Jump to content
IGNORED

Mark Ashton's full interview with the BP


DaveF

Recommended Posts

Some things I thought were particularly interesting:

 

Blamed Dean for Morrell and Palmer going out. It sounds like Dean's midfield would have been Walsh, Williams and Bakinson. I'm a bit sad we haven't been able to see that combo yet; excited to see it eventually though.

 

Ashton makes it "absolutely clear" that managers can veto transfers. He doesn't mention at all if managers can name a target in the first place though. Sounds to me like Ashton and co makes the shortlist, and then the manager can pick from that and veto, but not choose their own.

 

Ashton also says the manager has a say in which players can go. And then goes on to explain that it was Lansdowns decision to let Fam run down his contract, and also explained in detail how they decided to sell Bryan, Webster, and Reid because the players asked them to?

 

Ashton just seems a bit slippery to me. Nothing sticks. I'd hate him to be a manager in a company I worked in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have DH as manager and doing ok. AshtonI have No opinion about. We have made good money on transfers, Kelly, Webster, Flint and others. We got a good nice stadium and soon new training ground. Big boss is on big money and invest in City. DH many did not wanted, Houghton favorite along many, including me. Doubt that Houghton or another manager had us in a better position in table. We play football that often not good but still we doing ok. Walsh, Williams and all other injuries have made it difficault for us. All and all think its ok during this unusual time. The text in a swedish song is: Everybody wants to heaven but no one will die. COYR!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

I'd be prepared to wait longer than 1 window to decide that given the lack of money atm, couldn't go out and sign many players you'd count as prospects who we'd be able to develop and sell on, Joe Williams seemed an indication of it. Personally had no problem with some more experience being added to the squad we had either.

It’s more than 1 window mate. Try the last 4. The last 7 permanent signings, 6 are over 30 with zero future value. 
Adrian Mariappa Winter 21. 
Chris Brunt Summer 20. 
Chris Martin Summer 20. 
Joe Williams Summer 20. 
Nahki Wells Winter 20. 
Rodri Mid Season 19/20. 
Ashley Williams Summer 19. 

4 windows!! Doesn’t strike me as following the ‘plan’. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

Gregor was obviously told not to bring up The Athletic story, or mention any supposed unhappiness from Joe Williams.

Otherwise, for someone who doesn’t apportion blame, he does a fair bit of throwing Head Coaches under the bus for unpopular or unsuccessful transfer decisions.

‘Obviously’?  Didn’t stop Ashton talking about it though, did it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Harry said:

It’s more than 1 window mate. Try the last 4. The last 7 permanent signings, 6 are over 30 with zero future value. 
Adrian Mariappa Winter 21. 
Chris Brunt Summer 20. 
Chris Martin Summer 20. 
Joe Williams Summer 20. 
Nahki Wells Winter 20. 
Rodri Mid Season 19/20. 
Ashley Williams Summer 19. 

4 windows!! Doesn’t strike me as following the ‘plan’. 

That’s a little disingenuous.  Rodri and Ash were essentially short term emergency signings.  Mariappa was only signed because of the injury crisis and Brunt was only a short term deal (and has gone).  That only leaves Chris Martin and Nakhi Wells and my only gripe with those is that I simply don’t think Wells is good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

That’s a little disingenuous.  Rodri and Ash were essentially short term emergency signings.  Mariappa was only signed because of the injury crisis and Brunt was only a short term deal (and has gone).  That only leaves Chris Martin and Nakhi Wells and my only gripe with those is that I simply don’t think Wells is good enough.

How is it disingenuous? 
It’s pure fact. 6 of our last 7 permanent signings are over the age of 30 with no future value. That isn’t the model we are sold. And it’s an absolute fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

That’s a little disingenuous.  Rodri and Ash were essentially short term emergency signings.  Mariappa was only signed because of the injury crisis and Brunt was only a short term deal (and has gone).  That only leaves Chris Martin and Nakhi Wells and my only gripe with those is that I simply don’t think Wells is good enough.

Wells is plenty good enough if we played to his strengths 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally read it all.

Firstly, as an interview, it was a good interview, decent questions and decent responses, with depth.

Having previously refused Gregor’s request and leaving Geoff’s til after the window, it’s been brought forward for whatever reason.  The reason doesn’t matter, he set his stance, and has had to back-track through fans / media flak off the back of disclosure of the timing of the proposed interview with Geoff, and Gary Weaver doing the dirty on him.

You can read into the answers what you like, there are definitely bits to pick apart.

1 hour ago, YGBjammy said:

Ashton makes it "absolutely clear" that managers can veto transfers. He doesn't mention at all if managers can name a target in the first place though. Sounds to me like Ashton and co makes the shortlist, and then the manager can pick from that and veto, but not choose their own.

I picked up on that too.  It could be that he badly explained, because in the past he mentioned lots of people have input into the “funnel”.  For me I’d really like clarity of this.  But one, think, I don’t think any of our Talent ID analysts present Chris Brunt in the list for veto, which suggests individuals, inc head-coach can put “their” players into the process.

Ashton also says the manager has a say in which players can go. And then goes on to explain that it was Lansdowns decision to let Fam run down his contract, and also explained in detail how they decided to sell Bryan, Webster, and Reid because the players asked them to?

this to me says “we” (the board) will be very strong in their recommendation to get rid of a player or not, so a bit of a fait accompli presented to the head-coach.

Ashton just seems a bit slippery to me. Nothing sticks. I'd hate him to be a manager in a company I worked in.

Comments above ⬆️⬆️⬆️.

Bristol City’s Petr Cech maybe? Someone who is there if
needed with many players out...

He’s got a lot of cards in his deck and he’s bright, he’s a good communicator
and he’s hungry to learn and when you come across people like that, if you
have an opportunity to bring him into the organisation, I think you should. I
understand why people…
This is my biggest frustration. This is one of the biggest frustrations of my job
because I’d love to talk to the fans every day and bloody tell them, this is what’s
happening, this is why we’re doing this, this is why we’re doing that. I can
understand their frustration because they just won’t be able to know. But there
is so much that compromises us if we do.
But I just wish I could get the fans to see through my eyes, almost, on what
happens. We don’t get things right all the time – no one does at any club. But
we wake up every morning trying to do the right thing for the club and the
right thing in the way the Lansdowns have told us they want their vision for the
club.

Re underlined bit above.  If you really do think that, then create an open dialogue with fans.

Again, some humility and perhaps some examples (doesn’t have to name the players) where things didn’t work out in recruitment.  He refers to the success of Pato’s loan, but doesn’t explain what to the fans appears to be very poor thought around the Szmodics and Palmer transfers.

Overall it is what it is.  Still more questions needed and clearer answers required.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ashton “expects us to be in competition for promotion and that remains the case”. So Holden will be thrown under the bus at the end of the season if we fail?

Ashton thinks “we've been within a hair's breadth of every game... it’s gilt-edged chances either side... there's been nothing in any of the games. Absolutely nothing”. In four games this season, we haven’t even registered a single shot on target. We’ve only beaten three teams by more than one goal. IMO, we only deserved to win three league games (Stoke, Blackburn, Preston at home). That statement is a load of bollocks. 

Ashton said “Benik Afobe wanting to stay here and rehab here”. Afobe did most of rehab in London with ex-Arsenal physio Gary Lewin. Even Holden said Mawson was put on the road to recovery by Fulham. Why wasn’t the question asked about the Williams leak or Pato seeking a second opinion outside of the club? Why no questions about Rolls’ history and the facts he was sacked at West Ham and Arsenal or Rolls being Ashton’s mate? I can guess why this wasn’t probed. He “thinks Williams isn’t unhappy” - but doesn’t know for sure.

Ashton talks about how it’s his job to “review everything”. Who reviews his performance - the recruitment, the old boys’ club jobs for his mates? Again, I can guess why. 

A modicum of credit to Ashton for sticking his head above the parapet, but it all read like a hastily arranged script featuring plenty of me, me, me; “let me be clear - I did this, I did that” blah blah blah.

All my opinions, of course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry said:

It’s more than 1 window mate. Try the last 4. The last 7 permanent signings, 6 are over 30 with zero future value. 
Adrian Mariappa Winter 21. 
Chris Brunt Summer 20. 
Chris Martin Summer 20. 
Joe Williams Summer 20. 
Nahki Wells Winter 20. 
Rodri Mid Season 19/20. 
Ashley Williams Summer 19. 

4 windows!! Doesn’t strike me as following the ‘plan’. 

You know you're missing a hell of a lot of players from 19/20 summer?

Dasilva, Bentley, Szmodics, Nagy, Massengo, that's excluding Palmer and hoping Kalas would perform as well as he did alongside Webster which could encourage bids significantly higher than we bought him for. You conveniently stop counting back the transfers to after the 19/20 summer (despite saying 4 windows) to favour your argument but frankly I'd ignore free agents signed outside a window as you've highlighted something else being needed and you're limited on who you can sign so Williams, Rodri and Mariappa for me are too easy to explain add the fact they were initially all short term contracts 2 extended because we deem them playing well enough. Brunt and Martin were Holden wanting to add experience to the squad and Martin seemingly because Dean likes a more physical presence upfront to hit. Wells was Johnson's desire to try and find a top striker and given chances were Brownhill would have moved there anyway used that to bring in Wells.

I also tend to overlook January windows, unless a situation unfolds you don't often find the younger players available at those times and January comes at inflated cost which damages the idea of trying to buy players low to develop and sell on for higher. So Dean has only had 1 summer window which as said was severely hampered by COVID financial impact. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, YGBjammy said:

Ashton makes it "absolutely clear" that managers can veto transfers. He doesn't mention at all if managers can name a target in the first place though. Sounds to me like Ashton and co makes the shortlist, and then the manager can pick from that and veto, but not choose their own.

I'd say the head coach can at least provide a specification for the type of player put in front of him for a proceed/veto, remember Johnson said Eliasson was found because he said he wanted a Knockaert type player. The question would then be when presented with a list of 'Knockaert type' players, did Johnson look at Eliasson and say 'he's who/want I want' or 'Eliasson is the best of what you've shown to me but I'm still not overly keen' etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

I'd say the head coach can at least provide a specification for the type of player put in front of him for a proceed/veto, remember Johnson said Eliasson was found because he said he wanted a Knockaert type player. The question would then be when presented with a list of 'Knockaert type' players, did Johnson look at Eliasson and say 'he's who/want I want' or 'Eliasson is the best of what you've shown to me but I'm still not overly keen' etc. 

I reckon they can name a target - wasn't Brownhill a Johnson favourite while he was at Barnsley? Coincidence perhaps, but was he the only one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IAmNick said:

I reckon they can name a target - wasn't Brownhill a Johnson favourite while he was at Barnsley? Coincidence perhaps, but was he the only one?

I would agree tbh if they have a specific player in mind who could be attained for a reasonable level, such as Brownhill (compensation only?), Martin and Brunt being frees etc then they'll probably get them. I don't think a manager is going to be able to say get me x player whose going to cost £6m because I want them.

Webster may have been highlighted through a filter but remember Johnson clearly saying Flint only leaves if I get Webster, would back up what Ashton said about head coach having the final say on who leaves the club.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

You know you're missing a hell of a lot of players from 19/20 summer?

Dasilva, Bentley, Szmodics, Nagy, Massengo, that's excluding Palmer and hoping Kalas would perform as well as he did alongside Webster which could encourage bids significantly higher than we bought him for. You conveniently stop counting back the transfers to after the 19/20 summer (despite saying 4 windows) to favour your argument but frankly I'd ignore free agents signed outside a window as you've highlighted something else being needed and you're limited on who you can sign so Williams, Rodri and Mariappa for me are too easy to explain add the fact they were initially all short term contracts 2 extended because we deem them playing well enough. Brunt and Martin were Holden wanting to add experience to the squad and Martin seemingly because Dean likes a more physical presence upfront to hit. Wells was Johnson's desire to try and find a top striker and given chances were Brownhill would have moved there anyway used that to bring in Wells.

I also tend to overlook January windows, unless a situation unfolds you don't often find the younger players available at those times and January comes at inflated cost which damages the idea of trying to buy players low to develop and sell on for higher. So Dean has only had 1 summer window which as said was severely hampered by COVID financial impact. 

 

Is it true or isn’t it? 6 of the last 7 permanent signings are over 30. 
It’s true. It’s a fact that simply cannot be argued with. 
We can go a million ways around many other things, but you can’t argue with the absolute fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, petehinton said:

Throws LJ under the bus at every opportunity btw

And Holden!

Basically, if you don't like the players or the performances, blame Dean and Lee.

If you don't like the business model, blame Lansdown. 

But the bits that Ashton does are very successful and gets him praise from his peers.

By the way, he loves Steve Lansdown and he's not just saying that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mozo said:

And Holden!

Basically, if you don't like the players or the performances, blame Dean and Lee.

If you don't like the business model, blame Lansdown. 

But the bits that Ashton does are very successful and gets him praise from his peers.

By the way, he loves Steve Lansdown and he's not just saying that.

Beautifully summed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harry said:

How is it disingenuous? 
It’s pure fact. 6 of our last 7 permanent signings are over the age of 30 with no future value. That isn’t the model we are sold. And it’s an absolute fact. 

It's very disingenuous to go to Summer 2019 but only use one signing from that window.

Even more when they were signed late in the window because of not just a transfer out (Webster) but also a long term injury to Kalas that happened at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Harry said:

Is it true or isn’t it? 6 of the last 7 permanent signings are over 30. 
It’s true. It’s a fact that simply cannot be argued with. 
We can go a million ways around many other things, but you can’t argue with the absolute fact. 

Come on you know as well as anyone that the signings of A.Williams, Mariappa and Rodri wouldn't have been planned by the club so its harsh to include them as they were out of necessity rather than the plan for who they'd have wanted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

It's very disingenuous to go to Summer 2019 but only use one signing from that window.

Even more when they were signed late in the window because of not just a transfer out (Webster) but also a long term injury to Kalas that happened at the time.

How is presenting an exact fact considered disingenuous? 
Doesn’t matter how it’s come about, but the pure fact is that 6 of the last 7 permanent signings are over 30. 
How can anyone come up with an argument to disagree with that - it’s the simple truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Come on you know as well as anyone that the signings of A.Williams, Mariappa and Rodri wouldn't have been planned by the club so its harsh to include them as they were out of necessity rather than the plan for who they'd have wanted

Doesn’t matter how it’s come about. It’s still an absolute fact. 
For someone who preaches that he’s working to a ‘buy young, coach improvement, sell at profit’ model, and that he works “a couple of windows ahead”, this is quite something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

How is presenting an exact fact considered disingenuous? 
Doesn’t matter how it’s come about, but the pure fact is that 6 of the last 7 permanent signings are over 30. 
How can anyone come up with an argument to disagree with that - it’s the simple truth. 

I hadn't noticed that. It marks a departure from our previous strategy but hasn't been mentioned by Ashton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Harry said:

Doesn’t matter how it’s come about. It’s still an absolute fact. 
For someone who preaches that he’s working to a ‘buy young, coach improvement, sell at profit’ model, and that he works “a couple of windows ahead”, this is quite something. 

Well it does, because its not part of the plan. We all know you're not *cough* fond of the guy but this is reaching. With COVID impacted finances you expect the club to be bringing in multiple million pound players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lrrr said:

Well it does, because its not part of the plan. We all know you're not *cough* fond of the guy but this is reaching. With COVID impacted finances you expect the club to be bringing in multiple million pound players?

I can’t believe people are trying to argue against 100% facts. Is it true or not? Yes. 
We can find a mitigating circumstance in pretty much anything. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s, well, a fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mozo said:

Some funny stuff in there eh Dave. Perhaps a sign that he does feel the pressure.

There is some enlightening candid comments too which I appreciate. 

It was a good read in fairness....and although he gave a good account of himself, he’s quite careful / deliberate in what he says.

He didn’t change my view of him.

I think he’s a good administrator, a good “business of football” man.  I never doubt that.

But we have a weakness in recruitment, some of that due to a lack of coherent / consistent playing style....they need to be working together.  Some of it due to lack of the right skills, experience and seniority in that area....which he kind of admits:

“But there comes a point where... there's almost a perception that Ashton signs
the players, Ashton picks the players. You must be joking! I don't see enough
games. We have a recruitment team
and the head coach is involved at stage
one with the recruitment team. So any names on the list that he doesn't like, it
comes off at that point”

that you don’t have the skills yourself, can you honestly believe that an Analayst under the title Head of Technical Analysis can fill the gap that a proper Head of Recruitment can, or a DoF can.  That head of recruitment role has not been filled since Mervyn Day left (sacked?).  Adam Griffin (LJ’s cousin) is / was Senior Scout, and Richard Lee as advisor on transfers.

It suggests Ashton needs to do more doing in that space, because he doesn’t have the right people, and to me I think it’s because he wants the involvement, as his ego needs it.

Who in recruitment challenges the head-coach and who challenges the CEO and Owner?  I’d suggest nobody.

What do others think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...