[Rodney's Moustache]

Tips M, on 28 April 2015 - 06:10 PM, said:

Probably so comrade, beer can do funny things, certainly has done for me in the past.

It's marvellous what alchohol and a few mates backing you up can do for someones bravery especially when the odds are stacked in their favour

[azul]

freelander2, on 28 April 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:

I think we can all agree that Paul Cook is in a very strong position here.

However, what I don't understand, despite the stories & other things you hear throughout a manager's reign, is why the muck spreading only starts when it's time for a manager to move on? How can a person go from being a great manager, etc, etc, to some s'head overnight just because he wants to better himself?

It's telling that a number of posts on here have not been pulled today.

It's taken the best part of 18 months for an incident to be discussed

You have a point

[Bonnyman]

Eastander, on 28 April 2015 - 05:50 PM, said:

I think you are right and the someone somewhere gave them that belief before the Alan Biggs TV show, when PC's name was put into the 'Shop Window' How better to cover something that was already in the pipeline, (something you knew would both infuriate and alienate supporters ( a la Doyle fiasco) when it hit the public fan)- than to casually mention your amazement that PC had not been head-hunted- after you've already got some arrangement for someone to make an official approach at an arranged time in the near future !. Then put on an act of innocence saying " Who 'd have thought someone would want PC- we're as shocked as the fans" ! Yeah -right. From the minute Phil T's post hit this Board - you could scent" something wicked this way comes..." and call me a cynic but my gut -feeling is that this has all been complicitly orchestrated from the very beginning,

I would not fancy playing cluedo against you.

[Town_Fan]

freelander2, on 28 April 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:

I think we can all agree that Paul Cook is in a very strong position here.

However, what I don't understand, despite the stories & other things you hear throughout a manager's reign, is why the muck spreading only starts when it's time for a manager to move on? How can a person go from being a great manager, etc, etc, to some s'head overnight just because he wants to better himself?

It's telling that a number of posts on here have not been pulled today.

Mike you are a business man can you give me some advice?

My shareholders are on my case a bit, the company for the most part has been on an upward trajectory with the usual hiccups along the way. Part of the success has been due to a woman I brought in and she has, to the outside world at least, done a great job. However away from that public persona I have serious doubts about her. I think there is a possibility she might do something silly and embarrass my company. She constantly whines about everything and relationships are becoming fractious. She also gets all her staff from one particular employment agency and I don't like the way they have a monopoly.

If I sacked her the shareholders would go mad, do you think it's best if I talk her up and hope she gets a position elsewhere. This way she will be gone, I can't be held responsible and I may even get a finders fee.

Any thoughts?

[Misnomer]

Tips M, on 28 April 2015 - 06:27 PM, said:

No WB it was just the potential inference that anyone who talks to him and makes him annoyed (so that he and his entourage want to punch them) is someone spouting know all tactics to him, when in fact it was a reasonable question asked respectfully. So I reference back to the drink.



Absolutely sir, If I may refer back to my original comment in this thread suggesting that some people are decent folk just bad drunks.

Have to agree. Sober, I am a conscientious and decent person; regrettably, after five pints or a couple of large Vespers, I begin to turn into a cantankerous moron. Thirty years down the line I have realised I can't go beyond a certain amount of alcohol. To this end, I have recognised I have a problem and so stopped drinking. There are certainly many things I wouldn't have done if I'd have been sober (violence, sex, pointless arguments). Like you sa, some people are bad drunks, and I'm one of them.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

Town_Fan, on 29 April 2015 - 09:59 AM, said:

Mike you are a business man can you give me some advice?

My shareholders are on my case a bit, the company for the most part has been on an upward trajectory with the usual hiccups along the way. Part of the success has been due to a woman I brought in and she has, to the outside world at least, done a great job. However away from that public persona I have serious doubts about her. I think there is a possibility she might do something silly and embarrass my company. She constantly whines about everything and relationships are becoming fractious. She also gets all her staff from one particular employment agency and I don't like the way they have a monopoly.

If I sacked her the shareholders would go mad, do you think it's best if I talk her up and hope she gets a position elsewhere. This way she will be gone, I can't be held responsible and I may even get a finders fee.

Any thoughts?

Apologies, but you sound like a weak leader!

I find it best to tackle issues as and when they arise, not ignore them to a point where the brown stuff could well and truly hit the fan, by doing so you avoid any embarrassing situations that could harm you, your business & the employee concerned. By choosing to do nothing, it looks like you tolerate such conduct.

It's about management, leadership and accountability, letting employees know what is expected of them.

I must say, I do find it odd that if you had these concerns why you chose to offer new, improved and extended terms to your employee quite recently, you're sending out mixed messages to all stakeholders.

Given how weak you are, once your high maintenance, successful and popular employee leaves your business, who are you going to attached yourself to next? It might be worth some consideration on your part before doing something which you personally might regret!

[Town_Fan]

freelander2, on 29 April 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

Apologies, but you sound like a weak leader!

I find it best to tackle issues as and when they arise, not ignore them to a point where the brown stuff could well and truly hit the fan, by doing so you avoid any embarrassing situations that could harm you, your business & the employee concerned. By choosing to do nothing, it looks like you tolerate such conduct.

It's about management, leadership and accountability, letting employees know what is expected of them.

I must say, I do find it odd that if you had these concerns why you chose to offer new, improved and extended terms to your employee quite recently, you're sending out mixed messages to all stakeholders.

Given how weak you are, once your high maintenance, successful and popular employee leaves your business, who are you going to attached yourself to next? It might be worth some consideration on your part before doing something which you personally might regret!

Duly noted.

[RikShaw]

freelander2, on 29 April 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

Apologies, but you sound like a weak leader!

I find it best to tackle issues as and when they arise, not ignore them to a point where the brown stuff could well and truly hit the fan, by doing so you avoid any embarrassing situations that could harm you, your business & the employee concerned. By choosing to do nothing, it looks like you tolerate such conduct.

It's about management, leadership and accountability, letting employees know what is expected of them.

I must say, I do find it odd that if you had these concerns why you chose to offer new, improved and extended terms to your employee quite recently, you're sending out mixed messages to all stakeholders.

Given how weak you are, once your high maintenance, successful and popular employee leaves your business, who are you going to attached yourself to next? It might be worth some consideration on your part before doing something which you personally might regret!

By extending the terms of your 'maverick' employee TF, I think is actually a smart move, especially if you decide to publicise her contract of employment and business success to suitable/interested parties. Should such an approach be made in the near future, would leave you in a strong position to negotiate an agreeable level of compensation, which would go some way to pacifying your shareholders.

[Tips M'Gee]

azul, on 28 April 2015 - 11:17 PM, said:

It's taken the best part of 18 months for an incident to be discussed

You have a point

18 Months indeed and wouldn't have mentioned it, just defending a friend for which I make absolutely no apologies.

Rodney, on 28 April 2015 - 11:03 PM, said:

It's marvellous what alchohol and a few mates backing you up can do for someones bravery especially when the odds are stacked in their favour

Indeed, fortunately I'm a daft drunk.

[moondog]

Maverick, on 29 April 2015 - 10:42 AM, said:

By extending the terms of your 'maverick' employee TF, I think is actually a smart move, especially if you decide to publicise her contract of employment and business success to suitable/interested parties. Should such an approach be made in the near future, would leave you in a strong position to negotiate an agreeable level of compensation, which would go some way to pacifying your shareholders.

but if she has a lot of friends remaining with the firm what do you do with them ?

[kh83]

I think the reaction from some people regarding all this ridiculous!

Paul Cook is a great manager doing great things with our Football Club so it is inevitable that his name is going to get linked with other jobs. When it does the best thing we can do is acknowledge it obviously but then ignore it as much as we can, forget all the nonsense and rumors and spouting off because all that is going to do is add to any distractions already caused.

Just let the man get on with his job.

[dazcarrlegend]

moondog, on 29 April 2015 - 11:21 AM, said:

but if she has a lot of friends remaining with the firm what do you do with them ?

My advice would be to do what your customers want, with egos to be put to one side. They give your business the revenue, so if the employee is popular with your customers, you keep them. However, this cannot be at any cost (see Jeremy Clarkson)

[dim view]

freelander2, on 28 April 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:

How can a person go from being a great manager, etc, etc, to some s'head overnight just because he wants to better himself?

Easy, from my perspective. He's applied for a job on the grounds that he can't take us any further just when he has given us our best chance ever of doing just that. That's a terrible lack of judgement by which he is tainted in my book. Some might even say he's become a s'head overnight.

[moondog]

kh83, on 29 April 2015 - 11:26 AM, said:

I think the reaction from some people regarding all this ridiculous!

Paul Cook is a great manager doing great things with our Football Club so it is inevitable that his name is going to get linked with other jobs. When it does the best thing we can do is acknowledge it obviously but then ignore it as much as we can, forget all the nonsense and rumors and spouting off because all that is going to do is add to any distractions already caused.

Just let the man get on with his job.

Better doing it now with over a week before the first big game.


If Turner explained why he wished to publicly talk Cook up whilst expressing surprise no one had come in for him, at such a crucial stage in our entire history, seen by many
as an invitation to come and get him given the buy out clause was revealed or if Cook stated he wasn't interested in the Portsmouth job maybe we could ignore it, but the silence is deafening

[boot]

moondog, on 29 April 2015 - 12:09 PM, said:

Better doing it now with over a week before the first big game.


If Turner explained why he wished to publicly talk Cook up and whilst expressing surprise no one had come in for him, at such a crucial stage in our entire history, seen by many
as an invitation to come and get him given the buy out clause was revealed or if Cook stated he wasn't interested in the Portsmouth job maybe we could ignore it, but the silence is deafening

I was told several weeks ago that Paul Cook was not happy by the lack of backing in the transfer market having brought in over £1.5 million in player sales - no it wasn't a friend of a friend of a friend. He employs an agent to look after him and it appears that things were not entirely to his liking at Chesterfield. The Portsmouth job becomes available and it's not difficult to imagine a scenario in which his agent has made an enquiry on Cook's behalf because that's his job. His agent knows everything there is to know about Cook's contract - he was instrumental in negotiating it and will have informed Portsmouth accordingly. How on earth anybody thinks Turner let some sort of secret out of the bag and Portsmouth picked up on it is beyond me. There are no secrets if an agent is involved. It's no secret that Cook has done amazing things here- how could it be ? It's no secret that he had a contract with a buy out clause and even if it was his agent is going to disclose those contract details to whoever he thinks fit.

[Spireite-Karl]

boot, on 29 April 2015 - 01:57 PM, said:

I was told several weeks ago that Paul Cook was not happy by the lack of backing in the transfer market having brought in over £1.5 million in player sales - no it wasn't a friend of a friend of a friend. He employs an agent to look after him and it appears that things were not entirely to his liking at Chesterfield. The Portsmouth job becomes available and it's not difficult to imagine a scenario in which his agent has made an enquiry on Cook's behalf because that's his job. His agent knows everything there is to know about Cook's contract - he was instrumental in negotiating it and will have informed Portsmouth accordingly. How on earth anybody thinks Turner let some sort of secret out of the bag and Portsmouth picked up on it is beyond me. There are no secrets if an agent is involved. It's no secret that Cook has done amazing things here- how could it be ? It's no secret that he had a contract with a buy out clause and even if it was his agent is going to disclose those contract details to whoever he thinks fit.

I've got to agree, the Doyle deal was different as we were definitely looking to sell and actively touted him through the entire transfer window to the point where it became embarrassing. I can't see how this applies to what Turner has said about Cook though and if anything this has come from PC's side of the fence not the clubs; though it simply just could be all Portsmouth's doing and nothing to do with either.

[Town_Fan]

If Cook made any contact to Pompey either directly (formally applying) or indirectly (using an agent) then I don't want him at the club any more. Simple as that.

[Goku]

These hoes ain't loyal

[dim view]

Town_Fan, on 29 April 2015 - 02:38 PM, said:

If Cook made any contact to Pompey either directly (formally applying) or indirectly (using an agent) then I don't want him at the club any more. Simple as that.

This is wor I think.....
With PC's knowledge, the agent contacted Portsmouth, where he already has connections, and registered an interest. He asked them to keep the interest confidential until after the playoffs and was gobsmacked when the Pompey chair dismissed the request, as he had to do if PC is first choice.
AS CT said to that lass at the Post, 'agents run the game'.

[Town_Fan]

Goku, on 29 April 2015 - 02:48 PM, said:

These hoes ain't loyal