Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[John Edwards]

Please see the club's website for a message from director Bill Waterson concerning social media.

[TheCultOfIanTunnacliffe]

It's very honourable of Bill to apologise for somebody else's mistake.

[bighairedmike]

I find it abhorrent that Bill has been forced to make a statement on this issue, especially considering the circumstances surrounding the game which meant he couldn't be there.

I also think it's a disgrace that "the club" haven't apologised for the actions which have forced somebod, who volunteers a hell of a lot of time and effort, to pen a resignation.

I think it's a shambles that they have then allowed our Social media pages to not update for nearly 3 days, not even with a final score of the Stalybridge game.

It is also farcical that they then allowed the social media updates for the Nuneaton match to be handled by what can only be assumed to be an underperforming primate with severe dyslexia. One that then gave personal judgements on the game and asked who was getting drunk in the CSH after the game.

The whole thing stinks. Yet another PR disaster by the club. I didn't think the board could sink any lower, but forcing Bill to put his name to that caricature of a statement is beyond me.

[Leon]

Good to see an apology but a shame it's not from the person (still unidentified) who made the ghastly decision on the day.

If Jack left the ground and Andrew was at work, who was doing the Twitter after the 15 min mark?

[HashtagAlty]

I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable

I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.

[York Alty is back]

Does this apology open enough doors for either of the lads that update Twitter to return?

I suspect I know the answer.

[Mausoleum Alty]

Did Bill read that statement before agreeing to have his name connected to it? It looks like a child's written it.

[Malty G]

Jack, can you clarify how much notice you gave Bill about your participation. If the action was "precautionary" surely it would have done before the game. I take it Bill was not concerned at the time you spoke to him.

[im not really here]

Jack, can you clarify how much notice you gave Bill about your participation. If the action was "precautionary" surely it would have done before the game. I take it Bill was not concerned at the time you spoke to him.

Indeed. This statement is a valid gesture from Bill but merely exposes the Chairman for his lack of honesty and integrity. Bill had no issues with Jack and Andrew protesting and has built up a good relationship with both. The decision to lock them out was a Rowley family decision with no justification.

Rowley is ruining our club, and what point does this end?

[taxi Phil]

Since Bill has been nominated as the director responsible for communications,  I would NORMALLY expect him to take responsibility for dealing with this shambles.

But since he wasn't at the game, I would expect somebody else at board level to deal with the matter, and certainly quicker than 10 days later !

What were they scared of ? Is Twitter only designed to relay positive news about the club, or is it truly a social media tool that is allowed to comment freely when everything in the garden is not rosy, but withered and dying ?

Thanks for trying Bill - hope you're 100% fit again by the way - but I'm afraid this isn't enough to change my decision to finish with the club.

[Jimmy Hill]

The statement is awful, it doesn't actually address any of the issues people are upset about.

Even if it is was legitimate to remove Jack of his social media access, it isn't clear whether this was going to be a permanent revocation of access or just for the game in question (the latter being more defensible).

In any case the main problem was the way it was handled. Whilst social media might be a relatively new thing for football clubs to deal with politeness and professionalism aren't. The problem could have been solved before the protest through an email or a phone call.

The person who made this decision ended up making the club looking unprofessional by abandoning social media coverage midway through the match, and personally vindictive given the mild nature of the offending tweets.

Following the Tolson cock-up I thought the main problem with the board was that they were too loyal and didn't have the ability to make tough decisions, now it turns out that that many of them are just a bit thick.

[GolfRoader]

I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable

I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.

Just to clear up, how can you possibly tweet about the match if you aren't there? Were you watching from outside?

[bighairedmike]

I continued them after leaving the ground. Andrew and I often do it remotely when being at the game isn't viable

I think Dan Jones might like to explain why he removed the account. No apology from him in there.

Just to clear up, how can you possibly tweet about the match if you aren't there? Were you watching from outside?

You can "live tweet" by following different outlets. E.g., using Radio Robins plus matchday updates to put together tweets.

This is not exhaustive, and when this has been done you will probably notice that the teeets aren't every minute, but every 3 or so.

Im sure someone else will tell me I'm wrong, but that's a simplistic cover of it.

[andrewflynn]

When there was a game neither one of us could get to, we would provide text updates based on the audio commentary of Radio Robins or John Laidlar'a text updates. We still produced ours in the same format as usual so you probably never noticed. The plan was for Jack to exit the ground and then continue match day updates from the pub.

[Teasierbeaver]

When there was a game neither one of us could get to, we would provide text updates based on the audio commentary of Radio Robins or John Laidlar'a text updates. We still produced ours in the same format as usual so you probably never noticed. The plan was for Jack to exit the ground and then continue match day updates from the pub.

With this in mind Jack, can we assume that your final tweet was relaying information from radio robins or John Laidlars updates? I'm not looking for trouble here, I believe this whole thing has been a disaster and this alone will do enough damage to warrant club officials stepping down. However I also believe that this action being precautionary is a lie and so I want to know why it really happened. As the club won't tell the whole truth we'll need our own investigation.