Printable View
oh please, evey twatting fan can mouth off but she can't? you living in la la land if you think anyone would be able to give money to the club directly for use in transfers, it's not just a bacs transfer to wengers account is itQuote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser
i havent seen kroenke dipping his hand in his pocket either
The average fan isn't/wasn't in a position to make changes on the board and didn't once own fuckloads of shares, which she sold for a massive profit in spite of her 'love' for the club (much like Dein too actually). I wasn't being entirely serious about donating to the transfer budget but it's just an example of mouthing off but doing nothing to help the club. Of course, Kroenke isn't going to use his own cash, because he is promoting the 'self-sustaining business model', which means the shareholders put nothing into the club. But at least he isn't mouthing off, but then, neither did Lady Nina when she was on the board.
she wasnt in a position to make changes, she held 15% which didnt intitle her to enforce any change. we have no idea of the conversations or suggestions that were made whilst there.
she hasn't done anything bar put her opinion out into the public domain and by the looks of her backtracking she has learnt her lesson about the exposure twitter gives. her words were absolutely meaningless in the larger context and lets face it, she couldve really exposed some real shit once she was sacked
I have no problem with her putting her opinion into the public domain. However, her about face is not as meaningless as you suggest. The initial comment suggested that Dein was the problem, then she tried make him out to be a positive influence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz
well he was a positive influence for many years, that doesnt mean to say he also didnt cause problems internally.
I know what you are saying but here are two quotes attributed to her: they say two very different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz
he [Dein] was "the root cause of all the troubles at AFC".
"I stand corrected, Dein loves the club and although sometimes personalities fall out his contribution at Arsenal has been immense."
If she can "stand to be corrected" over her initial comment regarding Dein, will she stand to be corrected over this comment regarding the current board?
"They are passe. Have nothing more to give to the club at all."
Or will people accept the Dein change because it fits their view of him, and will not accept a change to the comments regarding the board, as it coincides with the prevailing view?
Just to follow up on the Dein being the root of all the problems: Could it be that he set Wenger up to be the all powerful person within the club that he appears to be? Was Dein responsible for establishing this apparent "dictatorship"?
Yes. Yes indeed. :good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser
i think it's more a case of Wenger becoming accustomed to assuming that extra 'power' once Dein left, as the board were slow to find a replacement. they may have now got in a CEO that concentrates in other areas (ie pushing the 'brand') rather fully duplicating the duties Dein once held.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toronto Gooner
i personally think the view on dein is split down the middle, the people that think he is a arsehole that tried to sell us out are equal to those that think he is the missing apostle from the bible.
given her insight into the internal happenings at the club, readers of twitter will more than likely take her on her word about dein. i'm not sure if her change of opinion was based on anyone challenging it online.
Errr, didn't hill wood do exactly the same thing? Cock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan B'stard