|
Post by ProudSalopian on Jan 12, 2024 10:06:22 GMT 1
Hey lets bring cotterill Back Some fans clearly don't want a football club at all Who is suggesting bringing him back? The conversation on here generally is Steve Cotterill was in the wrong but if the manager of our football club went rogue, there are also failings of the football club and the people he reports into
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Jan 12, 2024 10:09:04 GMT 1
Again regardless of the hyper rumours of supposed wrongdoing, the executive chairman of a business rools the roost and any mass failures underneath them shows their own poor management, inadequate frameworks and dreadful risk controls. If he wasn't the owner he would've been dismissed also. are you suggesting the chairman should have tailed both the COE and the Manager 24/7 ? ( wow that would have been a bit perverse) he didn't he trusted them, still beating himself up for doing exactly that, exactly what the fans wanted him to what would you have done, I guess by your posts, you'd still be trusting cotterill in charge no more questions m'lord No he shouldn’t have given Coterill a free hand the minute he walked through the door. One of the first things he did was go over Caldwell head and force the Umbro deal on the club, as you’ve said a worse deal than the Tory’s PPE procurement fiascos. It was so obviously a bad deal right from the off with no delivery deadlines and shocking service and great cost. What did Roland do? Decide to take a back seat and let him continue for 2 years. Not going to end well bringing this up again BTW.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Jan 12, 2024 11:25:13 GMT 1
I think the points of his interview have been well discussed, we're in danger of going over all ground now which won't achieve anything.
Arguably best to lock the thread and move on, in keeping with new years best wishes 👍
|
|
|
Post by Bob Rickerton on Jan 12, 2024 12:29:47 GMT 1
I know I've said this many times, but he reminds me so much of Gary Peters, in terms of the type of manager he is, the type of football he plays and his personality. Get away from the matchday/training environment and he's a very likeable character, he's open, he's honest, he's entertaining, he's passionate, he's certainly not dull. I remember people who were at the player of the year awards saying they could listen to him talk for hours. However get him in a pressurised environment and/or you don't do things the way he likes, well he's a different beast and it's easy to see why some people don't like him I'd never really thought about the Peters comparison before, but it's a great shout. And you're definitely right about him not being dull - the article's a complete puff-piece with absolutely no reference to any of the failures in his career, let alone the reasons for his departure from us (which are probably understandable for legal reasons.) And yet, it's a really entertaining read, and whatever you think of the bloke he's undeniably hugely knowledgeable and passionate about the game, perhaps to near obsessive levels. He's a marmite figure and that seems to be reflected in the opinions of both the dressing rooms and stands of every club he's been at. Sometimes in his interviews and the way he spoke he actually reminded me of another character whose surname began with P, and that's Alan Partridge. As was the case a couple of months ago when I semi-defended Caldwell, I've no idea about the off-the-pitch rumours and so can't really comment on them. Truthfully I do still think fondly of the bloke and I think some of that's in his outwardly facing character, I can't help but warm to it a bit. And I've also got to say, even if the off-the-pitch misdemeanours were large, I'll still retain gratitude for him managing us to comfortable safety from his hospital bed when he y'know, nearly died.
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Jan 12, 2024 12:36:31 GMT 1
I know I've said this many times, but he reminds me so much of Gary Peters, in terms of the type of manager he is, the type of football he plays and his personality. Get away from the matchday/training environment and he's a very likeable character, he's open, he's honest, he's entertaining, he's passionate, he's certainly not dull. I remember people who were at the player of the year awards saying they could listen to him talk for hours. However get him in a pressurised environment and/or you don't do things the way he likes, well he's a different beast and it's easy to see why some people don't like him I'd never really thought about the Peters comparison before, but it's a great shout. And you're definitely right about him not being dull - the article's a complete puff-piece with absolutely no reference to any of the failures in his career, let alone the reasons for his departure from us (which are probably understandable for legal reasons.) And yet, it's a really entertaining read, and whatever you think of the bloke he's undeniably hugely knowledgeable and passionate about the game, perhaps to near obsessive levels. He's a marmite figure and that seems to be reflected in the opinions of both the dressing rooms and stands of every club he's been at. Sometimes in his interviews and the way he spoke he actually reminded me of another character whose surname began with P, and that's Alan Partridge. As was the case a couple of months ago when I semi-defended Caldwell, I've no idea about the off-the-pitch rumours and so can't really comment on them. Truthfully I do still think fondly of the bloke and I think some of that's in his outwardly facing character, I can't help but warm to it a bit. And I've also got to say, even if the off-the-pitch misdemeanours were large, I'll still retain gratitude for him managing us to comfortable safety from his hospital bed when he y'know, nearly died. Another good post that I can get behind - I've heard a bit more depth on Umbro fiasco now, but I'll always keep an open mind on the mass of rumours doing the rounds If I discount all rumours, as i've literally no idea on them, I liked the bloke and found him highly engaging as manager of this club. I said on another thread, i'd love a manager of his experience, knowledge and passion back in, who could just manage the team. No daft say on kit deals, hotel rooms, team coaches, or anything else. It's the way to go imo
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 12:39:50 GMT 1
Hey lets bring cotterill Back Some fans clearly don't want a football club at all Who is suggesting bringing him back? The conversation on here generally is Steve Cotterill was in the wrong but if the manager of our football club went rogue, there are also failings of the football club and the people he reports into it was aimed at the guy who this week stated he wished he was still here, and on this thread is slagging off what he calls 'apologists' ( I guess that was aimed my way too for trying to have an opinion on the topic ) seeing as the chairmans message keeps having excerpts posted on here, I'll have a go at that too Despite regular financial meetings and warnings that spending is greatly exceeding income and budgets, it continues unabated. This had to stop, we know that It didn't stop, we know that but then it was stopped rather abruptly, we know that happened at the end of the season when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug ? seems to me like he gave far more than a fair chance for whatever craziness was going on to stop and it never in hindsight, it was far worse than he ever imagined a lot of the spending wasnt even for what it claimed to be for, and the manager was publicly trying to make a fool of the chairman and buying fans in to his game and out of shot was the biggest bully ever known at the club, especially to the females at the club and young players so sorry if I keep apologising for the club having to get rid of him, I knew all along he was a wrong un, thats probably what annoys most
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Jan 12, 2024 12:49:20 GMT 1
Who is suggesting bringing him back? The conversation on here generally is Steve Cotterill was in the wrong but if the manager of our football club went rogue, there are also failings of the football club and the people he reports into when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug? I think for me, at the first sight of financials going wrong, RW should have been signing everything off. No further meeting, no repeat meetings, no repeat warnings, the first warning should've been the alarm to take back complete oversight of the finances. Maybe that's easy to say in hindsight, but for someone who is "safe pair of hands" running a supposed "tight ship", it doesn't reflect well on RW, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 13:14:20 GMT 1
when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug? I think for me, at the first sight of financials going wrong, RW should have been signing everything off. No further meeting, no repeat meetings, no repeat warnings, the first warning should've been the alarm to take back complete oversight of the finances. Maybe that's easy to say in hindsight, but for someone who is "safe pair of hands" running a supposed "tight ship", it doesn't reflect well on RW, in my opinion. if we go back to day 1, our chairman head hunted a guy that was a friend, and one 99% of fans shouted WOW, I dont think for one second he would have come had he not been given a certain amount of trust and privileges , and how crazy would it have been if the chairman was following him around like a shadow ? I dread to think what kind of situation we'd be in this season if he'd still have been here, a, without the finance issues being sorted, or b, if the finance issues had been sorted and limits firmly in place
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Jan 12, 2024 13:49:43 GMT 1
Commenting purely on the football, it wasn’t a constant bed of roses but by god the job he did to keep us up in his first season (as Bob says whilst hospital-ridden with Covid) shows the commitment and obsession that’s a trademark of his personality. The football whilst you’d never call it free flowing was nowhere near as bad as made out. The way he galvanised the fans on their return from the Covid ban, and even in the bad times it felt like the players, fans and staff were all United and stronger together.
If only all the other s**t hadn’t gone on, I’d have him back tomorrow. Such a sad state of affairs for all concerned.
|
|
|
Post by claphamshrew on Jan 12, 2024 14:16:24 GMT 1
I think for me, at the first sight of financials going wrong, RW should have been signing everything off. No further meeting, no repeat meetings, no repeat warnings, the first warning should've been the alarm to take back complete oversight of the finances. Maybe that's easy to say in hindsight, but for someone who is "safe pair of hands" running a supposed "tight ship", it doesn't reflect well on RW, in my opinion. if we go back to day 1, our chairman head hunted a guy that was a friend, and one 99% of fans shouted WOW, I dont think for one second he would have come had he not been given a certain amount of trust and privileges , and how crazy would it have been if the chairman was following him around like a shadow ? I dread to think what kind of situation we'd be in this season if he'd still have been here, a, without the finance issues being sorted, or b, if the finance issues had been sorted and limits firmly in place I don't think anyone is suggesting RW should have been micro-managing SC or BC from the outset. However, regardless of how much trust you place in someone and autonomy you give them, it is entirely reasonable to expect a business with a multi million pound turnover and expenditure to have financial processes and controls in place that cannot be circumvented to extent that they seemingly were. If RW naively did not have these processes and controls in place initially (or not to the extent they should have been), then surely they should have been implemented / tightened up when the alleged financial mismanagement became known to him so the spending did not then continue "unabated". I believe you said yourself that RW is beating himself up about the whole episode, and I'd suggest part of that is due to him realising he could have prevented this escalating to the level that it seemingly has. We all know he prides himself on being an astute businessman, and regardless of who is ultimately to the blame, the position we find ourselves in could have been prevented (at least to an extent) with a bit more foresight and financial control from the top, if not initially, then certainly once the issues became apparent.
|
|
|
Post by Valerioch on Jan 12, 2024 14:20:09 GMT 1
if we go back to day 1, our chairman head hunted a guy that was a friend, and one 99% of fans shouted WOW, I dont think for one second he would have come had he not been given a certain amount of trust and privileges , and how crazy would it have been if the chairman was following him around like a shadow ? I dread to think what kind of situation we'd be in this season if he'd still have been here, a, without the finance issues being sorted, or b, if the finance issues had been sorted and limits firmly in place I don't think anyone is suggesting RW should have been micro-managing SC or BC from the outset. However, regardless of how much trust you place in someone and autonomy you give them, it is entirely reasonable to expect a business with a multi million pound turnover and expenditure to have financial processes and controls in place that cannot be circumvented to extent that they seemingly were. If RW naively did not have these processes and controls in place initially (or not to the extent they should have been), then surely they should have been implemented / tightened up when the alleged financial mismanagement became known to him so the spending did not then continue "unabated". I believe you said yourself that RW is beating himself up about the whole episode, and I'd suggest part of that is due to him realising he could have prevented this escalating to the level that it seemingly has. We all know he prides himself on being an astute businessman, and regardless of who is ultimately to the blame, the position we find ourselves in could have been prevented (at least to an extent) with a bit more foresight and financial control from the top, if not initially, then certainly once the issues became apparent. Exactly For me there's still a bit of 2 + 2 potentially = 5 here. For example, if somebody is a mass vile bully in the workplace, you have grounds to dismiss and end a contract. Yet we're also told we're still paying him. Things don't add up. That's just one example But I just don't know. Trying not to get too drawn in to old ground, this has been done to death, I eagerly await the published accounts to see the scale of any financial mismanagement
|
|
|
Post by ProudSalopian on Jan 12, 2024 14:45:18 GMT 1
when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug ? A good question, although a very difficult one to answer because no one whats this excessive spending was, how long it had been going on for, how long Roland was aware of it and what Roland was telling SC/BC. Although I'd argue he should have 'pulled the plug' a lot earlier. If the rumours are true that Cotterill was turned down by Caldwell when trying to get the Umbro deal and then went over his head to Roland, then Roland really cannot play the victim here. Not only did Roland undermine his CEO, he sanctioned a terrible business deal and effectively gave Cotterill a pass to do whatever he wanted. Had Roland backed his CEO then life could have been very different. But of course he didn't and here we are. (Last post on the subject as appreciate we are revisiting old ground)
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 14:48:32 GMT 1
I don't think anyone is suggesting RW should have been micro-managing SC or BC from the outset. However, regardless of how much trust you place in someone and autonomy you give them, it is entirely reasonable to expect a business with a multi million pound turnover and expenditure to have financial processes and controls in place that cannot be circumvented to extent that they seemingly were. If RW naively did not have these processes and controls in place initially (or not to the extent they should have been), then surely they should have been implemented / tightened up when the alleged financial mismanagement became known to him so the spending did not then continue "unabated". I believe you said yourself that RW is beating himself up about the whole episode, and I'd suggest part of that is due to him realising he could have prevented this escalating to the level that it seemingly has. We all know he prides himself on being an astute businessman, and regardless of who is ultimately to the blame, the position we find ourselves in could have been prevented (at least to an extent) with a bit more foresight and financial control from the top, if not initially, then certainly once the issues became apparent. Exactly For me there's still a bit of 2 + 2 potentially = 5 here. For example, if somebody is a mass vile bully in the workplace, you have grounds to dismiss and end a contract. Yet we're also told we're still paying him. Things don't add up. That's just one example But I just don't know. Trying not to get too drawn in to old ground, this has been done to death, I eagerly await the published accounts to see the scale of any financial mismanagement I guess its all hard to prove and could be very costly too if you go down the legal route we all often refer to old school managers giving the hairdryer treatment to players, but when they start giving it to a young girl for daring to ask for a player to leave the dressing room to attend a man of the match presentation something is very wrong, how can the players respect someone who does that, and if they do why ?
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Jan 12, 2024 14:54:54 GMT 1
Exactly For me there's still a bit of 2 + 2 potentially = 5 here. For example, if somebody is a mass vile bully in the workplace, you have grounds to dismiss and end a contract. Yet we're also told we're still paying him. Things don't add up. That's just one example But I just don't know. Trying not to get too drawn in to old ground, this has been done to death, I eagerly await the published accounts to see the scale of any financial mismanagement I guess its all hard to prove and could be very costly too if you go down the legal route we all often refer to old school managers giving the hairdryer treatment to players, but when they start giving it to a young girl for daring to ask for a player to leave the dressing room to attend a man of the match presentation something is very wrong, how can the players respect someone who does that, and if they do why ? Well, that might be a good time to draw a line under this, safe in the knowledge that Matt Taylor would, I'm sure, never do such a thing.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Jan 12, 2024 15:01:20 GMT 1
Who is suggesting bringing him back? The conversation on here generally is Steve Cotterill was in the wrong but if the manager of our football club went rogue, there are also failings of the football club and the people he reports into it was aimed at the guy who this week stated he wished he was still here, and on this thread is slagging off what he calls 'apologists' ( I guess that was aimed my way too for trying to have an opinion on the topic ) seeing as the chairmans message keeps having excerpts posted on here, I'll have a go at that too Despite regular financial meetings and warnings that spending is greatly exceeding income and budgets, it continues unabated. This had to stop, we know that It didn't stop, we know that but then it was stopped rather abruptly, we know that happened at the end of the season when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug ? seems to me like he gave far more than a fair chance for whatever craziness was going on to stop and it never in hindsight, it was far worse than he ever imagined a lot of the spending wasnt even for what it claimed to be for, and the manager was publicly trying to make a fool of the chairman and buying fans in to his game and out of shot was the biggest bully ever known at the club, especially to the females at the club and young players so sorry if I keep apologising for the club having to get rid of him, I knew all along he was a wrong un, thats probably what annoys most If as you say “a lot of the spending wasn’t what it was claimed for” that will leave the club in a very tricky position in being able to get the annual accounts signed off. As it’s effectively false accounting This could well be why there has been radio silence from the club as such issues can take a long time to resolve. I know a charity locally that had a kind of similar issue and it three years to get the accounts in a position where the auditors to sign them off There is also the potential issue of having submitted false evidence to VAT and tax returns which will take some time to resolve The source of the issues may have gone but the longer term impact could well linger on for some time
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 15:13:56 GMT 1
it was aimed at the guy who this week stated he wished he was still here, and on this thread is slagging off what he calls 'apologists' ( I guess that was aimed my way too for trying to have an opinion on the topic ) seeing as the chairmans message keeps having excerpts posted on here, I'll have a go at that too Despite regular financial meetings and warnings that spending is greatly exceeding income and budgets, it continues unabated. This had to stop, we know that It didn't stop, we know that but then it was stopped rather abruptly, we know that happened at the end of the season when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug ? seems to me like he gave far more than a fair chance for whatever craziness was going on to stop and it never in hindsight, it was far worse than he ever imagined a lot of the spending wasnt even for what it claimed to be for, and the manager was publicly trying to make a fool of the chairman and buying fans in to his game and out of shot was the biggest bully ever known at the club, especially to the females at the club and young players so sorry if I keep apologising for the club having to get rid of him, I knew all along he was a wrong un, thats probably what annoys most If as you say “a lot of the spending wasn’t what it was claimed for” that will leave the club in a very tricky position in being able to get the annual accounts signed off. As it’s effectively false accounting This could well be why there has been radio silence from the club as such issues can take a long time to resolve. I know a charity locally that had a kind of similar issue and it three years to get the accounts in a position where the auditors to sign them off There is also the potential issue of having submitted false evidence to VAT and tax returns which will take some time to resolve The source of the issues may have gone but the longer term impact could well linger on for some time most of your posts are based upon inventing situations where the club could get done by the tax man cant you go and chase Jimmy Carr instead
|
|
|
Post by davycrockett on Jan 12, 2024 15:23:43 GMT 1
it was aimed at the guy who this week stated he wished he was still here, and on this thread is slagging off what he calls 'apologists' ( I guess that was aimed my way too for trying to have an opinion on the topic ) seeing as the chairmans message keeps having excerpts posted on here, I'll have a go at that too Despite regular financial meetings and warnings that spending is greatly exceeding income and budgets, it continues unabated. This had to stop, we know that It didn't stop, we know that but then it was stopped rather abruptly, we know that happened at the end of the season when do cotterill fans think the best time should have been for the chairman to pull the plug ? seems to me like he gave far more than a fair chance for whatever craziness was going on to stop and it never in hindsight, it was far worse than he ever imagined a lot of the spending wasnt even for what it claimed to be for, and the manager was publicly trying to make a fool of the chairman and buying fans in to his game and out of shot was the biggest bully ever known at the club, especially to the females at the club and young players so sorry if I keep apologising for the club having to get rid of him, I knew all along he was a wrong un, thats probably what annoys most If as you say “a lot of the spending wasn’t what it was claimed for” that will leave the club in a very tricky position in being able to get the annual accounts signed off. As it’s effectively false accounting This could well be why there has been radio silence from the club as such issues can take a long time to resolve. I know a charity locally that had a kind of similar issue and it three years to get the accounts in a position where the auditors to sign them off There is also the potential issue of having submitted false evidence to VAT and tax returns which will take some time to resolve The source of the issues may have gone but the longer term impact could well linger on for some time Not to mention Financial Fair Play controls. I’m sure Roland wasn't monitoring spending v turnover so if neither BC or SC we’re talking to each other and BC was basically on garden leave who knows what repercussions may be round the corner.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Jan 12, 2024 15:54:25 GMT 1
If as you say “a lot of the spending wasn’t what it was claimed for” that will leave the club in a very tricky position in being able to get the annual accounts signed off. As it’s effectively false accounting This could well be why there has been radio silence from the club as such issues can take a long time to resolve. I know a charity locally that had a kind of similar issue and it three years to get the accounts in a position where the auditors to sign them off There is also the potential issue of having submitted false evidence to VAT and tax returns which will take some time to resolve The source of the issues may have gone but the longer term impact could well linger on for some time most of your posts are based upon inventing situations where the club could get done by the tax man cant you go and chase Jimmy Carr instead I thought I was backing up your point that it was only when Wycherley became fully aware of Cotterills actions that the seriousness of the situation become apparent - hence him beating himself up about the situation. Its often the tax man that is the starting point in identifying financial irregularities. In order to claim the VAT back on the transactions the body making the claim has to evidence the invoicing they submit if genuine and from a business that themselves is VAT regstered. So if "a lot of spending wasn't what it was claimed for" has occurred the club eithre can't claim the VAT element back thus loosing out on upto 20% of the cost (which could explain some of the losses), or have unitentinally claimed VAT back on items that have been claimed for. Even unitentional making a false claim can lead to a fine by HMRC I've had a bit of experience of this through the voluntary sector where smaller organisations have made VAT claims which unitentionally have been wrongly claimed (such as claiming expenditure made by a third party) and run into trouble with the tax bodies, and once involved it takes a fair old time to resolve things even when mistakes have been genuine. The suggestion Cotterill was booking hotel accomodation would be another example of expenditure incurred which has a VAT element to it, which if not correctly invoiced and evidenced could see the club miss out on recovering the VAT element
|
|
|
Post by mrcricket on Jan 12, 2024 16:36:06 GMT 1
How does Financial Fair Play work when you have clubs like Man City, Chelsea and Wrexham as part of the 92 Clubs?
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 16:36:22 GMT 1
most of your posts are based upon inventing situations where the club could get done by the tax man cant you go and chase Jimmy Carr instead I thought I was backing up your point that it was only when Wycherley became fully aware of Cotterills actions that the seriousness of the situation become apparent - hence him beating himself up about the situation. Its often the tax man that is the starting point in identifying financial irregularities. In order to claim the VAT back on the transactions the body making the claim has to evidence the invoicing they submit if genuine and from a business that themselves is VAT regstered. So if "a lot of spending wasn't what it was claimed for" has occurred the club eithre can't claim the VAT element back thus loosing out on upto 20% of the cost (which could explain some of the losses), or have unitentinally claimed VAT back on items that have been claimed for. Even unitentional making a false claim can lead to a fine by HMRC I've had a bit of experience of this through the voluntary sector where smaller organisations have made VAT claims which unitentionally have been wrongly claimed (such as claiming expenditure made by a third party) and run into trouble with the tax bodies, and once involved it takes a fair old time to resolve things even when mistakes have been genuine. The suggestion Cotterill was booking hotel accomodation would be another example of expenditure incurred which has a VAT element to it, which if not correctly invoiced and evidenced could see the club miss out on recovering the VAT element soz, i was just having a bit of fun ;-) if I know our chairman he will have been very honest with any findings and played it by the book even if it cost more than it might have done trying to cover things up
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Jan 12, 2024 16:45:22 GMT 1
I believe you said yourself that RW is beating himself up about the whole episode, and I'd suggest part of that is due to him realising he could have prevented this escalating to the level that it seemingly has. We all know he prides himself on being an astute businessman, and regardless of who is ultimately to the blame, the position we find ourselves in could have been prevented (at least to an extent) with a bit more foresight and financial control from the top, if not initially, then certainly once the issues became apparent. I think this is it, isn’t it ? Whatever Cotterill and Cauldwell did or did not do ( and I take all the rumours with huge amounts of salt) then you could make a case that perhaps that was always going to be a possibility. That is not the issue under debate What is though, is that a professional businessman of some years standing did not have in place the most basic of checks and balances that would be required of any similar sized organisation. That is neglectful in the extreme. And it is repeat behaviour, he has previous in this regard time and again. The focus being placed on the two former employees is a smokescreen, and that is deliberate.
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on Jan 12, 2024 16:56:42 GMT 1
Off topic but on topic I guess, can I just say what a good read this threads been - I know some people say it has been going over old ground but it's fascinating to hear little insights here and there, especially when it's related to STFC.
Also as strange as it sounds it's a really interesting topic (Cotterill/Caldwell/RW) and I don't often get the chance to talk to anyone about it in real life!
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Jan 12, 2024 16:56:57 GMT 1
I believe you said yourself that RW is beating himself up about the whole episode, and I'd suggest part of that is due to him realising he could have prevented this escalating to the level that it seemingly has. We all know he prides himself on being an astute businessman, and regardless of who is ultimately to the blame, the position we find ourselves in could have been prevented (at least to an extent) with a bit more foresight and financial control from the top, if not initially, then certainly once the issues became apparent. I think this is it, isn’t it ? Whatever Cotterill and Cauldwell did or did not do ( and I take all the rumours with huge amounts of salt) then you could make a case that perhaps that was always going to be a possibility. That is not the issue under debate What is though, is that a professional businessman of some years standing did not have in place the most basic of checks and balances that would be required of any similar sized organisation. That is neglectful in the extreme. And it is repeat behaviour, he has previous in this regard time and again. The focus being placed on the two former employees is a smokescreen, and that is deliberate. I'm in zero doubt BC & SC have done us, in fact I know it; but I totally agree the watertight, safe pair of hands chairman has ultimately let down the supporters and neglected the safety of our club yet again and should take the full blame. I mean to be fair, he might have taken full blame internally and this is the "beating himself up" reference.
|
|
|
Post by martinshrew on Jan 12, 2024 16:57:42 GMT 1
Off topic but on topic I guess, can I just say what a good read this threads been - I know some people say it has been going over old ground but it's fascinating to hear little insights here and there, especially when it's related to STFC. Also as strange as it sounds it's a really interesting topic (Cotterill/Caldwell/RW) and I don't often get the chance to talk to anyone about it in real life! It's a well conducted debate without any personal malice, exactly how it should be.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 17:00:16 GMT 1
I believe you said yourself that RW is beating himself up about the whole episode, and I'd suggest part of that is due to him realising he could have prevented this escalating to the level that it seemingly has. We all know he prides himself on being an astute businessman, and regardless of who is ultimately to the blame, the position we find ourselves in could have been prevented (at least to an extent) with a bit more foresight and financial control from the top, if not initially, then certainly once the issues became apparent. I think this is it, isn’t it ? Whatever Cotterill and Cauldwell did or did not do ( and I take all the rumours with huge amounts of salt) then you could make a case that perhaps that was always going to be a possibility. I wondered why everything you say is so salty ;-) maybe the chairman wanted him out a lot earlier but thought to himself 'not now obviously'
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Jan 12, 2024 17:08:05 GMT 1
I thought I was backing up your point that it was only when Wycherley became fully aware of Cotterills actions that the seriousness of the situation become apparent - hence him beating himself up about the situation. Its often the tax man that is the starting point in identifying financial irregularities. In order to claim the VAT back on the transactions the body making the claim has to evidence the invoicing they submit if genuine and from a business that themselves is VAT regstered. So if "a lot of spending wasn't what it was claimed for" has occurred the club eithre can't claim the VAT element back thus loosing out on upto 20% of the cost (which could explain some of the losses), or have unitentinally claimed VAT back on items that have been claimed for. Even unitentional making a false claim can lead to a fine by HMRC I've had a bit of experience of this through the voluntary sector where smaller organisations have made VAT claims which unitentionally have been wrongly claimed (such as claiming expenditure made by a third party) and run into trouble with the tax bodies, and once involved it takes a fair old time to resolve things even when mistakes have been genuine. The suggestion Cotterill was booking hotel accomodation would be another example of expenditure incurred which has a VAT element to it, which if not correctly invoiced and evidenced could see the club miss out on recovering the VAT element soz, i was just having a bit of fun ;-) if I know our chairman he will have been very honest with any findings and played it by the book even if it cost more than it might have done trying to cover things up There’s nothing funny about Jimmy Carr 😛 I may also be adding 2 + 2 and making 5 but the new director Duncan Montgomery has specialised in tax advice for the last 20 years, and a new finance officer has also been appointed, which might suggest a need to address some tax/accountancy issues with more specialist staff than were previously at the club
|
|
|
Post by tarporleyblue on Jan 12, 2024 17:20:26 GMT 1
The potential ramifications re HMRC wrongdoings are very worrying, if true.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jan 12, 2024 17:41:01 GMT 1
Commenting purely on the football, it wasn’t a constant bed of roses but by god the job he did to keep us up in his first season (as Bob says whilst hospital-ridden with Covid) shows the commitment and obsession that’s a trademark of his personality. The football whilst you’d never call it free flowing was nowhere near as bad as made out. The way he galvanised the fans on their return from the Covid ban, and even in the bad times it felt like the players, fans and staff were all United and stronger together. If only all the other s**t hadn’t gone on, I’d have him back tomorrow. Such a sad state of affairs for all concerned. The manager is without doubt the most important appointment for us in that we need someone who can put together a team that is very much the sum of its parts. So with that said and keeping it to just the football, I did think of Cotterill as someone who could do that for us. Granted there is a lot more to this but in an ideal world I would have liked to have seen what he could have done from that 12th place finish. For a brief moment there I thought there was a chance of getting something together at this level, I mean have a sniff of the play offs type thing.
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Jan 12, 2024 17:44:28 GMT 1
The potential ramifications re HMRC wrongdoings are very worrying, if true. Even bills for some odd expenses might have an invoice from a VAT registered legitimate business? Say you had one from a beauty salon, would HMRC ask questions as to why our players needed a beauty salon? It's surely any wrongly attributed expense they might squint at? Hopefully our new director and Finance chap can polish up the accounts to the satisfaction of HMRC.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 12, 2024 20:27:10 GMT 1
The potential ramifications re HMRC wrongdoings are very worrying, if true. Even bills for some odd expenses might have an invoice from a VAT registered legitimate business? Say you had one from a beauty salon, would HMRC ask questions as to why our players needed a beauty salon? It's surely any wrongly attributed expense they might squint at? Hopefully our new director and Finance chap can polish up the accounts to the satisfaction of HMRC. in answer to your hypothetical question they probably wouldn't if say it was documented as treatment for George Nurse at the clinic he would have been been at , especially if it was for the same amount and we did pay tax on it (id say if any questions needed to be answered then those actually involved in it should be the ones answerable to it ) then again, it could just be a load of botox ;-)
|
|