Co-opted Members

#63
Fine if that's your views, but as with DE we are supposed to be a family friendly club and my view on both these gentlemen are tarnished in my eyes by their inappropriate actions. There is also the small concern of SD connections with another club in this league, so my opinion on his moral fibre is probably irrelevant anyway as he has created a disconnect with our club by his takeover.
 

PC

Active member
#64
I don't disagree with any of that. In fact I think he should be thanked for his past efforts and asked to leave simply as a result of his purchase of another club in the same league as us.

The personal behaviour is important and, since this is a family club, I agree - Oxvox must be very careful whose members they are co-opting in future.
 
#65
Fine if that's your views, but as with DE we are supposed to be a family friendly club and my view on both these gentlemen are tarnished in my eyes by their inappropriate actions. There is also the small concern of SD connections with another club in this league, so my opinion on his moral fibre is probably irrelevant anyway as he has created a disconnect with our club by his takeover.
I should make it clear at this point I am speaking for myself and not OxVox. My views are mine and mine alone.
For what it's worth i have no problem with people making moral judgements on what they think is the right or wrong way for people to conduct themselves, we all have our own moral yardstick that helps guide us, but to suggest that because a man has decided to split up from his wife and is dating another woman that he is unfit to offer free advice to the committee of the supporters' trust for the club he loves and has supported all his life seems a little judgemental and a tad hypocritical. Should we check all of our players to see if any have left a previous wife? They are a far more visible representation of the club? Should we ban future investment from companies whose MD's have left a wife? Is this because of the lurid nature of the reporting in The Sun? If he had left his wife for an accountant in her 50's would we be so 'outraged'?

I don't try to defend what he may or may not have done, that is a matter for him and his family and those close to him, but what I will say is that he has not broken any laws or caused any physical injury. He has left his wife and is dating another woman. Everything else is just detail. Are we really to take the moral high ground over that?

The matter of a potential takeover at another club in our league is a quite separate issue and has, rightly I think, been addressed as such. At this point no deal has been finalised and it may never happen. If it does happen OxVox have clearly stated they will review the potential appointment.
 
#66
I should make it clear at this point I am speaking for myself and not OxVox. My views are mine and mine alone.
For what it's worth i have no problem with people making moral judgements on what they think is the right or wrong way for people to conduct themselves, we all have our own moral yardstick that helps guide us, but to suggest that because a man has decided to split up from his wife and is dating another woman that he is unfit to offer free advice to the committee of the supporters' trust for the club he loves and has supported all his life seems a little judgemental and a tad hypocritical. Should we check all of our players to see if any have left a previous wife? They are a far more visible representation of the club? Should we ban future investment from companies whose MD's have left a wife? Is this because of the lurid nature of the reporting in The Sun? If he had left his wife for an accountant in her 50's would we be so 'outraged'?

I don't try to defend what he may or may not have done, that is a matter for him and his family and those close to him, but what I will say is that he has not broken any laws or caused any physical injury. He has left his wife and is dating another woman. Everything else is just detail. Are we really to take the moral high ground over that?

The matter of a potential takeover at another club in our league is a quite separate issue and has, rightly I think, been addressed as such. At this point no deal has been finalised and it may never happen. If it does happen OxVox have clearly stated they will review the potential appointment.
These are you views and everyone is entitled to their opinion.
For me as I said I think it's inappropriate after his recent actions to have SD connected to a supporters group, I think it sends out the wrong message when these days we are trying to bring everything inside the club to a family oriented fan base.
 
#67
These are you views and everyone is entitled to their opinion.
For me as I said I think it's inappropriate after his recent actions to have SD connected to a supporters group, I think it sends out the wrong message when these days we are trying to bring everything inside the club to a family oriented fan base.
SD is a public figure and your only aware of his actions because of that "awesome" paper - the Sun.....

have you asked if any of the current OxVox/OUFC Board have done similar - would you want the same outcome if they had? everyone has a past, and their private lives, are well, private and should not affect their ability to offer, in this instance, advice of a footballing matter - its not like he is offering marriage advice :)
 

Navegante

Junior Member
#68
Private lives should remain just that: Private. The only scandal here is that 1) this got published in a national daily 2) said rag continues to be the nation's best selling daily.
 
#69
My personal opinion on this is that it's a private matter between Stewart and his family and should have no bearing on whether or not he is co-opted onto the committee.

If we are expecting him to behave to some kind of higher standards than the rest of the committee or members of OxVox, or players and staff at the club, then we walk a very dangerous path.

My private life (and I've not left my wife for a lap dancer - and even if I had I don't expect the Sun would be publishing a story about it) and the private lives of the committee are irrelevant to their suitability to represent OxVox.
 

Dave T

Well-known member
#70
My personal opinion on this is that it's a private matter between Stewart and his family and should have no bearing on whether or not he is co-opted onto the committee.

If we are expecting him to behave to some kind of higher standards than the rest of the committee or members of OxVox, or players and staff at the club, then we walk a very dangerous path.

My private life (and I've not left my wife for a lap dancer - and even if I had I don't expect the Sun would be publishing a story about it) and the private lives of the committee are irrelevant to their suitability to represent OxVox.
I agree. I also think that not only does it not affect things, but it’s also a little out of order discussing it on here. If personal threads/posts relating to Darryls private life were/are being removed I don’t see this as any different. It really has nothing to do with anyone what he does in his private family life. And having threads on it make it no better than the scummy news paper printing it
 
#71
Private lives should remain just that: Private. The only scandal here is that 1) this got published in a national daily 2) said rag continues to be the nation's best selling daily.
As much as I respect all those views, it's not private it's in the public domain and for me that's part of the issue.
 

Gary Baldi

Active member
#72
Not wishing to get in this particular debate, but there are occasions where telling those in a group such as a committee beforehand of a change in personal circumstances is the wisest course of action.
 
#73
As much as I respect all those views, it's not private it's in the public domain and for me that's part of the issue.
Not wishing to get in this particular debate, but there are occasions where telling those in a group such as a committee beforehand of a change in personal circumstances is the wisest course of action.
I wasn't asked about my personal circumstances when I joined the committee. I wouldn't expect anyone else on the committee to announce at the next meeting what their marital history is, or if it changes in the future.

Just because the public are interested, doesn't mean it's in the public interest. If Stewart's personal life becomes an 'issue', where doe we stop? Political allegiances, sexuality, line of work?
 

Gary Baldi

Active member
#74
I wasn't asked about my personal circumstances when I joined the committee. I wouldn't expect anyone else on the committee to announce at the next meeting what their marital history is, or if it changes in the future.

Just because the public are interested, doesn't mean it's in the public interest. If Stewart's personal life becomes an 'issue', where doe we stop? Political allegiances, sexuality, line of work?
I'm not relating that to this, to be very clear. But what I would say if is you are in a visible public role, there are circumstances where you have to be careful with personal circumstances and on a private level, let people know as a courtesy. I don't look at SD any differently than I did before either. Ish happens
 

MarkG

Active member
#76
I’d be more concerned about the potential for conflicts of interest with OUFC. What if some inside information about OUFC crops up at an Oxvox meeting that could be used to the advantage of his latest Club ?
 

Colin B

Active member
#78
I’d be more concerned about the potential for conflicts of interest with OUFC. What if some inside information about OUFC crops up at an Oxvox meeting that could be used to the advantage of his latest Club ?
The minutes have just been sent out Mark, and address this point.
 
Likes: m
Top Bottom