I’m in the too early to tell camp. Some promising signs but some concerning ones as well

If no one has ever succeeded with an appeal (no idea if Broughton is right on this) the why have an appeal process at all? oh and good luck…

A lot of what Broughton said in the video, about Undav for example, had appeared in the press (not sure whether they were Nixon articles though)

Some of us… (I’m not offering!)

I understand all that, so far I’ve not seen anything disrespectful though - which is good. Now what can we use to plug that hole…

I literally said I’m not defending us - in fact I’ve spent most the day criticising us. I was just merely pointing out there are other ways of not being ‘respectable’ towards players. The O’Brien situation is entirely on us! Re: replacing players after a promotion , I agree that’s perfectly normal - I just think 29 new ones is a tad excessive. O’Brien was bought by forest after their promotion - unless I’ve got that wrong?

Granted this is the only social media I look at but any praise for the statement I’ve seen has been heavily caveated.

Again, not defending us but… https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/transfer-news/nottingham-forest-transfers-tobias-figueiredo-6588128 Late submission of paperwork you say…

Why thank you… but maybe I was being entirely serious 🤔

I think it will ultimately hinge on whether it turns out to be the same old bullshit or a catalyst for change.

and possibly giving him more than 13 games (some from the bench) to prove his worth to you before trying to get shot of him.

I’m not defending us but you can’t sign 29 players in six months and be respecting them all at the same time. You must be signing some of them with little intention of playing them.

I know we’ve let him down, but haven’t they done the same by trying to ship him out only six months after signing him?

I’m certain you mean overestimating…

I’m glad you took that in the spirit it was intended - I understand you have access to the ban button…

But how about J*B…

As he said in the video, he did get the deals over the line - and then it all went wrong. I’m of the view that the CEO is ultimately responsible if not directly to blame - others see things differently

Something that I found interesting, was how much of what he said (eg about targeting Undav) had already appeared as leaks. Someone must have a good source somewhere.

Am I allowed to quote myself?? @JoeH - I’ve now watched the video - I think it’s a perfectly acceptable ‘holding position’ whilst they investigate further - though I’m unsure how he says the buck stops with him before this investigation has been concluded. I certainly think it’s more information than we would have been given pre his appointment but I wish he had been able to talk about how good a signing O’Brien would have been instead. As always, it’s actions not words that are important - I think they need to investigate quickly, but thoroughly and of course inform the fans of the outcome of this is an open and honest manner.

It was partly in jest - maybe I need to learn to use emojis! I’ll watch the interview now and come back to you. I’m enjoying the debate

He is literally one of only two people with the authority to sign the paperwork. As I said, maybe he shouldn’t need to be there, but maybe he should have been there in case. He decided to go to Birmingham, you say that’s normal and I’ve no reason to disbelieve you, but it doesn’t mean that decision won’t have impacted on what happened. Personally, I’d sack the lot and start again, could it be any worse? (Yes, yes I know it could be!)

You could argue that the CEO shouldn’t be needed but surely he should be there in case he is needed?

I guess it’s the had to be there versus would usually be there which is where peoples opinions different. I’m not sure if we’ve played on deadline day before but this is where I feel the difference is. I’m not against ‘networking’ I’m just not sure it’s always the most important thing any executive could be doing.

No one should stop anyone from posting their opinions. We all know there will be more than one person to blame for this, I guess a lot of the debate is over who should take the responsibility for it. This, to a point, probably depends on who you think is, or should be, ‘at the top of the process’ Some people think this is Waggott, others think it’s Broughton, and some think it’s Silvester.(I think that covers everything I’ve seen in this thread) Debate is always healthy, as long as it’s kept civilised and doesn’t turn personal.

The problem here is they knew it was doubtful, maybe even very doubtful, but we’re still going through the appeals process. The deadline for squad list submission surely has to be after the deadline for appeals. I will not mention this point again. 😀