreciate and accept that Tony Scholes is no chief scout, he has no footballing experience to speak of in the game. However after many statements from the club that "only the manager signs players", we have seen with the signings of Bauer and Ndiaye that this is not strictly true. In terms of quality of player bought in he is not to blame. He is however responsible for the man he hired to do that side of the work. They have both failed on numerous occasions. Tony Scholes however is in charge of how budgets are used, and as head of “running” of the club, he oversees all aspects including setting the standards of what the club is and means to those affected by it. Yet again tonight we have Jesé in the papers with reports he’s out on the piss in Spain, not really spending time with his child and the Stoke City mole John Percy has another exclusive again about lack of standards and care from stoke city footballers with no official line from the club. What is our press department doing? Why does nobody at the top of our club appear to have a grip of this situation? Why have we had bad press after bad press when we are in a relegation battle for week after week? Why is Tony Scholes and the board not setting the standards for what is expected of players and Staff? Regardless of who is manager? Why is it not intrinsically drummed in to players what it means to play for this club? What it means to the area and why is that respect for the club instilled into them from day one? Why does it appear it has taken a new manager to come in to install discipline into this squad and give the club direction? It is clear we need more successful "footballing people" at the top of the club to sort this mess out and people with proven track records of success. Especially recruitment. The whole situation reeks of a rudderless ship that has already hit the iceberg and I'm afraid the club management were willingly asleep at the wheel. Since Cartwright has come in I dare say his hit rate has been less that 50% on signings. Scholes and he have presided over:: - Berahino fiasco - A player with a known chequered past and now clearly spending far over the odds - Imbula - A player with the wrong 'attitude' from the start, little grasp of English. Another player who was clearly the wrong fit for the club - Agudelo - What happened there?! - Wimmer - A player with an astronomical fee but no quality to show for it. Another time Spurs have had our pants down. - Palacios - A make way for the crouch deal with little pay off - Jese - Ambition...say no more - Moting - A free transfer replacing your best player who kept us in the league must be great for a CEO when it comes off, but when it does you pay the price - The late signing of Bruno - Seemingly a self sabotage mission to mess up the start of the season and what was turning into the most stable centre back partnership we'd had in years for what? - Letting Bardsley go for Johnson - Extended contracts for Ireland Affellay? Why? - John Guidetti, Texiera, Sidwell, Van Ginkel, Jamie Ness, Edu, Shea, Bony - All failures - The failure to sign a striker of good enough quality since 2012 Its nothing short of a complete shambles and shows how without a strong manager we are a vacant of any identity as a club as it is not being set by the board at all. We have heard about 'self sustainability' and wanting to produce more academy players and yet we have had a revolving door of academy directors and seemingly no pragmatic approach to put things right apart from keeping talking about it and hoping it becomes true. Im sure Peter Coates would love for stoke to follow a Southampton model and sell one or two academy or recruited players for £30m+ every year but we have no track record of being able to do it, and no idea how to start to make that happen. The academy and scouting team is not up to it and simply wishing it would happen gets us in the situation we have now. Simply buying good foreign players for the U23 squad or an off the shelf Coever training scheme won't cut it. Not only that but hoping to do that would mean the club have an ongoing identity of both the club they are, the type of players they want to recruit and the type of football we want to play. And I have seen nothing to suggest we have a clue?! We have no identity, no 'stoke way'. For example, even in the championship the Brighton academy philosophy was "Brighton want to play and attractive brand of possession football with a winning mentality throughout their teams. We therefore recognise the need for all players to become skilled and confident technicians who enjoy and are comfortable on possession. Whilst developing a real game understanding" What do we stand for? Apart from a trying to get in a bunch of failed mercenaries that nobody else wants? Name the number of times stoke bought a successful recognised premier league player who was wanted by other clubs? Allen? Crouch? Yes the community aspects of the club have expanded but anyone who has any day to day interaction with the club know that is not a well run ship. From match day experience, the car parks, ticket office, the PA system, communication from the club, marketing. The club have done lots of great things in recent history such as the ticket price freezes, away fan travel, supporters council etc but I don't think this is enough to cover the ongoing clusterfuck that is Stoke City FC at the moment. The former management team staff still being at the club, failed signings, bad press. These problems are not from recent times and will take a lot of tough honesty and pragmatism from the club to put right. Change must happen. As fans I think we need to put pressure on them to make sure they do. In the history of professional football no one has ever accused the passionate supporter of knowing how to run a football club...and they were right, whoever they are!
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Apr 13, 2018 19:47:00 GMT
The logic for sacking scholes is . 1 He is paid £1m to oversee the runing of the club , we have just lost 90% of our revenue on his watch 2 He is responsible as part of his role for key recruitment player and manager wise it’s been appalling 3 He is responsible for Match day revenue it’s 15% down in our last results . 4 The investments we have made have seen an appallng return on investment , Wimmer, berahino , Imbula 5 As ceo he is responsible for performance managing direct reports Cartwright and Hughes were are cleatl6 failing 6 As Ceo he is responsible fir the clubs public relations , sign of ambition , what fuss , loss of control,of berahino story all more failures 7 He is responsible for successful implementation of board strategy , sustainable has been an unmitigated disaster . 8 He is responsible for safe guarding key assets , we’ve lost our best two to hostile bids in his watch and replaced neither . 9 He is responsible fir 5 years of under investment v our competitor set , Bournemouth , palace , Leicester , West Ham all delivered more investment and actually decent financial results . No other CEO in a commercial environment would survive that crime sheet point 1 alone would see them gone we’re there any institutional shareholders involved You have not got a clue who is responsible for our demise. It could be a number of people that have had their fingerprints on the abysmal recruitment policy and contractural agreements over the last few years. Cartwright Hughes Scholes Coates Junior Coates Senior Who knows.? I do know you have a scary obsession with the CEO. He may be as much use as a pork chop in a Lebanese restaurant but he's certainly not the main culprit in our sad decline. Sorry but it goes with the territory highest paid executive basks in the sunshine of the good times and pays the price in the bad ,that’s why they get paid big bucks for being accountable
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Apr 13, 2018 19:48:22 GMT
He is the CEO and is on the board because of that position, not because he is a shareholder. His employment contract should contain a provision that, should his employment as CEO be terminated, he will resign as director. In any event the company articles will allow the shareholders, ie Bet365, to remove him from the board if they so choose. Do you see any indication that is on the cards? I think he was making the point that he COULD be sacked. He's not a shareholder. He's the Chief Executive Officer.
|
|
|
Post by smallthorner on Apr 13, 2018 20:05:05 GMT
You have not got a clue who is responsible for our demise. It could be a number of people that have had their fingerprints on the abysmal recruitment policy and contractural agreements over the last few years. Cartwright Hughes Scholes Coates Junior Coates Senior Who knows.? I do know you have a scary obsession with the CEO. He may be as much use as a pork chop in a Lebanese restaurant but he's certainly not the main culprit in our sad decline. Sorry but it goes with the territory highest paid executive basks in the sunshine of the good times and pays the price in the bad ,that’s why they get paid big bucks for being accountable I'm not disputing that he seems to be a tad overpaid but he's not the one and only culprit in this unholy mess. How do you know if he's not been the instigater in keeping prices held for the last few years and the free coach travel.? No worries... it's probably (as these things generally are) a combination of general mismanagement, terrible acquisitions, complacency and downright dog poo football decisions. I get your frustrations...obviously. But think your angst is somewhat misdirected.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Apr 13, 2018 20:05:07 GMT
We will not be promoted while either are associated with the club. Wasn't Scholes here when we went up 10 years ago? Tony Pulis was in charge in those days.
|
|