Sports Republics response to “Spygate”

[Sheaf Saint]

They're doing themselves no favours with this continued radio silence.

I get that there is an awful lot to unpick and sort out to find a way forward, but FFS the fans deserve better than this. Even just a holding statement, with a massive apology to everyone who spent money on following the team this season and an acknowledgement that we have been badly let down.

They are still allowing all the narrative to be controlled by outside forces. Yet another total PR disasterclass from SR.

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

5 hours ago, SteveGc said:

So many bedwetters on this subject. The club I have no doubt have acted and been guided and continue to be by their lawyers 

Shitty lawyers by looks of it. 

[Toussaint]

57 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Bottles 😉

I was was fixated on the pepper grinder?!?

[Toussaint]

6 hours ago, SteveGc said:

So many bedwetters on this subject. The club I have no doubt have acted and been guided and continue to be by their lawyers 

Bedwetters, really, that’s the best you have, insult nearly everyone here because you somehow think they have it handled, based on… ?  The layers that have guided them, was it legal aid lawyers or first year law students? 

[Turkish]

32 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

They're doing themselves no favours with this continued radio silence.

I get that there is an awful lot to unpick and sort out to find a way forward, but FFS the fans deserve better than this. Even just a holding statement, with a massive apology to everyone who spent money on following the team this season and an acknowledgement that we have been badly let down.

They are still allowing all the narrative to be controlled by outside forces. Yet another total PR disasterclass from SR.

Even just a statement saying they are conducting an internal view. The club seem to excel in silence whenever there are bad times and publicly slap themselves on the back in good times.

i suspect they’re currently waiting on the FA investigations but even so something is better than silence, that just makes them look like they’re burying their head in the sand. Perception is everything 

[benjii]

8 minutes ago, Toussaint said:

Bedwetters, really, that’s the best you have, insult nearly everyone here because you somehow think they have it handled, based on… ?  The layers that have guided them, was it legal aid lawyers or first year law students? 

In fairness, they instructed good lawyers but I think the damage was done by Saturday lunchtime (i.e. pretty much immediately) by Parsons' apparent boardroom confession and our instant cooperation with the EFL.

He should have just said, "Sorry you feel aggrieved. I don't know anything about this. We will look into it."

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, benjii said:

In fairness, they instructed good lawyers but I think the damage was done by Saturday lunchtime (i.e. pretty much immediately) by Parsons' apparent boardroom confession and our instant cooperation with the EFL.

He should have just said, "Sorry you feel aggrieved. I don't know anything about this. We will look into it."

I can imagine Parsons did it with that ridiculous smirk as well. 

[EssEffCee]

2 minutes ago, benjii said:

In fairness, they instructed good lawyers but I think the damage was done by Saturday lunchtime (i.e. pretty much immediately) by Parsons' apparent boardroom confession and our instant cooperation with the EFL.

He should have just said, "Sorry you feel aggrieved. I don't know anything about this. We will look into it."

Didn't help that we sent a response to the EFL the day before the first leg which contained a lie either.

[Saint86]

11 hours ago, Midfield_General said:

Just out of interest, how do you infer how THB is feeling about the situation from him posting a photo of a pint of Guinness?

3 bottles by Boro this season? Surely?

[benjii]

2 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

Didn't help that we sent a response to the EFL the day before the first leg which contained a lie either.

Yeah. Again, why are we responding so quickly? Stupid.

[sadoldgit]

They released a statement in 20th May and sounded confident that they would overturn the sanction on appeal. We all know how that went! Nothing since but given that there is an internal investigation going on, decisions are being made about how to deal with it and move on and that the FA are also involved, it is crucial that the next club statement is spot on. Every is gutted and deflated. Put out the wrong system and things will only get worse, if that is possible. 
The last statement a few days ago said that there would be another in due course. I would prefer full chapter and verse rather than another holding statement and now that the final is over and out of the way l’m sure we will see something soon.

[EssEffCee]

1 minute ago, benjii said:

Yeah. Again, why are we responding so quickly? Stupid.

Properly daft mate. Clearly won't have had time to look it properly by that point, and Parsons then compounds that with his confession to Gibson the following day.

[Saint86]

10 hours ago, revolution saint said:

I'd assume the lack of a proper response is probably because something fairly big is in the offing and they're sorting it all out.  It doesn't really bother me too much but I can see why there's frustration and it's not unjustified.  

50/50 coin toss for me... Either something big is in the offing, or they're back to being paralysed by indecision and being inept again. After the whole Parsons Seppuku board room incident, it takes a leap of faith to think the club definitely make good calls this summer.

[Toussaint]

7 minutes ago, benjii said:

In fairness, they instructed good lawyers but I think the damage was done by Saturday lunchtime (i.e. pretty much immediately) by Parsons' apparent boardroom confession and our instant cooperation with the EFL.

He should have just said, "Sorry you feel aggrieved. I don't know anything about this. We will look into it."

The lawyer bit was just a throwaway line really, it’s the “bedwetter” bit I found inflammatory. I think we can all agree this is pretty serious and therefore highly emotionally charged. 

[ChristopheVAFC]

I wouldn't want to be in the offices at St. Mary's or the Staplewood Campus.

I think that right now, before the club publicly communicates with the fans about how this whole situation ends, the goal is to find answers to certain questions, make the right decisions (even if they haven't always made the right choices, I agree), and above all, to put out the fire internally.

Dragan must be furious, and it seems he intends to work on the matter personally in the coming days (I understand Dragan will be there in the next few days). Things are likely to get very heated, and I think some things will happen.

The club must first regain the trust of its sponsors, its players, and its fans.

This whole affair must be a lesson for the years to come.

I expect the club to make a statement towards the end of next week.

[macca155]

They'll have to break their silence soon. An email on season tickets must be on hold at the moment, and financially that can't wait much longer.

Nevertheless I don't think we should be too impatient. Probably sensible to let the whole playoff saga quieten down a bit. I'd rather they took their time and make the right decision.

Problem is I don't trust them one bit.

[saintant]

Maybe the silence is because they are expecting more accusations of spying on other clubs to surface. Whole thing is a complete mess  caused by something that gained us little or no advantage and we should never have broken the rules because the outcome has been a nightmare.

[macca155]

2 minutes ago, ChristopheVAFC said:

....the goal is to find answers to certain questions, make the right decisions .... and above all, to put out the fire internally.

Dragan must be furious, and it seems he intends to work on the matter personally in the coming days.....Things are likely to get very heated, and I think some things will happen.

That's a good point, I've envisaged a series of relatively calm crisis meetings with players, lawyers, and sponsors.

In reality they are probably all running around blaming each other, and waiting for Dragon.

[Nolan]

42 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Even just a statement saying they are conducting an internal view. The club seem to excel in silence whenever there are bad times and publicly slap themselves on the back in good times.

i suspect they’re currently waiting on the FA investigations but even so something is better than silence, that just makes them look like they’re burying their head in the sand. Perception is everything 

I think it actually points to the depth of what is going on

problem is, who is going to authorise that statement?

if Dragan is looking at Parsons, Eckert and Spors, then how does the message cascade to the social media team? in my mind it can only come from Solak and it sounds as if he may be quite busy at the moment.

[AlexLaw76]

10 minutes ago, saintant said:

Maybe the silence is because they are expecting more accusations of spying on other clubs to surface. Whole thing is a complete mess  caused by something that gained us little or no advantage and we should never have broken the rules because the outcome has been a nightmare.

We have no idea how accurate this statement is.

Even Tonda himself is quoted in stating that this info gathered (or potentially) gathered by the spying is valuable. 

As said, we could be in a parallel universe where we were cheating all season and Will Still benefited from it and is our manager today

[trousers]

12 hours ago, SaintlyAnd said:

I’ve spent a lot of this week feeling so angry and down about what happened. With people in our club and in particular SR. 

For my own sanity I tried formulating my thoughts on the last few years and how its built up to this. Appreciate its a long read, but was cathartic for me to gather together frustrations.

https://saintsstuff.substack.com/p/too-smart-to-do-the-basics-a-view
 

A good read @SaintlyAnd👍🏻

By the way, does your ex-analyst friend still stand by what he told you the other day, as per your post below? i.e. that we're probably not alone in doing this kind of thing...? (Turns out he was wide of the mark regarding the manager's involvement, in our case at least!) Cheers 

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by trousers

[S-Clarke]

12 hours ago, SaintlyAnd said:

I’ve spent a lot of this week feeling so angry and down about what happened. With people in our club and in particular SR. 

For my own sanity I tried formulating my thoughts on the last few years and how its built up to this. Appreciate its a long read, but was cathartic for me to gather together frustrations.

https://saintsstuff.substack.com/p/too-smart-to-do-the-basics-a-view
 

That is an amazing read, really enjoyed it. Thank you for posting it, you've nailed every point.

It should be published and circulated around the media! I still feel SR get off lightly with all of this.

[Livewire]

I am an in-house solicitor in a relatively large commercial company and am commenting from that perspective. Saints' initial response was brutally and stunningly inept. The tribunal as good as concluded that we lied to them at the outset by saying it was isolated and by making light of it. Who marshalled that initial response? Who gathered the facts? An in-house lawyer stops everything, speaks to everyone relevant and gets to the bottom of it. Was that done? If so, were any lies told to whoever asked the questions? Like someone said above, we had to get on top of the truth internally ASAP, which would have enabled us to formulate an appropriate response. I imagine no one legal was involved until it was too late - which is stunning. Parsons having that informal chat to Gibson at their place - was he advised to do so? By whom? The club were found to run the operation from the top - does that mean Tonda or the management? If a regulator comes after you, collaborate (unless you are Man City) and look like you mean it. We looked like we had something to hide. Not to mention the PR angle, where we were immediately treated like war criminals. There was no response to that. I don't blame the people running the appeal - by then it was too late. 

Edited 6 hours ago by Livewire

[AlexLaw76]

4 minutes ago, Livewire said:

I am an in-house solicitor in a relatively large commercial company and am commenting from that perspective. Saints' initial response was brutally and stunningly inept. The tribunal as good as concluded that we lied to them at the outset by saying it was isolated and by making light of it. Who marshalled that initial response? Who gathered the facts? An in-house lawyer stops everything, speaks to everyone relevant and gets to the bottom of it. Was that done? If so, were any lies told to whoever asked the questions? Like someone said above, we had to get on top of the truth internally ASAP, which would have enabled us to formulate an appropriate response. I imagine no one legal was involved until it was too late - which is stunning. Parsons having that informal chat to Gibson at their place - was he advised to do so? By whom? The club were found to run the operation from the top - does that mean Tonda or the management? If a regulator comes after you, collaborate (unless you are Man City) and look like you mean it. We looked like we had something to hide. Not to mention the PR angle, where we were immediately treated like war criminals. There was no response to that. I don't blame the people running the appeal - by then it was too late. 

If it happened, it is tragically hilarious....ie - "yeah, we'll pay the fine"

 

[Midfield_General]

2 hours ago, Football Special said:

I still dont get it? Bottled it 3 times? 

Yeah I think the implication is three bottles = Boro bottled it three times (which could be read as bottled autos, semis and final, or first leg, second leg and final). 

[S-Clarke]

6 minutes ago, Livewire said:

I am an in-house solicitor in a relatively large commercial company and am commenting from that perspective. Saints' initial response was brutally and stunningly inept. The tribunal as good as concluded that we lied to them at the outset by saying it was isolated and by making light of it. Who marshalled that initial response? Who gathered the facts? An in-house lawyer stops everything, speaks to everyone relevant and gets to the bottom of it. Was that done? If so, were any lies told to whoever asked the questions? Like someone said above, we had to get on top of the truth internally ASAP, which would have enabled us to formulate an appropriate response. I imagine no one legal was involved until it was too late - which is stunning. Parsons having that informal chat to Gibson at their place - was he advised to do so? By whom? The club were found to run the operation from the top - does that mean Tonda or the management? If a regulator comes after you, collaborate (unless you are Man City) and look like you mean it. We looked like we had something to hide. Not to mention the PR angle, where we were immediately treated like war criminals. There was no response to that. I don't blame the people running the appeal - by then it was too late. 

My true opinion is that Parson's simply did not know the full detail, and whilst his approach to assuming we'd get a fine and offering to pay a fine isn't bad in it's self, it's shockingly naive. A good CEO should be all over this, there should be governance within a club to ensure things like this don't even happen. 

I'm all for giving staff independence to make their own decisions, but the CEO still needs to be over those and still needs to be aware of what is going on.

The more and more I read it seems that he was blissfully unaware, and if he was blissfully unaware of this, then what else is he unaware of? Same as Dragon and the others. 

That's incompetence. That's why we need adults in charge, because taking football out of the equation for a second, this is a huge organisational governance failure. And the buck stops at the top with that, that's why they're paid the big bucks.

[sfc4prem]

5 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

My true opinion is that Parson's simply did not know the full detail, and whilst his approach to assuming we'd get a fine and offering to pay a fine isn't bad in it's self, it's shockingly naive. A good CEO should be all over this, there should be governance within a club to ensure things like this don't even happen. 

I'm all for giving staff independence to make their own decisions, but the CEO still needs to be over those and still needs to be aware of what is going on.

The more and more I read it seems that he was blissfully unaware, and if he was blissfully unaware of this, then what else is he unaware of? Same as Dragon and the others. 

That's incompetence. That's why we need adults in charge, because taking football out of the equation for a second, this is a huge organisational governance failure. And the buck stops at the top with that, that's why they're paid the big bucks.

Nutshell.

[Sarnia Cherie]

17 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

That is an amazing read, really enjoyed it. Thank you for posting it, you've nailed every point.

It should be published and circulated around the media! I still feel SR get off lightly with all of this.

Excellent analysis. Reuben Selles didn't get a mention. Another inept manager who spent more time choosing his roll neck jumper and suit for matchday than choosing his team. The silence from the owners is insulting and completely disrespectful to the supporters who have loyally stuck by Saints throughout SR's disastrous tenure. We surely deserve better than that.

[trousers]

27 minutes ago, Livewire said:

I am an in-house solicitor in a relatively large commercial company and am commenting from that perspective. Saints' initial response was brutally and stunningly inept. The tribunal as good as concluded that we lied to them at the outset by saying it was isolated and by making light of it. Who marshalled that initial response? Who gathered the facts? An in-house lawyer stops everything, speaks to everyone relevant and gets to the bottom of it. Was that done? If so, were any lies told to whoever asked the questions? Like someone said above, we had to get on top of the truth internally ASAP, which would have enabled us to formulate an appropriate response. I imagine no one legal was involved until it was too late - which is stunning. Parsons having that informal chat to Gibson at their place - was he advised to do so? By whom? The club were found to run the operation from the top - does that mean Tonda or the management? If a regulator comes after you, collaborate (unless you are Man City) and look like you mean it. We looked like we had something to hide. Not to mention the PR angle, where we were immediately treated like war criminals. There was no response to that. I don't blame the people running the appeal - by then it was too late. 

 

16 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

My true opinion is that Parson's simply did not know the full detail, and whilst his approach to assuming we'd get a fine and offering to pay a fine isn't bad in it's self, it's shockingly naive. A good CEO should be all over this, there should be governance within a club to ensure things like this don't even happen. 

I'm all for giving staff independence to make their own decisions, but the CEO still needs to be over those and still needs to be aware of what is going on.

The more and more I read it seems that he was blissfully unaware, and if he was blissfully unaware of this, then what else is he unaware of? Same as Dragon and the others. 

That's incompetence. That's why we need adults in charge, because taking football out of the equation for a second, this is a huge organisational governance failure. And the buck stops at the top with that, that's why they're paid the big bucks.

I'd like to hear more about our supposed dereliction of the 'governance officer' role in the club during the course of the season. One would imagine that's the root cause of everything that's happened here? Does anyone have any more info on why we have supposedly neglected this important function within the club over several / many months? 

Edited 5 hours ago by trousers

[Midfield_General]

1 hour ago, Nolan said:

I think it actually points to the depth of what is going on

problem is, who is going to authorise that statement?

if Dragan is looking at Parsons, Eckert and Spors, then how does the message cascade to the social media team? in my mind it can only come from Solak and it sounds as if he may be quite busy at the moment.

The way it works in any competent organisation is that the CEO sets the message in partnership with the Head of Comms and potentially an external PR agency/specialist, gets it approved by the Chairman, and then the Head of Comms and his/ her team cascades it out through the relevant media touchpoints - official statement on the OS, club social media channels, briefings to friendly local journalists (e.g. Blackmore at Solent, Alfie at the Echo) etc.

Then with a story of this size the national media pick it up from there and you should have a spokesperson in place and ready to go agreeing to do interviews with selected targeted sources to fight your corner. Normally at least one of the broadsheets (Saints have traditionally had good relationships with the Telegraph and Guardian), at least one of the major radio stations (e.g. TalkSport or BBC 5Live), and Sky.

As CEO, setting that narrative is a key part of Parsons' role, and as Head of Comms, advising on that and then getting it out there is basically the entire point of Sibley.

The fact that even Blackmore and Alfie have turned on the club saying they're completely in the dark shows that Parsons and Sibley can't even do the basics right. Giving local journalists 'our side of the story' and getting them to go in to bat for you should be the easiest thing in the world because it's a relationship where the two parties need each other. They haven't even managed to do that. 

Obviously when things get legal you have to be more careful with what you say, but people with skill and experience know how to do what they need to do while staying the right side of the line. Look at how Boro's machine went into overdrive. They won the spin war (and nationwide media support, which then influences all the neutrals) instantly because Saints just stayed completely mute and let Boro fill the demand for content with their narrative. Even now, they're still letting everyone else dictate what people think. 

Saints are a complete joke from top to bottom. They simply don't know what they're doing, it's as clear as day.

Edited 5 hours ago by Midfield_General

[Jack]

Starting to feel like they’re just hoping the media move on to the next thing, the World Cup and Tuchel’s weird squad, or whatever, this will all blow over and they can get away without doing anything meaningful at all. 
 

SR finally (accidentally) stumbled across something that resembles a competent manager, even if he’s a cheat, they know their track record on employing managers is absolutely atrocious so I’m sure they won’t want to sack Tonda if they don’t have to. I reckon they’re sitting tight to see what the FA do, if he’s banned then their hand is forced, if he’s not then I expect some piss weak statement saying we’ll learn from our mistakes and carry on.
 

If somehow Tonda is not banned for next season and the club decide to back him, I seriously hope they’ve made sure that he’d have the backing of the players. SR are probably completely unaware but they’re on seriously thin ice with the fans (again). 

[SaintsLoyal]

I will start with the 'message' made on the morning of the 2nd leg at St Marys from Poundshop

 

The first half of it is okay in parts, but there are also areas that highlight the lack of seriousness towards what had happened. It sounded like the club wanted to stall the whole process until after the final. Parsons claimed he knew the character of the staff when he clearly didn’t. At that point, he had already lied to the EFL, saying this wouldn’t happen at Saints. And yes, he is involved in the football side of things alongside Spors. He tried to do it alone when Wilcox left, and the agents took the piss out of him for being so clueless.

The second half of the statement is pointless, irrelevant stuff that should never have been part of the “message”.

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by SaintsLoyal

[ItchenRob]

30 minutes ago, Livewire said:

I am an in-house solicitor in a relatively large commercial company and am commenting from that perspective. Saints' initial response was brutally and stunningly inept. The tribunal as good as concluded that we lied to them at the outset by saying it was isolated and by making light of it. Who marshalled that initial response? Who gathered the facts? An in-house lawyer stops everything, speaks to everyone relevant and gets to the bottom of it. Was that done? If so, were any lies told to whoever asked the questions? Like someone said above, we had to get on top of the truth internally ASAP, which would have enabled us to formulate an appropriate response. I imagine no one legal was involved until it was too late - which is stunning. Parsons having that informal chat to Gibson at their place - was he advised to do so? By whom? The club were found to run the operation from the top - does that mean Tonda or the management? If a regulator comes after you, collaborate (unless you are Man City) and look like you mean it. We looked like we had something to hide. Not to mention the PR angle, where we were immediately treated like war criminals. There was no response to that. I don't blame the people running the appeal - by then it was too late. 

Until I retired a few years back I held a very similar role and I expect you are pretty much spot on.

I do take exception to Squire Patton Boggs being described as 'shitty' as I regularly instructed them myself 😄😇

I suspect they were just brought in too late.

[trousers]

6 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

The way it works in any competent organisation is that the CEO sets the message in partnership with the Head of Comms, gets it approved by the Chairman, and then the Head of Comms and his/ her team cascades it out through the relevant media touchpoints - official statement on the OS, club social media channels, briefings to friendly local journalists (e.g. Blackmore at Solent, Alfie at the Echo) etc.

Then with a story of this size the national media pick it up from there and you should have a spokesperson in place and ready to go agreeing to do interviews with selected targeted sources to fight your corner. Normally at least one of the broadsheets (Saints have traditionally had good relationships with the Telegraph and Guardian) and at least one of the major radio stations (e.g. TalkSport or BBC 5Live). 

As CEO, setting that narrative is a key part of Parsons' role, and as Head of Comms, advising on that and then getting it out there is basically the entire point of Sibley.

The fact that even Blackmore and Alfie have turned on the club saying they're completely in the dark shows that Parsons and Sibley can't even do the basics right. Giving local journalists 'our side of the story' and getting them to go in to bat for you should be the easiest thing in the world because it's a relationship where the two parties need each other. They haven't even managed to do that. 

Obviously when things get legal you have to be more careful with what you say, but people with skill and experience know how to do what they need to do while staying the right side of the line. Look at how Boro's machine went into overdrive. They won the spin war (and nationwide media support, which then influences all the neutrals) instantly because Saints just stayed completely mute and let Boro fill the demand for content with their narrative. Even now, they're still letting everyone else dictate what people think. 

Saints are a complete joke from top to bottom. They simply don't know what they're doing, it's as clear as day.

Is Sibley definitely our "Head of Comms"...? I'd always assumed he reported into such a person rather than being the head honcho in that department... 😳

[Livewire]

1 minute ago, ItchenRob said:

Until I retired a few years back I held a very similar role and I expect you are pretty much spot on.

I do take exception to Squire Patton Boggs being described as 'shitty' as I regularly instructed them myself 😄😇

I suspect they were just brought in too late.

Agree 💯. SPB are a good law firm. Kate Gallafent knows her stuff. They came on the scene likely when it was too late. Which is why I am zeroing in on the initial response. They had to instruct SPB straight away. That would have increased the likelihood of getting ahead of things and reacting appropriately. As it was, the initial reaction was... inadequate. It sealed our punishment.

[Saint-Reece]

2 minutes ago, trousers said:

Is Sibley definitely our "Head of Comms"...? I'd always assumed he reported into such a person rather than being the head honcho in that department... 😳

Yeah, think he’s Group Head of Comms and PR, something like that anyway.
 

I’m sure Fabrice can resurface to confirm. 😀

[SaintsLoyal]

We then move to the appeal statement

 

Woeful ... and just confirms Phil Parsons is totally out of his depth and thats no surprise being recruited with no experience whatsoever in running a football club or huge staff numbers. How did he get the job ? 

 

 

[trousers]

8 minutes ago, SaintsLoyal said:

I will start with the 'message' made on the morning of the 2nd leg at St Marys

 

The first half of it is ok in parts, but there is also areas that highlight the lack of seriousness towards what had happened. It sounded like the club wanted to stall the whole process to after the final. Parsons claimed he knew the character of staff when he clearly didnt. And yes he is involved in the football stuff alongside Spors, he tried to do it alone when Wilcox left and the agents took the piss out of him for being so clueless.

The second half ot the statement is pointless irrelevent stuff that should never have been part of the 'message'

 

 

How high up in the Dyson managerial chain was Parsons? And how did that qualify him to be CEO in a high profile / public facing industry such as professional football...?

[Gloucester Saint]

9 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

The way it works in any competent organisation is that the CEO sets the message in partnership with the Head of Comms, gets it approved by the Chairman, and then the Head of Comms and his/ her team cascades it out through the relevant media touchpoints - official statement on the OS, club social media channels, briefings to friendly local journalists (e.g. Blackmore at Solent, Alfie at the Echo) etc.

Then with a story of this size the national media pick it up from there and you should have a spokesperson in place and ready to go agreeing to do interviews with selected targeted sources to fight your corner. Normally at least one of the broadsheets (Saints have traditionally had good relationships with the Telegraph and Guardian) and at least one of the major radio stations (e.g. TalkSport or BBC 5Live). 

As CEO, setting that narrative is a key part of Parsons' role, and as Head of Comms, advising on that and then getting it out there is basically the entire point of Sibley.

The fact that even Blackmore and Alfie have turned on the club saying they're completely in the dark shows that Parsons and Sibley can't even do the basics right. Giving local journalists 'our side of the story' and getting them to go in to bat for you should be the easiest thing in the world because it's a relationship where the two parties need each other. They haven't even managed to do that. 

Obviously when things get legal you have to be more careful with what you say, but people with skill and experience know how to do what they need to do while staying the right side of the line. Look at how Boro's machine went into overdrive. They won the spin war (and nationwide media support, which then influences all the neutrals) instantly because Saints just stayed completely mute and let Boro fill the demand for content with their narrative. Even now, they're still letting everyone else dictate what people think. 

Saints are a complete joke from top to bottom. They simply don't know what they're doing, it's as clear as day.

10000%

Don’t get me wrong, delighted that Middlesbrough didn’t con their way into the PL yesterday. But I cannot see how SR can recover this situation, the horse has bolted long ago on their watch and the levels on incompetence and laziness on display are worse than anything I’ve seen in a professional context.

I wouldn’t let them run a bath. My loyalty is to our fans, very agnostic and apathetic about the football club for the foreseeable future. 

[trousers]

Just now, Saint-Reece said:

Yeah, think he’s Group Head of Comms and PR, something like that anyway.

Well, his head's got to be one of the first on the chopping block in that case, surely, give how woeful our communication has been throughout...?

[Midfield_General]

14 hours ago, SaintlyAnd said:

I’ve spent a lot of this week feeling so angry and down about what happened. With people in our club and in particular SR. 

For my own sanity I tried formulating my thoughts on the last few years and how its built up to this. Appreciate its a long read, but was cathartic for me to gather together frustrations.

https://saintsstuff.substack.com/p/too-smart-to-do-the-basics-a-view
 

That's an excellent piece. Spot on, and absolutely right about the bigger picture. 

Edited 5 hours ago by Midfield_General

[LGTL]

14 minutes ago, trousers said:

Is Sibley definitely our "Head of Comms"...? I'd always assumed he reported into such a person rather than being the head honcho in that department... 😳

Yes, he is, and he should absolutely be sacked for his role (or complete non-role) in the media fallout of all this. 

[Midfield_General]

45 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

My true opinion is that Parson's simply did not know the full detail, and whilst his approach to assuming we'd get a fine and offering to pay a fine isn't bad in it's self, it's shockingly naive. A good CEO should be all over this, there should be governance within a club to ensure things like this don't even happen. 

I'm all for giving staff independence to make their own decisions, but the CEO still needs to be over those and still needs to be aware of what is going on.

The more and more I read it seems that he was blissfully unaware, and if he was blissfully unaware of this, then what else is he unaware of? Same as Dragon and the others. 

That's incompetence. That's why we need adults in charge, because taking football out of the equation for a second, this is a huge organisational governance failure. And the buck stops at the top with that, that's why they're paid the big bucks.

'I didn't know' is absolutely incompetence, and it's not a defence. Never has been. Especially not at CEO level. 

The moment he got wind of it (which was before the first leg), the CEO should be kicking down doors and going scorched earth internally to find out exactly what has happened. Only once you know the situation can you formulate the plan, and for something of this magnitude, the only plan was to get the best possible specialist defence lawyer, and a crisis management specialist PR team, have them set the strategy, and then follow it. 

But instead, apparently without anything like knowledge of the full picture, Parsons strolls up to the man accusing him and admits guilt, because he hadn't made it his only priority to find out what had actually happened, how deep it went, how serious it was or what the actual ramifications were. 

It's the most amateur, ridiculous, damaging thing he could possibly have done. He absolutely has to go. 

Edit: Livewire beat me to it. Sorry, didn't read all the way back before mouthing off

Edited 5 hours ago by Midfield_General

[The Wyvern]

16 minutes ago, trousers said:

How high up in the Dyson managerial chain was Parsons? And how did that qualify him to be CEO in a high profile / public facing industry such as professional football...?

EMEA President. A decent level, but I’d guess in reality it’s just a senior business admin role. Very little public facing, thinking on your feet to make deals, or crisis management.

Would expect him to be fairly proficient with corporate governance though. 

Edited 5 hours ago by The Wyvern

[Midfield_General]

28 minutes ago, trousers said:

Is Sibley definitely our "Head of Comms"...? I'd always assumed he reported into such a person rather than being the head honcho in that department... 😳

Group Head of Communications and PR:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jordan-sibley-5b898423/

That's as high as it goes before you get to the Board. He'll report to Parsons. 

He's a lifer who started at the bottom, worked his way up and has never worked anywhere else. So he only knows 'the Southampton way', which explains why it's a PR disaster. 

[Saint Gifford]

I’m sorry but Southampton FC is hardly a worldwide business with offices in every major city on the planet. 
 

The chain of command is about 3 people not layers of management as in the corporate world. 
 

Of course everyone knew, probably not Dragon because he is so distant from everything connected with football. 
 

The lot of them are complicit, and if they are not what the fcuk is going on from a business perspective of running a football club. 
 

Would never in a million years would have happened under Marcus, Nicole, and Potts. 
 

We are just so unprofessional and like a Sunday League set up behind the scenes. 

[trousers]

18 minutes ago, The Wyvern said:

EMEA President. A decent level, but I’d guess in reality it’s just a senior business admin role. Very little public facing, thinking on your feet to make deals, or crisis management.

Would expect him to be fairly proficient with corporate governance though. 

Which, ironically, is our biggest 'faux pas' in all of this!

Edited 5 hours ago by trousers

[saint michael]

14 hours ago, SaintlyAnd said:

I’ve spent a lot of this week feeling so angry and down about what happened. With people in our club and in particular SR. 

For my own sanity I tried formulating my thoughts on the last few years and how its built up to this. Appreciate its a long read, but was cathartic for me to gather together frustrations.

https://saintsstuff.substack.com/p/too-smart-to-do-the-basics-a-view
 

Very good read and analysis. You should add in a bit about Seles too and then send this to Solak for response. I bet he has never looked at or considered the holistic position of his ownership beyond the financial. 

[sadoldgit]

17 minutes ago, Saint Gifford said:

I’m sorry but Southampton FC is hardly a worldwide business with offices in every major city on the planet. 
 

The chain of command is about 3 people not layers of management as in the corporate world. 
 

Of course everyone knew, probably not Dragon because he is so distant from everything connected with football. 
 

The lot of them are complicit, and if they are not what the fcuk is going on from a business perspective of running a football club. 
 

Would never in a million years would have happened under Marcus, Nicole, and Potts. 
 

We are just so unprofessional and like a Sunday League set up behind the scenes. 

I’m not so sure about Cortese!

[Gloucester Saint]

35 minutes ago, The Wyvern said:

EMEA President. A decent level, but I’d guess in reality it’s just a senior business admin role. Very little public facing, thinking on your feet to make deals, or crisis management.

Would expect him to be fairly proficient with corporate governance though. 

The main qualification was probably a 7 day membership at Stoneham GC. MLT has been a member there for donkey’s years and Solak is known to play there when in the UK.