Birch

[The Old Fox]

Why does it? We can't afford to hang onto people for nostalgic reasons. How long should we let him stay? When he is 80 and drawing a wage despite pissing himself everywhere, should we still hang on to him?

The law states that someone has to retire at 65 unless both parties reach an agreement. I imagine (though I haven't a ****ing clue if I'm honest) that the agreement presented was for him to carry on for free, which he didn't want (and why would he)

As a business decision, you are right. I believe that a football club is more than a business. He was a link to one of our, too few, golden ages - and we won't have anybody at the club who has kissed Tony Currie! :icon_bigg

 

[OldGit]

He's 65, boring and embarrassing at half time. Get rid.

Oh :icon_cry:

Bye bye then

 

[Macky]

Could be very cringeworthy at times but his heart was in the right place
its a pity our present regime dont recognise this, as it would help them,
instead of trying to be consumer friendly, and failing dismally at it.

Do we know that the 'present regime' are somehow trying to get rid of him? Apologies if I've missed it, but I haven't seen any evidence of... well, anything.

Also, should we really be employing people because 'their heart is in the right place'?

 

[Babylon]

Is he still here?

 

[four king power]

Do you need a special agreement to work past 65 if you own the club?

 

[Miles Away]

Why does it? We can't afford to hang onto people for nostalgic reasons. How long should we let him stay? When he is 80 and drawing a wage despite pissing himself everywhere, should we still hang on to him?

Going to have to politely disagree with you on this one Beights. 30K a year is nothing compared to the amount given to some of the players and other staff, and Birch has contributed more than, say, Bruno N'Gotty ever did.

Nothing wrong with phasing him out slowly, but I think some respect should be shown to a man who has served the club for over 3 decades.

As Brown Nose pointed out, he does a terrific job behind the scenes with the fans.

I'm slightly puzzled as to why people are so eager to throw out Birch. Perhaps he shouldn't be doing the halftime stuff, but there should always be a role for him at the club. I'd be a little saddened if he read some of the comments on here.

 

[Durham Fox]

Do you need a special agreement to work past 65 if you own the club?

An agreement with your employer when you own the business?

 

[Matt_B]

Do you need a special agreement to work past 65 if you own the club?

I doubt he will be listed as a paid employee. People are only getting upset I'm sure because of Stringer's tear-mongering tweets and the Mercury getting all emotional.

 

[Miles Away]

I doubt he will be listed as a paid employee. People are only getting upset I'm sure because of Stringer's tear-mongering tweets and the Mercury getting all emotional.

Not read either.

 

[four king power]

An agreement with your employer when you own the business?

Everybody answers to someone DF, everybody answers to someone.

The tax office usually for MM :icon_wink

I was not being serious, just thought it was a bit rich to kick up a fuss about the Birch being 65 when the owner is 72!

 

[Matt_B]

Going to have to politely disagree with you on this one Beights. 30K a year is nothing compared to the amount given to some of the players and other staff, and Birch has contributed more than, say, Bruno N'Gotty ever did.

Nothing wrong with phasing him out slowly, but I think some respect should be shown to a man who has served the club for over 3 decades.

As Brown Nose pointed out, he does a terrific job behind the scenes with the fans.

I'm slightly puzzled as to why people are so eager to throw out Birch. Perhaps he shouldn't be doing the halftime stuff, but there should always be a role for him at the club. I'd be a little saddened if he read some of the comments on here.

How is he not being showed respect? You (and I) have no idea what has gone on behind the scenes. He may have been told this a year ago, and not Stringer and the Mercury have got hold of it they are turning it into a big deal.

I'm not eager to throw him out, but I couldn't care about anything less if he does go.

 

[Miles Away]

How is he not being showed respect? You (and I) have no idea what has gone on behind the scenes. He may have been told this a year ago, and not Stringer and the Mercury have got hold of it they are turning it into a big deal.

I'm not eager to throw him out, but I couldn't care about anything less if he does go.

I don't know, I'm speculating. I certainly hope he is being given some respect.

It's your last sentence that puzzles me. Ah well. I suppose we will just agree to disagree. For me Birch has been a good ambassador and an excellent bloke to have attached to the club. Just my own feelings.

 

[Matt_B]

I don't know, I'm speculating. I certainly hope he is being given some respect.

It's your last sentence that puzzles me. Ah well. I suppose we will just agree to disagree. For me Birch has been a good ambassador and an excellent bloke to have attached to the club. Just my own feelings.

I'm sure he has, but if we don't move him on then the young ambassadors won't be able to mature, and the English ambassadorial team will fail miserably at next year's ambassador cup.

 

[SJN-Fox]

For anyone who feels so inclined ...

SAVE THE BIRCH

 

[Mike - True Blue Tinter]

For anyone who feels so inclined ...

SAVE THE BIRCH

Done, thanks.

 

[Ian Marshall]

Why does it? We can't afford to hang onto people for nostalgic reasons. How long should we let him stay? When he is 80 and drawing a wage despite pissing himself everywhere, should we still hang on to him?

The law states that someone has to retire at 65 unless both parties reach an agreement. I imagine (though I haven't a ****ing clue if I'm honest) that the agreement presented was for him to carry on for free, which he didn't want (and why would he)

I think the concern is over the apparent and ongoing move away from a club which welcomes strong bonds with supporters and that liaison is valued and serviced through the employment of people like Peter Jones and Alan Birchenall and towards a club where the unseen money men do alright and the fans are valued only really as a revenue generating source.

I don't necessarily even agree that getting him off the wageroll is good business from the club in a purely financial sense, but even if it is, doing something which is a little bit better from the club in a from a 'head' point of view, probably does not justify ripping out its heart, or put differently, a bit of its soul, its identity.

Just my thoughts on it. I see it as a bigger things than one man losing his job - its part of the transition our club is going through. Faceless and corporate makes sense on paper in a lot of ways and in a lot of situations in the business world, but in the entertainment/service/sport industry (and LCFC finds itself in all of these and more) sometimes having a bit of a personality, a likeable profile, a hook or a soul is worth more.

 

[Fox Fan]

I think the concern is over the apparent and ongoing move away from a club which welcomes strong bonds with supporters and that liaison is valued and serviced through the employment of people like Peter Jones and Alan Birchenall and towards a club where the unseen money men do alright and the fans are valued only really as a revenue generating source.

I don't necessarily even agree that getting him off the wageroll is good business from the club in a purely financial sense, but even if it is, doing something which is a little bit better from the club in a from a 'head' point of view, probably does not justify ripping out its heart, or put differently, a bit of its soul, its identity.

Just my thoughts on it. I see it as a bigger things than one man losing his job - its part of the transition our club is going through. Faceless and corporate makes sense on paper in a lot of ways and in a lot of situations in the business world, but in the entertainment/service/sport industry (and LCFC finds itself in all of these and more) sometimes having a bit of a personality, a likeable profile, a hook or a soul is worth more.

Birch should have been sacked for constantly blowing his whistle down the microphone at almost every home game last year.

I think the club could get someone more family friendly really. Birch spent a lot of his time perving on any girl within 100 yards of him.

Plus his pre-match on pitch pep talks...come on.

 

[Matt_B]

I think the concern is over the apparent and ongoing move away from a club which welcomes strong bonds with supporters and that liaison is valued and serviced through the employment of people like Peter Jones and Alan Birchenall and towards a club where the unseen money men do alright and the fans are valued only really as a revenue generating source.

I don't necessarily even agree that getting him off the wageroll is good business from the club in a purely financial sense, but even if it is, doing something which is a little bit better from the club in a from a 'head' point of view, probably does not justify ripping out its heart, or put differently, a bit of its soul, its identity.

Just my thoughts on it. I see it as a bigger things than one man losing his job - its part of the transition our club is going through. Faceless and corporate makes sense on paper in a lot of ways and in a lot of situations in the business world, but in the entertainment/service/sport industry (and LCFC finds itself in all of these and more) sometimes having a bit of a personality, a likeable profile, a hook or a soul is worth more.

That hurt my head and eyes, sorry.

 

[Blaby blue blood]

Plus his pre-match on pitch pep talks...come on.

Where are you?!!

 

[Ian Marshall]

That hurt my head and eyes, sorry.

.. and my feelings made up the final piece of a veritable triumverate of injured parties with that shot.