No place for Sam Hammam at our club

If Sam got paid what he is genuinely owed id be happy. As long as he isnt involved with CCFC anymore.

What confuses me is the same folk that say we are here today because of Sam dont seem to blame him for the rebrand. Surely we have Tan on board because of Sams mis management.

Maybe those that would rather be blue in league 2 should actually despise Sam even more.........hmmmmmm

I think you can genuinely blame Sam for a lot of things Craig (certainly the Ridsdale era) but the blame for the rebrand is a step too far. Sam had absolutely no imput on the reasons why we changed from Blue to Red that was totally down to VT.

Indeed would the rebrand had happened if Sam was advising VT at the time? May be, may be not but I'm pretty sure SH would have told VT forcabley that the fans wouldn't like it much.

Personally I have no objection to SH being involved again, as long as he sticks to what he is good at. I would certainly find him a role with the acadamy or finding promising young players from lower leagues (he was supreb at Wimbledon) and may be he could be a spokesman for the supporters directly to VT?

Whatever the conclusion of the Langston Notes is my absolute priority is what is best for the club and not me personally.

The Man that gave us Peter Ridsdale. Enough said.

The Man that gave us Peter Ridsdale. Enough said.

Nail, head

If Sam got paid what he is genuinely owed id be happy. As long as he isnt involved with CCFC anymore.

What confuses me is the same folk that say we are here today because of Sam dont seem to blame him for the rebrand. Surely we have Tan on board because of Sams mis management.

Maybe those that would rather be blue in league 2 should actually despise Sam even more.........hmmmmmm

I think you can genuinely blame Sam for a lot of things Craig (certainly the Ridsdale era) but the blame for the rebrand is a step too far. Sam had absolutely no imput on the reasons why we changed from Blue to Red that was totally down to VT.

Indeed would the rebrand had happened if Sam was advising VT at the time? May be, may be not but I'm pretty sure SH would have told VT forcabley that the fans wouldn't like it much.

Personally I have no objection to SH being involved again, as long as he sticks to what he is good at. I would certainly find him a role with the acadamy or finding promising young players from lower leagues (he was supreb at Wimbledon) and may be he could be a spokesman for the supporters directly to VT?

Whatever the conclusion of the Langston Notes is my absolute priority is what is best for the club and not me personally.

You mis-understand Tony. Im not blaming Sam for the rebrand, but Tan is here due to a number of factors, one being we needed money due to very bad mismanagement from previous owners. Ie) Riddler and Sam. They dont mess up, we have no Tan, we have no rebrand.......

You mis-understand Tony. Im not blaming Sam for the rebrand, but Tan is here due to a number of factors, one being we needed money due to very bad mismanagement from previous owners. Ie) Riddler and Sam. They dont mess up, we have no Tan, we have no rebrand.......

Fair enough but how far do you go back with the blame? Can you also blame Borley as he was Chairman prior to SH or a string of other previous owners?

Personally I blame Ridsdale far more than SH. When he took control as Chairman in October 2006 he clearly stated CCFC was 'debt' free.

We all know now that was absolutely untrue and we still owed Langston £24m + interest from that point. Ridsdale then promptly asset stripped the club (which included many of the young players brought through by SH's acadamy) and when they were all gone he turned to the Golden Ticket Scam which eventually led to the High Court winding up order because he paid himself and the players before the tax bill.

During the whole period of Ridsdale's Chairmanship he paid absolutely f**k all off the Langston debt, by always quoting 2016 as if that date was never going to come.

That is the real reason why we had to turn to VT and accept the rebrand.

So if as your saying Gwynn that Sam personally guaranteed the money to citi bank then the way I see it its SAMs debt and not Cardiff city's? If Langston borrowed the money then it's langstons liability?