It's not, believe me, despite the surface appearance of it. I'm actually differentiating between the two things; ownership and running. KP have been good for the club (on balance, I know everyone doesn't see it like that) and I wouldn't want a change. On the other hand, Top (or people he trusts) have made some rank decisions. That needs sorting certainly but not by changing owner.
Consider my intention when saying "if only", I'll clarify it.
From the club's perspective, should they not accept they've made mistakes, or only identify 'learning experiences' or some other such corporate PR speak, they ought none-the-less make significant board level changes even if only to appease supporters.
I consider supporter opion to be vital because the club isn't just a business, it is its supporters too. So the club ought act in a manner that they (the club) might consider supporter appeasement. I feel the supporters are owed that level of respect and not ignored or given the silent 'we know best' treatment.
Something has been ****ed up. I think the club needs to open to supporters about the how and why of that but I don't see the need to point the finger at who. That said, they need to be seen to be taking responsibility by making changes and having Rudkin walk the plank.
