[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

My understanding is that there is a £10 raffle for a chance to make the squad. However 5 of the spots on the supporter’s team and 1 on the legends team can be bought for £1000 and £2500,respectively. If no-one goes for the guaranteed spots, they will go to those who went for the raffle. Either way, there should be several spots available to those participating in the raffle, even if the 6 guaranteed spots are taken up. If I am understanding correctly.

If that is the case then it all seems fair enough and no-one is really being excluded.

[Apollo11]

I do agree with Fans 64, though. There could have been a general supporter raffle for a place on the team.

[Apollo11]

I don’t think it’s ‘just plain wrong’. If there is the money there to be made from the people ‘who can afford it’ then make it / take it.

To expect the club to give places on this team away for free (when they could make much-needed cash) seems a bit entitled to me.

2 users thanked author for this post.

iron64, lesgeo

[Apollo11]

lesgeo wrote:

Now all we need is for these attitudes to be set in stone for all future generations.

I feel fairly confident that Michelle and this Board will succeed in their aim of bringing the club into the black and making it sustainable. I’m also confident that she will put things in place to make sure that we’re protected for the future. I don’t know how those things will look, but the CIC owning the ground might be an indicator.

[Apollo11]

64 wrote:

I’m shocked by the straight and frank way they describe how they just worked through stuff in a workmanlike manor .there’s a lot of guff in football from fans about passion ,when they mean overt chest beating, but these people have it and a huge work ethic combined .I hope there’s no more surprises and they succeed.

I actually felt quite emotional listening to the podcast. In particular this was down to Michelle’s dedication and her utter lack of pretentiousness.

She is also the first Chair of the club that I can ever recall describing it as belonging to the town and its people more than it belongs to (her as) an individual – and meaning it.

We should all be humbled that we have such a person at the helm.

4 users thanked author for this post.

York Iron, lesgeo, Ferrite, Just Iron

[Apollo11]

Ferrite wrote:

And Henderson & Juryeff.

Like bringing a cotton bud to a sword fight.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Ferrite

[Apollo11]

Ferrite wrote:

Siderite wrote:

Legend gets bounded about a lot, but Hayes will always be an Iron great to me. Some of the ‘lazy Hayesy’ stuff was ridiculous.

Completely agree. Touch, vision, power, skill, a wonderful player. That goal on his third debut at Mansfield will stay with me forever, just like those goals at Chelsea, at home to Grimsby and on his debut v. Hull.

He scored some great goals, but it was his intelligence with passing and touch that has always stayed with me. A cut above.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Just Iron, Iron-awe, lesgeo, Siderite, Ferrite

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

Legend gets bounded about a lot, but Hayes will always be an Iron great to me. Some of the ‘lazy Hayesy’ stuff was ridiculous.

He had a great touch and could be really clever with a pass. I see a little bit of him in Whitehall, to be honest, as daft as that might sound.

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

I am not astounded he’d be fast and loose with the truth, but I am surprised that he thought he could fool people with something so obviously dubious. At the end he was saying how “Hilton was mostly good.” All while he was supposedly spearheading a dossier documenting Hilton’s problems.

Don’t forget that he’s also making out that he is a fair figure who came to bat for the Matts after their banning orders. While omitting that he made caveats in that defence about how they were in talks with the Swanns, which always was an attempt to discredit them and Bru. Hardly the fair figure he is now trying to portray himself as.

Seems to have been one of those people who thinks he’s the smartest in the room, but has been found out on multiple occasions?

[Apollo11]

One thing that this particular thread has smoked out is Me-Boy’s willingness to mislead or to try and manoeuvre his way out of any accountability.

His defensive claim (on Twitter) that he assisted with the dossier which contributed to Hilton’s downfall has rightly been called out by those who actually were involved in it.

That lie, rather than anything else, is the key issue now – because it’s an absolute whopper.

[Apollo11]

He seems to conflate negative things said about him with abuse.

That’s because he’s an angry middle-aged man endorsed by a supposedly impartial podcast.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Bishops Finger

[Apollo11]

64 wrote:

Notice he’s not said which comments his objects to,

I expect he just objects to being objected to.

[Apollo11]

“Angry, anonymous middle-aged men (endorsed by a supposedly impartial podcast and forum)”

1 user thanked author for this post.

Bishops Finger

[Apollo11]

CMC wrote:

For those asking about Dean’s contract… again… from the Pboro local paper, his intial contract says it ran till June i make it.

https://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/sport/football/emotional-farewell-to-peterborough-sports-from-jimmy-dean-as-he-discusses-the-privilege-of-managing-scunthorpe-united-4008000

So from what i can gather he was given a new one. wonder who authorised that…

It’s early May.

[Apollo11]

cassidystash wrote:

He’s a ‘politician’ – what do you expect.

Better.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Ferrite, Deereyme66

[Apollo11]

I’m not saying he’s right or wrong about anything. The manner of his expression is what is offensive. Absolutely charmless self-congratulatory loon-eyed rot pot.

[Apollo11]

1 user thanked author for this post.

inspector

[Apollo11]

By something happening I was indicating to a disagreement over budget rather something untoward.

But do you mean potential playing budget, or the budget which involves management wages?

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

Iron-awe wrote:

Cliff Byrne’s Right Peg wrote:

Looks like the contract wasn’t expired after all according to the latest podcast. If so we are potentially paying off another management team unless a clause was inserted within the deal.

WG assured us it was so it must have been true.

Do the Iron Hour people have any knowledge or is this WG style guesswork?

Jimmy signed an 18 month contract and no extension has ever been announced.

If it was an 18-month contract then maybe there was some negotiating to do over pay (etc) for a couple of months outstanding (if there were a couple of contracted months outstanding at the time of leaving, that is).

1 user thanked author for this post.

Siderite

[Apollo11]

Cliff Byrne’s Right Peg wrote:

Not sure, something has certainly happened during the last few days. If he was going I’d imagine it would have been announced on Monday. This seems to have come out of the blue.

The game was Saturday, Sunday was a rest day for all concerned.

Perhaps not all of the Board was available for a meeting immediately on Monday, so it was held over ’til Tuesday (or whenever). If you’re running a Board that is seriously co-operative then you wouldn’t just ‘fire’ someone from the important position of team manager and announce it like flicking a switch. You would discuss the whole situation and make your suggestions for a new scenario without that person (and with someone else). You would want to discuss and negotiate with the person who is leaving etc etc etc (particularly if, as seems to be the case, it was a contract not being renewed rather than a sacking). I don’t think announcing it a mere few days after the game indicates ‘something happening’ this week that is untoward. It seems to me to indicate Michelle and co have handled it calmly, decisively and relatively quickly. Professionally, in other words.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Just Iron, Deereyme66, Siderite

[Apollo11]

64 wrote:

I would say if this is correct then the club must be confident of finances as he won’t be the cheap option and will be expecting a few decent signing at least.I hope he is coming and succeeds, I did like him as a player

I don’t think it can be correct, surely? The club, under Michelle’s stewardship, seems to be trying to be truly realistic about the finances. In other words it’s cutting coat according to cloth, or that is the ultimate aim. I don’t see the Board risking what would be an expensive punt. Far more likely to promote Andy Butler (or bring in Brian Laws) than anything else, I think.

[Apollo11]

Ferrite wrote:

I am amazed how much he seems to have bonded with the fans, given how completely uninspiring he was.

This had a lot to do with the whole club situation itself. He was here when it was about to go pop, and he was still standing when it didn’t.

[Apollo11]

cassidystash wrote:

We’ve also the possibility of cash from the sale of shares which seems to be taking a bit of sorting. 1,000 supporters each buying £100 of shares would be a welcome addition.

I’ve thought about this quite a bit as I myself have expressed an interest to Michelle for buying shares, but am yet to receive a reply. I imagine this lack of reply to actually mean that she’s compiling a list of interested parties and will be in touch with each person once the club’s debts are cleared (which she has said she wants to do prior to next season starting). A share issue at that point could be a nice little influx of cash for a debt-free club – but, if shares are issued right now and money taken, the money would probably have to disappear into the debt-pot.

[Apollo11]

premier iron wrote:

I think Butterfield did not play as well as he could because he had little respect for the manager

But what about respect for himself?

[Apollo11]

To me, Whitehall looked better when we had a little spell late in the season of playing more direct football. He has a really great touch and is pretty smart with it.

Butterfield seemed to become less effective as the season wore on.

[Apollo11]

Edit for accidentally repeated post

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

And him giving Swanny £150.000 in the first place would put pressure on Swanny to sell Sharp the club and ground Apollo.
I’m happy what I’ve seen and read to form my opinion.

We don’t actually know what the agreement between Sharp and the club (Swann) was regarding the money. Let’s take it at face value that it was a loan essentially put in as goodwill to secure the sale – which did not then happen.

But in a round about way it now has and Sharp is on the board and, we can presume, he is not asking for his money back urgently (if at all).

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

By we are high and mighty there Snot, the accounts haven’t been published yet and yet you know, seriously what’s up with ya you really are a Walter Mitty character.

This seems a bit unnecessary to me.

In any case, the abridged version of the accounts up to June 2023 has been published (on 28th March 2024). Doesn’t that cover the period which includes the loan from Sharp?

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

To right Apollo11, at that moment in time Hilton had walked away from the club, the club itself in dire straights and a supposedly fan wanting to be included as a creditor is beyond me! And no reason to think he wont still will want it back if he walks away from the board.
The not so Sharp bit comes from him handing over £150.000 to Swanny in the first place when not many posters on here trusted him, far from it some weren’t going to to any more games so Swanny wouldn’t get another penny from them.

Don’t you think that asking for it back was perhaps just a way to put even more pressure on Hilton to clear off?

Edited to add: I’m not saying this is correct, I’m saying it’s possible.

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

Yes, he didn’t like him wanting the loan repaid.

That was a complex issue, lots of nuance which got lost in the noise.

[Author]

Posts