New Supporters Committee

True. But the mortgage analogy doesn’t really hold. It’s just a ridiculous deflection to compare someone getting mortgage with a football club running up astronomical debt due to continual poor decision making. The fact that they have mortgaged the stadium is a logical link to make when he makes such a stupid statement.

It’s a Jon G type nonsense statement - yes we have debt. Don’t you use debt when you buy YOUR house?

 

The concept of a supporters committee is a poor one, be it the idea of the club or a directive from any of the governing bodies running the game/leagues in this country.

With social media in all of its forms meaning supporters wanting information as it happens, no one club & supporter joint venture will ever satisfy the majority because as soon as a meeting is over, it's out of date. Answers will always bring more questions.

The only real way I can think of where supporters voices are heard and are able to have a direct influence would be a compulsory seat on the board of every club. Never gonna happen though.

Either that or have a very open policy where pretty much all news & happenings at the club are made public via the club site and its forever expanding social media presence. I mean, what is there to hide?

For me, this committee was not so much who was invited, and after a few days thought I can see why those who were present were chosen, but the news that information was to be kept secret from everyone outside of the room bar a few headlines. That for me was the divisive spoke in this very wonky wheel.

As I say, thinking about who was chosen for the first meeting kind of makes sense. Although what may have been a better idea was to make it open for individuals or supporter bodies to submit requests to be there rather than the majority of supporters only hearing about it after the event. That just made it feel like a very inclusive club within a club.

Remember though, it wasn't just social media types, vloggers, bloggers, cloggers and Canadian loggers. It also included supporter groups of various types and differing locations who the club had welcomed officially over the past few seasons. The social media types, as much as I've no interest in their output, also makes sense due to their followers making any involvement with them (potentially) good online traffic for the club. Keep the hashtags busy and it keeps the club in the public eye.

We also don't know if anyone did turn their place at the table down, either from the outset or once the need for secrecy was made.

But as I say, the idea of keeping what is said within meetings secret from the supporters those present are supposed to represent is just ridiculous. I get commercial sensitivities and possible problems with individuals either in the clubs past, present or future but the general running, future planning and past mistakes should be open to debate for everyone.

Again, secrecy breeds suspicion which fuels rumour which allows discontent and anger to become rife.

One final thought concerning who was chosen for the initial meeting.
Quite a few people here have asked why the forum wasn't asked to be present. I'd suggest it isn't because of what is written and the oft scathing views of the people running the club. I would think, and it's only a guess, that it has more to do with the nature of forums across the internet, ie. they largely consist of anonymous posters. Next to zero real names or photo identification used. If I were running a business and wanted(!?!) to meet my stakeholders, I think I'd look at those using their real names first of all.

But most of all the club have ****ed up royally with the way it wants to suppress what is said and have taken very little responsibility for those in the firing line after news of this debacle became public.

 

Certainly agree with most, if not all, of that.

As for the 'why wasn't the forum invited?' part....what you have said does make sense. But this forum has an owner and I'm sure that person's name is known (although I don't know for certain) as it must be a contractually somewhere? I don't see how it would have been too hard to invite the owner of WFC Forums and he/she/they could canvas the members for questions.

But I'm glad they didn't. Because again, that leaves people who aren't members of any of these groups, channels or forums on the outside looking in. It had to be made available to all in my opinion.

 

I'm pleased you posted this Moose. You are onto what worries me most, the things that affect the club's existence and it's future, like loans with the ground as security. Decisions about the playing side & recruitment have been baffling but this is where a good, old fans forum where everyone can have a moan & groan would fit the bill. No, it's the financial and off the pitch matters that really concern me. This is where I would like to see some proper investigative journalism and/or genuine supporters' groups unafraid to front up to the secrecy and smoke & mirrors that we are getting at the moment. This forum appears to have posters who could lead an open and constructive group. If it happens, they have my full support.

 

Why doesn't someone go the media about this or am l am totally naive.
The whole thing simply reeks.
Secrecy and suppression. Whatever next? Banning orders for fans who dare criticise the club or worse, forced to watch the team?
It appears that Duxbury is as slippery as an eel and cannot be trusted. His breakdown of the financial issues make him look like he couldn't run a bath.
Just when l thought the Watford FC couldn't get anymore embarrassing, the pops up.
Christ! We are in a right mess on and off the pitch.
What a f**king joke we are...

 

I'm just waiting for the announcement which says detailed information from the committee meetings, though not the full minutes, will be available but only behind a paywall.

Relegation, Covid and mismanagement doesn't pay for itself you know.

 

But we HAVE taken out huge loans secured against the stadium. That's a fact. Duxbury's fake PR is comparing a loan secured against the stadium to a domestic mortgage. As I already said, taking out a mortgage to buy an asset is the exact opposite of taking out a loan secured against a property u already own and would lose if you can't pay back the loan. Duxbury is trying to deceive the fans with this bull$h1t analogy. Our stadium would be taken away from us if we cant repay the huge loan secured against it. Pozzbury have mortgaged the clubs entire future. Duxbury also said debt is part of football, thats true but so are misogyny, racism and homophobia. Just because something is part of football doesnt mean its a good idea. In fact the PL, FL and UEFA are all trying to reduce clubs' debt levels. WFC's debt poses an existential threat to the football club. The debt is huge compared to the income of the club outside the PL and is only even theoretically manageable outside the PL due to Gino's wheeler dealing.

 

I have had a polite conversation with someone who is involved with one of the parties that attended and asked them what I believe to be pertinent questions that I feel would have been covered in the meeting but redacted.

I’ve asked them to put some meat on the bones and they have committed to doing that for me - they weren’t there but obviously their group were so they’re privy to the full minutes under the parameters given by the club.

I’ll share what I’m told.

 

A football club has had a rubbish season, is about to be relegated, has debts, and the CEO is slippery... gosh I've never seen that before!

What laws have been broken?

What do you want the media to do exactly?

 

The whole thing seems like a total waste of time.
Those invited or selected sound like the French from Vichy during WWII.
Looks as if we are heading into the Abyss. No one enjoys hearing criticism, but Watford FC are in such a mess that the fans, all fans not just 14 hand picked pleasure seekers. Many want some answers to the chaos that surrounds the club.
Totally clueless exercise.

 

Gino has lost our club money with his wheeler dealing so that won’t help (unless the current squad are worth £180m).

 

I agree. Although shows like Panorama (I’m not expecting this to happen obviously) will focus on goings on if they are alerted to shady dealings.

I’d love to see what a truly well-skilled investigative journalist could find about Bayat, the accounts. Could be nothing…could be something. Relegation, poor form, unhappy fans wouldn’t even come into it.

CEO has previous (Tevez saga), owners have previous (alleged match-fixing, fraud) and Bayat has previous and current….

What laws have been broken? Who knows. Maybe none. Maybe lots.

What would we want the media to do? Shine a light on it.

 

Do we still own Success and Peñeranda? They must be worth around £100m each by now given that when we signed them they were '2 of the best young players in world football'. Now they've had time to develop and mature under the Pozzo model they must both be worth 9 figures, surely!

 

You joke but Isaac Success has done as much in an Udinese shirt this season as Joao Pedro or Josh King have in Watford shirts.

 

Nantes have protested in various ways at Mogi Bayat's involvement in the club and their ownership, from banners inside the ground, to protests outside and my personal favourite, pulling up outside the training ground and blaring out clown music to represent the circus they'd become.

Still protesting even now they're having a good season, sitting 9th in the table and having just reached the cup final, although understandably not with quite the same vigour.

 

The atmosphere on Saturday is going to be so toxic. I can't wait.

 

The Bayat thing is indefensible. Granted the wheels of justice turn very slowly on the continent and there's always the 'innocent until proven guilty' mantra but it is a terrible look for us to put a person charged with these serious offences at the heart of our transfer strategy. This needs to be the first direct question at the next meeting and it shouldn't be moved on from until Duxbury/whatever patsy he sends provides a full answer as to why his claws are so deep into our club.

 

I'm almost sad to be boycotting it.

 

WD18 are doing a Live Committee Summary and Q&A at 8pm.

I don’t trust Ucko given his comments around not asking questions for people if they don’t share his view - but still might hold something of interest for some.

 

I’ve said it before…

owners - away from SEJ I can’t think of any owner in my lifetime I liked. Definitely not Bassini, Petchey, Timperley. What has disappointed me is I really thought that the Pozzos represented our bright future and, in the early days, I defended them massively. I now realise I was wrong

managers - post Bassett I’ve warmed to almost each manager. Many times they eventually ran their course but I have fond memories of most. Since the Pozzo revolving door I’ve no interest in any of them

players - never have I seen so many players, over the course of so many seasons, who have so much promise but consistently dont deliver. With rose tinted glasses on I do harp back to the average players who gave it their all.

Sprinkle the above with awful home form, the fact that it could have been oh so different with sensible decisions at the top, pending relegation, huge debt, a fan base where there is a “I am far better than you” attitude and, quite frankly, extreme apathy and you have a number of us who really don’t care anymore and are finding other ways to entertain us on Saturday afternoons. And I find that very sad

 

Possibly, but I would guess it will have very little at all to do with this issue, and much more to do with inadequacies on the pitch.

 

I had to switch after about 5 minutes. Too much “he accepts mistakes have been made” and thinking you can hold the club to account!

 

So - in Ucko’s Q&A he gave zero added info of note.

The Luther Blissett situation is being dealt with confidentially between him and the club…with a positive outcome hopeful.

No one asked any questions about the finances it seems - and Ucko (I respect his honesty even if frustrating) that he’s not a numbers person and really isn’t best placed to ask or comment on it. Guess we might have to get that from FTRE.

And rather crazily - no one asked about the clubs level of dealing with Mogi Bayat.

And people wonder why many fans don’t feel like these parties could possibly represent us!

 

13 pages of people writing essays to each other about an utterly irrelevant topic.

Never change you bunch of absolute cranks.

 

I think it was all a bit unscripted and that's why it was the way it was. Watched it as well and honestly feel sorry for him . . He's been well and truly stitched up by the club.

Somehow as fans we need to come together to get down the questions that the majority want to know. It can't be left to a certain individual just attending a meeting and thinking of something off the cuff. This will also be the litmus test of those on the committee, if they don't ask the questions they don't feel comfortable with then there really is no point of them being there to represent fans

 

Also that Uncle Ron/Rupert guy is relentless. Whether these people are worthy of being on the committee or not, that guy is just hounding them for no real gain.

 

Agreed. The standard response seems to be ‘Wolves deal exclusively with Mendes.’

 

Will add - the person is not Sam Ucko.

 

Everybody should just be nice…but in the real world that doesn’t happen. Me personally, if I suffered from mental health issues, I wouldn’t put myself in a position where the great unwashed have the opportunity to have a pop at me that may affect my health in a negative way

 

I've given this a lot of thought, but I my answer will probably disappoint. I'm on the fence.

I couldn't define myself as either COG or BW. (Similarly, I can't find a political party to call home - though I'm a furious BW on the Tories.)

There have been decisions from the club that haven't gone well, in my view. (As with most, if not all, clubs.) There have been things said by fans that, in my view, are rash. (As with most, if not all, sets of fans.)

So I don't feel on one side of the argument or the other.

(I also don't know much about topics like Mogi Bayat, or the ins and outs of the club's financing - as others seem to do. Ignorance, perhaps, is bliss.)

Also, I don't feel I have a 'position' on the owners/Chairman, other than a desire for them to do well for the club, and for fans to be happy.

Personally, what I want from supporting Watford is to be happy. I was happy before. (Especially when the club bought me beer - as per a previous post.) I'm less happy now. (With some of the club's decisions, but also with the way football ownership has moved towards billionaires and nation states - as per a previous post.)

I want happiness for other people too. (Even if some don't seem to want it themselves!) Hence my post asking for ideas for people bringing about the change they want.

Sorry if this sounds like equivocating, but I don't feel I'm on either side of the divide that's the premise for your question. I do know I hate seeing Watford fans being spiteful to each other.

Happy to discuss further, if you want. (Tried to see if I could reply to you as a conversation thing on this forum, but failed.)

 

Wolves dealing with Mendes is both totally distinguishable from us and Bayat and also not a good idea either. They use Mendes to only sign his clients (unlike us seemingly using Mogi as an intermediary on every deal) and do not pay over the odds in agent fees. Mendes also has clients who, you know, are actually good at football. But it’s still not good to be linked to just one agent. Mendes agitated for a number of his players to leave and some of the incomings were pretty odd. It’s generally served them well on the whole and gave them access to top players when they were in the Championship but I think being beholden to one agent (even if, as appears to be the case with Mogi for now, a lot of his deals - Louza, Dennis, Kamara - appear to have gone fairly well) is an awful idea and I don’t think the Wolves example is a shining light to be emulated.

For what it’s worth I thought Ucko was much more self-aware and reasonable in his tone and discussion about the situation than Leventhal and FTRE and while it wasn’t that helpful substantively I appreciated that he took the time to go through the club’s ‘minutes’ and add some details and address the questions.

 

Nothing. Just make it available to all. Just expose the club.
Then again, who really cares?
As someone else has mentioned on here. The fans will wilt and cave in to the club.

 

#1 club. #1 fans.