Errm lets have a bit of reality check here guys.

I was one of the first to say bazzo's post was harmful etc etc, but there are a few too many holier than thou type posts now I think.
It was a mistake to post imho, but it seems based on some facts so shouldn't really be burning him at the stake just yet should we.
Plenty of others would have done the same given the chance.

He's apologised, Glover has explained it, we've all had chance to pick on someone besides Mathers......let's move on.

Bazzo I think you mis the point.

I'm not saying you're wrong though saying it was the truth when what you promised hasn't happened is pushing it, hey to me some of what AG said sounded like the same pap Ted was coming out with towards the end. I simply don't know and neither would it appear do you - but you could well be spot on who knows.

However being right doesn't always make it right. AG is not the club and posting what you did damages the good name of the club or what's left of it. AG would move on but the club hopefully would survive and the less bad publicity the better.

What would or could have happened if last week AG was on the brink of a new sponsorship or a deal with the banks or any other business related issue and said persons got wind of what you said and took it seriously?

I just can't see how posting what you did helps anybody including the fans I really can't.

Come on Baz, I for one believe you meant no malice but it was wrong and it was legally wrong - if I'd have been AG I would have shut this forum down if it had gone much further. Luckily not the case and we can move on.

Forgetting everything else which I'm now happy to do having got it off my chest - but surely there were genuine legal implications on this one. That's what set it apart for me, basically Bazzo was suggesting that he had it on good authority that WTRLFC would or could whichever you want be bust by the weekend and creditors would not be paid. What if the security company took it seriously and demanded payment for stewarding before the next game which if we couldn't pay it pre match we'd have to cancel the game and forfit the points. As I said I don't think that was the aim of the post but it was reckless and IMHO above the normal stuff and was rightly locked.

He's apologised which is a big thing to do.

Free speech is an awkward thing but I think it's easier to decide on when the law states you cannot unfairly affect a companies ability to trade.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be high and mighty as I've made a few posts/mistakes like this in my time maybe worse - you live and learn.

Right shake hands and move on Vasty

There is a clear message born out of all this and that is self censorship and responsibility.
This is an independent forum, but can have an impact on the club for good as well as bad.
Equally as mods we have rules which we have to abide by and as Al has mentioned earlier, as a group sometimes we need to stretch them.
Free speach and all that is great and on a personal level i feel that if people have info or conserns they should be aired, we are independent after all.
All this has blown up over something that could perhaps have occured, as supporters we have learnt a lot more about thge situation as a result of conserns posted on here; that otherwise we would not have known. Equally others have got to know it too and with Wakey it doesn't take long for others to get 2 + 2 to equal 5.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing and i am 100% certain that most of us have learned a lesson as a result.
After years of mis-trust and let down its only to be expected that fans are fearful.

Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd

Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd

Quote ="matt_casfan"Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd'" Give over if you read the thread that is common knowledge. Nor far be it from me to defend Glovers increasingly dodgy business practices but I'm afraid your troll bus was a bit late on this one.

Quote ="matt_casfan"Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd'" Give over if you read the thread that is common knowledge. Nor far be it from me to defend Glovers increasingly dodgy business practices but I'm afraid your troll bus was a bit late on this one.

Quote ="matt_casfan"Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd'" How do you know it's petition number two? couldn't it be the one AG alluded to?Get yourself back to the Nutjobs forum and keep your paranoia to yourselves. Obsessed?

Quote ="matt_casfan"Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd'" How do you know it's petition number two? couldn't it be the one AG alluded to?Get yourself back to the Nutjobs forum and keep your paranoia to yourselves. Obsessed?

There are two seperate winding up orders, one from Macron and one from HMRC. There Macron one will be linked to the court case so that may prevent any comment being made.

Quote ="vastman" Quote ="matt_casfan"Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd'" Give over if you read the thread that is common knowledge. Nor far be it from me to defend Glovers increasingly dodgy business practices but I'm afraid your troll bus was a bit late on this one.'" I've read the thread and can't see where two WUP are common knowledge seeing as this one from Macron has only been advertised today. AG never mentioned it in his interview despite knowing about it.

Quote ="vastman" Quote ="matt_casfan"Why did AG fail to inform you of this in his 'statement'? Winding up petition number two! www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/ ... f+1873+ltd'" Give over if you read the thread that is common knowledge. Nor far be it from me to defend Glovers increasingly dodgy business practices but I'm afraid your troll bus was a bit late on this one.'" I've read the thread and can't see where two WUP are common knowledge seeing as this one from Macron has only been advertised today. AG never mentioned it in his interview despite knowing about it.

Thought it was common knowledge about 2 winding up orders it was obvious the micron dispute would end like this.

How? The micron dispute went to court, afaik. Never heard what the verdict was.

Where is this common knowledge? Why didn't AG mention this? Far too many unanswered questions for my liking lately.

He does refer to the problem with the supplier, though:

[iAnother large impact we have had on our cash is a legal battle we have had with one of our suppliers. We are nearly at the end of it and hopefully have reached a point of compromise. This has cost us a lot in both time and money and has been a real drain on cash resources.

The legalities attached to this have created further complications with certain creditors and as such HMRC will advertise a winding up petition on the 11th July.[/i

Crusty undies for you tomorrow.

It seems no compromise has been reached because it has been advertised by macron today?

That would now appear the case - which is what AG said though not I assume the outcome he wanted.

We will never get to the truth but it makes you wonder if it would have been cheaper to pay the original bill.

The dispute with Macron is down to AG not been happy with the standard of product. Is that correct ? If this is right why wasn't this brought up when the kit was originally sold at the beggining of last season ?

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, still I dont think it means we have "lost" as it were.

I seem to remember hearing that they had also delivered a load more stock than we asked for and then billed us for it. Did I imagine that? or can anyone else remember that?

This could be an issue of timing - the publication of the Gazette means that often, these things are published even though they've been resolved, because the resolution happened after the publication deadline; that happened to me earlier this year over a mix up with some returns.

I believe it was just quality issues on goods and that Macron refused to accept them as returns.

It was quality and issues with erroneous sizing - I provided a statement to that effect, as I was deeply dissatisfied with the Macron replica shirts I bought for me and the kids.

So it's all your fault?
The fi-ta gear is worse IMO!
Pay up!!
Move on!!!
End of!!!!
Till the next bill arrives from a supplier?
Unfortunately this is how AG operates!!!!

Well I think we can guess where the (early) early bird ST money is going.