SL and MA have a message for you...

[EnderMB]

Let's not forget that Lansdown has been in this situation before, and thankfully we have a full transcript of "that" interview.

Looking back over that interview, you can say that Lansdown has previous. Ultimately, he wants to run the club in a certain way, and ultimately doing things his way matters far more than hiring the most qualified candidate. That much is clear in his answers around LJ during our relegation fight, Des Taylor being released, etc.

Obviously, three years later, and we're in a much better position than we were, but how much of that is down to LJ and how much is down to the vision at play? Hiring Holden and finishing worse off next season would indicate that LJ was punching above his weight, and would heap huge amounts of pressure on Ashton and Lansdown for the approach they've adopted for half a decade.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Show Me The Money! said:

It’s not just about him spending a fortune. It’s about the club being able to meet FFP.

 The majority of us have bitched and moaned about clubs spending beyond there means and cheating FFP and then laughed when said clubs come crashing back down again.

 Yet that seems to be what lots of people are expecting us to be doing now

It is. 

Strangely some (not all but some) of those who shout loudly about this offer precious little in the way of solutions. 

I don't want Holden but there is a balancing act to be had here. I'm not sure what the answer is, but at least I'm honest about it. 

If there is no amendment to the £39m 3 year rule, it'll be quite tricky given Covid losses.

[Southport Red]

4 hours ago, Loco Rojo said:

People spouting such anger towads the board when nothings official is ridiculous.

We could yet have the manager that people want but do you think there will be threads apologising for some of the comments? 

How?

DH decides that, despite applying for the job and going through a ‘rigorous’ recruitment process, that, actually, he doesn’t want the job after all. If you were Chris Hughton, would you even pick the phone up if MA rang you on Tuesday?

[Superjack]

3 hours ago, Show Me The Money! said:

The fact that he has asked to think about it over the weekend says to me that he’s fully aware he isn’t the person that the fans want and I wouldn’t be surprised if he chooses to not take it.

Even though I wouldn’t have appointed him myself and I’m pissed off like most people with how this whole process has been handled, part of me wants him to take the job on and make a big success of it. It’s not within the realms of possibility.

The thing I think we have to take into account here is its not just about who the head coach is. If whoever is appointed is going to get pretty much no funds with which to improve the squad and will have to go with more of our promising anyway would someone like CH be guaranteed to be more successful than DH? I personally don’t think so.

Totally get the anger at the board though they’ve totally cocked up the handling of this big style.

You said it.

[Southport Red]

13 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It is. 

Strangely some (not all but some) of those who shout loudly about this offer precious little in the way of solutions. 

I don't want Holden but there is a balancing act to be had here. I'm not sure what the answer is, but at least I'm honest about it. 

If there is no amendment to the £39m 3 year rule, it'll be quite tricky given Covid losses.

Because SL and MA 5 weeks ago talked of new faces, breaths of fresh air and exceptional candidates from around the world, that is the entire problem. If the narrative 5 weeks ago had been “difficult times, unprecedented circumstances, uncertain financials” etc etc and they appointed DH straight away, everyone would have said “DH wasn’t my free choice, but I understand, good luck Dean”. The board have sold fans a “pup”, then spent 5 weeks ignoring them and are now giving Dean Holden a poisoned chalice. 

Plus, we don’t know if the SG thing was nonsense or not, but IF it was true, we weren’t worried about Covid or FFP when offering him 550K per week. 

[Superjack]

3 hours ago, BS15_RED said:

Sadly,  in the eyes of the club, we are merely customers now, and not supporters anymore.

Well if I piss my customers off, I expect them to go elsewhere.

[One Team]

Unfortunately this is exactly the underwhelming and disappointing decision I expected and feared but hoped we’d learned from and would move on from.

After all SL’s rhetoric I thought he’d actually learned something; it’s appears not and yet again we’ve missed a golden opportunity to really take this club up a level and it seems we are intent to repeat past failings.

Quite simply this is disgraceful. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

28 minutes ago, Southport Red said:

Because SL and MA 5 weeks ago talked of new faces, breaths of fresh air and exceptional candidates from around the world, that is the entire problem. If the narrative 5 weeks ago had been “difficult times, unprecedented circumstances, uncertain financials” etc etc and they appointed DH straight away, everyone would have said “DH wasn’t my free choice, but I understand, good luck Dean”. The board have sold fans a “pup”, then spent 5 weeks ignoring them and are now giving Dean Holden a poisoned chalice. 

Plus, we don’t know if the SG thing was nonsense or not, but IF it was true, we weren’t worried about Covid or FFP when offering him 550K per week. 

How much, you mean £50k per week??

Let's be fair we don't know- we don't know if the FFP loss limit has been changed or carries on regardless due to Covid losses- how do we know- answer we don't- whether the club were assuming they might change.

Imagine having to hit rolling £39m losses with no adjustment in time of Covid- we just don't know!

I see what you mean though, the 5 weeks- it's all very odd, the sudden sacking of McAllister- it's all odd- the lack of transparency is very odd. the lack of a plan is very odd.

As it goes, Ashton declared in the final 9 or 10 days of April that we had a season of austerity ahead- what's the true state of play here?? Both can't be right tbh!

@phantomI read your post about financial experts with interest- can you cite them? Or link to an article- wages not affected by this is quite interesting if so!

[milo1111]

4 hours ago, Chappers said:

How about “It’s gonna cost me a fortune keeping this football club going until normality returns”

Why say what he said on talksport then Happyclap ??? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

33 minutes ago, milo1111 said:

Why say what he said on talksport then Happyclap ??? 

By the same token, why did Ashton declare it was a season of austerity ahead pre-dating this?

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/a-season-austerity-championship-ceo-4064862

[phantom]

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

@phantomI read your post about financial experts with interest- can you cite them? Or link to an article- wages not affected by this is quite interesting if so!

Hi

It was Kieran Maguire on Talksport. 

I'll see if I can find any links

[Numero Uno]

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

By the same token, why did Ashton declare it was a season of austerity ahead pre-dating this?

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/a-season-austerity-championship-ceo-4064862

So why are two members of the same circus preaching two totally opposite messages? One could be forgiven for thinking they are media whores who will say anything people want to hear if you shove a microphone in their face as long as they say something. I think the people running this club is the overriding issue that has to be looked at, the choice of manager is a sideshow.

[Chappers]

6 hours ago, milo1111 said:

Why say what he said on talksport then Happyclap ??? 

Teddies flying out of pram today. Ever thought of giving the guy a chance?

 

Boo hoo, I want a big name manager...,,

[Chappers]

7 hours ago, Superjack said:

Well if I piss my customers off, I expect them to go elsewhere.

Yeah, and come crawling back if we do well

[supercidered]

13 hours ago, Loco Rojo said:

I really hope there's some humble pie to be eaten at the end of this

Mew mew mew mew mew 

[supercidered]

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

It is. 

Strangely some (not all but some) of those who shout loudly about this offer precious little in the way of solutions. 

I don't want Holden but there is a balancing act to be had here. I'm not sure what the answer is, but at least I'm honest about it. 

If there is no amendment to the £39m 3 year rule, it'll be quite tricky given Covid losses.

So we go and appoint a cone collector?

Talk about false economy. Holden isn’t worthy of this role. There is nothing in this appointment that makes any sense. I doubt eve Holden can believe his luck. Only City can royally f@ck up such a massive and once in a generation opportunity!

[Olé]

10 hours ago, BS15_RED said:

Sadly,  in the eyes of the club, we are merely customers now, and not supporters anymore.

Pretty much this.

I didn't bother to post yesterday as my language would have been fairly agricultural, and after sleeping on it I'm still not sure how to put my feelings into words - it's not even about Dean Holden anymore, nor wanting to be "spoiled" with bigger names - it's something much more fundamental about who City is being run for and why.

It's wonderful that a number of super-fans are taking precisely this moment to virtue signal their realism, patience and unwavering loyalty to the club. Unfortunately to patronise me in that way wouldn't work, as my enthusiasm to support isn't wavering conditional on some decision or investment, I simply realise it's no longer my club. 

This isn't about finances or even ambition or sticking through thick or thin - I'd be more motivated to support a City in the Conference South where I trusted and could identify with the club and the people who run it. "A good honest effort" is a bit of a cliche in football, but it has the same meaning at a 30 quid club as at a £30m club.

I can support an honest effort wherever that finds us, sadly in my view SL & MA have now confirmed a dishonesty about their motives that I've long feared, but is now out in the open. Holden is only the final (but probably largest) swing in a death by a thousand cuts. Repeatedly saying one thing, doing another, treating us all as fools.

To pick but one example (though useful because it also addresses "but COVID, but finances" head on). The club talk about youth and pathway. But bin off Taylor Moore quickly and loan in midfielders before they'll play Morrell. We talk about self sufficiency but throw millions and millions on players who barely play. All on SL's watch. 

We are an expensive play thing for the Lansdown family, they spin the story of being well run and some of you lap it up, but pay close attention and it's the opposite, an utter indulgence of spending on players and "ones for the future", few of which we ever see. We have a CEO on FTSE-250 CEO money, telling us how smart this all is.

And at the heart of this, is this ridiculous contradiction - and charade - with managers. Despite all this spending, SL inexplicably somehow finds excuses and storylines to place inexperienced, easily manipulated coaches in the most important role at the club. And on we go with this cycle of spending to prop up his little football fantasy.

This self-indulgence is the fundamental and biggest dishonesty of SL & MA's running of the club. There are many little lies along the way (and let's not even start on the 'customer experience') but realising I can't trust them to do the right thing, I for one find it hard to identify with the club or understand for whose benefit it is being run. 

I think back to away games - most recently after blowing results at Barnsley and at Charlton - talking to longstanding, loyal to the core supporters, who all see the same depressing long term weaknesses: a lack of "been there, done it" experience and leadership. It's mind numbingly obvious and yet SL persists with his puppets instead.  

So yes, hiring Holden (and on the back of yet more lies and spin) will be the final and most explicit reminder that this is Lansdown's toy to do with as he pleases, just as it was also for his son, re-branding our club (sorry, changing our crest). And it's hardly worth me getting worked up supporting it all, if I can't identify with their "ideas".

The next time I'm able to be at Ashton Gate, it will be 100% as a customer of their project. Hard to still be a supporter of people who treat us like fools.

[Unan]

Two threads have been merged, the title isn't mine but it says I made it..

[Kid in the Riot]

13 minutes ago, Olé said:

Pretty much this.

I didn't bother to post yesterday as my language would have been fairly agricultural, and after sleeping on it I'm still not sure how to put my feelings into words - it's not even about Dean Holden anymore, nor wanting to be "spoiled" with bigger names - it's something much more fundamental about who City is being run for and why.

It's wonderful that a number of super-fans are taking precisely this moment to virtue signal their realism, patience and unwavering loyalty to the club. Unfortunately to patronise me in that way wouldn't work, as my enthusiasm to support isn't wavering conditional on some decision or investment, I simply realise it's no longer my club. 

This isn't about finances or even ambition or sticking through thick or thin - I'd be more motivated to support a City in the Conference South where I trusted and could identify with the club and the people who run it. "A good honest effort" is a bit of a cliche in football, but it has the same meaning at a 30 quid club as at a £30m club.

I can support an honest effort wherever that finds us, sadly in my view SL & MA have now confirmed a dishonesty about their motives that I've long feared, but is now out in the open. Holden is only the final (but probably largest) swing in a death by a thousand cuts. Repeatedly saying one thing, doing another, treating us all as fools.

To pick but one example (though useful because it also addresses "but COVID, but finances" head on). The club talk about youth and pathway. But bin off Taylor Moore quickly and loan in midfielders before they'll play Morrell. We talk about self sufficiency but throw millions and millions on players who barely play. All on SL's watch. 

We are an expensive play thing for the Lansdown family, they spin the story of being well run and some of you lap it up, but pay close attention and it's the opposite, an utter indulgence of spending on players and "ones for the future", few of which we ever see. We have a CEO on FTSE-250 CEO money, telling us how smart this all is.

And at the heart of this, is this ridiculous contradiction - and charade - with managers. Despite all this spending, SL inexplicably somehow finds excuses and storylines to place inexperienced, easily manipulated coaches in the most important role at the club. And on we go with this cycle of spending to prop up his little football fantasy.

This self-indulgence is the fundamental and biggest dishonesty of SL & MA's running of the club. There are many little lies along the way (and let's not even start on the 'customer experience') but realising I can't trust them to do the right thing, I for one find it hard to identify with the club or understand for whose benefit it is being run. 

I think back to away games - most recently after blowing results at Barnsley and at Charlton - talking to longstanding, loyal to the core supporters, who all see the same depressing long term weaknesses: a lack of "been there, done it" experience and leadership. It's mind numbingly obvious and yet SL persists with his puppets instead.  

So yes, hiring Holden (and on the back of yet more lies and spin) will be the final and most explicit reminder that this is Lansdown's toy to do with as he pleases, just as it was also for his son, re-branding our club (sorry, changing our crest). And it's hardly worth me getting worked up supporting it all, if I can't identify with their "ideas".

The next time I'm able to be at Ashton Gate, it will be 100% as a customer of their project. Hard to still be a supporter of people who treat us like fools.

A simply brilliant summation of Steve Lansdown FC. 

[robin_unreliant]

So why doesn't he run the Rugby club in the same way, that is what really frustrates me. 

Is it because he isn't really interested in the game. Merely owning it is enough to satisfy his ego. Whereas he wants his say in the football because that's his passion? Or maybe the cost of rugby is so much less that he doesn't feel the same need for control. 

It is all a bit depressing if true. 

[Alessandro]

26 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

A simply brilliant summation of Steve Lansdown FC. 

All done in the name of self sufficiency, which to be fair is admirable, a lot of what has been put in place over the last half decade has been in many cases positive and praised here, so i'm reluctant to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

But I wholeheartedly agree in doing so you don't have to sell your soul and that's increasingly what City fans are feeling.

And now Holden, it feels like so much is undone for me. Coupled with the a communications veto akin to Russia, we're left deflated to say the least. 

Lauded one of the best owners in British football, is our chairman actually a little bit of weak man backed up by stacks of cash or cleverly playing us for fools? 

[Bat Fastard]

32 minutes ago, Olé said:

Pretty much this.

I didn't bother to post yesterday as my language would have been fairly agricultural, and after sleeping on it I'm still not sure how to put my feelings into words - it's not even about Dean Holden anymore, nor wanting to be "spoiled" with bigger names - it's something much more fundamental about who City is being run for and why.

It's wonderful that a number of super-fans are taking precisely this moment to virtue signal their realism, patience and unwavering loyalty to the club. Unfortunately to patronise me in that way wouldn't work, as my enthusiasm to support isn't wavering conditional on some decision or investment, I simply realise it's no longer my club. 

This isn't about finances or even ambition or sticking through thick or thin - I'd be more motivated to support a City in the Conference South where I trusted and could identify with the club and the people who run it. "A good honest effort" is a bit of a cliche in football, but it has the same meaning at a 30 quid club as at a £30m club.

I can support an honest effort wherever that finds us, sadly in my view SL & MA have now confirmed a dishonesty about their motives that I've long feared, but is now out in the open. Holden is only the final (but probably largest) swing in a death by a thousand cuts. Repeatedly saying one thing, doing another, treating us all as fools.

To pick but one example (though useful because it also addresses "but COVID, but finances" head on). The club talk about youth and pathway. But bin off Taylor Moore quickly and loan in midfielders before they'll play Morrell. We talk about self sufficiency but throw millions and millions on players who barely play. All on SL's watch. 

We are an expensive play thing for the Lansdown family, they spin the story of being well run and some of you lap it up, but pay close attention and it's the opposite, an utter indulgence of spending on players and "ones for the future", few of which we ever see. We have a CEO on FTSE-250 CEO money, telling us how smart this all is.

And at the heart of this, is this ridiculous contradiction - and charade - with managers. Despite all this spending, SL inexplicably somehow finds excuses and storylines to place inexperienced, easily manipulated coaches in the most important role at the club. And on we go with this cycle of spending to prop up his little football fantasy.

This self-indulgence is the fundamental and biggest dishonesty of SL & MA's running of the club. There are many little lies along the way (and let's not even start on the 'customer experience') but realising I can't trust them to do the right thing, I for one find it hard to identify with the club or understand for whose benefit it is being run. 

I think back to away games - most recently after blowing results at Barnsley and at Charlton - talking to longstanding, loyal to the core supporters, who all see the same depressing long term weaknesses: a lack of "been there, done it" experience and leadership. It's mind numbingly obvious and yet SL persists with his puppets instead.  

So yes, hiring Holden (and on the back of yet more lies and spin) will be the final and most explicit reminder that this is Lansdown's toy to do with as he pleases, just as it was also for his son, re-branding our club (sorry, changing our crest). And it's hardly worth me getting worked up supporting it all, if I can't identify with their "ideas".

The next time I'm able to be at Ashton Gate, it will be 100% as a customer of their project. Hard to still be a supporter of people who treat us like fools.

Sad to read this and your disappointment is clear.  I am maybe one of the people that you mention who will support the club through thick and thin - simply because I have no  choice in the matter and no means of changing anything with which I disagree. 

Maybe it would help to look back a few years to when we had ramshackle stands and nineteenth century toilets and third world catering facilities. All changed now, and without looking through tear misted eyes, I think it has all improved out of all recognition.  The same happens when your sweet children grow up into adulthood - they change, but they are still "of you". 

I think that like many on here, you are disappointed because all the changes have whetted your degree of expectation.  We have rarely been in such a comfortable position in the second tier of English football apart from the days in the old top division. I go back more than 50 years with City and I find myself being cheesed off because we miss out on the play-offs. The miracle of the change wrought by SD and family is that we now no longer question the ambition but expect it as a right.  Well life is rarely like that. 

As for the "lies and deceptions" - well it is simplistic to think that running a large organisation in difficult times will not chuck up the inevitable confrontations of desires and facts. Sometimes they might really want to do something, but the circumstances would make it unwise. Sometimes these things are thrashed out in the boardroom and decisions mad may well end up being different to the original intentions announced by a single board member. That is why you have a board of directors, to arrive at the most considered decisions.  

Your disappointment with the apparent appointment of Dean Holden also betokens a belief that you know better than the board although you do not know all the facts, what was said, what the finances dictated and who amongst the candidates best fitted the task described by the board to take our club forward.  They run the club for the benefit of all and sometimes we must have faith and support them because they are more likely to be "in the know" than the keyboard executives on this forum.

i hope you can forgive and forget and move on. We have a team to support and they are the focus of our love for the club. What goes on behind the scenes is little to do with us, because as I said at the outset, we cannot change or control those things. Our influence is to be able to lift the boys on the pitch and hopefully drive them to achieve the ambitions that we all harbour.  Sorry this is so long but your post was considered and pretty fundamental to many people, and I just wanted to add a different persective.

[Red Exile]

22 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

All done in the name of self sufficiency, which to be fair is admirable, a lot of what has been put in place over the last half decade has been in many cases positive and praised here, so i'm reluctant to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

But I wholeheartedly agree in doing so you don't have to sell your soul and that's increasingly what City fans are feeling.

And now Holden, it feels like so much is undone for me. Coupled with the a communications veto akin to Russia, we're left deflated to say the least. 

Lauded one of the best owners in British football, is our chairman actually a weak man? 

Steve Lansdown isn't a weak man. I've met him but a handful of times but I've had substantial conversations with him. He's anything but weak. I'd say he has all the self-doubt of a self-made billionaire, i.e. not much! Which means that in conversation, whilst he's a decent chap and easy to get on with, he didn't appear to me to respond well to criticism, or invite other perspectives.

He's his own man treading his own path, a bit stubborn.

My impression of him was that he doesn't much care much whether he loses traditional City supporters along the way, he's not one himself. They can be replaced by folk more used to behaving as 'customers'.

[Red Exile]

9 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

That is why you have a board of directors, to arrive at the most considered decisions.  

Yours is a perspective I can't really appreciate...far too deferential to authority...but it is, I acknowledge, a widely held perspective.

Where I'd pick you up is on the suggestion that Bristol City has a 'board' in any meaningful sense of the term. A club like Burnley has a functioning board. We have the owner, his mate, his son and Mark Ashton. I don't see a great diversity of opinion there and it is abundantly clear who has the casting vote. I don't buy the notion of things that are above our little heads and beyond our comprehension being 'thrashed out'...Steve decides...end of.

I find myself identifying less and less with what Steve Lansdown is creating. It's hardly the end of the world but, personally, I find it a great shame.

 

[Bat Fastard]

1 minute ago, Red Exile said:

Yours is a perspective I can't really appreciate...far too deferential to authority...but it is, I acknowledge, a widely held perspective.

Where I'd pick you up is on the suggestion that Bristol City has a 'board' in any meaningful sense of the term. A club like Burnley has a functioning board. We have the owner, his mate, his son and Mark Ashton. I don't see a great diversity of opinion there and it is abundantly clear who has the casting vote. I don't buy the notion of things that are above our little heads and beyond our comprehension being 'thrashed out'...Steve decides...end of.

I find myself identifying less and less with what Steve Lansdown is creating. It's hardly the end of the world but, personally, I find it a great shame.

 

Having run a business for many years I know that sometimes decisions made in the boardroom may not look attractive to people outside the boardroom who have not had the data and information available to the board. With Bristol City, the people actively involved in the business will feed back this information to fellow board members - particularly SL who, although the most experienced member, is also the most detached from day to day involvement.  I would expect the effort to be largely collegiate and all the talk of power plays and domination are unlikely to be true. People make up stuff to fit their narrative - the forum would not exist if this were not the case. 

Our opinions are not well informed so I conclude that we should support the club, which happens to be run by the board. We have no alternative but to trust them - unless, of course, you are able to but them out.

[Banjo Island]

28 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

Sad to read this and your disappointment is clear.  I am maybe one of the people that you mention who will support the club through thick and thin - simply because I have no  choice in the matter and no means of changing anything with which I disagree. 

Maybe it would help to look back a few years to when we had ramshackle stands and nineteenth century toilets and third world catering facilities. All changed now, and without looking through tear misted eyes, I think it has all improved out of all recognition.  The same happens when your sweet children grow up into adulthood - they change, but they are still "of you". 

I think that like many on here, you are disappointed because all the changes have whetted your degree of expectation.  We have rarely been in such a comfortable position in the second tier of English football apart from the days in the old top division. I go back more than 50 years with City and I find myself being cheesed off because we miss out on the play-offs. The miracle of the change wrought by SD and family is that we now no longer question the ambition but expect it as a right.  Well life is rarely like that. 

As for the "lies and deceptions" - well it is simplistic to think that running a large organisation in difficult times will not chuck up the inevitable confrontations of desires and facts. Sometimes they might really want to do something, but the circumstances would make it unwise. Sometimes these things are thrashed out in the boardroom and decisions mad may well end up being different to the original intentions announced by a single board member. That is why you have a board of directors, to arrive at the most considered decisions.  

Your disappointment with the apparent appointment of Dean Holden also betokens a belief that you know better than the board although you do not know all the facts, what was said, what the finances dictated and who amongst the candidates best fitted the task described by the board to take our club forward.  They run the club for the benefit of all and sometimes we must have faith and support them because they are more likely to be "in the know" than the keyboard executives on this forum.

i hope you can forgive and forget and move on. We have a team to support and they are the focus of our love for the club. What goes on behind the scenes is little to do with us, because as I said at the outset, we cannot change or control those things. Our influence is to be able to lift the boys on the pitch and hopefully drive them to achieve the ambitions that we all harbour.  Sorry this is so long but your post was considered and pretty fundamental to many people, and I just wanted to add a different persective.

Hi batfastard just a little message offering my aplogies for an unwarranted outburst towards yourself your quite right who ever gets the job i will follow throgh thick and thin mostly thin really sorry fellow red

[Alessandro]

18 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

Steve Lansdown isn't a weak man. I've met him but a handful of times but I've had substantial conversations with him. He's anything but weak. I'd say he has all the self-doubt of a self-made billionaire, i.e. not much! Which means that in conversation, whilst he's a decent chap and easy to get on with, he didn't appear to me to respond well to criticism, or invite other perspectives.

He's his own man treading his own path, a bit stubborn.

My impression of him was that he doesn't much care much whether he loses traditional City supporters along the way, he's not one himself. They can be replaced by folk more used to behaving as 'customers'.

I don't mean weak in a traditional, simple sense. I actually mean weak in the way that you alluded to in this reply. 

Unable to take criticism can be a sign of weakness, not learning from your mistakes the same. Appointing the easy option, "yes men" - getting MA to sit LJ down and sack him/do his dirty work, etc etc. There is a fine line sometimes and some people hide weaknesses behind arrogance or stubbornness.

Or perhaps as has been said already he simply doesn't really give a shit what we all think - fans are customers and there will always be more customers. In fact, fans being customers make running a club much easier.

[Red Exile]

11 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

Having run a business for many years I know that sometimes decisions made in the boardroom may not look attractive to people outside the boardroom who have not had the data and information available to the board. With Bristol City, the people actively involved in the business will feed back this information to fellow board members - particularly SL who, although the most experienced member, is also the most detached from day to day involvement.  I would expect the effort to be largely collegiate and all the talk of power plays and domination are unlikely to be true. People make up stuff to fit their narrative - the forum would not exist if this were not the case. 

Our opinions are not well informed so I conclude that we should support the club, which happens to be run by the board. We have no alternative but to trust them - unless, of course, you are able to but them out.

I'd suggest that our opinions of the qualities needed for a successful Championship manager are as well informed as any of those in the Bristol City boardroom. But let's not prolong this.

I have no plans to buy Steve out. 

 

6 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Or perhaps as has been said already he simply doesn't really give a shit what we all think - fans are customers and there will always be more customers. In fact, fans being customers make running a club much easier.

I think you have hit the nail on the head!

[Bat Fastard]

6 minutes ago, Banjo Island said:

Hi batfastard just a little message offering my aplogies for an unwarranted outburst towards yourself your quite right who ever gets the job i will follow throgh thick and thin mostly thin really sorry fellow red

This is a football forum and we must have some cut and thrust. If we were sat next to each other in AG we would both be roaring our team to victory. Under the skin we are all City supporters - even though our frustrations often cause us grief. Be of stout heart!!

[Alessandro]

6 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

Having run a business for many years I know that sometimes decisions made in the boardroom may not look attractive to people outside the boardroom who have not had the data and information available to the board. With Bristol City, the people actively involved in the business will feed back this information to fellow board members - particularly SL who, although the most experienced member, is also the most detached from day to day involvement.  I would expect the effort to be largely collegiate and all the talk of power plays and domination are unlikely to be true. People make up stuff to fit their narrative - the forum would not exist if this were not the case. 

Our opinions are not well informed so I conclude that we should support the club, which happens to be run by the board. We have no alternative but to trust them - unless, of course, you are able to but them out.

You're not necessarily wrong in what you say and have written elsewhere in simplistic terms - but you're missing the one, key fundamental point here right now.

Emotional attachment.

To have the attitude you have is all good and well and admirable, but that 'Oh well, what will be will be - we don't have any control anyway" attitude is firstly, incorrect, because we as fans do have some control. (A club without fans simply won't exist, as they're finding out right now, if they think COVID is bad.....) And secondly it's a statement devoid of emotion, because frankly, supporting your football club is not an emotionally rational thing, so when the club make disappointing or conflicting decisions that directly effect you emotionally, don't be surprised when fans simply don't just sit back and 'trust them'.