The Everton Board Thread

[Wat Tyler]

Nothing new in this from Everton themselves.




queries flowing?


Let's refer back to the timeline.

The statement was put out at 12pm. At 12:11pm Juliet Ferrington made reference to the alleged incident.

1:28pm The Echo article about 'headlockgate' is released.



One hour and 28 minutes after the original statement they're provided the same information from "senior club sources" and published the story without establishing any facts and other than a more specific detail about the apparent physical incident it seems to me their queries during that hour and 28 minute must not have been very indepth. They're now claiming they seeked to establish further details of the incident - yet didn't say that in any articles just what they had been told by "sources".

- if that was the case then why didn't the club just say that when they originally briefed journalists about the alleged incident. Or better yet why did the club brief someone who's not even a journalist, more of a broadcast reporter and a female one at that and then wait over an hour before telling other journalists about the alleged incident.



This is just The Echo trying to make it look like they are / were doing some genuine journalism rather than just relaying disingenuous information directly from Prentice himself.

Good post, that source is definitely Prentice, he has always been Bill’s lapdog and all his cronies at the Echo and Okeefe at the Athletic have took what he said as gospel.

All involved call themselves Evertonians but have had zero problem putting out a fake story to the national media that matchgoing Everton fans are dangerous thugs.

 

[COYB75]

Absolutely not - but director of football/chief scout?! 100%

I can definitely be head scout. You had to do all the different roles playing that game. Just doing one for Everton should be a doddle. ?

 

[Efcjake]

Nothing new in this from Everton themselves.




queries flowing?


Let's refer back to the timeline.

The statement was put out at 12pm. At 12:11pm Juliet Ferrington made reference to the alleged incident.

1:28pm The Echo article about 'headlockgate' is released.



One hour and 28 minutes after the original statement they're provided the same information from "senior club sources" and published the story without establishing any facts and other than a more specific detail about the apparent physical incident it seems to me their queries during that hour and 28 minute must not have been very indepth. They're now claiming they seeked to establish further details of the incident - yet didn't say that in any articles just what they had been told by "sources".

- if that was the case then why didn't the club just say that when they originally briefed journalists about the alleged incident. Or better yet why did the club brief someone who's not even a journalist, more of a broadcast reporter and a female one at that and then wait over an hour before telling other journalists about the alleged incident.



This is just The Echo trying to make it look like they are / were doing some genuine journalism rather than just relaying disingenuous information directly from Prentice himself.

The interesting thing about the Echo article is that it indicates multiple sources at the club relayed this Headlock story to them.

They need to be named and shamed.

It's fairly clear that at the very least multiple people in the club have intentionally misstated the details of the incident (given that nobody has contacted Merseyside Police regarding this headlock) hours before announcing board members wouldn't attend a match they were being protested against.

The club has to come out and say who is libelling the supporters to local media with false allegations.

Simply saying "no comment" or "the matter is closed" is not good enough and will not change what these sources have said or the resulting fall out and smear campaign against Evertonians.

 

[blueseas]

It’s an absolute shambles, how we have got here. The Everton board treat the fans with utter contempt. There’s no real channel of communication. It’s almost like they’re running the club into the ground ‘on purpose’.

How can these people who in some respects are captains of their industry do this, or not see what they are doing, and do something to change?

Alleged money laundering. Alleged lying to fans about assaults and threats of violence if they come to the ground, it’s literally laughable. Lying about transfer bids, lying about supposed new grounds

Everton have become a real life soap opera.

We are embarrassing.

Apt name!

 

[BNJ1878]

Has Grogg O’Queef said anything regarding the latest activities?

He's meeting Prenno for a quiet pint to strategise.

Ain’t no way they can survive this in my opinion. Not even Teflon Bill.

My question is, if you sack the board, what are the mechanics of that and replacing them? Genuine query.

The clubs articles of association state it needs 3 directors. So 'sack the board' means the club cannot function.

I guess they could keep Ingles, who seems to be the least despised, promote Chong, even if Interim, and dunno.... Jimmy Martin as Chairman.

 

[trueblue84]

He's meeting Prenno for a quiet pint to strategise.

The clubs articles of association state it needs 3 directors. So 'sack the board' means the club cannot function.

I guess they could keep Ingles, who seems to be the least despised, promote Chong, even if Interim, and dunno.... Jimmy Martin as Chairman.

Moshiri could appoint 3 new directors tomorrow.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

 

[Blue_Eagle]

Moshiri could appoint 3 new directors tomorrow.

Called Terry, John & Phil.

All scouse, lad.

 

[Ruairi77]

He's meeting Prenno for a quiet pint to strategise.

The clubs articles of association state it needs 3 directors. So 'sack the board' means the club cannot function.

I guess they could keep Ingles, who seems to be the least despised, promote Chong, even if Interim, and dunno.... Jimmy Martin as Chairman.

I would imagine it is a minimum of 3 directors.
Meaning you could hire 3 (preferably interim) directors and fire the old 3.
Not sure why any of the existing directors would have to stay.

 

[BNJ1878]

Moshiri could appoint 3 new directors tomorrow.

Of course he could.

But it's bleeding obvious to all who have been paying attention since..... Let's say 2004 that Kenwright and whoever he keeps close isn't the right person for the job, so why has he survived?

Moshiris biggest mistake, letting that vain baboon keep his snout in the trough.

 

[BNJ1878]

I would imagine it is a minimum of 3 directors.
Meaning you could hire 3 (preferably interim) directors and fire the old 3.
Not sure why any of the existing directors would have to stay.

Yes, 3 as a minimum to function.

None if them need to stay.

DBB will probably be sacrificed before Moshiri acts anyway, Sharp has absolutely no business being anywhere near his non exec role and I doubt we'll see Kenwright again, his ego won't cope with the rejection.

If Ingles sticks around, even short term it's easier to find 2 then 3. (plus I suspect being the money man Moshiri is quite keen he stays, he knows where the bodies are buried.)

 

[Efcjake]

Finally someone is calling out the ridiculousness of the claims coming from the club.

Anyone involved in spreading that headlock allegation in the media should be doing the leg work to verify whether they've been unwittingly used by the club to slander our fans over a claim that has zero evidence.

 

[maccavennie]

The interesting thing about the Echo article is that it indicates multiple sources at the club relayed this Headlock story to them.

They need to be named and shamed.

It's fairly clear that at the very least multiple people in the club have intentionally misstated the details of the incident (given that nobody has contacted Merseyside Police regarding this headlock) hours before announcing board members wouldn't attend a match they were being protested against.

The club has to come out and say who is libelling the supporters to local media with false allegations.

Simply saying "no comment" or "the matter is closed" is not good enough and will not change what these sources have said or the resulting fall out and smear campaign against Evertonians.

Yep, if the matter is closed well they need to clarify what happened.

 

[Bluestar]

What an absolute shambles this all is.

The energy being expended by fans and the board by this utterly unnecessary distraction.

Everything should be going into improving the team and supporting the team.

This board must now do the right thing and go.

 

[Efcjake]

Yep, if the matter is closed well they need to clarify what happened.

The Echo is confirming multiple sources within the club passed them the Headlock story.

We know Merseyside Police were not told of any headlock or any other incidents.

So at best you've got either a safety situation. That wasn't reported to authorities or you have club officials sharing rumours and exaggerated false statements that paint the support in a terrible light.

I find it much more believable that this was an atrocious PR play that has blown up in their face.

We cannot let them sweep it under the rug and move on.