Points deduction

Anything yellow and blue
Post Reply
Pe├▒a Oxford United
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1760
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:13 am

Re:

Post by Pe├▒a Oxford United »

&quotIsaac&quot wrote:And as others have said. The 5 point decision is ridiculous, apparently it's only the games he started, but given that he actually scored in the Eastbourne game when he came on as sub (and wasn't it the decisive 4th goal to put us 4-3 up?) then it shows the decision to be exactly what it is, an ill-thought out fudge.
I certainly agree with this and we can be damned sure that supporters of other clubs - and the clubs themselves - are likely to think so too. (I believe Crawley are already complaining.)

Or at very least, as per everything else - if it's not a fudge then could they explain why?
Last edited by Pe├▒a Oxford United on Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
entirely disenchanted
A-Ro
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2594
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Beset by fools and ne'er do wells.

Post by A-Ro »

Because &quotnormal custom and practice and precedent&quot is going to end up in every club calling up before every game to ensure that every player is registered. Just to be safe.
Pe├▒a Oxford United
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1760
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:13 am

Re:

Post by Pe├▒a Oxford United »

&quotA-Ro&quot wrote:Because &quotnormal custom and practice and precedent&quot is going to end up in every club calling up before every game to ensure that every player is registered. Just to be safe.
Well, no it isn't, because it doesn't. And nor would they have reason to do so, unless (as per my comments about relating to Altrincham) they actually register players before every game.
entirely disenchanted
Werthers Original
Dashing young thing
Posts: 584
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 8:30 pm
Location: Oxford

Post by Werthers Original »

We all make mistakes at work, and I don't think Mick Brown has made any more than most. Obviously, how much mistakes at work matter depends on what your job is - a lot if you're a public figure or holding secret data, and not much at all if you work in a library or book shop. Pena's comments strike me as rather poisonous, and reminiscent of those made on the Daily Mail website by people eager to start a witch hunt against the culprit of the day.
Pe├▒a Oxford United
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1760
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:13 am

Post by Pe├▒a Oxford United »

Don't be an arsehole. I've suggested that somebody in a position of responsibility should offer their resignation where they make a serious and damaging error. That's perfectly normal. It's called &quotaccountability&quot. It rarely applies at Oxford United, but it should do.

Your personal remarks are ignorant on several levels and not for the first time.
entirely disenchanted
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:
&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:One mistake versus thousands of good decisions and actions.
Thousands?

Go on, list a few hundred for us then.

I really hate this &quotMick's been a good old Oxford boy for years&quot attitude. I've never thought he was anything special and he seems to be immune from criticism despite not obviously performing on a superhuman level.

It's precisely this sort of approach that brings incompetence.
So unless I spend the next 4 hours typing up a list for you because you can't be bothered to think straight, that means what I've said is untrue.

Utter bollocks.

This has nothing to do with any &quotMick Brown is above criticism&quot nonsense, so stop making up untruths to fit your argument.

Mick Brown should be rightly criticised IF he has made this mistake. But it is nowhere near sufficient for him to lose his job, given the many years of good work he has done.

What breeds incompetence is getting rid of highly knowledgeable and experienced staff, just because you don't like the cut of their jib.
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotWerthers Original&quot wrote:We all make mistakes at work, and I don't think Mick Brown has made any more than most. Obviously, how much mistakes at work matter depends on what your job is - a lot if you're a public figure or holding secret data, and not much at all if you work in a library or book shop. Pena's comments strike me as rather poisonous, and reminiscent of those made on the Daily Mail website by people eager to start a witch hunt against the culprit of the day.
I concur.
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:Don't be an arsehole. I've suggested that somebody in a position of responsibility should offer their resignation where they make a serious and damaging error. That's perfectly normal. It's called &quotaccountability&quot. It rarely applies at Oxford United, but it should do.

Your personal remarks are ignorant on several levels and not for the first time.
No you haven't.

You've clearly tried to make this out to be crime of the century for apparent reasons of personal dis-regard for Mick Brown.

What it is, is a minor error (if indeed he has made an error, and you should know better than to cast aspertions without having access to the facts), which has had significant consequences.

That is not a resigning matter, not even close.
Pe├▒a Oxford United
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1760
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:13 am

Re:

Post by Pe├▒a Oxford United »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:So unless I spend the next 4 hours typing up a list for you because you can't be bothered to think straight, that means what I've said is untrue.
You chose to make the claim, not me. If you think it stands up of its own accord then by all means let it stand: but I think &quotthousands of good decisions and actions&quot is self-evident hyperbole.
&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:What breeds incompetence is getting rid of highly knowledgeable and experienced staff
If the club think he's invaluable then they have the option of refusing his resignation. But the error is no less serious and damaging because the person who makes it has been around for twenty years and the principle of accountability is exactly the same.

It's up to other people to judge whether Brown is the right person for the job: but accountability demands that people acept responsiblity for error and offer to relinquish it where they have not lived up to it.

Personally I think Brown has a reputation that he doesn't merit, but it wouldn't matter if he did merit it. He should show why he bears no responsiblity for the debacle or he should offer to resign. (For all I know, he's made such an offer: but nobody's actually said so.) But if he doesn't, then what level of error would be necessary, before he does? Why the fuck is Mick Brown immune?
entirely disenchanted
Pe├▒a Oxford United
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1760
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:13 am

Re:

Post by Pe├▒a Oxford United »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:for apparent reasons of personal dis-regard for Mick Brown.
What precisely do you mean by this? Can we take that as an internet &quotapparent&quot?
entirely disenchanted
A-Ro
Grumpy old git
Posts: 2594
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Beset by fools and ne'er do wells.

Re:

Post by A-Ro »

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:Incidentally, I think the same principle would apply in many situations. You've basically got to ensure that what you send to an organisation has been received and acknowledged and if you don't, when it comes to trouble later you won't have a leg to stand on.
And there's the rub, the Conference do not acknowledge receipt of the registrations it is up to the sender to assure himself that the message has been received and this is where the system can and will fall down.

I do messaging for a living and the standard practice for ensuring delivery is for the receiver to send back an Ack which the sender reconciles against the original message and then updates its status to Sent.

It would be a very simple process to implement and much more foolproof.
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:You chose to make the claim, not me. If you think it stands up of its own accord then by all means let it stand: but I think &quotthousands of good decisions and actions&quot is self-evident hyperbole.
And you chose to demand excessive support for it or have it regarded as being untrue. In other words utter bollocks.

If you don't think Mick Brown has taken 100s of correct decisions and actions in all the years he has served the club and you think it is &quotself evident hyperbole&quot, I think you've just destroyed your own point.
&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:If the club think he's invaluable then they have the option of refusing his resignation. But the error is no less serious and damaging because the person who makes it has been around for twenty years and the principle of accountability is exactly the same.

It's up to other people to judge whether Brown is the right person for the job: but accountability demands that people acept responsiblity for error and offer to relinquish it where they have not lived up to it.

Personally I think Brown has a reputation that he doesn't merit, but it wouldn't matter if he did merit it. He should show why he bears no responsiblity for the debacle or he should offer to resign. (For all I know, he's made such an offer: but nobody's actually said so.) But if he doesn't, then what level of error would be necessary, before he does? Why the fuck is Mick Brown immune?
QED M'Lud.

Your entire argument is based on your own personal dis-regard for Mick Brown, and that is not a basis on which to carry out staff management.

Again you repeat the mistake. you have no idea who has made a mistake or indeed what that mistake was, yet you seek to crucify the man.

To repeat, the error is not serious, it is the consequences that are significant.

Again you have repeated your ill considered notion that Mick Brown is immune from criticism. I've not seen anyone suggest anything of the sort, so again we must regard this as your own personal vendetta.

This is not even close to a resigning matter, so the issue of the clbu accepting or not does not even arise.

Perhaps you mgiht like to call for the sacking of Jon Murray for the lies printed by the Oxford Mail about the club over many years. No, thought not. One rule for one...
GodalmingYellow
Senile
Posts: 5178
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am

Re:

Post by GodalmingYellow »

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:
&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:for apparent reasons of personal dis-regard for Mick Brown.
What precisely do you mean by this? Can we take that as an internet &quotapparent&quot?
Which word didn't you understand? It is in English. And we take it from your own words.
Dr Bob
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1064
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:16 pm
Location: Nottingham

Post by Dr Bob »

While you chaps carry on....here is what I think I know, along with what we might reasonably infer, from what has been made public. The tone of comments from the club suggests to me they are absolutely clear they did what they had to and were not in the wrong. The deduction of 5, rather than 11, points can (rightly or wrongly) be read as tacit acknowledgement that the Conference knew they slipped up, but for whatever reason felt the need to give a token penalty rather than do nothing and risk the wrath of other clubs....and rather than come out and say their systems are flawed and admit changes are needed. (BTW I do not for a second agree with the TiU conspiracy theorists that the Conference did this to keep us in this league, because they somehow 'need' us).

From what has been said about Alty, it would not be welcomed if the club rang the Conference offices once the documents have been faxed and/or posted (although the suggestion that they and others should do so until or unless better processes are put in place has its merits). Does the Conference not have a simple receipt acknowledgement system in place? If not, why not?

From all this, I strongly suspect that the club do not feel they did anything wrong, nor (importantly) fail to do anything that they would not normally have done in this or any similar situation (such as call the Conference to make sure documents have arrived). If I am right in this, then on the basis of what has been made public so far I see no reason for Mick Brown to be sacked, nor to tender his resignation: the flaw seems to lay with the Conference and its staff and/or processes.

If, in the written explanation for the decision, other material evidence comes to light, this could change. In the meantime, I think we should wait to see what that written explanation says - or, if we do not get to see it, trust that KT will take appropriate action (unless people feel he is now tainted by this episode). That might be an appeal, swallowing the penalty, calling for changes to the Conference system, or sacking someone. As things stand this morning, however, I do not see there is sufficient information for immediate further action, especially doing something as terminal as sacking.
Pe├▒a Oxford United
Middle-Aged Spread
Posts: 1760
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:13 am

Re:

Post by Pe├▒a Oxford United »

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:Which word didn't you understand? It is in English. And we take it from your own words.
Well, not &quotdis-regard&quot you didn't, which isn't really English, but the point is: what are you actually claiming is the basis for my failing to rate Brown as highly as you do? The word &quotpersonal&quot has many meanings.

Are you saying it's because I dislike him as a person? What would be the evidence? If you don't mean that, what do you mean?

I certainly can't work it out from your postings, they're too busy screaming to say anything coherent.
Last edited by Pe├▒a Oxford United on Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
entirely disenchanted
Post Reply