Right, I am going to be very tactful with my words here as I don't want to go too far off topic nor come across as pedantic when I name drop, but you're suggestion that I know nothing of the situation is a grave error and one which I'll rectify. Also, I'm not afraid to discuss these matters now, as I said, it's been two years since Steve left and currently have very few ties to the inside.
The question was asked how close me and my family are/were to the club? Well they bought in to it, and in fact even financed the north west stand through my old mans organisation before he retired (I'm sure I can find this on the internet to confirm this). See the people around the club- Steve Sutherland, Peter Varney, Steve Waggot, Chris Roberts (Greenwich Council), Paul Elliot etc etc? We spent a good several years with them, working closely and tiresly on sponsorship, and even enjoying beers when the time was there. I think we all became close (hours of meetings and conference calls forced that), but especially with Steve and Paul (the latter even helping me seek employment with a former company).
So now you'll see, I can go further in to conversations I've heard (first and second hand) - but I wont. Take a deep breath and realise that I was complimenting Steve on doing a good job in difficult circumstances and that there were people from the inside (again, if you need proof I'm sure I can find it) who tried to bring Steve down through the internet (a public tool). I never said THOSE people were Varney. I neither said it was Murray. I said it was my belief that once Steve's name had been dragged through the mud and fans used him as a scapegoat, then I believe it was the board who continued to let him take the flack as it took the attention away from them. Why do I think that? Because I saw a change in attitude. Nothing was said directly, but once where Steve was welcome at the club, towards the end he appeared (my observation, not his) shunned from the inside. I saw no attempt from the club to protect him when the times got especially rocky and he (and at times his family and friends) were subjected to abuse from the very small minority. Not one single thing.
If you took offense, then I'll apologise. I think you may have misunderstood my comments about ''cretins'' as that wasn't aimed at Varney. But, when you argue that Steve was ''out of his depth but a nice guy''? Well, it's the same stuff I've read over the net and not one individual has ever been able to discuss why he was out of his depth. We can discuss the dramatic cost cutting of overheads he implemented (and every step of the way with the intention of not making the fans pay more - E.G the making middle to upper management have free bar privileges revoked). I'm not saying he was flawless, but I'm definitely saying he did a much better job than 90% give him credit for.
To everyone else, I'm sorry if this has become tedious. It's apparent the thread has broken down in to a one on one, but I'm also comfortable in the knowledge that what has been said hasn't broken any confidentiality ''agreements'', something which some might (others might not) find interesting.
