TRL Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I totally agree... but the damage is done and we have to live with it. I think SL stepping back and the board letting SoD get on with it within the new restictions is a good thing. I think they've realised they've made mistakes and know **** all about football and are now trying to do something about it. Perhaps they are being too stealth like for the fans liking... but perhaps also that's a good thing as apart from SL they seem poor at comminication. From what i've seen on the pitch this season... we are going in the right direction. For those who don't go it's hard to gauge because they only see points and league tables... I've been going for years and the football we are trying to play is the best for a long time... it will come... it's just taking forever to get that win. Well as I have pointed out various times no visits to AG fo me whike SL is the owner. Steve and his ego are wrecking this club. Sooner him his son and tgeir cronies bugger off the better. But it won't happen as SL has sewn the club up to his ownership like a kipper! Piss poor state of affairs. I can live with good or bad performances on the pitch, that is the nature of the beast. But SL and his cronies, nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunningdalered Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 With this club, I get the feeling that SL and/or the board are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Going back 10 years, Danny Wilson failed to get us out of the third division despite being given financial backing by SL. Gary Johnson came in and with some astute signings achieved what DW failed to do. In the championship GJ was also backed financially by SL, but I can also well remember the criticism on here that we weren't going for the so called "big name" players that many felt were essential if we were to compete with established championship clubs. I presume those mythical big name players would have been even more expensive that players we did sign, so would have made our debt position even greater. Also it has always seemed to me that as a club we have struggled to attract good players because we are a footballing backwater. As a result we have had to pay over the odds to get players here meaning that we have all to often ended up with over priced and over paid players, relative to their value to us out on the pitch. Those chickens have come home to roost big time since ffp started to bite - even more so following relegation. If SL controlled the spending more over the last decade, then he would have been be accused of stifling the manger's ability to be competitive out on the pitch. Many say that SL needs to take the advice of football people, but he has backed his managers ( the football people) in the transfer market, so is he to blame if those managers make poor decisions about players? For most of the last decade , SL has been the typical wealthy club owner/chairman, ploughing his money into the club chasing the footballing dream that the majority of fans share. The simple truth is that during this time a majority of fans would have felt that success was down to money and how often have we seen posts asking for SL to dip his hands into his very deep pockets to bail us out - time and time again. SL has made mistake sand has admitted to those over the last year, especially when talking about the way the club needs to be going forward. Financial necessity is heavily forcing the issue as league 1 financial restrictions have forced us to prune back the club's expenditure to comply and also reinforce the reasons behind the new football philosophy i.e. brining through academy players, and buying young players with the right potential. Steve and the board have done the right thing as far as putting in place a long term strategy. Where they keep falling flat on their faces is their communication of where we are on that road. If we were getting results and were nicely placed in the table then I doubt that anyone would bother whether we heard from the board or not. The problem is that the sceptics among the fan base see results as the only measure and for these fans I think the board needs to speak, if only to give SOD public backing - not the dreaded vote of confidence, but that the club's plans are on track. If not, then the danger is that fans will start to think that SOD is the only person at the club working to a long term plan, and that the board have a something more short term in mind, if they have any plan at all. Exactly this. The only caveat that I would place on your comment is that the Board made a big mistake in the appointment of KM as manager. Other than that, appointing SC, DM and SOD have all been rational decisions, and SL has been unstinting in his support for his managers. I don't get all this wailing and gnashing of teeth about the Board - and banging on about communication - ffs, what do people want - a weekly newsletter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petehinton Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 spot on article about everything wrong with this club. SO'D has all the time it takes to work IMO. What we see on the pitch/forefront is players leaving, younger players coming in, better style of play etc. What the board hides is things mentioned in this - cutting meals before the games, ground/media staff being let go, etc. The board need to stop ******* hiding and come out and explain to us the transition in their eyes behind the scenes, not just SO'D saying he's going to bleed through youngsters, not spend £££ on players so on so on. I wonder when the next Jon Lansdown interview on YouTube will come up including him basically praising himself on how well he's done for lowering ticket prices and...uh....staying out of the spotlight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Well as I have pointed out various times no visits to AG fo me whike SL is the owner. Steve and his ego are wrecking this club. Sooner him his son and tgeir cronies bugger off the better. But it won't happen as SL has sewn the club up to his ownership like a kipper! Piss poor state of affairs. I can live with good or bad performances on the pitch, that is the nature of the beast. But SL and his cronies, nah. I can understand your resentment mate... it seems a catch 22. If SL walked away with his debt, then I wouldn't mind someone else coming in on the board and ownership. With the Financial restraints in place now it wouldn't make much difference on the footballing front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockinredrobin Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/BRISTOL-CITY-BLOG-Age-austerity-hitting-home/story-19921424-detail/story.html If you havent already please read this article Since becoming best mates poring over the Shrewsbury game DVD , Stockhausen has become SoD's friend in the media in order to get access Over the last few weeks Stockhausen has published a few stories /articles friendly to SoD heloing him get his message across and also managing expectations I have no doubt that today's article is actually penned by Stockhausen but the original author is undoubtedly SoD It talks about the cutting of wage bill and more relevant - the silence of the Board The most interesting line is : Of course, frustrated supporters are quite within their rights to question the head coach when results are poor and the one certainty in all of this is that O’Driscoll will, sooner or later, part company with the club in this regard I have sympathy with SoD - results are bad and the situation would be helped by backing him publicly - I take their silence as par for the course - Keith Dawe may as well be the Invisible Man , Jon Lansdown is on paternity leave , SL in Guernsey with better things to do However is I was being cynical I could take the silence as : they dont want to back a manager they might have to sack in 6 weeks time! Where I lose sympathy with SoD ( and the many posters on this forum that KEEP on mentioning it ! ) is with the wage bill and cost -cutting - thats all relative - yes the wage bill ( if its to be in adherence to FFP ) will have to fall to a level of £5m - £6m per season BUT this season there are caveats that mean you can spend more than 60% - EVEN SO we must have a wage bill that is in the Top 5 of the division ?? SoD's problem is he's getting bottom 5 performance out of Top 5 wages and that will be what gets him the sack if results don't improve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 already a thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Right Honourable Les Q Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Just started to read that article. Got to the bit about a "purge on waste and excess...pursued with a religious zeal". This board are turning into the Taliban! Save a bit more by not shaving, and putting the money saved towards some bananas to go with the soup and sarnies. To go off on a horticultural tangent: if you feed your plants lavishly, for a while, then do an about-turn, and do the opposite, with no gradual reduction, don't be surprised if your plants are in shock for a bit. And struggle to adjust/ flower*. And expect some searching, angry questions on Gardener's Question Time. *That may not be quite the case, botanically speaking. But, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I can't help but think Stockhausen has developed a bit of a man crush on SOD. Perhaps it was his loved up state that caused him to misspell Keith Burt's surname and Adam El-Abd's first one. Onto the article. Did anyone not expect us to have to trim drastically to adapt to L1? Obviously, O'Driscoll would have. And he'd have known that when he took the job. You can criticise the board for things like the ticketing shambles and other PR disasters, but where in that article does it say that they have meddled in football decisions? They've set a budget and SOD has to stick to it. He'll have known what it was and probably have helped the board formulate that figure. Of course, every club in L1 would like to take expensive players from higher divisions - but none, barring Wolves, can. We are in that respect no different to the vast majority of this division. Stockhausen's Sean-love even sees him sort of suggesting the players were starved before Port Vale and maybe that's why they were so pish-poor. Well poor dears. They only earn several grand a week, obviously buying their own meals - like most of us have to do - was beyond their pockets. In conclusion, O'Driscoll is having to work in the same way that the vast majority of managers in this division, if not football generally, have to: On a shoestring. We (and he) knew it would be thus. If you critics think you could change all that, phone up Lansdown and make him an offer. But you're going to need pockets deeper than the Avon Gorge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Right Honourable Les Q Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Well as I have pointed out various times no visits to AG fo me whike SL is the owner. Steve and his ego are wrecking this club. Sooner him his son and tgeir cronies bugger off the better. But it won't happen as SL has sewn the club up to his ownership like a kipper! Piss poor state of affairs. I can live with good or bad performances on the pitch, that is the nature of the beast. But SL and his cronies, nah. You can swop "Steve and his ego" for someone else. But you'll only get "someone else and their ego" unless they're one of the Dalai Lama's mob, and not many of them are very up on their ffp/scmp/bcfc. Or the five pillars. Well, not the five pillars down Ashton Gate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Sorry, who are these five pillocks? Are they responsible for the ticketing and catering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockinredrobin Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I can see that but why does everyone keep swallowing the line that we should be 5th bottom because we have no money to spend on players - its nonsense ! does anyone really believe that we have a smaller player budget than the likes of Coventry , Shrewsbury , Colchester etc etc It does my head in that people think or believe thats an excuse for the position we are in I want SoD to be a success but facts are facts : 5 wins in 30 League games as our manager ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheese Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Sorry, who are these five pillocks? Are they responsible for the ticketing and catering? Steve Lansdown Jon Lansdown Keith Dawe Doug Harman are four of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Right Honourable Les Q Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Anyone know a potential owner without ego (and, preferably, a son)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich_s Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Stockhausen's Sean-love even sees him sort of suggesting the players were starved before Port Vale and maybe that's why they were so pish-poor. Think you may be thinking of the Wycombe game. Paupers supper did the trick at Port Vale as they played their socks off. Could possibly have taken its toll on Flint's concentration in the last minute though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calculus Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I can see that but why does everyone keep swallowing the line that we should be 5th bottom because we have no money to spend on players - its nonsense ! does anyone really believe that we have a smaller player budget than the likes of Coventry , Shrewsbury , Colchester etc etc It does my head in that people think or believe thats an excuse for the position we are in I want SoD to be a success but facts are facts : 5 wins in 30 League games as our manager ! I'm sure that in theory the player budget isn't small. Our problem is that a fair amount of that budget is taken up by 'non performing' players such as Kilkenny, Pearson, Carey, Fontaine etc.. We may even still be paying parts of ex-players wages as part of their exit deals. How much dead money is being spent is interesting question, but nobody would or should ever answer it publically. The other questions that need addressing are that of the £40m debt: Do we pay interest on the debt that reduces the playing budget? Are we budgeting to repay a bit of the debt each year and therefore spend less on players? Don't pretend to know the answers to these questions, so if anyone knows..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Think you may be thinking of the Wycombe game. Paupers supper did the trick at Port Vale as they played their socks off. Could possibly have taken its toll on Flint's concentration in the last minute though You're right. In stifling my laughing at how Andy Stockhausen is the new Otib hero, I'd got me soup and sandwiches mixed up. Maybe Flinty's mind was on whether room service was still operational post-match? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Right Honourable Les Q Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 The next budget speech, a few weeks away now, will be fascinating. If the board's 'chancellor' turns up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I must be going soft, that's the 2nd or 3 rd article AS has written recently that has impressed me. Why doesn't he do it more often, or more to the point print it in the actual paper and not the ephemeral world of the blog ! Lots of people have said that there must be something "wrong" at the root of the club. This article may point some way toward it. The sea change from Bollinger to Lambrini in one hit, must have some effect on the players ! Also,not one to knock SL before, I agree he should be the messenger of doom. He hardly has anything to fear, he OWNS the ******* shooting match "....if you don't like it, you know what you can do!" No doubt he'll be back again when S/T renewals are afoot (which ever league we're in). What next, back to the old...."fish and chips on the coach" after away games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 A nice piece BUT AS only points out what is obviously going on. Financial Fair Play levels the field and the club can no longer rely on a wealthy man to underpin the finances of the club. Therefore a policy of selling players will need to be maintained in order to continue to bring in revenue to build. The preference for young players who we can mould and give experience to should increase there value and so on> SoD knows this and Knew this coming in. It has been the way he has built clubs before and as such us and him were the perfect fit. I do not go along with the notion SoD has been told what the policy is, the man himself agrees and took the job on that basis. Nevertheless I do go along with the suggestion the board hide behind him. Its a difficult call as too many statements of support sound as though they are giving him a dreaded vote of confidence, but they need to support the man somehow. I understand much of this was brought up at the fans parliament the other day, nevertheless an interview on world by a member of the board reitterating policy is now called for....At least the vocal minority that seem to not get it can have something to think on! COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 A nice piece BUT AS only points out what is obviously going on. Financial Fair Play levels the field and the club can no longer rely on a wealthy man to underpin the finances of the club. Therefore a policy of selling players will need to be maintained in order to continue to bring in revenue to build. The preference for young players who we can mould and give experience to should increase there value and so on> SoD knows this and Knew this coming in. It has been the way he has built clubs before and as such us and him were the perfect fit. I do not go along with the notion SoD has been told what the policy is, the man himself agrees and took the job on that basis. Nevertheless I do go along with the suggestion the board hide behind him. Its a difficult call as too many statements of support sound as though they are giving him a dreaded vote of confidence, but they need to support the man somehow. I understand much of this was brought up at the fans parliament the other day, nevertheless an interview on world by a member of the board reitterating policy is now called for....At least the vocal minority that seem to not get it can have something to think on! COYR Excellent post bravo . I feel there is a média overload these days .We never heard Harry Dolman speak from one week to the next .He just got on with the job.We all know what Cloughie thought of chairmen spouting off. I agree that O'Driscoll is "on message" and is under no illusions of the task ahead.I think the club are doing a good job.There are problems in every organisation but i believe there is a will to create a good,solid sustainable football club for the future. I am of course disappointed with the results on the pitch but happy with the way we appear to be putting the infrastructures into place. Happy with youngsters getting in the team,happy to have no more ordinary ,or worse ,players who are just here for the money and have no affiliation to the club or investment in future of it. I believe the future is bright ,even ,i'll whisper this,If we go down again . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich i e Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I must be going soft, that's the 2nd or 3 rd article AS has written recently that has impressed me. Why doesn't he do it more often, or more to the point print it in the actual paper and not the ephemeral world of the blog ! Lots of people have said that there must be something "wrong" at the root of the club. This article may point some way toward it. The sea change from Bollinger to Lambrini in one hit, must have some effect on the players ! Also,not one to knock SL before, I agree he should be the messenger of doom. He hardly has anything to fear, he OWNS the ******* shooting match "....if you don't like it, you know what you can do!" No doubt he'll be back again when S/T renewals are afoot (which ever league we're in). What next, back to the old...."fish and chips on the coach" after away games? I have it on good authority in those days, the rt hon Les Q used to buy them for the players, I wonder if he'd like to confirm or deny? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Watts Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 The other questions that need addressing are that of the £40m debt: Do we pay interest on the debt that reduces the playing budget? Are we budgeting to repay a bit of the debt each year and therefore spend less on players? No, is the simple answer to this. The £40m debt is to SL, who has underwritten the debt as an interest free loan portions of which are then converted into shares in the business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Colby-Tit Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 How depressing. If we can't compete with the likes of Peterborough to attract players then League 2 beckons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Right Honourable Les Q Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I have it on good authority in those days, the rt hon Les Q used to buy them for the players, I wonder if he'd like to confirm or deny? I can confirm, for my Rt. Hon friend, that fish, and indeed, chips, were purchased, for the players, and the management, on the occasion of the wondrous cup triumph of December 1983, at Eastville dog track. Evelyn's, Parson's Street, the supplier of said stodge, the finest fish n chips in south Bristol back then. My generosity stretched to another blow-out that season, following the securing of promotion from the old fourth divi, at Chester's Sealand Road. Both occasions saw the heroic goalscorers involved permitted to add mushy peas, at my own personal expense, to their tea. Mr C. Middlemas kindly brought his own ketchup and brown sauce, to save me spending too much. Initially, the grub was bought via a low interest loan from myself to Mr. T. Coops, with a jolly reasonable 25 year repayment plan. However, after a persuasive presentation from senior players, on behalf of Mr. Coops (basically, Mr. T. Morgan threatened me, in a most unpleasant cockernee fashion), I agreed to waive the interest, and just let them have the bloody greasy stodge for nothing. Pains me still to think of this. I've still got the receipts, to remind me, er, as a momento, of those two glorious occasions. Incidentally, Chester charged me for that bloody fence you lot trampled into the Cheshire dirt that day. Ran the length of the pitch! Cost me hundreds! Took it back to HQ, where it was used to keep the chickens in for a few years. Happy days Will Mr. Steve cough up and buy us all fish n chips when we finally win three league points, in one game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowley Birkin Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I remember the night said Mr Morgan had 3 meals whilst we were sampling Weston Super Mare's night life. Man v food, Trev always won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Right Honourable Les Q Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Trev v. Les, Trev bloody won! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.