please join in the protest

[Genghis Khan]

Maybe a meeting with VR/Fedetovas and some fans Reps to discuss the following points would be a starting point :

 

1) The promise that the debt was going to be cleared wasn't kept. Infact it very nearly doubled.

 

2) The treatment of certain players and managers which caused great disruption throughout the team.

 

3) The ever increasing number of useless FBK Kaunas players that found there way to club. These players cost the club money in 'Registration Fee's but for some reason this has never been disclosed to the minor Shareholders.

 

4) The lack of attendence by the BOD and the Chairman at matches.

 

5) The behaviour of the club's Chairman at more than one AGM.

 

6) The waste of time and money on the New Stand proposal.

 

7) The short/long term plan for the club.

 

8) Why, if the owner doesn't trust the Managers signing policy, did he decide to continue with him a coach ?

 

9) Why is the owner still choosing players for the club ? And how does he rate his signings for the Club since 2004 ?

 

10) How does the club propose to pay UBIG/UKIOS the huge some of money it's due in 2010 ?

 

DH, you are down as one of the 35 on here that say they will attend - are you prepared to put these questions to VR / Serjey yoursellf or are you expecting sneakypete to do it?

[Francis Albert]

why would somebody want to get involved if he thought the fans of the club were just shoulder shruggers, or he didnt even know if the fans wanted somebody new through the door?

 

You'd think he'd at least want a passionate support as part of his investment

 

Well he'd certainly want a support that goes on turning up at games and paying, and, despite predictions for four years that people would be voting with their feet in massive numbers, so far the club continues to be supported in impressive numbers, all things considered. Whether the sight and sound of fans telling the owner who has for all his faults probably invested more than all previous owners put together to GTF would be an encouragement I'm not so sure. Just as I am not convinced the sight and sound of "Pieman Pieman GTF" was a really big inducement to potential local investors last time around.

[Gambo]

at least i care about my team you ****ing **** and am prepared to do something about rather than sit on my arse

 

i hope that the board at least listen to the fans for once and give us a statement to what is actually happening instead of bull**** . i am hoping to at least hear something postive from our board who many think the sun shines out of there arse and am willing to do something i.e. protest at the running of my beloved club instead of doing nothing . we should at least be united instead of bickering and only used real radio and een ti drum up support . am not trying to upset any fans ,just want thye board to realise that were no mugs

 

The highlighted bits are going well.

[Colonel Kurtz]

Surely the decision is simple..if your going to proterst after the Celtic match then go behind the stand,if your not then dont

It will be easy for us in the WB as we can nip out and back in whilst having a pint...look out for the red banner with the hammer and sickle in the corner emblazoned with NYET ROMANOV.

Good luck to the boy...the people who have not came across well,are those on here who probably have a degree in English lit and do the back shift at Macdonalds.

[Victorian]

Maybe a meeting with VR/Fedetovas and some fans Reps to discuss the following points would be a starting point :

 

1) The promise that the debt was going to be cleared wasn't kept. Infact it very nearly doubled.

 

2) The treatment of certain players and managers which caused great disruption throughout the team.

 

3) The ever increasing number of useless FBK Kaunas players that found there way to club. These players cost the club money in 'Registration Fee's but for some reason this has never been disclosed to the minor Shareholders.

 

4) The lack of attendence by the BOD and the Chairman at matches.

 

5) The behaviour of the club's Chairman at more than one AGM.

 

6) The waste of time and money on the New Stand proposal.

 

7) The short/long term plan for the club.

 

8) Why, if the owner doesn't trust the Managers signing policy, did he decide to continue with him a coach ?

 

9) Why is the owner still choosing players for the club ? And how does he rate his signings for the Club since 2004 ?

 

10) How does the club propose to pay UBIG/UKIOS the huge some of money it's due in 2010 ?

well done to DH for bringing some sort of structured and coherent agenda to proceedings. as someone has since said perhaps a lot of those points would be better suited to the AGM or to some kind of official approach to the club and a request for a conversation to be entered into.

 

some of those points focus on historical events and policies therefore perhaps there would be a degree of going over old ground without any meaningful purpose however there are some good and pertinent points in there as well which could be explored with the club.

 

it would be highly interesting to know whether the protest leading OP agreed with any of it. wouldn't be ironic if a far more credible and intelligent poster like DH attempted to make sense of his would be protest... only for the would be protester to turn round and have nothing to do with it.

 

the trouble is that we are now into page 12 and we still haven't heard the aims and objectives from the horses mouth.

[speedbump]

Surely the decision is simple..if your going to proterst after the Celtic match then go behind the stand,if your not then dont

It will be easy for us in the WB as we can nip out and back in whilst having a pint...look out for the red banner with the hammer and sickle in the corner emblazoned with NYET ROMANOV.

Good luck to the boy...the people who have not came across well,are those on here who probably have a degree in English lit and do the back shift at Macdonalds.

 

Aye, the OP has came across as very well rounded chap with constructive points and a charming manner about him:stuart::stuart:

[scott_jambo]

Good luck mate.

 

It wont make any difference but it is about time someone protested against Romanov.

[redm]

The guy is protesting against the way Vlad is treating us THE FANS.He is not asking Vlad to leave or spend millions,but Vlad will make millions selling Driver and Wallace and replace them with keek.A lot of you's are saying what good will it do,well we've never protested before,so we wont know if Vlad maybe will take notice.What makes me laugh is that Speirs basically said the same on Sunday and he was applauded,but of course he had a better vocabulary then the OP,a lot of posters on here seem terrified to protest and are willing to sit back and watch us lose our best players,take our money to give to amatuer players NOBODY has ever heard of,WONT buy us the striker we so badly need,then pop his head round our door ONCE every 2 years,talk his usual bile to the media about the OF.

And as for all the posters who wrote'' oh imagine the OP talking the media.what an embarrasment'',well you dont have to worry about that as Vlad does it at least 6 times a year.

 

How come you got the inside track on what the protest is about and we didn't?

 

Will you be attending?

[Colonel Kurtz]

Aye, the OP has came across as very well rounded chap with constructive points and a charming manner about him:stuart::stuart:

 

Im no wanting to take the boy out for dinner then to the pictures.

We have a long history of protest in The Marmion...NRA .legilisation of Johnny Cash etc.

One of the regulars had his bag stolen containing his hash and his viagra,the joke goin around thje boozer is that the polis are looking for a boy with an erection laughing at his own jokes

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Oh well, it should made Sky Sports News.

 

Can someone post the footage on YouTube when it happens? There is a morbid fascination where car crashes are concerned.

 

Thanks in advance.

[portobellojambo1]

DH's questions are more suitable for an AGM and should be properly formulated submitted in writing to the club, if this is submitted properly within the rules then they are required to provide some answers or explanations , iam often surprised that our shareholders don't seem to use what powers they do have to try to obtain the information sought. Iam surprised nobody has done this before or if they have what success have they had?

 

 

Agree with the above, they are the sort of questions that should be raised at an AGM, and in some cases I believe have (the more historical/general questions). I think, however, there is a combination of circumstances which mean that on many occasions at AGM's the sensible questions are lost, amongst the drivel some people turn up and spout (as alluded to by BB) and there is also the problem that if the board/chairman/owner don't want to answer the question or questions put to them they won't.

 

I'm not convinced that by sitting down in a private meeting with Romanov the answers hoped for will be forthcoming either, assuming a meeting with Romanov can be arranged. This is something that certain organised groups have been trying to arrange for a long while now, without any luck.

[speedbump]

Im no wanting to take the boy out for dinner then to the pictures.

We have a long history of protest in The Marmion...NRA .legilisation of Johnny Cash etc.

One of the regulars had his bag stolen containing his hash and his viagra,the joke goin around thje boozer is that the polis are looking for a boy with an erection laughing at his own jokes

 

I will never call it The Marmion.

[Victorian]

How come you got the inside track on what the protest is about and we didn't?

 

Will you be attending?

people have been waiting so long for the horse's mouth to speak that they now appear to be making up their own version of what is within the horse's mind.

 

and well they might.

 

this aint no talking horse... more like a rocking horse.

[Nelly Terraces]

Hearts have the lamest support in Britain.

 

Spinkless and weak. The worst support I've stood amongst in the last 10 years.

 

Other punters just laugh at us having our tummies tickled by the current regime at the club.

 

Protest? Do me a favour. Most of the blunts on here wouldn't protest if you walked into their house, shagged their wives/daughters, dumped on the living room floor, scooped all their beer and nicked their flatscreen. Like I said, spineless and weak.

 

Cheers.

[lost in leith]

Agree with the above, they are the sort of questions that should be raised at an AGM, and in some cases I believe have (the more historical/general questions). I think, however, there is a combination of circumstances which mean that on many occasions at AGM's the sensible questions are lost, amongst the drivel some people turn up and spout (as alluded to by BB) and there is also the problem that if the board/chairman/owner don't want to answer the question or questions put to them they won't.

 

I'm not convinced that by sitting down in a private meeting with Romanov the answers hoped for will be forthcoming either, assuming a meeting with Romanov can be arranged. This is something that certain organised groups have been trying to arrange for a long while now, without any luck.

 

Until recently the Shareholders Association used to submit a list of questions in advance. That meant that you could be reasonably sure that the key issues would be covered, and those answering on behalf of the Board would have answers prepared.

 

That hasn't happened at the last couple of AGMs I've attended. The difficulty then is it's pot luck as to whether the people who get picked to ask a question have something sensible to say. As BB says, a lot of time can get used up by complete slavers. Ironically the person who spouted the most drivel at the AGM BB refers to was Roman Romanov

[portobellojambo1]

WONT buy us the striker we so badly need

 

See this is the bit I don't understand berrasbraw.

 

I'm no great lover of Vladimir Romanov and one of the things we were most disappointed in was his insistence on pushing players on the managers he appointed. At the beginning of this season Csaba Laszlo asked what funds were available to him for players, and he was told the parameters within which he could work. He knew these parameters before any player had arrived.

 

Based on those parameters, and the fact he, Csaba Laszlo, knew we needed someone to score goals for us regularly, he splashed out on players such as Balogh, Santana and Bouzid. One could argue, very well I think, that resources at Tynecastle (Kello/McDonald, McGowan/Zaliukas/Goncalves, Novikovas/Templeton for example) meant these were positions which didn't need players brought in immediately. Once he had spent all the budget available to him it then became apparent we still didn't have a goal scorer, and Mr Romanov is being blamed for that.

 

Do you honestly fecking believe that Mr Romanov should be the target of abuse for something that wasn't his fault. He stayed out the way, provided the funds and let the manager select the players, and Romanov is now being blamed for doing what the fans wanted him to do.

[Gambo]

See this is the bit I don't understand berrasbraw.

 

I'm no great lover of Vladimir Romanov and one of the things we were most disappointed in was his insistence on pushing players on the managers he appointed. At the beginning of this season Csaba Laszlo asked what funds were available to him for players, and he was told the parameters within which he could work. He knew these parameters before any player had arrived.

 

Based on those parameters, and the fact he, Csaba Laszlo, knew we needed someone to score goals for us regularly, he splashed out on players such as Balogh, Santana and Bouzid. One could argue, very well I think, that resources at Tynecastle (Kello/McDonald, McGowan/Zaliukas/Goncalves, Novikovas/Templeton for example) meant these were positions which didn't need players brought in immediately. Once he had spent all the budget available to him it then became apparent we still didn't have a goal scorer, and Mr Romanov is being blamed for that.

 

Do you honestly fecking believe that Mr Romanov should be the target of abuse for something that wasn't his fault. He stayed out the way, provided the funds and let the manager select the players, and Romanov is now being blamed for doing what the fans wanted him to do.

 

Good post PJ1, and some of the above is why i am struggling to get my head around the idea of a protest at this particular time.

[Genghis Khan]

Hearts have the lamest support in Britain.

 

Spinkless and weak. The worst support I've stood amongst in the last 10 years.

 

Other punters just laugh at us having our tummies tickled by the current regime at the club.

 

Protest? Do me a favour. Most of the blunts on here wouldn't protest if you walked into their house, shagged their wives/daughters, dumped on the living room floor, scooped all their beer and nicked their flatscreen. Like I said, spineless and weak.

 

Cheers.

 

Who gives a toss what other supporters think?

[Yo Yo the Parrot]

why do so many on hear be criticle of spelling etc am sorry but when the **** did this site become and english grammer test, posh ignoarnt ****s man, he making his point he allowed to rant and rave as he wishes, you knobheads who think that its great to point out certain mistakes well then go becoming a english teacher or somthing of sort

 

That would seem as pointless as this proposed protest as pupils like your good self and sneaky do not seem to have bothered turning up for an class.

[Nookie Bear]

Maybe a meeting with VR/Fedetovas and some fans Reps to discuss the following points would be a starting point :

 

1) The promise that the debt was going to be cleared wasn't kept. Infact it very nearly doubled.

 

2) The treatment of certain players and managers which caused great disruption throughout the team.

 

3) The ever increasing number of useless FBK Kaunas players that found there way to club. These players cost the club money in 'Registration Fee's but for some reason this has never been disclosed to the minor Shareholders.

 

4) The lack of attendence by the BOD and the Chairman at matches.

 

5) The behaviour of the club's Chairman at more than one AGM.

 

6) The waste of time and money on the New Stand proposal.

 

7) The short/long term plan for the club.

 

8) Why, if the owner doesn't trust the Managers signing policy, did he decide to continue with him a coach ?

 

9) Why is the owner still choosing players for the club ? And how does he rate his signings for the Club since 2004 ?

 

10) How does the club propose to pay UBIG/UKIOS the huge some of money it's due in 2010 ?

 

 

Spot on. Wouldn't expect any answers from Mister Romanov but maybe one of his apologists on here could have a bash?

[Colonel Kurtz]

people have been waiting so long for the horse's mouth to speak that they now appear to be making up their own version of what is within the horse's mind.

 

and well they might.

 

this aint no talking horse... more like a rocking horse.

 

thought the boys name was pete not Mister ED

[Colonel Kurtz]

That would seem as pointless as this proposed protest as pupils like your good self and sneaky do not seem to have bothered turning up for an class.

 

"a class" surely ...makes you look a bit stupid

[Colonel Kurtz]

Hearts have the lamest support in Britain.

 

Spinkless and weak. The worst support I've stood amongst in the last 10 years.

 

Other punters just laugh at us having our tummies tickled by the current regime at the club.

 

Protest? Do me a favour. Most of the blunts on here wouldn't protest if you walked into their house, shagged their wives/daughters, dumped on the living room floor, scooped all their beer and nicked their flatscreen. Like I said, spineless and weak.

 

Cheers.

 

If the intruders made an error in their grammar they would be on here all night

[Guest JamboRobbo]

See this is the bit I don't understand berrasbraw.

 

I'm no great lover of Vladimir Romanov and one of the things we were most disappointed in was his insistence on pushing players on the managers he appointed. At the beginning of this season Csaba Laszlo asked what funds were available to him for players, and he was told the parameters within which he could work. He knew these parameters before any player had arrived.

 

Based on those parameters, and the fact he, Csaba Laszlo, knew we needed someone to score goals for us regularly, he splashed out on players such as Balogh, Santana and Bouzid. One could argue, very well I think, that resources at Tynecastle (Kello/McDonald, McGowan/Zaliukas/Goncalves, Novikovas/Templeton for example) meant these were positions which didn't need players brought in immediately. Once he had spent all the budget available to him it then became apparent we still didn't have a goal scorer, and Mr Romanov is being blamed for that.

 

Without doubt, this is the crux of it. If the above happened, then I'd blame Csaba.

 

But I don't think this is what happened.

 

Why?

 

1. Csaba has been banging on for a year and half that we need strikers. If he was given a budget, and told he could spend it how he liked, I doubt he is stupid enough to spend it all without remembering to get the one thing he's been banging on about for a year and a half.

 

2. It's been apparent since Vlad arrived, that his people do the negotiating of contracts. I don't think anyone (even Gambo) can or would deny this? So it's perfectly feasable that the signing of strikers is being vetoed by Vlads negotiators, whilst the signing of other players is being allowed through.

 

3. The vetoeing by Vlad is then confirmed by the fact Vlad came out and told us. Money was not the issue, the reason we didn't sign strikers is that he didn't think the ones selected by the manager were suitable.

 

4. You say "he splashed out on players....". Well firstly, Balogh was signed back in January, not in the summer. Yes, money was paid, but that was back in January.

 

Secondly, which of the other players did he "splash out" on? as far as I'm aware, all those players you list are freebies, and are all taking up less wages than the "high earners" who left, so I don't see how anyone can say we splashed out in the summer?

 

Do you honestly fecking believe that Mr Romanov should be the target of abuse for something that wasn't his fault. He stayed out the way, provided the funds and let the manager select the players, and Romanov is now being blamed for doing what the fans wanted him to do.

 

If he has done that, I'd agree.

 

I don't believe he did do that, for the reasons listed above.

[Victorian]

Spot on. Wouldn't expect any answers from Mister Romanov but maybe one of his apologists on here could have a bash?

quite a few so-called romanov apologists have actually praised DH for his excellent post but don't allow that minor detail to detract from your point... whatever that may be.

[Jammy T]

well done to DH for bringing some sort of structured and coherent agenda to proceedings. as someone has since said perhaps a lot of those points would be better suited to the AGM or to some kind of official approach to the club and a request for a conversation to be entered into.

 

some of those points focus on historical events and policies therefore perhaps there would be a degree of going over old ground without any meaningful purpose however there are some good and pertinent points in there as well which could be explored with the club.

 

it would be highly interesting to know whether the protest leading OP agreed with any of it. wouldn't be ironic if a far more credible and intelligent poster like DH attempted to make sense of his would be protest... only for the would be protester to turn round and have nothing to do with it.

 

the trouble is that we are now into page 12 and we still haven't heard the aims and objectives from the horses mouth.

 

As I said earlier - something apparently shambolic can be the catalyst for something more constructive.

 

Whatever you say about the OP it has facilitated some sort of discussion on the issue, whether you agree with the notion of protesting in the current circumstances or not

[Rods]

See this is the bit I don't understand berrasbraw.

 

I'm no great lover of Vladimir Romanov and one of the things we were most disappointed in was his insistence on pushing players on the managers he appointed. At the beginning of this season Csaba Laszlo asked what funds were available to him for players, and he was told the parameters within which he could work. He knew these parameters before any player had arrived.

 

Based on those parameters, and the fact he, Csaba Laszlo, knew we needed someone to score goals for us regularly, he splashed out on players such as Balogh, Santana and Bouzid. One could argue, very well I think, that resources at Tynecastle (Kello/McDonald, McGowan/Zaliukas/Goncalves, Novikovas/Templeton for example) meant these were positions which didn't need players brought in immediately. Once he had spent all the budget available to him it then became apparent we still didn't have a goal scorer, and Mr Romanov is being blamed for that.

Do you honestly fecking believe that Mr Romanov should be the target of abuse for something that wasn't his fault. He stayed out the way, provided the funds and let the manager select the players, and Romanov is now being blamed for doing what the fans wanted him to do.

 

Sorry mate and how do you know this as fact ?

 

For me it more probably happend like this.

 

Laslo spoke to Romanov said we need cover in these posistions

 

Centre half so laslo signs bouzid

Right midfield we all knew the posistion is weak, losing miko and the forever disapearing Kingston.

 

Balogh was always hear and is a mute point.

 

Romanov then says all of these are fine but take Kurchaski and the Lith. But laslo does not want the Lith

 

Laslo is pleased and knows fine romanov is aware that we also need a new striker.

 

Things are good but Laslo has done well and is receiving paludits from the fans.

 

Romanov then throws in the spanner in the guise of Laslo new striker.

 

Its not stokes, namouchi the boy from charlton or plymouth its Romanovs man Whiteveen.

 

I believe also we had talks with some strikers and romanov mucked them up similar to the Slovakian centre half. After we had sold Berra.

 

Then Romanov strikes again at Laslo you cant have your strikers. But hear is a couple of portgusers. Like it or Lump it.

[Jammy T]

Very good questions DH. Ultimately the fact remains that there is very little we can do if we don't like the answers, however it will at least let us know if Romanov is capable of constructive dialogue.

 

Back on the subject of protest. I see Jammy T is comparing the potential protest to the Suffragette's and the Chinese students movement for democracy at Tiannemen Square in an earlier post. How loose a grasp on reality do some folk have on here? These were major political movements with clear objectives, apart from the fact comparing them to fan disatisfaction at a football club is ludicrous, both protest movements were absolutely clear about what they were protesting about and what they were seeking to achieve. Neither is evident in this case.

 

I am not comparing the causes between these events to now - that would clearly be ridiculous.

 

But I would imagine that if Suffragettes Kickback existed at the time Emily Davison would be roundly mocked for suggesting that she runs across a racetrack in front of a load of horses that might kill her

 

The point being, sometimes the manner in which a protest is implemented is questionable but it does not necessarily mean that such a protest does not have a part to play as part of a bigger picture

[jambovambo]

All credit to the OP for doing "something", although maybe he isn't the right person to be the figurehead.

 

Just maybe this is the start of something.

 

As for DH's questions - great stuff - but anything we are asking should be forward-looking now.

 

As I said before, "the past is just the past".

[Genghis Khan]

Sorry mate and how do you know this as fact ?

 

For me it more probably happend like this.

 

Laslo spoke to Romanov said we need cover in these posistions

 

Centre half so laslo signs bouzid

Right midfield we all knew the posistion is weak, losing miko and the forever disapearing Kingston.

 

Balogh was always hear and is a mute point.

 

Romanov then says all of these are fine but take Kurchaski and the Lith. But laslo does not want the Lith

 

Laslo is pleased and knows fine romanov is aware that we also need a new striker.

 

Things are good but Laslo has done well and is receiving paludits from the fans.

 

Romanov then throws in the spanner in the guise of Laslo new striker.

 

Its not stokes, namouchi the boy from charlton or plymouth its Romanovs man Whiteveen.

 

I believe also we had talks with some strikers and romanov mucked them up similar to the Slovakian centre half. After we had sold Berra.

 

Then Romanov strikes again at Laslo you cant have your strikers. But hear is a couple of portgusers. Like it or Lump it.

 

So, in other words, you don't actually know?

[Jammy T]

 

Do you honestly fecking believe that Mr Romanov should be the target of abuse for something that wasn't his fault. He stayed out the way, provided the funds and let the manager select the players, and Romanov is now being blamed for doing what the fans wanted him to do.

 

This is a little bit of fantasy to be fair

 

Romanov in his own words has said he had the money to sign a striker but didnt as he didnt trust his managers judgement.

 

So he didnt truely and fully let the manager select the players.

 

If the owner of a club doesnt trust his managers judgement he gets rid of him, gets someone he does trust in and allows him to spend this money he has stashed away on the players the manager decides we need

[jambovambo]

I am not comparing the causes between these events to now - that would clearly be ridiculous.

 

But I would imagine that if Suffragettes Kickback existed at the time Emily Davison would be roundly mocked for suggesting that she runs across a racetrack in front of a load of horses that might kill her

 

The point being, sometimes the manner in which a protest is implemented is questionable but it does not necessarily mean that such a protest does not have a part to play as part of a bigger picture

Brilliant

[Voice of reason]

Where would we be if Romanov had not appeared?

 

- at Murrayfield - Tynecastle turned into flats

- Millions in debt with no assets

- players like Craig Gordon sold for peanuts

- most likely out of business or, if not, relegated years ago.

- no 2006 Scottish Cup or 2nd placed finish or 3rd last season

 

Now don't get me wrong - I see the terrible, terrible decisions Romanov has made and shake my head in disbelief. I really wish he would go and a Hearts supporting multi-millionaire would appear as if by magic. But this is delusional -totally delusional. I hate the way Romanov runs our club, and squirm whenever I hear him interviewed, but he has saved us up from a virtual certain extinction up until now. His mis-managent can only be partially excused by believing he comes from a different culture and he doesn't 'get' the British style of managing a club.

 

Romanov has seen the club through a world recession with huge clubs struggling to survive all over the place [Rangers are a local example]. Many clubs have gone into administration in the same period that started out on firmer ground to start with than Romanov had to contend with at Hearts. If we get through the next few years without going bust or getting relegated, and staying at Tynecastle, then hats off to Romanov - that's a minor miracle considering the debt he inherited when he took over and before the recession really kicked-in.

 

I defend a person I really don't respect and it pains me greatly.

 

Back on to thread; the protest idea does not have my support in the proposed format. Any protest needs to be organised by a properly set up group that have a carefully thought through plan and with a respected and politically aware Hearts icon at the head. Someone like Jon Colquhoun would do me. I'd follow him into a protest.

 

The protest in it's current guise is potentially an embarrassment to our club. I really hope it does not happen.

[Genghis Khan]

Ewen is friends with the following Peters:

 

Peter Harte

Peter Watycha

Peter Sugden

Peter Hogan

Peter Dempsie

Peter McHugh

Peter Heenan (based in Edinburgh)

Peter Abraham

Peter Cannon (based in Edinburgh)

Peter Henderson (based in Edinburgh)

Peter McCoy

Peter Chalmers

 

Any of the above ring any bells, folks? We just need to eliminate them from our enquiries..

 

I can exclusively reveal folks.......that "sneakypete" is the chap in bold. He has some interesting Facebook friends including those 2 bell-ends from Unreal Radio. My personal fav was Jorge Cadette.

[Craig Herbertson]

This is from a page on Lithuanian business ettiquete and might help the direction of the protest

 

Business Meetings & Negotiations

 

.Appointments are necessary and should be scheduled 2 to 3 weeks in advance.

.Send a list of the people who will be attending and their titles so the Lithuanians can assemble a team of similar level people.

.Confirm the meeting when you arrive and again the day before the meeting, since meetings are sometimes cancelled on short notice.

.Arrive on time for meetings. Punctuality is important.

.Meetings are formal.

.There will be a period of small-talk while your colleagues get to know you and decide if you are the type of person with whom they wish to enter into a business relationship.

.Wait to be told where to sit. In many cases you will be seated across from someone of a similar level.

.Presentations should be thorough, clear, and concise and include back-up analysis to support your position.

.Expect to discuss each point thoroughly before moving on to the next.

.Business moves slowly due to the bureaucratic nature of society.

.Be prepared to meet with several lower levels of people before getting to the actual decision maker.

.Lithuanians often use time as a tactic, especially if they know that you have a deadline. Be cautious about letting your business colleagues know that you are under time pressure or they will delay even more.

.Lithuanians will not be rushed into making a deal. They must think it is in their best interest before agreeing.

.Meetings often conclude with a summary of the discussion and a toast to future dealings.

[PTBCAL]

This is a little bit of fantasy to be fair

Romanov in his own words has said he had the money to sign a striker but didnt as he didnt trust his managers judgement.

So he didnt truely and fully let the manager select the players.

 

If the owner of a club doesnt trust his managers judgement he gets rid of him, gets someone he does trust in and allows him to spend this money he has stashed away on the players the manager decides we need

 

Do you actually blame VR?

 

Obau, Balough, Bouzid. Very very average at best and if I am being honest a complete waste of money in terms of wages etc.... I would rather watch some Hearts youngsters oput in a shift.

[savage]

whilst i would like our leader to come out and give a statement as to the future of the club and where he stands, i predict that the Op and his four mates along with 10 neds who see it as a chance to shout at the police will achieve the sum total of nothing but good luck trying

[Guest JamboRobbo]

Do you actually blame VR?

 

Obau, Balough, Bouzid. Very very average at best and if I am being honest a complete waste of money in terms of wages etc.... I would rather watch some Hearts youngsters oput in a shift.

 

How much are they earning?

[Rods]

So, in other words, you don't actually know?

 

Of course I dont know I am just saying it the way I see it.

 

Mines is based on recent treatment of managers and players by romanov.

 

Also for what I percieve as Romanovs liking for sorting people out in the limelight at our club over the years.

 

I also believe I heard it on this board that we had discussions with Ismale Macloed but they where stuffed up by Romanovs people.

 

Much like the slovakian centre half I cant remember his name.

 

My point is Romanov has went out of his way to bring laslo down a peg or two.

 

Why because he had done well like burley and ivanauskus before him.

[scott_jambo]

How much are they earning?

 

?1,500 - ?2,500 a week.

[Genghis Khan]

 

I also believe I heard it on this board that we had discussions with Ismale Macloed but they where stuffed up by Romanovs people.

 

Much like the slovakian centre half I cant remember his name.

 

Well, that must be The Gospel then if you heard it on here!

[Jammy T]

Do you actually blame VR?

 

Obau, Balough, Bouzid. Very very average at best and if I am being honest a complete waste of money in terms of wages etc.... I would rather watch some Hearts youngsters oput in a shift.

 

1. I blame VR for appointing and sticking with a manager who he plainly does not trust to identify players for the team

2. I agree that Csaba' signings have been very very average at best, but I am so bloody used to the tsunami of complete mediocrity arriving at the club for the last 4 years that I can see this is not a problem suffered by Csaba alone

3. I am not entirely sure who Csaba wanted as his main striker - it certainly wasnt Witteveen - so I cant be certain how appropriate Vlad's veto was

4. I actually think what Vlad said was a way of getting a cheap public shot at Csaba and I doubt very much we do have the money - either way it is not a glowing endorsement of the way Vlad goes about his business

5. But if we do have the cash for a striker we have singularly failed in every transfer window for about 2.5 seasons to rectify the problem, and I simply cannot see how Csaba can be held entirely to blame for this

[frankblack]

Where would we be if Romanov had not appeared?

 

- at Murrayfield - Tynecastle turned into flats

- Millions in debt with no assets

- players like Craig Gordon sold for peanuts

- most likely out of business or, if not, relegated years ago.

- no 2006 Scottish Cup or 2nd placed finish or 3rd last season

 

Now don't get me wrong - I see the terrible, terrible decisions Romanov has made and shake my head in disbelief. I really wish he would go and a Hearts supporting multi-millionaire would appear as if by magic. But this is delusional -totally delusional. I hate the way Romanov runs our club, and squirm whenever I hear him interviewed, but he has saved us up from a virtual certain extinction up until now. His mis-managent can only be partially excused by believing he comes from a different culture and he doesn't 'get' the British style of managing a club.

 

Romanov has seen the club through a world recession with huge clubs struggling to survive all over the place [Rangers are a local example]. Many clubs have gone into administration in the same period that started out on firmer ground to start with than Romanov had to contend with at Hearts. If we get through the next few years without going bust or getting relegated, and staying at Tynecastle, then hats off to Romanov - that's a minor miracle considering the debt he inherited when he took over and before the recession really kicked-in.

 

I defend a person I really don't respect and it pains me greatly.

 

Back on to thread; the protest idea does not have my support in the proposed format. Any protest needs to be organised by a properly set up group that have a carefully thought through plan and with a respected and politically aware Hearts icon at the head. Someone like Jon Colquhoun would do me. I'd follow him into a protest.

 

The protest in it's current guise is potentially an embarrassment to our club. I really hope it does not happen.

 

Spot on.

 

mod delete

 

If they want to get Romanov out they must find someone who is prepared to meet Romanov's asking price. Shouting Vlad GTF with nothing to back it up is not going to achieve anything positive as has been demonstrated by the **** (from the Trust?) that published the open letter to Romanov a few years back.

 

Anyone noticed how communication between Romanov dried up after that.

 

Do these people want to get the club wound up? Administration isn't going to happen - its either sell the club or face liquidation.

[Rods]

Well, that must be The Gospel then if you heard it on here!

 

Maybe I am wrong perhaps you can correct me.

 

As for the slovakian guy last January that was in the paper.

 

The simple fact is whenever things go well Romanov steps in and mucks things up.

 

Is he going to push it to far one day.

[jambovambo]

Spot on.

 

mod delete.

 

If they want to get Romanov out they must find someone who is prepared to meet Romanov's asking price. Shouting Vlad GTF with nothing to back it up is not going to achieve anything positive as has been demonstrated by the **** (from the Trust?) that published the open letter to Romanov a few years back.

 

Anyone noticed how communication between Romanov dried up after that.

 

Do these people want to get the club wound up? Administration isn't going to happen - its either sell the club or face liquidation.

 

Not sure that helps.

 

By the way, what difference has it made to Hearts that Craig Gordon wasn't sold for peanuts ?

[Colonel Kurtz]

Not sure that helps.

 

By the way, what difference has it made to Hearts that Craig Gordon wasn't sold for peanuts ?

 

none..all transfer fees will in future be paid in Roubles to avoid currency conversion charges....Nyet Romanov

[Jammy T]

Spot on.

 

mod delete

 

.

 

I presume you consider those that protested against Robinson without any clear resolution to the problem at that time were also "mod delete"

 

??

[flecktimus]

Not sure that helps.

 

By the way, what difference has it made to Hearts that Craig Gordon wasn't sold for peanuts ?

 

Now there's a question

[portobellojambo1]

 

4. You say "he splashed out on players....". Well firstly, Balogh was signed back in January, not in the summer. Yes, money was paid, but that was back in January

 

I re-read my original post JR, and accept I said beginning of season, which would suggest around May/June time of this year. In terms of signing players Hearts set their budgets for a year, like many, many companies, as at the close of business 31 December each year (some companies budget April to April, to fit in with the tax year), so any signings made in the Summer would have to take account of anything spent from 1 January 2009 to May/June. Slip of the tongue (or fingers in this case) and I apologise for that.

 

When I said splash out (brought in might have been a less press style statement) the parameters he was given was in relation to transfer fees and wages (the figure I heard was that the existing budget couldn't increase by more than ?20,000 per week, how that was calculated I don't know, i.e. would a transfer fee of say ?300,000 be classed immediately as an increase each week of ?6K, seems feasible). Assuming transfer fees were converted to weekly wages that would effectively have meant Laszlo had to find a striker in the Summer who was available either for a relatively low fee or an a free, with the option of offering him, if arriving on a free, a potential top line salary of ?14K per week, but with no additional signings if the top figure was used. As I've said I believe players already existed at Tynecastle, negating the need for other signings, which meant that if a striker was desperately needed he could have been purchased as a top priority in the Summer. I've no idea what the players brought in since January 2009 are earning combined/cost in fees, but would imagine a combined figure of ?20,000 p/w above wage bill at close of business 31 December 2008 isn't a million miles away.

 

I think, or hope, you realise (if even from historical posts on here) I ain't no supporter of Vladimir Romanov, and if I genuinely believed he was to blame for the non arrival of a striker I'd say so. However, as it has been relayed to me (the course of events) by people I trust I do genuinely believe that on this occasion Laszlo had a chance to bring in a striker and failed to do so, until it was too late and we ended up with Witteveen being "forced" on us.

 

Sorry mate and how do you know this as fact ?

 

For me it more probably happened like this.

 

I believe also we had talks with some strikers and romanov mucked them up similar to the Slovakian centre half. After we had sold Berra.

 

You are perfectly entitled to your opinion Rents, however I think it would probably suit your interests if Romanov could be blamed (as I've already indicated to JamboRobbo if I thought VR was to blame on this occasion I'd have no hesitation in saying so), however I don't think he is, given what I've been told.

 

As for talks with various strikers, I don't think there is any evidence to back these paper stories up, is there ?

 

I think it was more a case of small bits of non stories being combined to create a bigger non story.

[Jammy T]

Where would we be if Romanov had not appeared?

 

- at Murrayfield - Tynecastle turned into flats

- Millions in debt with no assets

- players like Craig Gordon sold for peanuts

- most likely out of business or, if not, relegated years ago.

- no 2006 Scottish Cup or 2nd placed finish or 3rd last season

 

.

 

Interesting points

 

You'll recall that the price agreed for Tynecastle would likely have left us with a debt of less than ?5m.

 

The relative lower fee we would likely have got for Gordon has therefore to be considered in that context. That said, Hibs did pretty well from the position of relative weakness that we would have been in to get ?4m for Brown. And I'd imagine we'd have seen the full extent of the transfer fee for Gordon flowed through the accounts... We had Driver and Berra and Wallace for example, without Vlad, so we would still have had the opportunity to benefit from those sales

 

You cant say we would not have won a Scottish Cup. We have won without Vlad before and will do again without him in the future

 

We would have had an uncertain future, and it is complete conjecture as to what our crowds would have been at Murrayfield

 

However, I am not sure our future would have been any more uncertain than it currently is