Does anybody still not blame the board. ?

[NickJ]

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

For some reason @NickJ thinks you're ITK. I take the view that you haven't got a scoobies (and I believe you've admitted you're not ITK).

Firstly, Mark Ashton was not responsible for signings players in his previous consultancy role at the club. He helped put recruitment processes in place but his main task was to actually help the Academy develop to Cat 2 status.

Secondly,  notwithstanding the fact he wasnt responsible for signing players he could not have signed Nicky Hunt as he signed in 2010 - two years before Ashton arrived at City.

Ashton hasn't been at the club 'a couple of months' either. He left Oxford on 12 December.

As for your throwaway comment that Ashton's main job was to sack SC. Well I'll let others make their mind up but suffice to say you are not credible in the slightest.

I would put very strong money and my house mate that robin4ever speaks with authority.

Also Tim Kirk was brought in to develop the Cat 2 and when he left Amy Kington took over. Whether they had outside consultancy help I don't know, but my question would be, what would this guy Mr Ashton know about it.

Also I would suggest very strongly that whatever his official leaving date from Oxford, he was closer to Bristol City than you might imagine before that time.

Have to say also, I very much believe Mr Ashton is largely responsible, directly or indirectly, for SC leaving.

From what I have heard so far Mr Ashton is a very very very polished performer.

2 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Or maybe the indiscretions only came to the boards attention in say, the summer, around the time deals were taken out of the hands of SC/KB and SL became much more involved?

You mean alleged indiscretions mate, unless you have evidence of actual indiscretions, so lets call them "concerns".

And yes, I have already said, it isn't maybe, it is the case that the concerns started in the summer. And then presumably were put to bed as being unfounded, unless anyone knows any different?

 

[MarkRed!]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

@MarkRed!

McInnes and O'Driscoll didn't pick the teams and were just handed a teamsheet?? Why would any manager put up with that.

DM was a relatively new and up and coming manager and SOD was part of the 5 pillars nonsense when he was the Head Coach.  They thus did what they were told and accepted the structure they were employed under. SC did not accept this. Given the state of the team at the time, board had no choice but to accede to his demands.... we were going down. That season was one of the worst I can remember. In fact, it was desperate.... TBF it is only if DM and SOD came out and spoke about it that we would know 100% the truth, they don't because when they are paid off they sign gagging clauses. SC will do the same, which is why we have not heard a peep from him.... 

[spudski]

3 hours ago, NickJ said:

Excuse me, "indiscretions"? Where has this been mentioned before?

I think the answer is nowhere, so you seem to be introducing it. You specifically seem to be introducing it in the area of the previous manager, assuming that is who you mean by "better the devil you know".

Strong stuff.

The implication of what you are saying is the board were prepared to overlook these indiscretions when the manager was successful, but not when he wasn't.

Interesting, if true.

Apologies Nick...yes never spoken openly about it on the forum. But many on here would back me up from email discussions about alleged indiscretions.

[MarkRed!]

19 minutes ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

He joined us as COO after SC was sacked.....

Although Ashton left Oxford in December, he would have had a notice period in his contract. Although it is rumoured the Oxford owner wanted more of a hands on roll, it is highly likely that he had already been offered a job by City and thus this coincided with it. It can be no coincidence that his appointment results in SC dismissal. The results argument is a smoke screen because the board did F@all when it might have made a difference in November... IMO SC would still be in place if he had acceded to Ashton's appointment.  Can any fan really say we are better off..... time will tell and the board should be judged ultimately on whether we avoid relegation....

[NickJ]

1 minute ago, spudski said:

Apologies Nick...yes never spoken openly about it on the forum. But many on here would back me up from email discussions about alleged indiscretions.

Did these alleged indiscretions ever become anything more than alleged indiscretions?

[spudski]

1 minute ago, NickJ said:

Did these alleged indiscretions ever become anything more than alleged indiscretions?

Yes...caught out...and it was dealt with.

[Kid in the Riot]

1 hour ago, robin4ever said:

There is one thing that is creditable and fact ..... And that is that I know a great deal more than you.Everyone knows your agenda with your little rat pack following , but when you remove your rose tinted glasses I still doubt you will be capable of accepting the truth. Left oxford in December ???? Was actively in communication and putting things on place at BCFC at least 6 weeks before that. ITK ?????? My source is probably 90 per cent correct on most championship gossip and info , but only the city facts are of interest to me. Yes I am pro SC because he took our club from the gutter to the brink of something fantastic and I also admit he made mistakes but so does every manager. I applaud him and will clap him should he ever return to AG , but for whatever warped and twisted reason you have always criticised and moaned and whinged like a clueless armchair supporter before he even managed his first game. I never seen the hoof ball or  the league 2 football we were destined for when he arrived. I will always give people a chance and never try judge people too quickly , but I will make an exception for you and I would  find it impossible to be in your irritating company . So let's just thank god I never need to actually listen or meet you. 

So now you've changed your mind and you are ITK?? You're posts are very confusing. When you make an incorrect statement like saying Mark Ashton signed Nicky Hunt can you see why that would make people think that the rest of what you're saying is not true?

Ashton was indeed involved at AG before his official start date however it is a matter of fact that he left Oxford in mid December. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, MarkRed! said:

DM was a relatively new and up and coming manager and SOD was part of the 5 pillars nonsense when he was the Head Coach.  They thus did what they were told and accepted the structure they were employed under. SC did not accept this. Given the state of the team at the time, board had no choice but to accede to his demands.... we were going down. That season was one of the worst I can remember. In fact, it was desperate.... TBF it is only if DM and SOD came out and spoke about it that we would know 100% the truth, they don't because when they are paid off they sign gagging clauses. SC will do the same, which is why we have not heard a peep from him.... 

Cheers. That's very interesting stuff, confidentiality clauses linked to payoffs also rather figure too. Just shocked a manager worth their salt however...having players picked for you in a transfer market is one thing, it's bad of course but it's one thing.

But teams picked by someone else, well that's a whole new level and quite shocking...especially as the manager has to take the blame if results go poorly.

[shelts]

2 hours ago, BigAlToby&Liam said:

I'm afraid I don't quite agree with this. For me it's not quite the Ashton Gate I remember. I worry that it might easily become Bristol Stadium to "make Bristol proud".

Ashton Gate was when the pitch was surrounded by The Williams and Dolman Stands, the Open End and the East End, not areas that are named after the 4 main points of the compass. 

As I've said elsewhere SL is an investor. I'd bet my non-HL pension fund that he'd have been less generous if he'd not been able to secure his investment by way of valuable and income generating freeholds in BS3. Not a bad thing, but equally not as philanthropic as it might seem.

You will never make money out of football, the words of his business partner Mr Hargreaves 

[Kid in the Riot]

2 hours ago, NickJ said:

I would put very strong money and my house mate that robin4ever speaks with authority.

Also Tim Kirk was brought in to develop the Cat 2 and when he left Amy Kington took over. Whether they had outside consultancy help I don't know, but my question would be, what would this guy Mr Ashton know about it.

Also I would suggest very strongly that whatever his official leaving date from Oxford, he was closer to Bristol City than you might imagine before that time.

Have to say also, I very much believe Mr Ashton is largely responsible, directly or indirectly, for SC leaving.

From what I have heard so far Mr Ashton is a very very very polished performer.

You mean alleged indiscretions mate, unless you have evidence of actual indiscretions, so lets call them "concerns".

And yes, I have already said, it isn't maybe, it is the case that the concerns started in the summer. And then presumably were put to bed as being unfounded, unless anyone knows any different?

Ashton was definitely providing outside help for the academy, Nick.

No doubt Ashton was involved in SC sacking. Indirectly I would guess as I think the board were probaby 90% sure they could no longer trust SC with recuitment or managing the team some time before Xmas. The writing was very much on the wall.

Re 'indiscretions' that's what you and spud referred to them as - call em what you like! 

@MarkRed! who was picking the teams for SOD and Mcinnes then?!

[spudski]

7 minutes ago, SX225 said:

And the missing two words are:

 

Keith Burt.

Indeed... also wondering whether he is going to stay. If so...in what capacity? DoF or head Scout?

As for scouting...Mr Ashtons or Mr Burts 'Associates' now working for us both here and abroad?

[WTFiGO!?!]

On 23 January 2016 at 21:04, Doozerchris said:

This Forum was split prior to the sacking of Cotts,  but now the realisation that he's gone and not a great deal , formation apart has changed just wondered what the general consensus is now .?

I'm not that fussed about consensus.  Consensus means you take the views on of morons.  Tell me, what is the point of that?

My view is, we have a stinkingly wealthy owner who has contrasting knowledge of pension funds and the running of football clubs. 

I believe our next managerial appointment will be a disaster ala all but two of the last seven or so, we'll be relegated, our debt will tumble into the £200 million margin and the wanky 'brand' that is Bristol Sport will continue unopposed by 'consensus opinion'.  

£30+ will still be the going rate for walk up supporters and attendances will plummet back to about 9000.  

Of course , I hope I'm wrong but history is on my side here.

[havanatopia]

 

10 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

"Plain mad" is a very good phrase to use in this context. ...

That sounds boring. What about the flailing arms type of mad? Its a lot more fun and you get a good work out into the bargain.

7 hours ago, NickJ said:

From what I have heard so far Mr Ashton is a very very very polished performer.

I hope he does the walk and not just the talk.

5 hours ago, shelts said:

You will never make money out of football, the words of his business partner Mr Hargreaves 

To coin a phrase from that cost comparison site where the butler is chipping ice off the block "they know that"

2 hours ago, WTFiGO!?! said:

I'm not that fussed about consensus.  Consensus means you take the views on of morons.  Tell me, what is the point of that?

My view is, we have a stinkingly wealthy owner who has contrasting knowledge of pension funds and the running of football clubs. 

I believe our next managerial appointment will be a disaster ala all but two of the last seven or so, we'll be relegated, our debt will tumble into the £200 million margin and the wanky 'brand' that is Bristol Sport will continue unopposed by 'consensus opinion'.  

£30+ will still be the going rate for walk up supporters and attendances will plummet back to about 9000.  

Of course , I hope I'm wrong but history is on my side here.

You are assuming that someone in the City board room is a moron. Bit ott! But more to the point we are not really party to how decisions are made; no doubt SL has the final say, would you agree? That is one man and based upon a pretty patchy record what does that make him in your eyes and does that evidence, for all to see, suggest that he is your moron? I ask not to be disrespectful of your view but to try and figure out what you prefer, consensus decisions or single man decisions because you seem to trash both. You may be right about our chances mind.

[Kid in the Riot]

1 hour ago, robin4ever said:

My posts are very confusing ???? I believe you would find the most basic post very confusing ,

Yes, that's right, I can't handle your supreme intellect

[Frenchay Red]

I'm not going to start another thread as their are already plenty on the current situation, but given the mess the club appear to be in at the moment I wonder of we could have rescued the situation and retained the best manager we have had for many years and the one most likely to keep us the this league.

There is no doubt that something went very wrong following last season's triumphs and it also seems likely that whatever it was, neither the manager nor the club were without fault. Whatever it was it appears to have led to a breakdown between Cotts and SL, who previously seemed to have a good working relationship.

Many have said that Cotts, as a result, "spa his dummy out" as someone described it, and stubbornly stuck to his players and his formation to make a point to SL.

If this is the case and with the team slipping down the league I wonder why SL did not have a one to one "crisis meeting" with Cotts to attempt to clear the air and get things back on track with everyone pulling in the same direction.

Perhaps he did and Cotts was still feeling let down and refused to accept the olive branch.  In which case why not try third party mediation to resolve matters, again perhaps this was explored and refused or failed.

All supposition of course, and now merely idle speculation, but I can't help but think that perhaps SL gave up on Cotts too easily, given how he turned things round when he came here.

May be it was impossible to resolve the problem and he had to go, but we are now without a manager, without any apparent permanent signings imminent, and it seems only heading one way, and with what appears to me, a bit of a spin doctor now running things, (I would be very happy to be proved wrong).

 

As we followed the tour bus and stood in front of the Lloyds building last May applauding and cheering those who had given us such an amazing season, who would have thought it could have all fallen apart to such an extent and in such a short space of time.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Here's my problem with the indiscretions theory (which of course may or may not be true) everybody in SC's main team must have been aware of what was going on, one left and one was sacked but two remain, now either the two remaining grassed the other two up or have just had knuckle raps for either not grassing or being involved on the periphery of the indiscretion.

But once more if this theory is correct everybody involved should have been sacked immediately, because this may be part of the reason why other clubs are reluctant to deal with us financially, that and other misdemeanours which I suspect Hull and Brentford could enlighten us about.

 

[CotswoldRed]

9 minutes ago, Frenchay Red said:

I'm not going to start another thread as their are already plenty on the current situation, but given the mess the club appear to be in at the moment I wonder of we could have rescued the situation and retained the best manager we have had for many years and the one most likely to keep us the this league.

There is no doubt that something went very wrong following last season's triumphs and it also seems likely that whatever it was, neither the manager nor the club were without fault. Whatever it was it appears to have led to a breakdown between Cotts and SL, who previously seemed to have a good working relationship.

Many have said that Cotts, as a result, "spa his dummy out" as someone described it, and stubbornly stuck to his players and his formation to make a point to SL.

If this is the case and with the team slipping down the league I wonder why SL did not have a one to one "crisis meeting" with Cotts to attempt to clear the air and get things back on track with everyone pulling in the same direction.

Perhaps he did and Cotts was still feeling let down and refused to accept the olive branch.  In which case why not try third party mediation to resolve matters, again perhaps this was explored and refused or failed.

All supposition of course, and now merely idle speculation, but I can't help but think that perhaps SL gave up on Cotts too easily, given how he turned things round when he came here.

May be it was impossible to resolve the problem and he had to go, but we are now without a manager, without any apparent permanent signings imminent, and it seems only heading one way, and with what appears to me, a bit of a spin doctor now running things, (I would be very happy to be proved wrong).

 

As we followed the tour bus and stood in front of the Lloyds building last May applauding and cheering those who had given us such an amazing season, who would have thought it could have all fallen apart to such an extent and in such a short space of time.

Too much is made of the SL/SC relationship.  If you look at the structure of the board and day-to-day roles, SC shouldn't have had much of a need to talk to SL at any point this season.

[Kid in the Riot]

25 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Here's my problem with the indiscretions theory (which of course may or may not be true) everybody in SC's main team must have been aware of what was going on, one left and one was sacked but two remain, now either the two remaining grassed the other two up or have just had knuckle raps for either not grassing or being involved on the periphery of the indiscretion.

But once more if this theory is correct everybody involved should have been sacked immediately, because this may be part of the reason why other clubs are reluctant to deal with us financially, that and other misdemeanours which I suspect Hull and Brentford could enlighten us about.

You are assuming 100% guilt though Esmond. The waters were dark and murky...

Anyway, one thing's for sure it will NEVER come to light publicly what happened last summer because the truth would be too damaging for all concerned. So, we'll all be speculating in perpetuity....

[Chivs]

33 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

You are assuming 100% guilt though Esmond. The waters were dark and murky...

Anyway, one thing's for sure it will NEVER come to light publicly what happened last summer because the truth would be too damaging for all concerned. So, we'll all be speculating in perpetuity....

What are these alleged indiscretions?  If it's all a bit "slanderous" then If you put it on here I promise not to tell anyone.

[NickJ]

I think the fact that the word being used is "indiscretion" rather than for example "impropriety" is quite significant.

Alleged indiscretion, possibly caused by differing perceptions and imprecise boundaries, would be very different to actual impropriety.

All of which is a sideshow to the fact that it led to our ex-manager not being given the promised tools to show he is a good Championship manager - IMO.

I feel an analogy involving cakes coming on.

[BCFC Jordan]

I think it's quite clear that SC was far more intent on taking this club up a level than the board are, contrary to that pathetic statement from Dawe.

 

We've lost a man that was passionate about taking this club to the next level and had proven he could bring success on the pitch when given the tools to do it.

 

Another successful month, January then. So far, two uninspiring loan signings and the loss of a great manager for this club all so they can take the flack off themselves and distract from another failed window. A great sign that we're looking to stay up...

 

Hopefully they don't go for a cheap option with a manager and we can somehow scrape survival and build in the summer. Maybe one day the board will learn from repeating the same mistakes... maybe not though, it's been going on for far too long now and they're always distancing themselves from the blame.

[citywest30]

Just what could these 'indescretions' or 'misunderstandings' be tho? - x amount to the agents that SL thought was too much? Any other possibilities? 

[extonsred]

Not read all the posts on here but I absolutely blame the board for not insisting there was a proper recruitment plan in place with a plan B ready to implement -- that is their job. Defenceless your honour!!

[Red-Robbo]

So let me get this straight: last season when we were great it was all Steve Cotterill's doing; this season where we have been crap it's all the board's doing.

Oh and they are all idiots for appointing first Derek McInnes and then Sean O'Driscoll who most of us here wanted at the time and many football pundits outside the club tipped to do great things here.

Right, now I have that set of paradoxes fixed in my mind. ...

[Esmond Million's Bung]

19 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

Well we all believed the SOD hype back in those days.

To quote Samuel Goldwyn :  "We've all passed a lot of water since then. ."

So you want a quote off do you?, to quote Tonto "I think paleface speak with forked tongue" in the first ever episode of "The Lone Ranger."

12 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

So let me get this straight: last season when we were great it was all Steve Cotterill's doing; this season where we have been crap it's all the board's doing.

Oh and they are all idiots for appointing first Derek McInnes and then Sean O'Driscoll who most of us here wanted at the time and many football pundits outside the club tipped to do great things here.

Right, now I have that set of paradoxes fixed in my mind. ...

I don't see that at all RR, what I see is people saying that the board (given the 'indiscretions' theory) could and should have acted earlier, I suspect the results in a way was manner from heaven to give them an ulterior motive for the sacking and not risk perhaps any scandal, but I fear we might live to regret that wait and the indiscretions  along with our alleged dealings with Hull and Brentford have damaged the clubs reputation, it's almost certainly why we are struggling to make permanent signings IMO.

 

 

[Red-Robbo]

25 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

So you want a quote off do you?, to quote Tonto "I think paleface speak with forked tongue" in the first ever episode of "The Lone Ranger."

I don't see that at all RR, what I see is people saying that the board (given the 'indiscretions' theory) could and should have acted earlier, I suspect the results in a way was manner from heaven to give them an ulterior motive for the sacking and not risk perhaps any scandal, but I fear we might live to regret that wait and the indiscretions  along with our alleged dealings with Hull and Brentford have damaged the clubs reputation, it's almost certainly why we are struggling to make permanent signings IMO.

 

 

They say that now, but many might have been among the 72% here who voted on here for sticking with Cotterill in a poll conducted early in December. 

The majority only approved the action after it had been taken - and then only narrowly. 

Tonto was right. There are a lot of palefaces talking with forked tongues about.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

2 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

They say that now, but many might have been among the 72% here who voted on here for sticking with Cotterill in a poll conducted early in December. 

The majority only approved the action after it had been taken - and then only narrowly. 

Tonto was right. There are a lot of palefaces talking with forked tongues about.

Firstly there is probably more people now who have inkling of how SC and the club have acted in the past 8 months and it's as usual the club and it's fans who are the ones suffering, only time will tell if the timing of this sacking was correct and my feeling is unless we cannot bring in some quality permanent signings especially strikers IMO we have had it, I can't see where the goals are going to come from, 0-1 or 0-0 won't keep us up that's for sure.

indeed Tonto was right and as you pointed out one of them owns the club.

 

[Vincent Vega]

4 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

 

indeed Tonto was right and as you pointed out one of them owns the club.

 

Beat me to it..

[Red-Robbo]

1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said:

Firstly there is probably more people now who have inkling of how SC and the club have acted in the past 8 months and it's as usual the club and it's fans who are the ones suffering, only time will tell if the timing of this sacking was correct and my feeling is unless we cannot bring in some quality permanent signings especially strikers IMO we have had it, I can't see where the goals are going to come from, 0-1 or 0-0 won't keep us up that's for sure.

indeed Tonto was right and as you pointed out one of them owns the club.

 

Best chuck him out and point the next guy who'll chuck £10m a year into the club, and rebuild the ground, in the direction of BS3. 

[Esmond Million's Bung]

23 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Best chuck him out and point the next guy who'll chuck £10m a year into the club, and rebuild the ground, in the direction of BS3. 

Whoa, only saying that he is not always right and this time if rumours are true, he wasn't right and the club and fans are once more suffering.

Clubs inevitably yo yo from the championship to the prem, but we have managed to set a new benchmark 1st to championship, this is the 3rd promotion **** up in a row and it's becoming boring, everything was in place to get it right this time and it would appear that several people have managed to conspire to **** it up completely.

You know I normally support SL because he is a good man but between Coppell, SOD and now SC something appears to be awry with communication, promises or expectation and that I fear has affected player recruitment and quite possibly manager recruitment.

2 players signed permanently in 18 months is surely a warning that something ain't right, especially when one left before the ink dried on his contract and plus the fact that popular opinion was that SC was the reason that players wouldn't sign, well he's gone and ....................................................................................................

PS:- A lot of people criticised SC for what they considered to be untruths in his post match interviews and when pointed out that managers lie to protect the players, again popular opinion was, why say it if he didn't mean it, the same goes for SL.