It would not be apparent which payments they needed to look at until they had carried out a review in that area. As Ricardo said, that can't be done overnight.
The whole point surely would be that they would ask the person in charge of the day-to-dayrunning of the club - the chief executive - to review all operations and identify cost cuttings and he's hardly likely to identify himself is he? It's standard practice to pay someone to make the business run as efficiently as possible and then get rid of that person. I have to say I'm with the Allams on this one, for me they havent been slack in this case.
I recall reading a long debate about something you posted involving Maguire, but I don't think that'll be what you're referring to. In that debate you switched your position when more facts became available that disproved your initial comments. I've noticed that can be a bit of a habit of yours, posting generalisations in the hope of it looking like inside knowledge to shout about, but more often keeping quiet when it doesn't happen. If you have inside knowledge, it's more believable if you post it fully before everyone knows.
Really? I'd love you to go back and find exactly where I switched my position on Maguire. I'm all ears. The debate centred around his (Maguire's) outburst in the HDM about the number of company cars employees had (somehting like 50) and I pointed out that Maguire actually gave company cars to several employees he brought over from Stockport. FACT. My point was it was a case of people in glass houses and a ridiculous situation. Whoever it was I was debating this with has since gone very quiet. In fact, I really dont remember ever switching my position on anything. The challenge is yours to find where I flip-flopped.
So instead of speculation, glorification, dare I say, making stuff up, and narrow minded local sensationalism, why doesn't our heralded local media (heralded by nobody but themselves I would add) expose and investigate such stuff? I think we all know the answer - lazy and low quality journalism and more than any thing else, a self sustaining oligopoly!
That argument means that Hull is full of monkies who subscribe to what they read. It doesn't have to be that way!
To be fair, I don't recall all teh details, but just clicked that it was another of those discussions where you'd adjusted what your point was as more facts became available. Why this one sticks in my mind is that it was one of the few occasions that I had some inside knowledge. Your claim was that he'd got rid of company cars, only to dish them out to incomers. What I knew was that, he hadn't as such. The 'new' cars were actually the old ones still in contract. It would have cost more to get rid of them than to keep them.
I'm maybe with the Allams too, depending on how long it took them to find out what was going on and eventually sack him.
