Steve Borley...

[Jimmy the Jock]

Maybe as a director he knew the true position of the club...

Maybe. Although if he did, then it's curious that the Chairman and CEO didn't...

Really? There are plenty of examples of one director knowing about the workings of a company that the chairman or CEO weren't privy to. Being a civil servant I wouldn't expect you to be too familiar with corporate governance other than what you have read in a book. Perhaps you are outside of your comfort zone here but don't really appreciate it. It certainly appears that way.

Is there really any need to adopt such an attitude, Feedback? You are an intelligent person and you do not need to resort to schoolboy insults. Why not just argue your point reasonably if you think you have a good case. People don't seem to realise that insulting other posters does not necessarily strengthen their own case.

Yeah, but, he's right about civil servants though.

Is there really any need to adopt such an attitude, Otis? You are an intelligent person and you do not need to resort to schoolboy insults. Why not just argue your point reasonably if you think you have a good case. People don't seem to realise that insulting other posters does not necessarily strengthen their own case.

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

You make some valid points, however one you have missed is that really, it's no one's business other than the shareholders.

Really? There are plenty of examples of one director knowing about the workings of a company that the chairman or CEO weren't privy to. Being a civil servant I wouldn't expect you to be too familiar with corporate governance other than what you have read in a book. Perhaps you are outside of your comfort zone here but don't really appreciate it. It certainly appears that way.

Yup, that must be it. TG and Whiteley were out of the loop. Borley knew best. And got weighed in, remarkably enough.

Corporate governance? What has that got to do with Cardiff City Football Club?

It's like shelling peas

Depends if you like peas

[Elysium]

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

[The Penguin]

Really? There are plenty of examples of one director knowing about the workings of a company that the chairman or CEO weren't privy to. Being a civil servant I wouldn't expect you to be too familiar with corporate governance other than what you have read in a book. Perhaps you are outside of your comfort zone here but don't really appreciate it. It certainly appears that way.

Yup, that must be it. TG and Whiteley were out of the loop. Borley knew best. And got weighed in, remarkably enough.

So ummm yeah, it's quite relevant actually but im happy to help.

It's like shelling peas

Indeed. But not like corporate governance.

Quite, and they are two subjects you have limited knowledge of.

Maybe as a director he knew the true position of the club...

Maybe. Although if he did, then it's curious that the Chairman and CEO didn't...

Really? There are plenty of examples of one director knowing about the workings of a company that the chairman or CEO weren't privy to. Being a civil servant I wouldn't expect you to be too familiar with corporate governance other than what you have read in a book. Perhaps you are outside of your comfort zone here but don't really appreciate it. It certainly appears that way.

Is there really any need to adopt such an attitude, Feedback? You are an intelligent person and you do not need to resort to schoolboy insults. Why not just argue your point reasonably if you think you have a good case. People don't seem to realise that insulting other posters does not necessarily strengthen their own case.

I accept your criticism.

[The Penguin]

Maybe as a director he knew the true position of the club...

Maybe. Although if he did, then it's curious that the Chairman and CEO didn't...

Really? There are plenty of examples of one director knowing about the workings of a company that the chairman or CEO weren't privy to. Being a civil servant I wouldn't expect you to be too familiar with corporate governance other than what you have read in a book. Perhaps you are outside of your comfort zone here but don't really appreciate it. It certainly appears that way.

Is there really any need to adopt such an attitude, Feedback? You are an intelligent person and you do not need to resort to schoolboy insults. Why not just argue your point reasonably if you think you have a good case. People don't seem to realise that insulting other posters does not necessarily strengthen their own case.

What's rude about this? It's not insulting in any way. If someone seems clearly lacking in understanding of a subject then it's not rude to suggest it. Feedback has hardly been insulting.

[Mabinogion]

Maybe as a director he knew the true position of the club...

Maybe. Although if he did, then it's curious that the Chairman and CEO didn't...

He certainly didn't know what was going on with the finances when Sam Hammam (*spits) was running the circus. I believe the quote was "It's his money, he can do what he wants with it!".

[Elysium]

Could you define "corporate governance" and could you define "shelling peas"

[The Lone Gunman]

As Feedy alluded to, it's possible you're out of your depth but I can help.

There are no words.

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

I thought you had me on ignore. It would appear that, just like your stance regarding the rebrand, you change your tune with alarming regularity. It's hard to keep up with you as you're all over the place.

As Feedy alluded to, it's possible you're out of your depth but I can help.

There are no words.

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

[The Lone Gunman]

Quite, and they are two subjects you have limited knowledge of.

Much like your good self and the 'governance' of Cardiff City Football Club, it seems. Tell me, have you ever talked to Messrs Borley or Whiteley on this particular subject? I have.

[The Lone Gunman]

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

That was Jobson's choice.

[Elysium]

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

First world problems

You can't say things like that about the deity that is Bob the Blogger

[Elysium]

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

That was Jobson's choice.

Who's he?

[the other bob wilson]

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

First world problems

What's so funny? Feedback is currently showing 16.000+ posts about half of which, at least, would have touched on UK politics in some way and there's been a few occasions in the past five years where there's been "clean ups" whereby people have lost thousands of the messages they've posted to free up space. Tens of thousands doesn't seem like an exaggeration to me, but even if it is, it still makes no difference to the point I was making about the irony of him of all people saying "we should not concern ourselves with matters beyond our control"

[The Lone Gunman]

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

That was Jobson's choice.

Who's he?

Used to be the lead vocalist for the Skids.

[Packerman]

As Feedy alluded to, it's possible you're out of your depth but I can help.

There are no words.

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

the season of goodwill has officially ended

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

That was Jobson's choice.

Apart from the 4 you just wrote obviously.

That was Jobson's choice.

Who's he?

Used to be the lead vocalist for the Skids.

Which ironically is where your current thinking seems to be

[The Penguin]

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

First world problems

Nigel is correct in as much as that it wont be forgotten, but that SB's previous altruism and 'City through and through' actions will have become overshadowed (for many) by more recent stories.

To be fair, you've got a point there

[Packerman]

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

First world problems

Nigel is correct in as much as that it wont be forgotten, but that SB's previous altruism and 'City through and through' actions will have become overshadowed (for many) by more recent stories.

croesy and feedy have a mutual assistance pact, feedy only fails to honour this pact if croesy is beyond help

I think Steve Borley is an honourable man. He has supported our club through thick and thin, and has frequently put his health and his money on the line. He may have made some bad decisions, but I think every one of them was what he believed was in the best interests of the club.

I also don't like the attacks on Scott young, who has been a great servant of the club over a number of years. Maybe he isn't a great coach, but once again I think he is doing his very best. (Which sadly may not be good enough.)

I don't think either men like whats happening at the club, however they have to be more diplomatic (in public at least) than we need to be.

How about we stop attacking each other, and focus on the real enemy TAN. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL.

I agree with a lot of what you say but there's being diplomatic and then there is going completely OTT to defend the rebrand and belittling long term supporters who had a different viewpoint. He was best to say nothing at all or at least stick to "the rebrand was necessary to save the club" line.

Spot on, Steve lost a lot of respect from a lot of supporters for the way he behaved at the time. It won't be forgotten.

Mind you, some of it is now comedy gold. It was recalled on Twitter only yesterday when the red seats were first rumoured in the new stand that Borley tweeted he didn't care what colour they would be as someone would always be sat on them in games so nobody would see them.

First world problems

Nigel is correct in as much as that it wont be forgotten, but that SB's previous altruism and 'City through and through' actions will have become overshadowed (for many) by more recent stories.

Where have I concerned myself about matters beyond my control?