While there is perhaps a bit of negativity surrounding Brad Lloyd with some fans, and scepticism regarding the appointment of Austin as a replacement for SOS, I can't say they have done much wrong. But have we seen much from them, they are basically criticised for being largely absent from the debate, have they had time to have an influence yet?
I thought Lloyd was better around the time of the Plowman MRP debacle, but I can't help but wonder if our Exec and Board are more focussed on the lost appeals fee than being outraged at the Plowman suspension. I'll bet you a penny to a pound that is the case! btw., A decision that has since been contradicted by the MRP and Tribunal more than once since the event, as a precedent it did not even last a month!
So I'd pose this question.
Given the board we have, and given that Liddle seems to run everything, how much of what 'they' do is a consequence of external interference. Do we get to judge them on merit, or is what we see or don't see a result of interference and constraints?
Should we expect anything to change under Sayers, or is it just more of the same?
I thought Lloyd was better around the time of the Plowman MRP debacle, but I can't help but wonder if our Exec and Board are more focussed on the lost appeals fee than being outraged at the Plowman suspension. I'll bet you a penny to a pound that is the case! btw., A decision that has since been contradicted by the MRP and Tribunal more than once since the event, as a precedent it did not even last a month!
So I'd pose this question.
Given the board we have, and given that Liddle seems to run everything, how much of what 'they' do is a consequence of external interference. Do we get to judge them on merit, or is what we see or don't see a result of interference and constraints?
Should we expect anything to change under Sayers, or is it just more of the same?
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"