SL and MA have a message for you...

[Bat Fastard]

1 minute ago, Alessandro said:

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'.

We DO have emotional attachment. Every time the team runs out or we score a goal or concede a dodgy penalty, we feel the raw emotion and that is our attachment to the club. We cannot influence or change which players we buy or bring up from the academy or how coaches or manages them.  We will still sing the name of the manager when things go well and mutter when they do not.  My rules are simple - I only boo the opposition, gasheads and people like Hollowhead, Warnock and Pulis. The rest of the time I try to keep it positive.  We enjoy the product - and have no control or even knowledge of all the ingredients.

[Bat Fastard]

10 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

I have no plans to buy Steve out. 

I hope this will make him feel better.

[BARNEYB]

You reap what you sow

Time will tell if they have messed up and it's then you gets what you deserve and have to face the music

[Banjo Island]

10 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

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!!

Cheers bud ive been roaring the reds on since 1967 and will continue regardless and if i was doing it sat next to you id buy you a pint or two COYR

[Bat Fastard]

5 minutes ago, Banjo Island said:

Cheers bud ive been roaring the reds on since 1967 and will continue regardless and if i was doing it sat next to you id buy you a pint or two COYR

Good to know how much we have in common - I also first went in 1967.  It would be an honour to raise a glass with you once the vaccinations have made it safe to return.

[Alessandro]

7 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

We DO have emotional attachment. Every time the team runs out or we score a goal or concede a dodgy penalty, we feel the raw emotion and that is our attachment to the club. We cannot influence or change which players we buy or bring up from the academy or how coaches or manages them.  We will still sing the name of the manager when things go well and mutter when they do not.  My rules are simple - I only boo the opposition, gasheads and people like Hollowhead, Warnock and Pulis. The rest of the time I try to keep it positive.  We enjoy the product - and have no control or even knowledge of all the ingredients.

A simplistic set of 'rules' in my opinion. I don't mean that in an offensive way, good for you if that's how you feel. 

Turn up to the game and when you leave Ashton Gate, you leave it all behind. A true customer.

Unfortunately, turning up for the game is not even the half of it. Many fans spend more time thinking about City, emotionally investing in City before games, after games and between games. Yes, despite having 'no' control and not knowing all the details behind the scenes. They'll still ask the questions, because they care about the answers emotionally.

And despite what you think, these second type of 'fans' are vital. Because they keep the club honest. Same as in other areas of life, authorities need to be questioned and challenged, otherwise before you know it, we're all a group of lemmings, 'accepting' our fate because we have no control. Don't give up control when you might actually have more than you think.

 

 

[jayjay]

13 hours ago, iamsober said:

I don’t understand why SL and MA don’t just appoint themselves as Head coach/ assistant and have done with it 

And have Jon put out the cones.

[Bat Fastard]

4 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

A simplistic set of 'rules' in my opinion. I don't mean that in an offensive way, good for you if that's how you feel. 

Turn up to the game and when you leave Ashton Gate, you leave it all behind. A true customer.

Unfortunately, turning up for the game is not even the half of it. Many fans spend more time thinking about City, emotionally investing in City before games, after games and between games. Yes, despite having 'no' control and not knowing all the details behind the scenes. They'll still ask the questions, because they care about the answers emotionally.

And despite what you think, these second type of 'fans' are vital. Because they keep the club honest. Same as in other areas of life, authorities need to be questioned and challenged, otherwise before you know it, we're all a group of lemmings, 'accepting' our fate because we have no control. Don't give up control when you might actually have more than you think.

 

 

You are mistaken if you think I am simply a customer.  Bristol City has dominated my thoughts and time for more than 50 years. It is the great passion in my life.  Everything about the club is interesting and I am happy to discuss it until the cows come home, but that does not alter the basic fact that I cannot change or influence decisions mad by the club, many of which are very good an beneficial to us fans.  I have no choice but to support. I do not have a pram, and if I did I would certainly not be chucking my toys out of it. I like to think that my views are honest - you of course are perfectly at liberty to think that I am an old fool.

[Nogbad the Bad]

 

54 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.

No doubt in my mind customers is what they are aiming for rather than passionate fans.

It's almost like there's a concerted effort to alienate and get rid of the long suffering over 50's in our supporter ranks - a bit of a nuisance - and replace us with well off day trippers, perhaps not even Bristolians, who are content with a matchday experience made up of of hours of drinking and socialising in the concourse, buying loads of food, and where the football match itself is merely a sideline. 

I've commented before on my bemusement on leaving my seat completely fed up after yet another soul destroying terrible performance and having to fight my way through groups of laughing, drinking fans in the concourse for whom the awful performance and result seems to have had no negative effect at all.

Having supported City for 50 consecutive seasons, and attended the vast majority of home games in that time, I commented on here a few months ago that I had finally reached the stage where I was unwilling to continue to financially support the club under a continuation of SL's latest torturous pet project, LJ, hence no ST, but was looking forward to a positive change whereby I could happily put money into my club again.

Having long held the depressing view LJ was more or less unsackable I was happily surprised when the deed was belatedly done, and the club, at last, seemed it was ready to accept the futility of these unambitious appointments and give the fans a manager to truly get excited about.

I'd happily accept Hughton, Cook, and Lowe if we were going for a young manager, already proven successful at a lower level, but Dean Holden??

Holden would be another deflating 'project', nothing more than the latest in a long line of grateful SL puppets, and, if so, for many long standing fans being treated with disdain yet again truly would be the final straw.

The powers that be at AG must be confident there are thousands out there ready to replace disenchanted long term fans like me who will throng the concourses drinking merrily despite awful performances and real hope of either entertaining football or tangible progression, but in reality I really doubt there are.

 

  

[Alessandro]

16 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

You are mistaken if you think I am simply a customer.  Bristol City has dominated my thoughts and time for more than 50 years. It is the great passion in my life.  Everything about the club is interesting and I am happy to discuss it until the cows come home, but that does not alter the basic fact that I cannot change or influence decisions mad by the club, many of which are very good an beneficial to us fans.  I have no choice but to support. I do not have a pram, and if I did I would certainly not be chucking my toys out of it. I like to think that my views are honest - you of course are perfectly at liberty to think that I am an old fool.

I’m not sure if age comes into it - perhaps just whether you’re someone who questions the status quo or not. 

I can only go on what you’re writing on here, and with respect you come across and someone who is very much a ‘customer’. You say City are a great passion in your life. Well your posts don’t come across as someone particularly passionate or emotionally attached. I could re-phrase that as you come across as being a fan with little, or no expectations. What will be will be.

I say that, because, in my opinion, if you were more passionate and did have expectations, you’d be questioning the decisions. They go hand in hand for me. You say you like to discuss all things City and you’ve got plenty of posts on here, yet you don’t want to question things.

As I say, all good and well, horses for courses. You’re more than entitled to come on here and preach resignation.

[Superjack]

3 hours ago, Chappers said:

Yeah, and come crawling back if we do well

What, my customers?

[Ska Junkie]

3 hours 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.

Superb post. 

[Ska Junkie]

1 hour ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

 

No doubt in my mind customers is what they are aiming for rather than passionate fans.

It's almost like there's a concerted effort to alienate and get rid of the long suffering over 50's in our supporter ranks - a bit of a nuisance - and replace us with well off day trippers, perhaps not even Bristolians, who are content with a matchday experience made up of of hours of drinking and socialising in the concourse, buying loads of food, and where the football match itself is merely a sideline. 

I've commented before on my bemusement on leaving my seat completely fed up after yet another soul destroying terrible performance and having to fight my way through groups of laughing, drinking fans in the concourse for whom the awful performance and result seems to have had no negative effect at all.

Having supported City for 50 consecutive seasons, and attended the vast majority of home games in that time, I commented on here a few months ago that I had finally reached the stage where I was unwilling to continue to financially support the club under a continuation of SL's latest torturous pet project, LJ, hence no ST, but was looking forward to a positive change whereby I could happily put money into my club again.

Having long held the depressing view LJ was more or less unsackable I was happily surprised when the deed was belatedly done, and the club, at last, seemed it was ready to accept the futility of these unambitious appointments and give the fans a manager to truly get excited about.

I'd happily accept Hughton, Cook, and Lowe if we were going for a young manager, already proven successful at a lower level, but Dean Holden??

Holden would be another deflating 'project', nothing more than the latest in a long line of grateful SL puppets, and, if so, for many long standing fans being treated with disdain yet again truly would be the final straw.

The powers that be at AG must be confident there are thousands out there ready to replace disenchanted long term fans like me who will throng the concourses drinking merrily despite awful performances and real hope of either entertaining football or tangible progression, but in reality I really doubt there are.

 

  

Another superb post. 

[BS15_RED]

3 hours 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.

I think you’ve summed up this whole sorry farce very eloquently there. 

[havanatopia]

9 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Another superb post. 

Brilliantly written and passionate. I think and hope they are both wrong.

[Ska Junkie]

8 minutes ago, havanatopia said:

Brilliantly written and passionate. I think and hope they are both wrong.

I 100% agree Havana. Excellent posts though.

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

I tried to post a picture of a snake oil salesman, doing a massive tuck-back moonie, but unfortunately my techie skills are wanting.

[Olé]

2 hours ago, Bat Fastard said:

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.

An articulate and fair response albeit "supporting through thick and thin", "no choice in the matter" and "unable to change anything you disagree with" whilst perfectly true observations, fall into the trap I mentioned of (politely) patronising me by implying my support must somehow be conditional, when in fact the point I made is less about wavering in my support, but more fundamentally about wondering whether it is even my club to support.

I would be no less and no more of a supporter if the club lost 10 on the bounce or won 10 on the bounce, if the club was penniless or rich beyond anyone's dreams. My support would be the same, because it's the club I've followed all my life, and I identify with its' purpose for existing. But what if you can't? What am I then supporting if I don't recognise the club or the motives of those that run it? Because necessarily, it's become their club not mine.

I feel a massive disconnect with the Lansdown's and MA. The Lansdown's are wonderful benefactors but in many ways the club has become a platform to play out their fantasies rather than simply act as custodians - Steve, it must be clear now, seeks influence over the "football managers" domain, son Jon rebrands the entire club and experiments with merchandise. MA is their appointed figurehead to dress it all up to supporters as some kind of strategy.

Strategy is about the furthest word from the truth I can think of - there are so many flaws and wild inconsistencies in our execution of a plan that I don't know where to start, but perhaps the obvious one is spending historically unprecedented levels (tens of millions) on players, even on squad fillers, and yet having an "anyone will do", "the more unproven the better" approach to the one person that leads and coordinates them? How is that a strategy?

If we want to go down that route, perhaps we could actually play our young players alongside a young coach, and take the inevitable bumps and bruises that will come our way, but in the name of financial prudence and sticking to a consistent philosophy? But no, MA and SL lavish millions on one cause (stock piling promising, but often quite average footballers), while strangling the life out of the manager/coaches role, for clearly quite alternative motives.

You say above that we have a board of directors to arrive at these "considered" decisions! Tell me who is on our board of directors and how considered or nuanced can they possibly be? Steve and his son are half the board. We're a long way from when this club was represented by quite independent businessmen and minds who could actively disagree. To think our board reaches considered decisions is to underestimate Lansdown's now total control.

You say I believe I know better than the board, but do not know all the facts. I do not know better than them, nor do I need to! I can just point to facts they share. THEY get rid of LJ so indicating desire for change (that they were quite public about). Yet now they don't want change. Now THEY want a young coach. But not an in demand, highly rated young coach, simply one who is already here. It's the board's conviction, not mine, you should question.

I admire the blind faith that leads you to conclude that "they run the club for the benefit of all". That's exactly what I would expect from someone privileged to own and run our club, and it's precisely because I now no longer believe that they share this objective, that I find it hard to see it as my club any longer. They've marginalised us into customers, they lie and lie to us, and in this latest episode proven they'll do anything to protect their self-indulgence.

[Numero Uno]

There seems to an over simplistic assumption on the part of one or two posters that the people who are moaning about this appointment are fair weather fans who will come “crawling back” when results pick up.

This is exactly the complacent attitude that the Board are exhibiting too. I know quite a few people who are fed up to the back teeth with the way this club are managed who were there when we went nine defeats on the spin under GJ, who travel all over the country watching City, who let it pass when the benefactor claimed “it’s only a badge” etc. etc.

The complacency is “they’ll come back”, “they’ll be replaced” and the like. You only have to look at the make up of our support on an average match day to realise that if the club tips the balance too far the wrong way then there could be a very tough and turbulent period ahead.

Complacency from the people at the top will set this club back years if they are not careful. At the moment it’s the 2021-22 season that I am most concerned about.

[Bat Fastard]

5 minutes ago, Olé said:

An articulate and fair response albeit "supporting through thick and thin", "no choice in the matter" and "unable to change anything you disagree with" whilst perfectly true observations, fall into the trap I mentioned of (politely) patronising me by implying my support must somehow be conditional, when in fact the point I made is less about wavering in my support, but more fundamentally about wondering whether it is even my club to support.

I would be no less and no more of a supporter if the club lost 10 on the bounce or won 10 on the bounce, if the club was penniless or rich beyond anyone's dreams. My support would be the same, because it's the club I've followed all my life, and I identify with its' purpose for existing. But what if you can't? What am I then supporting if I don't recognise the club or the motives of those that run it? Because necessarily, it's become their club not mine.

I feel a massive disconnect with the Lansdown's and MA. The Lansdown's are wonderful benefactors but in many ways the club has become a platform to play out their fantasies rather than simply act as custodians - Steve, it must be clear now, seeks influence over the "football managers" domain, son Jon rebrands the entire club and experiments with merchandise. MA is their appointed figurehead to dress it all up to supporters as some kind of strategy.

Strategy is about the furthest word from the truth I can think of - there are so many flaws and wild inconsistencies in our execution of a plan that I don't know where to start, but perhaps the obvious one is spending historically unprecedented levels (tens of millions) on players, even on squad fillers, and yet having an "anyone will do", "the more unproven the better" approach to the one person that leads and coordinates them? How is that a strategy?

If we want to go down that route, perhaps we could actually play our young players alongside a young coach, and take the inevitable bumps and bruises that will come our way, but in the name of financial prudence and sticking to a consistent philosophy? But no, MA and SL lavish millions on one cause (stock piling promising, but often quite average footballers), while strangling the life out of the manager/coaches role, for clearly quite alternative motives.

You say above that we have a board of directors to arrive at these "considered" decisions! Tell me who is on our board of directors and how considered or nuanced can they possibly be? Steve and his son are half the board. We're a long way from when this club was represented by quite independent businessmen and minds who could actively disagree. To think our board reaches considered decisions is to underestimate Lansdown's now total control.

You say I believe I know better than the board, but do not know all the facts. I do not know better than them, nor do I need to! I can just point to facts they share. THEY get rid of LJ so indicating desire for change (that they were quite public about). Yet now they don't want change. Now THEY want a young coach. But not an in demand, highly rated young coach, simply one who is already here. It's the board's conviction, not mine, you should question.

I admire the blind faith that leads you to conclude that "they run the club for the benefit of all". That's exactly what I would expect from someone privileged to own and run our club, and it's precisely because I now no longer believe that they share this objective, that I find it hard to see it as my club any longer. They've marginalised us into customers, they lie and lie to us, and in this latest episode proven they'll do anything to protect their self-indulgence.

I think your current views may be coloured by the disappointment in what appears to be their selection of DH. We are in accord with virtually everything - but the metaphysics of "my club" may need a bit of examination.

What makes a young chap go to football? Does it have anything to do with the stadium? The board? the manager? - or do they just truck along one day to watch a match with friends or a relation? After that first match, if they claim that City is "their team" - what do they actually mean?  It is not ownership in the legal sense, but maybe it is simply joining in with like minded individuals to watch more matches and follow news about the club above all others.  It is a strange kind of attachment because, once established, it seems impossible to break. It can wax and wane through the various distractions that we all feel in life, but in the end we are still supporters/fans/followers. 

Our relationship with the club has never allowed us to pick the actual team, manager, coaches, colour of away strip or many other things. Do you recall the who-ha about the old gold shirt colour chosen for the Leyland Daff cup final against Stoke? If there was a clash of colours and we had to change, and that was the only colour available - why not just call it "cider" because our fans love the colour of their favourite drink - or some such.  You might say that the board were not in accord with the fans by choosing that colour, but the presentation was probably the result of some awkward choice made under pressure.  If someone claimed that they did not feel part of the club that could make such a choice, would that be reasonable? Or was this just clumsy marketing that was a bit bungled under pressure?

The latest choice of manager has probably come about as the result of evolutionary thinking by the board who ended up reverting to their original plan because, all things considered, that is still the best way forward for our club.  Is this clumsy marketing again?  Possibly, but there is no reason to think it has not come about after an earnest and thorough evaluation of every aspect of the issue that confronted the board.  We can speculate all we like as to whether it is right or wrong, but once decided, what do we do?

It is still "our club" whatever happens. We will still watch games and debate every issue of matches and the way that the club operates - but in the end, we get on with it and enjoy our football. There will be highs and lows as you suggest but fans endure. We are a very odd bunch and this is a very strange relationship that we are embarked upon. In my case I'm sure the love will last until they turn on the crematorium afterburners and turn me, in my city shirt, into ashes. We are all bloody peculiar and we have got ourselves into a strange situation. In years to come it will be another decision that gets your goat, and I will still keep going in the same old way.  Ying and yang.

[Bat Fastard]

5 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

There seems to an over simplistic assumption on the part of one or two posters that the people who are moaning about this appointment are fair weather fans who will come “crawling back” when results pick up.

This is exactly the complacent attitude that the Board are exhibiting too. I know quite a few people who are fed up to the back teeth with the way this club are managed who were there when we went nine defeats on the spin under GJ, who travel all over the country watching City, who let it pass when the benefactor claimed “it’s only a badge” etc. etc.

The complacency is “they’ll come back”, “they’ll be replaced” and the like. You only have to look at the make up of our support on an average match day to realise that if the club tips the balance too far the wrong way then there could be a very tough and turbulent period ahead.

Complacency from the people at the top will set this club back years if they are not careful. At the moment it’s the 2021-22 season that I am most concerned about.

I have always loved the City of Bristol badge and then I liked the robin and now I will get used to the new badge.  I actually bought up some Tshirts with the old badge but may well get new ones as well. These things can seem a big deal at the time but they pass.  Humans are adaptable and we will all get past this time and soon be cheering on our team again.

[The Constant Rabbit]

4 hours 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.

 

 

Ole 

I have been Aubergined to death for saying this for nearly 2 years.

It's a shame that it takes a revelation of such manifest incompetence to take the blinkers off some people.

SL bought our club, our land, and built (and is still building) a South Bristol empire which will net him unimaginable profit when sold.

BCFC is his toy for when he's bored.

He's found out now that you actually can buy success in Rugby, and it's a lot cheaper.

 

BCFC will idle its time away in the champ or below until a new owner comes in when buying the whole lot off SL, or he finishes his property project and decides to treat the football side with much more impetus and interest.

Until then, as i have repeatedly said, it's his plaything, and if we don't like it, we can get lost.

It won't be long post-covid that all those nice concerts, weddings and conventions more than cover any loss of crowd attendance income.

 

This club is going nowhere with the Lansdowns, and never will.

 

[S25loyal]

@SX227 not sure with your emoji, I’ve got it slightly wrong I’d admit looking into it. 

 

The English Football League (EFL) has a policy - informally known as the 'Rooney Rule' - that clubs must interview at least one black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) candidate for a managerial vacancy.

But that is not necessary if they do not have a shortlisting process and interview only one candidate. 

[Numero Uno]

11 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

I think your current views may be coloured by the disappointment in what appears to be their selection of DH. We are in accord with virtually everything - but the metaphysics of "my club" may need a bit of examination.

What makes a young chap go to football? Does it have anything to do with the stadium? The board? the manager? - or do they just truck along one day to watch a match with friends or a relation? After that first match, if they claim that City is "their team" - what do they actually mean?  It is not ownership in the legal sense, but maybe it is simply joining in with like minded individuals to watch more matches and follow news about the club above all others.  It is a strange kind of attachment because, once established, it seems impossible to break. It can wax and wane through the various distractions that we all feel in life, but in the end we are still supporters/fans/followers. 

Our relationship with the club has never allowed us to pick the actual team, manager, coaches, colour of away strip or many other things. Do you recall the who-ha about the old gold shirt colour chosen for the Leyland Daff cup final against Stoke? If there was a clash of colours and we had to change, and that was the only colour available - why not just call it "cider" because our fans love the colour of their favourite drink - or some such.  You might say that the board were not in accord with the fans by choosing that colour, but the presentation was probably the result of some awkward choice made under pressure.  If someone claimed that they did not feel part of the club that could make such a choice, would that be reasonable? Or was this just clumsy marketing that was a bit bungled under pressure?

The latest choice of manager has probably come about as the result of evolutionary thinking by the board who ended up reverting to their original plan because, all things considered, that is still the best way forward for our club.  Is this clumsy marketing again?  Possibly, but there is no reason to think it has not come about after an earnest and thorough evaluation of every aspect of the issue that confronted the board.  We can speculate all we like as to whether it is right or wrong, but once decided, what do we do?

It is still "our club" whatever happens. We will still watch games and debate every issue of matches and the way that the club operates - but in the end, we get on with it and enjoy our football. There will be highs and lows as you suggest but fans endure. We are a very odd bunch and this is a very strange relationship that we are embarked upon. In my case I'm sure the love will last until they turn on the crematorium afterburners and turn me, in my city shirt, into ashes. We are all bloody peculiar and we have got ourselves into a strange situation. In years to come it will be another decision that gets your goat, and I will still keep going in the same old way.  Ying and yang.

I and many others do understand the point you are making. However, in my opinion of course, it is important that the people making the decisions know that whilst there is not much as fans we can do to change those decisions we will QUESTION them if we think they are extremely poor decisions and, at times, take the action that we can take to voice our disapproval. As someone else rightly pointed out such questioning at least keeps the people in charge honest some of the time. Otherwise you end up with a football club that is literally a plaything of some rich guy on Guernsey who does what he wants when he wants and to hell with the paying customers. I think even you would agree that is an unhealthy situation for the football club to be in whether we can personally do anything about it or otherwise.

Steve Lansdown is appreciated by the vast majority of supporters but it should be borne in mind that we were attracted as fans in the first place to BRISTOL CITY FC and not STEVE LANSDOWN (BRISTOL SPORT NUMBER 2 PRIORITY SPORTS CLUB) FC!!

[Bat Fastard]

3 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I and many others do understand the point you are making. However, in my opinion of course, it is important that the people making the decisions know that whilst there is not much as fans we can do to change those decisions we will QUESTION them if we think they are extremely poor decisions and, at times, take the action that we can take to voice our disapproval. As someone else rightly pointed out such questioning at least keeps the people in charge honest some of the time. Otherwise you end up with a football club that is literally a plaything of some rich guy on Guernsey who does what he wants when he wants and to hell with the paying customers. I think even you would agree that is an unhealthy situation for the football club to be in whether we can personally do anything about it or otherwise.

Steve Lansdown is appreciated by the vast majority of supporters but it should be borne in mind that we were attracted as fans in the first place to BRISTOL CITY FC and not STEVE LANSDOWN (BRISTOL SPORT NUMBER 2 PRIORITY SPORTS CLUB) FC!!

I don't for a minute believe that it is not right to question decisions. But what happens when those issues are complex and difficult to communicate due to confidentiality issues and the like? I the end decisions have to be made and people can discuss them all they like, but they will not change.  To reduce this to the belief that the club is a plaything does not really bear scrutiny. It is a serious business that is trying to become sustainable and successful at the same time. That means that commercial aspects have to be able to feed cash into the club and lessen the need for SL to write off debts every season.  The issues that the board have to wrestle with are not easy and many fans have little understanding of how businesses operate and tend to take things personally.  Others simply understand that they are doing their best and although it does not mean that they make mistakes, they will at least be honest mistakes made with the best intentions.

On another thread @Major Icewater (sorry if I got the spelling wrong!) set out very neatly the kind of financial issues that the board may be having to deal with right now. I suggest you look it up. I am very pleased that my business was not confronted by any similar problems and I am grateful to be retired and out of the firing line in these difficult times.

[Cowshed]

54 minutes ago, Olé said:

An articulate and fair response albeit "supporting through thick and thin", "no choice in the matter" and "unable to change anything you disagree with" whilst perfectly true observations, fall into the trap I mentioned of (politely) patronising me by implying my support must somehow be conditional, when in fact the point I made is less about wavering in my support, but more fundamentally about wondering whether it is even my club to support.

I would be no less and no more of a supporter if the club lost 10 on the bounce or won 10 on the bounce, if the club was penniless or rich beyond anyone's dreams. My support would be the same, because it's the club I've followed all my life, and I identify with its' purpose for existing. But what if you can't? What am I then supporting if I don't recognise the club or the motives of those that run it? Because necessarily, it's become their club not mine.

I feel a massive disconnect with the Lansdown's and MA. The Lansdown's are wonderful benefactors but in many ways the club has become a platform to play out their fantasies rather than simply act as custodians - Steve, it must be clear now, seeks influence over the "football managers" domain, son Jon rebrands the entire club and experiments with merchandise. MA is their appointed figurehead to dress it all up to supporters as some kind of strategy.

Strategy is about the furthest word from the truth I can think of - there are so many flaws and wild inconsistencies in our execution of a plan that I don't know where to start, but perhaps the obvious one is spending historically unprecedented levels (tens of millions) on players, even on squad fillers, and yet having an "anyone will do", "the more unproven the better" approach to the one person that leads and coordinates them? How is that a strategy?

If we want to go down that route, perhaps we could actually play our young players alongside a young coach, and take the inevitable bumps and bruises that will come our way, but in the name of financial prudence and sticking to a consistent philosophy? But no, MA and SL lavish millions on one cause (stock piling promising, but often quite average footballers), while strangling the life out of the manager/coaches role, for clearly quite alternative motives.

You say above that we have a board of directors to arrive at these "considered" decisions! Tell me who is on our board of directors and how considered or nuanced can they possibly be? Steve and his son are half the board. We're a long way from when this club was represented by quite independent businessmen and minds who could actively disagree. To think our board reaches considered decisions is to underestimate Lansdown's now total control.

You say I believe I know better than the board, but do not know all the facts. I do not know better than them, nor do I need to! I can just point to facts they share. THEY get rid of LJ so indicating desire for change (that they were quite public about). Yet now they don't want change. Now THEY want a young coach. But not an in demand, highly rated young coach, simply one who is already here. It's the board's conviction, not mine, you should question.

I admire the blind faith that leads you to conclude that "they run the club for the benefit of all". That's exactly what I would expect from someone privileged to own and run our club, and it's precisely because I now no longer believe that they share this objective, that I find it hard to see it as my club any longer. They've marginalised us into customers, they lie and lie to us, and in this latest episode proven they'll do anything to protect their self-indulgence.

Doug Harman was employed to oversee management of Ashton Gate ltd. He is a director of Bristol City. Mr Harman was never a fan of Bristol City. He didn't like football till  he was employed by Mr Lansdown. 

Mr Lansdown and his Son are the board.

[Numero Uno]

2 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

I don't for a minute believe that it is not right to question decisions. But what happens when those issues are complex and difficult to communicate due to confidentiality issues and the like? I the end decisions have to be made and people can discuss them all they like, but they will not change.  To reduce this to the belief that the club is a plaything does not really bear scrutiny. It is a serious business that is trying to become sustainable and successful at the same time. That means that commercial aspects have to be able to feed cash into the club and lessen the need for SL to write off debts every season.  The issues that the board have to wrestle with are not easy and many fans have little understanding of how businesses operate and tend to take things personally.  Others simply understand that they are doing their best and although it does not mean that they make mistakes, they will at least be honest mistakes made with the best intentions.

On another thread @Major Icewater (sorry if I got the spelling wrong!) set out very neatly the kind of financial issues that the board may be having to deal with right now. I suggest you look it up. I am very pleased that my business was not confronted by any similar problems and I am grateful to be retired and out of the firing line in these difficult times.

Again, understand what you are saying and I run a business myself. The question that people cannot work out the answer too is why did the benefactor go on national radio and give a completely different message? Surely he must have had an idea of the financial constraints you are referring to at that time, and if he didn't then I am stunned, so why couldn't he at least temper the expectation at that point (I realise that you cannot always put the full truth into the public domain immediately but you should not be spouting very publically what people now believe to be a cock and bull story about fresh ideas, next man in to finish the job etc. etc.).

[Bat Fastard]

8 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Again, understand what you are saying and I run a business myself. The question that people cannot work out the answer too is why did the benefactor go on national radio and give a completely different message? Surely he must have had an idea of the financial constraints you are referring to at that time, and if he didn't then I am stunned, so why couldn't he at least temper the expectation at that point (I realise that you cannot always put the full truth into the public domain immediately but you should not be spouting very publically what people now believe to be a cock and bull story about fresh ideas, next man in to finish the job etc. etc.).

You seem to dismissing the case that Dean Holden was considered the best option for the job after they had considered the matter long and hard.  People seem frustrated because he is not their idea of the ideal candidate but as I have kept stressing, the club are trying to run the business in a certain way and they will have drawn up a detailed specification of the kind of person needed.  Dean Holden, having "lived the plan" for the previous 4 years would have been in a position to take advantage of this and the fact that he has intimate knowledge of the squad, up and coming youngsters and transfer plans in the offing, makes him a very logical selection. It will be interesting to hear the eventual interviews with the board - but it still will not change the decision.  Come down to rural Somerset and lay back!!

[Numero Uno]

Just now, Bat Fastard said:

You seem to dismissing the case that Dean Holden was considered the best option for the job after they had considered the matter long and hard.  People seem frustrated because he is not their idea of the ideal candidate but as I have kept stressing, the club are trying to run the business in a certain way and they will have drawn up a detailed specification of the kind of person needed.  Dean Holden, having "lived the plan" for the previous 4 years would have been in a position to take advantage of this and the fact that he has intimate knowledge of the squad, up and coming youngsters and transfer plans in the offing, makes him a very logical selection. It will be interesting to hear the eventual interviews with the board - but it still will not change the decision.  Come down to rural Somerset and lay back!!

The latest (on the radio now) is that we are employing someone to "help" him. Total guesswork but an older DOF perhaps? Now that might start to appease a few fans. Still don't think any of this has been handled well at all but we've done it to death!!

I aim to retire in Somerset when that time comes................

[Bat Fastard]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

The latest (on the radio now) is that we are employing someone to "help" him. Total guesswork but an older DOF perhaps? Now that might start to appease a few fans. Still don't think any of this has been handled well at all but we've done it to death!!

I aim to retire in Somerset when that time comes................

You will love retirement in Somerset!