Everyone knows that Cardiff is at the mercy of one man’s whi

Everyone knows that Cardiff is at the mercy of one man’s whims and there is nothing anyone can do about it, but to be a sacking club and not have candidates in mind at all times is sinful. Absolutely unforgivable. To bin a manager and only then give it any thought is negligence

100% spot on.

The few who accuse the many of 'club bashing' surely realise the 'club' IS Vincent Tan. As you say, one mans whim and fancy.

As a major shareholder there is no argument against that.

However, he needs to take into account other shareholders who in turn have the right to question him and in rare circumstances they can take him to court over neglect. I can see it now Abrahams v Tan, this is going to be a Showcase.

Absolutely Spot OP

Everyone knows that Cardiff is at the mercy of one man’s whims and there is nothing anyone can do about it, but to be a sacking club and not have candidates in mind at all times is sinful. Absolutely unforgivable. To bin a manager and only then give it any thought is negligence

How do you know they aint got any one in mind ? .

As a major shareholder there is no argument against that.

However, he needs to take into account other shareholders who in turn have the right to question him and in rare circumstances they can take him to court over neglect. I can see it now Abrahams v Tan, this is going to be a Showcase.

Other shareholders ? There's shares are worth less

As a major shareholder there is no argument against that.

However, he needs to take into account other shareholders who in turn have the right to question him and in rare circumstances they can take him to court over neglect. I can see it now Abrahams v Tan, this is going to be a Showcase.

Other shareholders ? There's shares are worth less

Regardless, they can still give a No Confidence.

As a major shareholder there is no argument against that.

However, he needs to take into account other shareholders who in turn have the right to question him and in rare circumstances they can take him to court over neglect. I can see it now Abrahams v Tan, this is going to be a Showcase.

Other shareholders ? There's shares are worth less

Regardless, they can still give a No Confidence.

No they can't, they can't do anything, the shares are no where near the amount to bring a no confidence vote,

Tan should take over as Manager he does think he's a football expert (who actually knows sweet FA) and after a few weeks of shambles sacks himself and disappears for good never to be heard of again.

As a major shareholder there is no argument against that.

However, he needs to take into account other shareholders who in turn have the right to question him and in rare circumstances they can take him to court over neglect. I can see it now Abrahams v Tan, this is going to be a Showcase.

Other shareholders ? There's shares are worth less

Regardless, they can still give a No Confidence.

No they can't, they can't do anything, the shares are no where near the amount to bring a no confidence vote,

Happened against the Riddler.

As a major shareholder there is no argument against that.

However, he needs to take into account other shareholders who in turn have the right to question him and in rare circumstances they can take him to court over neglect. I can see it now Abrahams v Tan, this is going to be a Showcase.

Other shareholders ? There's shares are worth less

Regardless, they can still give a No Confidence.

No they can't, they can't do anything, the shares are no where near the amount to bring a no confidence vote,

Happened against the Riddler.

How did it ? .totally different situation tan owns nearly 100% of the shares