Is it just me who seems to think he's a relatively benign/benevolent owner? Are people looking for Abramoviches or Shake Mansours here?
He seems to be getting slaughtered for taking 6m out of the club in the last six years. In other places he's being slated for a lack of vision (presumably purely on the grounds he's not articulated it) and my personal favourite, a lack of "passion".
As I've posted many times before, I'm far from his biggest fan and was more than a little skeptical when he arrived but he's not used us to leverage debt, he's not taken consultancy fees for the restructuring of the debt and he's only taken a very, very small amount out of the club over his tenure.
Have these people lost a sense of perspective? Are they just generally ignorant or are they just venting spleen on the easiest target?