Print

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

[cheshire cat]

Just for information how many followers does the twitter feed have?

[ManagementGuru]

I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.

1.  The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board.  As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward.  In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.

2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication.  No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations.  Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after.  What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual  - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be.  Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control.  In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.

3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time.  But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family.  I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue.  Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans.  So please can we make every effort to cut this out.

As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club.  Please recognise our positive intentions.  We have a big job ahead of us.  And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.  

[cheshire cat]

Grahame, I am told, had the backing off two other directors to make the call.

However, as chairman, he triggered the process and Dan Jones according to those who were involved in the decision did so.

When I questioned Dan, he has not objected to the notion he did it.

For me that is the crux of the matter. On here Graheme Rowley is portrayed as devil incarnate but as Chairman (not dictator) his role is to implement the agreed wishes of the board. If you are telling me that he is a dictator and the board simply kiss his feet replacing him comes with massive risk.  

Edited to add   Bill has spoken whilst i was typing. I concur with his submission.

[blackpoolalty]

This is the final straw for me. I'm finished with Rowley FC. So many happy memories and emotions watching the alty since 1994 when I fell in love with shazza, carmo, Andy green etc. Sometimes in life you have to make a stand. I won't be attending when that man is at the club (apart from any action as regards to future protests)

Same for me.

My club is a shambles.

Regarding the social media: We had a damn good team of volunteers who dragged the club into 2017, gaining popularity for tweets and the such. All gone at the change of a password given the nod from the chairman. That decision wasn't in the interest of the football club but was clearly to save further embarrassment to Rowley. As for Paul Salts comment, if you're going to dish out patronising literature at least make sure it's relevant.

[blackpoolalty]

I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.

1.  The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board.  As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward.  In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.

2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication.  No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations.  Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after.  What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual  - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be.  Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control.  In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.

3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time.  But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family.  I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue.  Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans.  So please can we make every effort to cut this out.

As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club.  Please recognise our positive intentions.  We have a big job ahead of us.  And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.  

I would never myself get personal but as chairman of my football club I see Rowley at the head of criticism, and quite rightly so.

Positive intentions? We're about to be relegated AGAIN, to our lowest EVER position on our history. Ive seen nothing positive whatsoever for a long time, don't think I will, don't expect to. Lost heart following the team I've supported for 14 years, season in season out

[AFC56]

I can put up with total incompetence on the field for 18 months, I can just about put up with very poor managerial appointments and woeful PR. But the treatment of Jack and Andrew is totally wrong and something I won't be associated with. They did nothing wrong. Nothing. Jack had an opinion and is being punished because it didn't fit in with the board. If it was a board decision Bill, then fine. I don't agree with any of you. I hope you all take great pleasure playing micklover sports in front of 200 nodding dogs without one bit of atmosphere. Enjoy.

[Uncle Globnasty]

I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.

1.  The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board.  As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward.  In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.

2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication.  No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations.  Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after.  What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual  - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be.  Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control.  In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.

3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time.  But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family.  I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue.  Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans.  So please can we make every effort to cut this out.

As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club.  Please recognise our positive intentions.  We have a big job ahead of us.  And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.  

I understand your statement, but I feel it is too late for the board to continue in it's current form. You have come to the table late in the day and can not be held accountable for a lot of what has gone on before. Any credibility the chairman ever had has gone through a succession of bad decisions and actions and I'm sorry, but collective responsibility is great in principle, but in this case one man heads the operation and one man is accountable. There is now a huge rift in the support. We have lost large sections of support from the young (and future) supporters as they naturally don't wish to see a losing team week in, week out to supporters of decades standing who will not set foot inside the ground again whilst GR remains in position.

For my part, I have been supporting this once great club for the best part of forty years and I've had enough. I actually don't care about our results any more this season and that in itself is a sad indictment of where we currently stand.

From bad mouthing and unfounded allegations in the national press (no apology or remorse) to a farce of a strategic review carried out by a family friend where any question deemed too 'difficult' for the current regime was cut short. Horrendous PR statements, the whole sorry Twitter episode and that's before we even begin to talk about two successive relegations whilst having sold a player to a Premiership club. The footballing side of things was far from the final straw for me though. This no longer feels like my club and I don't see how your 'collective responsibility' can rectify that.

[andrewflynn]

Just for information how many followers does the twitter feed have?

Twitter - 13,725
Facebook - 4,556
Instagram - 806

Post 'reach' (how many people's Facebook or Twitter accounts you are hitting) during our time on the channels probably averaged out at about 50,000-60,000 per month on Facebook and well over 100,000 on Twitter. It sometimes exceeded that if we 'went viral', an example being the tweet following Jim Harvey's departure that amassed 6.000 or so retweets.

[cheshire cat]

Thanks Fabio

[HashtagAlty]

Our reach during our tenure we reached in excess of 9 million people on Twitter.

We averaged over 75,000 per day at many points.

Our best single tweet received a million unique views, with 85,000 responding in one way or another.

in our last full month we reached close to 1 million views.

Not bad for a few Twitter lads.

[Leon]

I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.

1.  The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board.  As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward.  In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.

2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication.  No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations.  Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after.  What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual  - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be.  Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control.  In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.

3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time.  But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family.  I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue.  Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans.  So please can we make every effort to cut this out.

As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club.  Please recognise our positive intentions.  We have a big job ahead of us.  And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.  

The fact that the Twitter password was changed after about 25 minutes of the game strongly suggests it was an impulsive decision made in the moment by one individual, presumably GR, and without thought to the social media coverage of the rest of the match. If it had been a board decision, presumably it would all have happened pre-match?

I appreciate you trying to explain. But you shouldn't ask people to stop criticising the chairman specifically because many fans believe him to be the specific source of the profound malaise affecting our club. At some point you're going to have to decide whose side you're on.

[Spring]

It was clearly a positive gesture of Management Guru, a member of the board to come on the forum and further explain the Twittergate episode and I for one applaud him for doing this. I also totally endorse his comments about not involving family members in criticism and by inference to refrain from flinging out insults instead of having logical discussion. Everyone I believe at the end of the day has the same objective, what is best for Alty F C. The difficulty is that people see a solution to this in different ways and inevitably this will result in criticisms being made of the Chairman and the Board as I believe Management Guru accepts. To not be criticised when we are facing a second relegation in two seasons would be a human impossibility in the passionate world of football.

He has thrown more light on the Twittergate situation which is slowly unravelling but why it has taken so long and been so convuluted is best known to those directly involved. It would now appear from piecing things together that during the match, the Chairman consulted with other board members and  they together took the decision to pull the plug and instructed someone to do this. It would also appear that as the Chairman has devolved communication to a board member he did not involve himself in talking to volunteers or to clarify the situation himself. This then is the rationale that is finally been given to the fans, as I understand it but inevitably the fact that it has taken two weeks to establish  this has clearly caused anguish and has already resulted in a number of longstanding and loyal supporters to quit the club which everyone must see as unfortunate.

Management Guru , if I have misunderstood anything I apologise and please correct me but at least now we understand what happened, I think. Thank you for explaining what happened and why the Chairman remained mute and at least now the fans know they are not being ignored or taken for fools.

[Hulme Robin]

A board decision taken 25 minutes into a game?
Pull the other one.

[CB]

I would like to make a couple of points in addition to my original statement.

1.  The decision to change the password on the Twitter account was a Board decision - discussed and agreed by the Board.  As a board we have recognised that we have not necessarily acted as a collective in the past; and as part of our evolution we are trying to make sure we do going forward.  In this case, we did take a collective decision and increasingly we will do so in the future.

2. I put out the statement, and take accountability for the error because I am the Director with responsibility for communication.  No-one is hiding behind me, I am rather stepping up to meet my obligations.  Again as a board we have recognised that we each need to take individual accountability for the areas we look after.  What this will mean, to be clear, is that there will no longer be just one individual  - the Chairman - being held to account for what goes on at the club, we all will be.  Collectively accountable for the decisions we take together and individually accountable for those areas under our control.  In my opinion this is healthy change and will lead to a healthier club.

3. I have no objection to the board being criticised for mistakes we make, and be sure we will make mistakes from time to time.  But can we please stop the personal criticism of family members, specifically in this case the Rowley family.  I do not believe this has any place in a debate about rights and wrongs of this or any other issue.  Ad hominem commentary has no place in interactions between the board and the fans.  So please can we make every effort to cut this out.

As a board we are trying to change - and we need to in order to face up to and overcome the challenges facing the club.  Please recognise our positive intentions.  We have a big job ahead of us.  And lets keep the criticism directed firmly where it belongs if we do not deliver change - at the board, at each and every one of us but not elsewhere.  

Was it a 'board decision' to change the password halfway through the match?

Going by some of the comments from the Rowley/board camp, I suspect they are stuck in the 1980's and don't appreciate how important social media is. The fact they thought that someone could do it after just 10 mins training prior to a match shows this. They consider it an after-thought, something that keeps the kids amused. Social media (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram etc.) is VITAL for companies.  Companies and brands spend a fortune on social media, so for the work that Jack and Andrew did voluntarily to be dismissed is outrageous and unforgivable. Social media represents how professional a company or business is. The fact that the feed from the Stalybridge game was cut halfway through is embarrassing and unprofessional.

The sooner this antiquated board drag themselves into the 21st century the better.

[taxi Phil]

More likely it was decided BEFORE the game that a Twitter shutdown would be effected if the walkout was mentioned. The chairman "was too busy watching the game"  to discuss the matter with Jack, yet SOMEBODY was monitoring the Twitter feed as a first priority.

In any event, it's purely and simply censorship at a time when the club promised us better communication and openness.

I don't care who pulled the plug, or on whose instructions. What I DO care about is the club, yet again, treating its supporters like idiots. It's cancer, it's incurable, it's the end for me and many other long suffering fans of a club we've loved for years.