please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Is that a good option? Sacking - I think not. Mix up the 'playing from the back' and 'a good punt downfield' sometimes, and I'll be happy!
The questions that I would have liked to ask him are: Q1: Why did you become financially involved with Fortuna Sittard and leave abruptly within a year? Q2: On what footballing basis did you consider to appoint Shota Arveladze as a manager of a Champioship side? Q3: Why did you become financially involved with Shelbourne FC and leave abruptly within six months?
We would like to thank McVitie's and dear Murat Ülker once again for supporting us while we are chasing our dream, being by our side and adding strength to us on the way to this dream. This cooperation will give us more strength and we will work harder for our One Family One Dream slogan in line with our goals.
I think they'd be great questions to ask and I alon with others would be interested to hear to answers, but unfortunately you would struggle to find a journalist these days who'd risk his contact with Acun by asking them
Sure someone will most likely ask Tan next time the multi club thing comes up again, but would a hack for a national know to ask searching questions about minor investments in foreign leagues where he wasn't a controlling stakeholder?
Presumably you're already happy then because we mix in plenty of punts downfield. Usually once the opposition has come onto us. A lot of our chances and goals have come from it.
Question 2 would be utterly pointless, he obviously thought he was a capable manager, it just turned out he wasn't and he got rid, happens at every club at some point.
Question 1 was answered at the time he bought us - that he was dipping his toe and wanted full control of a club.
I suspect the answer to question 1 and 3 would be pretty much the same (a better question might be why did you do a deal at Shelbourne, which was similar to the one that hadn't worked previously? Though he did at least have a controlling interest in Shelbourne, so maybe he thought things would be different). I can imagine getting into a similar situation, I invest in another clothing brand, then the remaining directors who run the business day to day tell me they've decided to ignore all my ideas and buy 100,000 pairs of stonewashed jeans instead. They'd have their shares back within an hour.
Wasn't the 60% stake contingent on a 3m investment programme which never came to fruition? That was my understanding. Err and what's wrong with stonewash?
