CliftonCliff

Read this on waking this morning. I trust you felt better after posting this quite unnecessarily abusive rant. I doubtless have many faults, but being a halfwitted idiot isn’t one of them. For the record, and for a bit of balance, I have on a fair few occasions in the past posted in defence of Lansdown when he’s been the subject of disproportionate or unwarranted criticism and, like the vast majority of supporters, I remain enormously grateful for what he’s contributed to the club, not least the stadium rebuild and the hugely improved training facilities. None of which renders him immune to negative comment if and when he gets things wrong, which he plainly has, numerous times. There is a pretty stark contrast between his business acumen and his ability to judge and manage people, as has been pointed out countless times by many others besides me. It isn’t just a question of money. Anyone who hasn’t detected a decline in the stewardship of the club over the last few years simply hasn’t been paying attention. What’s happened this week is fundamentally wrongheaded on so many levels it’s hard to know where to start. There’s a reason why there’s such an overwhelming consensus on a forum that is usually deeply divided on such issues. You are very much in a tiny minority in trying to defend the indefensible and your arguments are not made any more credible by personal attacks on individual posters. This club now has a serious problem with a deeply dysfunctional ownership and you appear to be one of a very small number of people who don’t recognise that.

Would fit with a toxic ownership, look what they did to Pearson, who in his right mind would want to work for them narrative. I remember years ago, when SOD was appointed, he remarked that BCFC was respected as a club, within the football industry. I wonder how many people on the inside would say that today?

As a bit of a digression, regarding the Wade Elliott question, of course no sensible supporter would actively canvass his appointment to this particular job at this precise moment: minimal experience in the role, and that was pretty disastrous, but BCFC aside, it actually wouldn't surprise me if he made a go of it somewhere else eventually. Cheltenham is and was a basket case and probably already beyond salvation when he took it on. I doubt anyone else would have fared any better and if you wanted to criticise him, it would probably be for his decision making in agreeing to accept the job in the first place. From what I've seen of him, which admittedly is not a huge amount, he is quite an impressive bloke. Intelligent, articulate, seems to be good with people, successful career as a player behind him, none of which guarantees anything, of course, but I have a hunch he'll resurface somewhere at some point*, if he hasn't already, and with a better outcome. (*Anyone actually know what he's up to these days?)

As long as the denouement consists of the slimy evil owner being unmasked as the real villain and banged up for life, with his son and accomplice also given a lengthy spell of community service, coupled with a life ban from ever holding office in any football club again, I don't much care what TV soap you base it on or who's in the cast. What we've actually got at the moment is something more akin to Some Mothers Do Have 'Em, with wall-to-wall farce, but minus the laughs, and with JL as the hapless Frank Spencer. You'd have to come up with a far more sinister parallel for SL himself, though: I can't think of one devious and dangerous enough off the top of my head at the moment.

As far as I'm concerned, that would be an argument in favour of appointing him, rather than a reason not to, though as I already said, I'm not actually advocating it.

That actually is not entirely beyond the bounds of possibility, in my opinion (and no, I don't know anything, apart from the relevant history that we're all aware of). Nor am I advocating it, thought the one redeeming aspect would be that it might provide some continuity and help preserve at least a little of the culture instilled by Pearson, which would be a small consolation.

Despite all his much vaunted business acumen and experience, he really has painted himself into a corner, hasn’t he? The club is imbedded, as far as I can see, in a complex nest of companies from which it’s nigh on impossible to extract it as a stand alone entity. He’s deprived the club of arguably its most valuable material asset that it used to own outright (the stadium), can’t restore it to them, and no sane investor wants to buy a club without the security of having its own ground. Nor do they want all the other corporate baggage that it’s now inextricably tied up with. But the man’s an entrepreneurial genius, apparently. I know nothing of business, but it starts to look to me like one of the most spectacular own goals in corporate history.

Your last sentence, beyond a doubt. Not only have they made complete and utter fools of themselves, but they have revealed themselves in the most cack handed way to be thoroughly disingenuous. Having shown themselves to be totally lacking in professionalism, they have gone a step further and demonstrated beyond question that they are also, frankly, untruthful. There’s no coming back from that.

Don’t trust their integrity, either.

I should probably know this, as it presumably must have been spelled out somewhere, but I’m still unclear as to whether all the personnel who have gone were dismissed, or if some chose to leave in the wake of Pearson’s sacking. Can anyone enlighten me?

For those of us who don’t know, could you enlighten us as to where the article you refer to may be found?

I’ll second that. The article does an invaluable service to the club and everyone who cares about it, by placing firmly in the public domain much that needs to be more widely understood but which the Lansdowns would prefer people not to know. We have lost so much more than a very good and influential manager. With the additional loss of medical and coaching staff, this rips the heart out of the whole operation that has so painstakingly been put together. Two years or more of work wilfully thrown away. It’s incredibly wasteful and destructive. I don’t think they have any idea of the extent of the damage done to the organisation they’re supposed to be looking after. It’s incredibly demoralising to witness.

Lot of truth in that last point. The irony is that they correctly appointed someone of experience with a strong personality to rescue them from a total mess of their own making, and to change the whole culture of the club to something less glaringly dysfunctional. They then sack him when he does those things so competently, and becomes, in their conspicuous absence, the visible face of BCFC, because they are then resentful that he’s shouldered a role and responsibility that they’ve abdicated from and consequently feel threatened by him. Pathetic, really, isn’t it ?

It certainly wouldn’t surprise many people, based on past experience.

Well, some of us have been through a pretty much uninterrupted period of well over half a century, in my case from the early sixties, and I can tell you the only thing that surpasses this is the club almost going out of existence in 1982. The clowns who steered City into that catastrophic financial position, who included Stephen Kew, if I remember rightly, were in some respects of a similar ilk to the Lansdowns, and every bit as arrogant, stupid and detached from reality. Sometimes it’s not just what you do, but how it’s done. The way that NP has been hung out to dry and shafted for personal, not football reasons, is really quite despicable. Like countless others, I have defended SL in the past against what at the time was very unfair criticism, but you can’t defend the indefensible and the only feeling I have towards the ownership now is one of complete and utter contempt. There is now a profound distrust among the fan base that will never be overcome, regardless of whether the Lansdowns stay or go in the long run. One of the lowest points I’ve ever experienced in sixty-odd years of following this club.

Even by the Lansdown’s currently rock-bottom standards, this is spectacularly stupid, incompetent, unjust and gutless. I don’t think they have a shred of integrity left. I am absolutely incandescent. Even when apoplectic with anger, I don’t do the “that’s me finished “ hissy fit thing, or at least I never have up to now, but it might just be different this time. I’m 76. I started supporting the club as a youngster and was a nailed-on regular by the age of 14. You can do the arithmetic. But I’ve absolutely effing had it with the ownership. This is beyond anything seen since 1982 and I’m really not sure I can stomach any more. If the recent poll is any guide, only some 3 per cent of fans were actively opposed to a contract extension for NP. I really hope the other 97% have the resolve to either stay away in protest, or else let these faceless arseholes have it full throttle next time they’re in the stadium. They are beneath contempt.

If it weren’t so so infuriating and serious, I’d find the idea that the “Board” might act positively hilarious. It would, I suppose, at least indicate that somebody’s still alive up there. Current indications are that rigour mortis has already set in. (And by the way, what Board?)

I have only the RB radio commentary to go on, but from what I’m hearing, regardless of the final outcome, this has been a pretty heroic performance in the circumstances, which is - among other things - another tribute, if any more were needed, to what Pearson has managed to do with threadbare resources. I am so, so peed off with the massive leadership vacuum at the top of the club: a near total abdication of responsibility.

It wouldn’t be an achievement. It would be a bloody miracle.

This is optimism on an epic scale. In fact, it’s beyond that: it’s positively delusional. Fair play to you for positivity, but if you’re proven right, I’ll be coming to you for next week’s winning lottery numbers.

Jesus! That’s telling us we’re absolutely down to the bare bones. Struggling to get a competitive team on the field.

You're right. As someone else said, he could look a a bit ungainly, but that was deceptive. He was, in fact, quite a cultured player, with an accurate left foot and a very good football brain, if somewhat limited by the aforementioned lack of pace and the proverbial QE2 turning circle. He was also a good captain and leader. I recall the cohort of youth/reserve team players who were introduced into the senior side when we were struggling a bit as a club (John Giles was one whose name I remember), and I have a clear memory of him looking after the young lads, shouting instructions and encouragement. I had considerable respect for him as a footballer and recall the team of which he was a member with great affection - especially Jantzen, who was very talented and one of my favourite City players of all time. Good memories: a very different era.

Yep, one that works, finally. Thank you for that.

Me too (to coin a phrase…)

How do you say “thanks, but no thanks” in emoji?