Kendrick Says It's Time To Ask Questions

[Dribbler]

Toronto fair enough, but that was the point I was making earlier on, how about "We are not happy with where we are, we know the last 3 games hav'nt been good enough but we are working hard to get it right".
Do not expect them to slate the club, but just more corporate bull, lets see a bit of wake up and smell the coffee matter of fact.

There's nothing corporate about it. He's the captain of the football club answering questions on the official website. What did you expect him to say? And even if off the record he's a little concerned, there's no point as an athlete developing that frame of mind and letting it influence not only his own game but those who is leading.

This is exactly what I've been saying and Chris recently. No matter what an official employee of the club says, even if it is true and as close to "from the heart" as possible, some people are simply going to watch it through cynical eyes. For that reason I don't care what is said, I just care about the what I see. If the team is doing well, almost everything else is irrelevant.

Oh please come on, it's totally corporate, players of clubs, especially captains, have to toe the the managerial and corporate line. To think otherwise would be naive. The problem isn't when they say things that we know are true, it's when they try to, for want of a better phrase, polish and obvious turd and present it to us a gold.

Yes, the important thing is what we do on the pitch and getting it right on the pitch, and when that doesn't happen, and we are as abject as we have been so often over the last few seasons, we are at least entitled to expect that we'll get a little honesty from the club and it's representatives.

[TheEgo]

No more or less importance should be given to any reasonable post, whether called a report or not. It does not have to be a lengthy tome or look like part of a thesis, but needs to get the point across. Mr.Hodgson does not appear to have let his position in the Directors Box cause him to be silent on things he doesn't agree with and why not? This isn't Russia. However, I don't know in what form his disagreements were initially aired. If he was shouting things out in there that were derogatory to the Club, then it is only to be expected that it would be jumped on. Although you may pay well to go in those areas, there is always an element of decorum to be observed if you wish to remain in there. But, as I said, I don't know if he did 'misbehave' in that manner.

He categorically didn't. He was essentially told "be careful you don't overstay your welcome" because he tweeted that RL had only been to VP once in 2 years (which was also reported in the press and elsewhere) the whole situation was petty. There was no "misbehaving" in the directors area. Conversations were had over email. This guy (whatever you all think) paid a LOT of cash for the 'privilege' of sitting in the directors box. So to be told "don't outstay your welcome" to me smacks of bully boy tactics.

Aside from that. The article is spot on and shows what is evidentially wrong with our club. Even a win over a very poor Norwich side doesn't overshadow that.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe he pays to sit in the directors box - that's an additional perk. There are two sides to every story.

You are wrong. He paid a considerable sum for 2 director box tickets, I.e it costs more than other boxes. As well as being match day sponsor a few times and bringing guests to entertain at HIS cost.

Bottom line is people ridiculing him and saying he is up his own arse and self important is out of order and hugely ironic. Lambast the article, but not the man. He used the word report as a title for an 'article' given there was a previous "report"

[pauliewalnuts]

No more or less importance should be given to any reasonable post, whether called a report or not. It does not have to be a lengthy tome or look like part of a thesis, but needs to get the point across. Mr.Hodgson does not appear to have let his position in the Directors Box cause him to be silent on things he doesn't agree with and why not? This isn't Russia. However, I don't know in what form his disagreements were initially aired. If he was shouting things out in there that were derogatory to the Club, then it is only to be expected that it would be jumped on. Although you may pay well to go in those areas, there is always an element of decorum to be observed if you wish to remain in there. But, as I said, I don't know if he did 'misbehave' in that manner.

He categorically didn't. He was essentially told "be careful you don't overstay your welcome" because he tweeted that RL had only been to VP once in 2 years (which was also reported in the press and elsewhere) the whole situation was petty. There was no "misbehaving" in the directors area. Conversations were had over email. This guy (whatever you all think) paid a LOT of cash for the 'privilege' of sitting in the directors box. So to be told "don't outstay your welcome" to me smacks of bully boy tactics.

Aside from that. The article is spot on and shows what is evidentially wrong with our club. Even a win over a very poor Norwich side doesn't overshadow that.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe he pays to sit in the directors box - that's an additional perk. There are two sides to every story.

You are wrong. He paid a considerable sum for 2 director box tickets, I.e it costs more than other boxes. As well as being match day sponsor a few times and bringing guests to entertain at HIS cost.

Bottom line is people ridiculing him and saying he is up his own arse and self important is out of order and hugely ironic. Lambast the article, but not the man. He used the word report as a title for an 'article' given there was a previous "report"

You say HIS cost as if it should be anyone else's cost.

As for up his arse, "report"? Really? I think the word he meant was "opinion". When you call something a report you are implying it is factual, which it is not.

[dave.woodhall]

No more or less importance should be given to any reasonable post, whether called a report or not. It does not have to be a lengthy tome or look like part of a thesis, but needs to get the point across. Mr.Hodgson does not appear to have let his position in the Directors Box cause him to be silent on things he doesn't agree with and why not? This isn't Russia. However, I don't know in what form his disagreements were initially aired. If he was shouting things out in there that were derogatory to the Club, then it is only to be expected that it would be jumped on. Although you may pay well to go in those areas, there is always an element of decorum to be observed if you wish to remain in there. But, as I said, I don't know if he did 'misbehave' in that manner.

He categorically didn't. He was essentially told "be careful you don't overstay your welcome" because he tweeted that RL had only been to VP once in 2 years (which was also reported in the press and elsewhere) the whole situation was petty. There was no "misbehaving" in the directors area. Conversations were had over email. This guy (whatever you all think) paid a LOT of cash for the 'privilege' of sitting in the directors box. So to be told "don't outstay your welcome" to me smacks of bully boy tactics.

Aside from that. The article is spot on and shows what is evidentially wrong with our club. Even a win over a very poor Norwich side doesn't overshadow that.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe he pays to sit in the directors box - that's an additional perk. There are two sides to every story.

You are wrong. He paid a considerable sum for 2 director box tickets, I.e it costs more than other boxes. As well as being match day sponsor a few times and bringing guests to entertain at HIS cost.

Bottom line is people ridiculing him and saying he is up his own arse and self important is out of order and hugely ironic. Lambast the article, but not the man. He used the word report as a title for an 'article' given there was a previous "report"

That's fair enough, although as I said there are two sides to every story and the fact that this one hasn't been particularly picked up by the media might indicate that there's more to it than he has mentioned. For example, I've heard something a bit different but I wouldn't go claiming it as fact until it was corroborated any more than I would call a lengthy Facebook post a report.

[Clampy]

No more or less importance should be given to any reasonable post, whether called a report or not. It does not have to be a lengthy tome or look like part of a thesis, but needs to get the point across. Mr.Hodgson does not appear to have let his position in the Directors Box cause him to be silent on things he doesn't agree with and why not? This isn't Russia. However, I don't know in what form his disagreements were initially aired. If he was shouting things out in there that were derogatory to the Club, then it is only to be expected that it would be jumped on. Although you may pay well to go in those areas, there is always an element of decorum to be observed if you wish to remain in there. But, as I said, I don't know if he did 'misbehave' in that manner.

He categorically didn't. He was essentially told "be careful you don't overstay your welcome" because he tweeted that RL had only been to VP once in 2 years (which was also reported in the press and elsewhere) the whole situation was petty. There was no "misbehaving" in the directors area. Conversations were had over email. This guy (whatever you all think) paid a LOT of cash for the 'privilege' of sitting in the directors box. So to be told "don't outstay your welcome" to me smacks of bully boy tactics.

Aside from that. The article is spot on and shows what is evidentially wrong with our club. Even a win over a very poor Norwich side doesn't overshadow that.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe he pays to sit in the directors box - that's an additional perk. There are two sides to every story.

Lambast the article, but not the man. He used the word report as a title for an 'article' given there was a previous "report"

If people want to lambast the article, surely they can lambast the title as well? It's not a 'report', it's an opinion.

[Legion]

He's reporting his opinion via an article.

[saunders_heroes]

Report, article, blog - who gives a flying shite what it's called, it's the content that matters. Don't sweat over the small stuff, or so they say.

[john e]

Report, article, blog - who gives a flying shite what it's called, it's the content that matters. Don't sweat over the small stuff, or so they say.

just to confirm, is this a post or a status  ?

[Legion]

A comment?

[TheEgo]

No more or less importance should be given to any reasonable post, whether called a report or not. It does not have to be a lengthy tome or look like part of a thesis, but needs to get the point across. Mr.Hodgson does not appear to have let his position in the Directors Box cause him to be silent on things he doesn't agree with and why not? This isn't Russia. However, I don't know in what form his disagreements were initially aired. If he was shouting things out in there that were derogatory to the Club, then it is only to be expected that it would be jumped on. Although you may pay well to go in those areas, there is always an element of decorum to be observed if you wish to remain in there. But, as I said, I don't know if he did 'misbehave' in that manner.

He categorically didn't. He was essentially told "be careful you don't overstay your welcome" because he tweeted that RL had only been to VP once in 2 years (which was also reported in the press and elsewhere) the whole situation was petty. There was no "misbehaving" in the directors area. Conversations were had over email. This guy (whatever you all think) paid a LOT of cash for the 'privilege' of sitting in the directors box. So to be told "don't outstay your welcome" to me smacks of bully boy tactics.

Aside from that. The article is spot on and shows what is evidentially wrong with our club. Even a win over a very poor Norwich side doesn't overshadow that.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe he pays to sit in the directors box - that's an additional perk. There are two sides to every story.

You are wrong. He paid a considerable sum for 2 director box tickets, I.e it costs more than other boxes. As well as being match day sponsor a few times and bringing guests to entertain at HIS cost.

Bottom line is people ridiculing him and saying he is up his own arse and self important is out of order and hugely ironic. Lambast the article, but not the man. He used the word report as a title for an 'article' given there was a previous "report"

You say HIS cost as if it should be anyone else's cost.

As for up his arse, "report"? Really? I think the word he meant was "opinion". When you call something a report you are implying it is factual, which it is not.

I say HIS cost as it was considered a 'privilege' when I'm fact it isn't. He paid good money for it. Money that you or I could pay if we wanted or could afford to. It's not a privilege.

As I said, I THINK the word report was just a play on words due to the original "report" I'm sure, no in fact I know he's been stating it's his opinion.

My only issue is the attitude of some to him being up his own arse and the like. There's a fair few people on here/twitter other fan sites that could easily be labeled the same. Petty and pointless dig for the sake of it...

[Dave]

st as it was considered a 'privilege' when I'm fact it isn't. He paid good money for it. Money that you or I could pay if we wanted or could afford to. It's not a privilege.

I'd say it is.

If he was told that his money specifically gave him those rights, and as long as he kept sponsoring match balls and hiring the Holte Suite he was allowed to do and say as he wanted then fair enough. He has reason to feel aggrieved.

I'd guess though that it's a case of "I'm pumping a lot of money into the club, so I'm more valuable and should therefore be treated a bit better than somebody who doesn't", and that's fine as far as I'm concerned. It makes sense from a business perspective.

But unless that formal agreement is in place, then it's just a case of his money outweighing the minor inconvenience of somebody extra being in the director's box. It's now got to the point where his money doesn't outweigh the inconveniences of somebody extra being in the director's box AND a load of criticism that the board feel they probably don't need at the moment.

Him being there in the first place was a business decision and now him not being there anymore is also a business decision.

[saunders_heroes]

Report, article, blog - who gives a flying shite what it's called, it's the content that matters. Don't sweat over the small stuff, or so they say.

just to confirm, is this a post or a status  ?

It's my statement on the report.

[TheEgo]

No more or less importance should be given to any reasonable post, whether called a report or not. It does not have to be a lengthy tome or look like part of a thesis, but needs to get the point across. Mr.Hodgson does not appear to have let his position in the Directors Box cause him to be silent on things he doesn't agree with and why not? This isn't Russia. However, I don't know in what form his disagreements were initially aired. If he was shouting things out in there that were derogatory to the Club, then it is only to be expected that it would be jumped on. Although you may pay well to go in those areas, there is always an element of decorum to be observed if you wish to remain in there. But, as I said, I don't know if he did 'misbehave' in that manner.

He categorically didn't. He was essentially told "be careful you don't overstay your welcome" because he tweeted that RL had only been to VP once in 2 years (which was also reported in the press and elsewhere) the whole situation was petty. There was no "misbehaving" in the directors area. Conversations were had over email. This guy (whatever you all think) paid a LOT of cash for the 'privilege' of sitting in the directors box. So to be told "don't outstay your welcome" to me smacks of bully boy tactics.

Aside from that. The article is spot on and shows what is evidentially wrong with our club. Even a win over a very poor Norwich side doesn't overshadow that.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe he pays to sit in the directors box - that's an additional perk. There are two sides to every story.

You are wrong. He paid a considerable sum for 2 director box tickets, I.e it costs more than other boxes. As well as being match day sponsor a few times and bringing guests to entertain at HIS cost.

Bottom line is people ridiculing him and saying he is up his own arse and self important is out of order and hugely ironic. Lambast the article, but not the man. He used the word report as a title for an 'article' given there was a previous "report"

That's fair enough, although as I said there are two sides to every story and the fact that this one hasn't been particularly picked up by the media might indicate that there's more to it than he has mentioned. For example, I've heard something a bit different but I wouldn't go claiming it as fact until it was corroborated any more than I would call a lengthy Facebook post a report.

Fair enough. I'm not sure he posted it on Facebook? He wrote an article that got picked up by lots of places, sites etc! I know a little more than I'm willing to say, however as you say it's natural that there are two sides. The bigger picture for me is that most of what he says ('fall out' aside) is being said by many other fans I see tweet or post on twitter/message boards, not too mention those that attend VP too.

As an editor of a (rather excellent fanzine) could you not run an article yourself maybe gauging the temperature of the fan base (so to speak) you don't have to offer your own opinion, but gauge they of others? I liken it to an editor of a paper trying to gauge it's readership? Food for thought or a big no no?

Incidentally I have no agenda or affiliations, just your average fan.

[TheEgo]

st as it was considered a 'privilege' when I'm fact it isn't. He paid good money for it. Money that you or I could pay if we wanted or could afford to. It's not a privilege.

I'd say it is.

If he was told that his money specifically gave him those rights, and as long as he kept sponsoring match balls and hiring the Holte Suite he was allowed to do and say as he wanted then fair enough. He has reason to feel aggrieved.

I'd guess though that it's a case of "I'm pumping a lot of money into the club, so I'm more valuable and should therefore be treated a bit better than somebody who doesn't", and that's fine as far as I'm concerned. It makes sense from a business perspective.

But unless that formal agreement is in place, then it's just a case of his money outweighing the minor inconvenience of somebody extra being in the director's box. It's now got to the point where his money doesn't outweigh the inconveniences of somebody extra being in the director's box AND a load of criticism that the board feel they probably don't need at the moment.

Him being there in the first place was a business decision and now him not being there anymore is also a business decision.

Yep and not a privilege. It was business and he had a right as we all do as paying customers to speak his mind. Anyway I'm not here to debate the ins and outs, more defend the needless and crass digs and him personally. I know him and he's a good guy. Like all of us he cares a lot about his club. We all at least have that in common don't we?

[dave.woodhall]

Fair enough. I'm not sure he posted it on Facebook? He wrote an article that got picked up by lots of places, sites etc! I know a little more than I'm willing to say, however as you say it's natural that there are two sides. The bigger picture for me is that most of what he says ('fall out' aside) is being said by many other fans I see tweet or post on twitter/message boards, not too mention those that attend VP too.

As an editor of a (rather excellent fanzine) could you not run an article yourself maybe gauging the temperature of the fan base (so to speak) you don't have to offer your own opinion, but gauge they of others? I liken it to an editor of a paper trying to gauge it's readership? Food for thought or a big no no?

Incidentally I have no agenda or affiliations, just your average fan.

I thought it was on Facebook originally, but it was certainly picked up by other sites.

Every page of every edition of H&V (except for the editorial and the diary) is a chance for the fanbase to give their own temperature. That's what it's there for.