Closure of the official Club Forum

[Diatribe]

I can tell you that amongst the committee members, there was a view that the forum was not representative,

I presume that what they meant was, the forum wasn't representative of their views.

 but most of the complaints about the board came from one particular individual...

I don't suppose by any chance this particular individual happens to share the surname of a comedian from a 1970's sitcom.

NB. There's no prizes for guessing by my input to this forum that there isn't much transpiring in the cricket or antique world at the moment 

[eastsax]

I don't suppose by any chance this particular individual happens to share the surname of a comedian from a 1970's sitcom.

It has to be said that the desire to close down the OMB can be traced back to the days of David East's tenure. However, the will to actualise that never transpired until the new broom was put in place.

[freddiefisher]

the club were very accommodating in having a forum that allowed certain criticism to b fair. it was their forum after all, they could do what they wanted. however in going to the trouble of having a forum, it was annoying that it was undermined by it being heavily moderated and some subjects being never posted by certain people, and a distinct inconsistency in what was allowed and by which posters.

for example criticism of non playing nigel, and the fact his tenure has correlated with a malaise was never allowed. and highlighting the non playing staff costs at the club.

likewise the whole kaneria affair. i think i had to pm a member (galboy maybe?) with information on this (maybe under a previous guise, as the admin were often keen to find out who was who), as my post on the subject was either heavily edited or removed after posting, meaning a message stream made know sense...i was revealing why a certain player was released, yet it wasnt allowed on the board despite it being true, however i was vindicated by what was allowed to be aired in public eventually.

hopefully an unofficial forum will out the truth.

[Blocky]

I can tell you that amongst the committee members, there was a view that the forum was not representative,

I presume that what they meant was, the forum wasn't representative of their views.

 but most of the complaints about the board came from one particular individual...

I don't suppose by any chance this particular individual happens to share the surname of a comedian from a 1970's sitcom.

NB. There's no prizes for guessing by my input to this forum that there isn't much transpiring in the cricket or antique world at the moment 

Clearly the Committee both cricket and General wear seriously tinted spectacles.  I, as you will probably have guessed, drink regularly in the orange tree.  On any Froday night, there are between 5-20 members of ECCC in the pub.  I speak to all of them regularly, and I can assure you, the forum was indeed representative of the general view.  None of these other members posted on the old forum to my knowledge, yet they all shared the following opinions:

1.  The committee was fairly clueless and the old CEO should have been sacked, not allowed to resign.
2.  The coach had become stale and needed either replacing or some major assistance
3. Our player recruitment policy has been appalling in terms of both domestic and o'sea in recent years.
4. The beer at the ECG is also appalling and something needs to be done about it.
5.  The price for membership was not VFM for working members
6. Fossie should be asked to relenquish one day captaincy and concentrate on being a world class keeper for the remainder of his career.


by closing the moderated forum, ECCC have uncovered the hornets nest.

Squareleg will hopefully find willing volunteers to serve on the committee with the ability to bring about change, and now unmoderated anti club comments can be aired.

it's going to get very interesting.

[nat]

"Squareleg will hopefully find willing volunteers to serve on the committee with the ability to bring about change, and now unmoderated anti club comments can be aired."

I'd be willing to stand for the committee but only if several other like minded (reform agenda) members did so too. We'd need a putsch of the committees to effect any change.

[cashless]

I'd be willing to stand for the committee but only if several other like minded (reform agenda) members did so too. We'd need a putsch of the committees to effect any change.

The problem of a committee all thinking alike is that outsiders ideas are quashed as they are not in line with committees thoughts.

[nat]

I'd be willing to stand for the committee but only if several other like minded (reform agenda) members did so too. We'd need a putsch of the committees to effect any change.

The problem of a committee all thinking alike is that outsiders ideas are quashed as they are not in line with committees thoughts.

And the problem is ...?

That's why I have always favoured benevolent dictatorship.

[squarelegumpire]

"Squareleg will hopefully find willing volunteers to serve on the committee with the ability to bring about change, and now unmoderated anti club comments can be aired."

I'd be willing to stand for the committee but only if several other like minded (reform agenda) members did so too. We'd need a putsch of the committees to effect any change.

I don't think, from what I hear that EVERONE needs to go. In any event there are only three seats in any given year.

If anyone wants to volunteer, as last year I'm happy to collate details.. squarelegumpire@btinternet.com

Discretion assured.

[vim]

There is a, now unofficial unofficial Essex CCC forum. It was created just after the 20 all out.

There is little traffic. The member who created it should not have almost exclusively tried to recruit the 45+ mummy boys who sit in the River Stand for LVCC matches.

[nat]

...The member who created it should not have almost exclusively tried to recruit the 45+ mummy boys who sit in the River Stand for LVCC matches.

How do you know? Do they discuss Waltham Forest FC and the times of trains to Colchester?

[ClaireW]

"Squareleg will hopefully find willing volunteers to serve on the committee with the ability to bring about change, and now unmoderated anti club comments can be aired."

I'd be willing to stand for the committee but only if several other like minded (reform agenda) members did so too. We'd need a putsch of the committees to effect any change.

I don't think, from what I hear that EVERONE needs to go. In any event there are only three seats in any given year.

If anyone wants to volunteer, as last year I'm happy to collate details.. squarelegumpire@btinternet.com

Discretion assured.

Actually there are a total of 5 places each year (on a 3 year cycle). However this year NOBODY is due to retire...Graham Saville's birthday is after the cut off date and I believe he will stand for another term, so any candidate has to get enough support to unseat a sitting member...and two of the sitting committee members this year are former players who get elected come what may, even if they have presided over a season that featured 20 all out.

I'll confess to a vested interest, as if I decide to continue, I'm one of the 5 up for re-election this year...tbh I'm fed up that in the intervening years nobody stands, but every third year there's a ballot and I have to run the gauntlet...with 2 places guaranteed to go to Graham Saville and Ronnie Irani!

Next year however on my calculation there will be 2 vacancies. Undoubtedly some of the clique that exists on the committee will encourage their mates to stand, however, any new brooms would stand as good a chance as the chosen ones in an election.

What has been said by some, however is correct, once elected it isn't easy to effect change as there are 14 other people there who don't necessarily agree with each other, and the cricket committee (which is probably the one most people would like to see some change on) doesn't really answer to anyone.

[Andy]

Fascinating stuff. I always thought the club had a very short structure - basically the Captain, Manager and Chair ran the whole show. Has there always been such a morass of committees, or is there a causal link between bureaucratisation and the decline of the club?

[afinetickletoleg]

Fascinating stuff. I always thought the club had a very short structure - basically the Captain, Manager and Chair ran the whole show. Has there always been such a morass of committees, or is there a causal link between bureaucratisation and the decline of the club?

Does that mean that there may be some sympathy forthcoming towards the restrictions that the coach, Grayson or otherwise, has to work under?   I can't imagine that it would be easy for anyone with Irani poking his oar in.

[Andy]

Does that mean that there may be some sympathy forthcoming towards the restrictions that the coach, Grayson or otherwise, has to work under?   I can't imagine that it would be easy for anyone with Irani poking his oar in.

Not easy, but that's no different from the lot of managers at the biggest Premier League clubs with their rich owners. Difference being, when the team doesn't perform the manager is asked to leave asap.

Believe it or not, I suggested Larry instead of Irani as skipper and suggested Larry needed a good couple of years to settle in as coach.

However, I tend to judge Larry on what he says. Comments about the 'priorities' of the club don't help his cause.

[ClaireW]

Fascinating stuff. I always thought the club had a very short structure - basically the Captain, Manager and Chair ran the whole show. Has there always been such a morass of committees, or is there a causal link between bureaucratisation and the decline of the club?

There has indeed always been a morass of committees! Until a few years back the general committee consisted of 18 members plus treasurer, president and solicitor. Now it's 15 plus the President, no solicitor and the treasurer comes from within the 15 general committee members.

There are actually a couple less sub committees now as some were merged into the Membership sub committee. Most of what comes before the general committee is a fait accomplis from the "executive" committee.

The one thing that has been consitent throughout is that the cricket committee don't seem to answer to anyone!