...is the right answer.

I suspect some might take issue with your choice of "passengers"...

FA's driving. The rest fell out.

Can I just ask a question about Caisley's comments. Who the hell is Duncan Preston?

An actor.

Google is your friend!

Quote: Maccbull_BigBullyBooaza "Can I just ask a question about Caisley's comments. Who the hell is Duncan Preston?'" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Preston

Quote: Maccbull_BigBullyBooaza "Can I just ask a question about Caisley's comments. Who the hell is Duncan Preston?'" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_Preston

MPs now getting involved writing to RBS asking to extend our overdraft, this is quickly turning into a 3 ring feckin circus

If we get any more injuries/suspensions, Mr Preston's love for the club will result in him donning a shirt!

Usually sits with the Directors in the main stand.
Not seen him this year,suspect he,s touring with some production or other.

Googled him. Yep I know who he is.

Really?

If its a choice between having a club to support - hopefully for the long term, but with a wassock of a chairman, or no club because we could not agree which wassock was the least awful, then yes - surely?

And most fans anyway (not RAB-folk, obviously) will hardly care which wassock is in charge (since they usually regard the chairman and his board as wassocks anyway?) as long as there is SOMEONE in charge to blame and moan about?

And if - as I do - you continue to believe that any period of administration presents threats too serious to risk, then you'd support the strategy that seeks to preserve the going concern? But not take your bat home if that failed?

That does not mean you have to LIKE the alternatives on offer as Chairman. As it happens, I would not wish for either if a better alternative - any alternative - was to manifest himself. Maybe one WILL should Mr Caisley, having had his revenge, then decided to sell his holding? But I'd not stop supporting the Bulls simply because of the wassock in charge, unless something outrageous happened. And neither I think would most fans? Which I think is the point Bulliac was making?

I accept everything that everyone has said in the negative about both Peter Hood and Chris Caisley - definitely rock and hard place - BUT two things rattle around in my consciousness: (1) Caisley brought in Peter Fox (and at the time I was very dubious about the decision) - something which got us into SL in the first place and without which we would never have had the glory days; and (2) Hood made what I believe was the most disastrous decision ever (yes, even worse than the Harris episode) when he stuck by McNamara who, despite being a very nice person, had so very clearly been promoted beyond his competence. That decision was beyond incompetent - it was shortsighted and stupid. I believe this because even with the disastrous Harris situation, with good results and play off opportunities we could have maintained our fan base and sponsorship and therefore had the means to try to get back in the black. With a weak squad, poor results and an inevitable slide over 4 years it was clear we were going to be in an even worse financial situation. So, my personal rock and hard place will probably land me in the CC camp by a whisker simpy on the basis of those two outcomes.

I disagree. I haven't spoken to a single person who doesn't see the connect between the ownership/management of the club and the supposedly genuine possibility that tomorrow night could be the club's last ever home game. Lots of posters disagree with my take on matters but not too many hold the groundsman responsible. It's absurd to suggest it's the interest of a few obsessives. I think pretty much every single person/poster is discussing this with reference to who owns or is chairman of the club as it's patently obvious this is the key factor not only in our present predicament but any hope we have of competing in the future.

Anyway as I argued for action from the shareholders and this is what appears to have ocurred whether CC is my cup of tea or not, I have pledged. What a sucker!