Time For Answers From The Board

I can't see how they can explain it without either a degree of embarassment or with a big payout on another contract.

I agree with my earlier statement echoed by ohtobeatplainmoor's post on the Youth Team sponsor thread. A public slagging match will help nobody. If it gets out, then maybe a further statement/first statement.

I would not expect the Club to release a statement dealing with how another person felt. It is for that person to do that and clearly their advice led to the statement we have all read with it's reference made to an "employee".

My point is that such a statement - ie. with the references you make - is more for the sponsor than the Club to draft. Should they be so advised.

If the Club were announcing that they had dispensed of someone's services in conjunction with an agreed statement, then that would be different.

But to be seen to undermine that person whilst in post might allow that person to claim they had been constructively dismissed.

Dave

Hasn't Sean already cleared that up though, by the statement made in the Herald Express?

If I have understood you correctly, you feel that the statement made on the club website could have been interpreted by some to mean that in some way CLB were in some sort of financial difficulty? However, to be fair to the club it didn't actually say that at all, it merely inferred that TUFC would pursue CLB for any monies owed to them under the sponsorship arrangement, which is an entirely different thing.

Now, if the club has made such a statement when in fact all payments due to the club under the sponsorship arrangement are indeed up to date - then that clearly would be out of order - and I would expect a full and public apology to be made by the club.

Let's face it, Sean Melhuish has confirmed that the reason the sponsorship has been brought to an end is not down to any financial problems on the part of CLB , but that there had been a problem with an employee of TUFC.

Whilst the statement made on the website could have been interepreted in another way, let's face it how many people actually read the official website ... and how many more read the Herald Express ... where any confusion has surely been cleared up?

I appreciate that Sean has some issues with an employee of TUFC, and whoever that may be I think it's fairly safe to assume he must be pretty high profile within the club, but I hope that this situation doesn't degenerate into a public slanging match, which can only be harmful to the football club in all honesty. Far better for it to be resolved between Sean, the directors of the football club and the individual employee concerned privately on this occasion in my opinion.

Whilst it was vital for the future of our football club that Chris Roberts was exposed for what he really was, and you played no small part in that , I'm not sure that this particular situation can ultimately do anything but harm to the football club if it is exposed in the same way - not least because the individual employee concerned may (or may not, of course) be a vital part of it's future success?

tufc01, I will pull you up on one point and that Is that you said one was as bad as the other. That Is not the case and I know this is getting In the way Of talking about the team etc, It Is important for many reasons that will become clear when any news does break.

Dave, How do I and 99% (actually with 200 members and only 2 people 'knowing' the 'truth' thats about right) of the people on here know that??
We HAVE to base our information on what we have been presented with. So far this amounts to what can be gleaned from the club website (whether its been signed or not) and the HE. So i have to stand by what i said earlier.

A theme that runs through the forum is that we should only form opinions on information that we are given, so you will have to forgive me for my opinion at this present moment in time.