Lord Knows
New member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
- Messages
- 9,702
- Reaction score
- 1
With the majority of questions asked relating to on field performance why wasn't someone responsible for that at the meeting, namely a coach?
With the majority of questions asked relating to on field performance why wasn't someone responsible for that at the meeting, namely a coach?
Because the meetings are not meant to be there to discuss on the pitch matters. The whole idea was to get the members of the Parliament to share concerns/questions/ideas to the club on things like tickets, promotions, finance, issues at the ground etc. Every now and again they will get the manager to attend and then encourage the members to ask footballing questions. However, the majority of those that go don;t actually use it to do what it is intended for and spend their time asking questions that simply cannot be answered. I mean, who thought Jez would be able to answer why does Afobe play deep at times. Just a waste of everyones time really.
So scrap the fans parliament and have questions and answers meetings with Kenny Jackett and staff so the truth about Wolves is given direct rather than re edited by the media.
So scrap the fans parliament and have questions and answers meetings with Kenny Jackett and staff so the truth about Wolves is given direct rather than re edited by the media.
Just wasted a few minutes of my life reading through of what is mostly dross.
Did someone really ask this?
'To a question from Anita Midha about whether there were any plans to refurbish the Steve Bull Stand'
my guess is that anita midha did
Can you see why I took the view there was no longer value in attending? It is a couple of free pints and that is about the best bit. Constant re-visit of old material. Interspersed with inane stuff.