MAL
Disabled account
I am amused that when searching this quote Google points first to Dickhead quotes. I am sure that's not where you found it but it gave me a chuckle
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
I am amused that when searching this quote Google points first to Dickhead quotes. I am sure that's not where you found it but it gave me a chuckle
I am really not sure what this is trying to prove - the ability to cut and paste? I know the responsibilities of directors, I have explained my opinion. This just feels like filling up space in the absence of anything constructive to add to discussion.From both the council and a role as a director conflicts are both ways , he is going to love this relationship , I'm glad MAL is allowed to speak on here !
View attachment 2713
I am really not sure what this is trying to prove - the ability to cut and paste? I know the responsibilities of directors, I have explained my opinion. This just feels like filling up space in the absence of anything constructive to add to discussion.
However it may have been prudent of you to review the information relating to Companies Limited by Guarantee. This will answer some of the more ill informed comments and accusations you have made. I am sure with your claimed knowledge you realise the club is limited by guarantee rather than by shares.
Just for clarity I am on here in a PERSONAL capacity.MAL: You're the only person posting here in an official capacity. From the start you evaded questions about whether one of you fellow RC directors was also a senior employee of the council. Why was it a secret if you thought there was no conflict of interest? Why has be resigned from both companies if there was no problem? But of course there is a problem, because anyone can find the council's code of practice and general Company Law, which makes it clear that this situation is unacceptable from both sides.
I am amused that when searching this quote Google points first to Dickhead quotes. I am sure that's not where you found it but it gave me a chuckle
No other interest with the property developer Councillor you may want to declare ?
So you agree SRUFC Ltd, the organisation which runs the club is limited by guarantee. You accept that it is not for profit. You will I am therefore sure distance yourself from comments about being paid. Stafford Rugby Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of SRUFC Ltd. Given your apparent detailed knowledge of all these details I am sure you know that. There is therefore no dividends payable to individuals - again I am sure you will disassociate yourself from previous comments about directors getting dividends. I am not sure what you are trying to prove here, I think it is clear I was not wrong.Wrong again, unless Companies House is telling porkies. SRUFC Ltd is limited by guarantee, Stafford Rugby Ltd is a private limited co.
Is this some suggestion that one would not 'friend'councillors or parents on FB. Or that this is in some way an undue influence. I never cease to be amazed at the depths folks will go for trying to stir a cheap argument, trolling somebodies social media accounts is certainly an interesting approach. I don't hide my social media contacts - this is quite a ridiculous post, especially form somebody who appears to share views expressed elsewhere that being anonymous is a good thing as it prevents bullying
I don't even understand the question. I must be being thick or perhaps the question is too obtuse. I will say i do not know the backgrounds of everybody (or indeed most) of people associated with the club as members, or parents of players - how could I. I obviously cannot discuss anything that could be considered confidential but if I understood the question this may help me replySo the question I will ask you again and perhaps you can answer a straight yes or no ! Any associations with the club and or directors of the club
Is this some suggestion that one would not 'friend'councillors or parents on FB.
For the sake of clarity, would you please pose the question(s) you are asking in English.Is that a yes or a no then ? Being a small town and all that MAL ?
I'm sorry but most of your posts are gibberish. You may, or may not have valid points but most of the time I have no idea WTF you are on about.Was the question links being absolutely anything
I have responded to the Beaconside comments many times. Where on Riverway are you suggesting 4 more Pitches. There is already a mass conflict about trying to have Hockey and Cricket coexist and manage a home for St Leonards. There is simply no space to add a club the size of Stafford Rugby Club. Any more suggestions?
I am amused that when searching this quote Google points first to Dickhead quotes
Just for clarity I am on here in a PERSONAL capacity.
Again I do not agree with your interpretation. It is clear for the Companies Limited by Guarantee rules that it is foreseen that councils can appoint to boards of companies limited by guarantee. This is not what happened here but if it is foreseen as that being acceptable I am bemused by the open declaration being unacceptable. I went to the AGM of the Playing Fields Trust - this is full of council people - is this wrong, I do not think so. It is entirely within a persons decision as to whether they wish to continue in a volunteer position. You could consider that other time pressures were a factor, you could consider a recent marriage was a factor, you could consider many things but you don't - you as others simply try to take 2 facts and guarantee association. It cannot always be so. I will state I have no idea of the answer.
I have never evaded the question, it is not a secret - it is a matter of public record. I was asked how many senior employees of SBC were on the rugby club board. The answer when I was asked was zero. I was entirely correct and factual in that answer - yet people accused me of lying. People ask for straight answers and then get upset when they get them. The Stafford Rugby company is a new entity and directors were carried over and it simply took time from a companies house point to get log ins etc to amend. There is no avoidance, there is also no obligation to spell out every meeting every detail, every admin step. I am sure people can see the answers I gave were honest and straight forward
So you agree SRUFC Ltd, the organisation which runs the club is limited by guarantee. You accept that it is not for profit. You will I am therefore sure distance yourself from comments about being paid. Stafford Rugby Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of SRUFC Ltd. Given your apparent detailed knowledge of all these details I am sure you know that. There is therefore no dividends payable to individuals - again I am sure you will disassociate yourself from previous comments about directors getting dividends. I am not sure what you are trying to prove here, I think it is clear I was not wrong.
I apologise sincerely if I mis represented anything as I am very supportive of the Hockey club. As I read it the ECB objected to the development which seemed to me to be the biggest hurdleMal...
To clarify...
There's no mass conflict..... "they" just don't want us to have something that "might" affect a revenue stream "they" wish to protect. There's more than enough room for us, as a cricket and hockey club, to play cricket and hockey.
However, we do "appreciate" having our betters protect us from ourselves.