I don't think that being 'popular' is the issue to be honest. Like a politician promising 'jam today', any sports club chairman can make himself popular by making the sort of announcements that fans want to hear. Being popular doesn't make the decision correct though, especially when it leads to even more unpopular decisions having to be made further down the line (often by someone else) in order to get back onto an even keel. Being chairman means sometimes you have to announce unpopular board choices.

Caisley [icould[/i have laid it on the line when we were at VP, he could have said that moving back to Odsal wasn't possible and that there was no alternative to staying at VP, whereas he actually presented it as the direct opposite, saying we had no choice [ibut[/i to go back to Odsal (due to drop in gates). Much as most fans definitely wouldn't have been happy to stay there (includes me, btw), presented in that fashion we would have had no real option but to accept it, and I guess that the vast majority [iwould [/ihave accepted it. It's surprising what you can put up with when you risk losing everything.

When the board negotiated the compensation deal which was intended to to last until (I think) 2018 and then virtually spent it, in just a few short years chasing glory, it was a dereliction of duty imo. This wasn't just CC of course, as I understand it the other board members [icould[/i have outvoted him, but he was, as chairman, the leading light and the figurehead of the board, so the opprobrium falls on him I guess.

I don't think there is any way to present 'Harrisgate' which will make it smell any sweeter. It is simply the worst decision since the night Abraham Lincoln said to his wife "shall we go out tonight and take in a show..."?

How about lawyers with a moustache...regardless of style...?

My theory stands.

It's an American police 'tache.

Which one? Caisley looks dodgy, Hall looks like Gareth Hale.

Caisley's most likely to wear the mirrored glasses, that is if the mirrors face inwards.