Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
MAYBE Potter HAS OFFERED to resign, knowing that TB can't afford to sack him
Many a word said in jest
MAYBE Potter HAS OFFERED to resign, knowing that TB can't afford to sack him
How so? A guest in the Boardroom I mean?
MAYBE Roy HAS OFFERED to resign, knowing that (whoever the Palace Chairman is) can't afford to sack him
I’ve been a guest in the board room on match day, courtesy of one of the board
According to a regularly reliable sauce.
I hope it's to approve funds for January and not the other thing....
More likely a 'board meeting'....without the 'emergency' ('additional' perhaps)....... As you say, plenty going on for them to discuss - finances, upcoming window, Covid, current form, ground expansion and covid STH ticket allocation (I'd also add lack of a breakfast pie at a 12.00 kick off myself but I'm not in charge)
Will be genuinely staggered if he sacks Potter. Far more likely to come out with a strong statement backing him.
How so? A guest in the Boardroom I mean?
[/B]
New ten year contract
......and his pick of Eridivisie strikers in the window.
……..as have a number of people but thankfully you are respectful and don't come spouting off on here about what was said and done by those who were kind enough to invite you.
You also said you heard a massive row the night we failed to sign Vincent Janssen.I was a guest in the boardroom for the fateful home defeat to Millwall, and witnessed a colossal and noisy post match disagreement between Tony and Burke in the trophy/ante room to the boardroom. Burke was gone xx days later that was, can’t remember exactly, a few days, maybe a week. But it was ferocious. I have a photo of the two them sharing a post match cuppa, shortly before TB invited him ‘out for chat’....
I don’t think any trade secrets have been shared here. I’ve simply reported a heated discussion took place 6 years ago, and not quoted anyone or anything, which resulted in a departure we all new about 6 years ago. Sorry if anyone thinks that’s a breach of trust. It could have been construed as such if I shared that insight the day after, but, six years?!
I'm very tempted to type "Yawn" as I'm intrigued as to the credibility of your "sauce" but I'm hoping you are right.
Why "sauce" for "source" and "sings" for "signs" is beyond me? It's not funny as far as I can see,please could someone enlighten me or am I due a whooshing (whatever that is)