Peter Pannu has once again been accused of some form of wrong doing in the local press and yet again he has to come out and explain himself.
What is hard to understand is that when a ‘new’ scandal is uncovered or charged Pannu refers the accusations to some form of evidence that has been published. Don’t get me wrong, when I read this published information I seem to be more confused than I was before I read it but surely the media that keeps accusing him have access to an experienced accountant or a ‘more clever than I’ solicitor who could read thesestatements/accounts and answer the questions for them. It can’t be a coincidence that when Pannu issues a statement he doesn’t clarify the matter but refers his answer to an official disclosure which has been there for all to see all the time.
The latest accusation of the ‘consultancy agreement’ has been answered in the usual manner, referring not explaining.
If I were him I’d be fed up with it all and just say “no comment” which would probably be inferred as arrogance, saying that when a statement is issued it can also be misconstrued
“I would say the media have hit a nerve from the statement” rears its head again.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t springs to mind.
Mr Li was referred to as a former director and was put on a pedestal, why did it not state that he was the former discredited ‘Xtep’ director, was this intentional or was this just another fact that could have been discovered by reading the official releases. The first rule of any solicitor is to discredit the witness.
Pannu has always stated that he was the driving force behind the Xtep investigation and the introduction of a new kit sponsor that we now profit from, I would guess that Mr Li and Pannu are not best buddies.
Is it also coincidental that the original accountants ( I think the ones that refused to ‘sign off’ the accounts and were duly dismissed by the HK board) are now happy to return to the fold, are they being duped too ?
Pannu has backed himself with facts yet again and asked Bluenoses to read all pieces with an open mind.He has also stated that we deserve a change and that is something he is trying to achieve but bearing in mind he is the manager as such and not the owner, therefore cant personally grant or stop a sale.
My biggest fear is that if someone ‘uncovered’ some horrendous crime and Pannu was relieved of his position who would be left holding the rudder.
Pannu and the BCFC staff have a firm grip of the rudder at the moment and keep stopping for £5 of fuel because unfortunately something has turned off the 500 gallon tank.
Often Partisan stated earlier this week that a 10,000 strong Bluenose conga in Hong Kong wouldn’t make a blind bit of difference to the decision making, it’s therefore time to back the shirt, and wait to see what happens.