What went wrong at Bristol City Football Club

[Alessandro]

On 1/29/2016 at 13:05, NickJ said:

You seem vocal as well - why don't you.

You also seem to have access to information which the ordinary fan would not come across, which is good, because opinions are always likely to be better if based upon fact. However the facts in your post are not really relevant to the random question which you have posed.

Yes I try wherever possible to base opinions on facts, not here say. You should try it one day.

If you have a problem with this thread - which most people seem to agree does show striking similarities to past mistakes - then I can't help that as its already out there, so maybe just not read.

I have no problem with this (or any) thread, did I say that? Because I disagree with you, I have a problem? Please don't try and hide behind other people by saying "most people seem to agree". In fact reading through this, yes it sparks debate, but it looks pretty 50/50. You've had one or two likes for your post?? I wouldn't define that as majority. but we do know you like to twist the truth to suit your argument. Unfortunately for you, you're not very good at it.

So far as your question is concerned, it is not my area of expertise, but I would expect those running the football club to have that expertise. Leading on from that, I have never said, anywhere, whether I think they do have that expertise, or not, specifically in relation to financial and transfer dealings.

I knew this would be your answer when I wrote this question. So I ask you now, you admit this is not your area of expertise, yet you feel qualified to set the boundaries by which financial and transfer dealings are judged by?

I have however stated that I do not think that the current board of directors are the best qualified to run our football club, as in, Bristol City Football Club Ltd. Funnily enough many people seem to agree. What do you think?

Again, hiding behind other people. Would you like to quantify 'many'? And I disagree with your opinion here and have set my reasons for that clearly in fact on this and other posts regarding the board.

If you have some sort of problem with something else I have said, by all means try again, though it would be easier if you could respond to a specific comment I have made.

I have been very specific in my responses to you, would you like it in simpler language? You post an article (a very one sided, well written but one sided article) and I will ask, yes we've had some high wage signings who have been a failure. But it does not mention the high wage players who have been a success.  Buying a player in football will ALWAYS be somewhat of a gamble. The transfer history of football is littered with examples of players signed on big wages who haven't matched their form at their previous club. It's part and parcel of football. Do you think Bristol City are alone in this? ALARM CALL - FOOTBALL COSTS MONEY

Regarding managers, the general footballing public also don't give enough consideration about quite how much of a gamble every new managerial appointment is. Tinnion was a club hero, it was a gamble that didn't pay off. Mcinnes came very highly rated, but that didn't pay off. But generally BCFC have gone for sensible options, GJ, BOD, SCop, SCot. Some have had success, some haven't. That is football. Again BCFC are not alone in this. We've had about the same turnover of managers in the last 10 years as Swansea (7?). Have you heard of Roberto Martinez? What was his first job in management, and where is he now? Sometimes you have to gamble on a manager ALA Tinnion, sometimes it pays, sometimes it doesn't. 

Finally, financially. I've said it already in this post but I obviously need to say it twice. For all the doom and gloom you speak of, we have one of the lowest net debts of any club in the Championship £25mil (lowest 3 or 4). I think 1, 2 clubs max are actually in profit. you think our board is ill equipped, I wonder how you'd react if we had debts in excess of twice that at £50 million like a large group of the championship, or even 3 times like Cardiff, what about 7 times like Bolton?!

I think you just need to have a reality check. Would you like anymore specifics? Happy to carry on chatting, but when you have an opinion that is based upon any kind of fact.

 

[spudski]

I'll give you a fact...

I've spoken personally to many managers that have worked for us...and each to a man said they struggled because (A) What they were often told at Interview was one thing, when in reality it was different...often 'goalposts being moved' and (B) the Club didn't have in place. people, who could do their jobs well....which led them to have to do it themselves.

A quote I heard was...'I don't have a clue what that person actually does at the Club'.

As I mentioned in another thread...managers fail long term here, because of a poor infrastructure in the past.

We might have had short term success, some players might have had success and moved on to better things...but as a Club and team...in the big picture of things, considering the amount of money thrown at it....we have seriously under achieved.

Put the 'infrastructure in place...a united board....and a decent Coach/Manager...pull all in the same direction and we get somewhere...but our past has been a joke.

Ask anyone in football about our past scouting 'system' from development football to first team and it would be laughed at.

To anyone....if you were the owner of a football club with £billions....wouldn't you make sure you had all the 'working bits' a football club needs in place, before trying to be successful?

We might look promising from the outside...like a brand new gleaming Ferrari....but take a peek under the bonnet and it told a different story.

[BobBobSuperBob]

8 minutes ago, spudski said:

I'll give you a fact...

I've spoken personally to many managers that have worked for us...and each to a man said they struggled because (A) What they were often told at Interview was one thing, when in reality it was different...often 'goalposts being moved' and (B) the Club didn't have in place. people, who could do their jobs well....which led them to have to do it themselves.

A quote I heard was...'I don't have a clue what that person actually does at the Club'.

As I mentioned in another thread...managers fail long term here, because of a poor infrastructure in the past.

We might have had short term success, some players might have had success and moved on to better things...but as a Club and team...in the big picture of things, considering the amount of money thrown at it....we have seriously under achieved.

Put the 'infrastructure in place...a united board....and a decent Coach/Manager...pull all in the same direction and we get somewhere...but our past has been a joke.

Ask anyone in football about our past scouting 'system' from development football to first team and it would be laughed at.

To anyone....if you were the owner of a football club with £billions....wouldn't you make sure you had all the 'working bits' a football club needs in place, before trying to be successful?

We might look promising from the outside...like a brand new gleaming Ferrari....but take a peek under the bonnet and it told a different story.

You have far more recent 'knowledge' than me Spud but we've always seemed to be two steps behind off the pitch.

If I'm honest I think this started with the near death of the club in the 80s

There was no infrastructure left and as we've all reminisced on here TC and a few other diamonds did the lot.

For example Through the 80s 90s our 'scouting set up' was definitely poor to say the least if non existent, and behind any decent clubs you could think of

Thinks have changed / altered it would seem for a long while have still left us behind the eight ball , off the pitch.

 

On a Positive note

Intereested to hear Scott Golbourne say how impressed he was with the facilities / training ground since he'd been away

Talked of a set up that impressed and said spoke of Premiership potential.

Im completely out of touch regarding training ground facilities but nice to hear the opinion of a Championship player coming from Wolves and having been at Reading

(What a cracking lad he is in his interviews - a delight to listen to)

[Major Isewater]

On 29 janvier 2016 at 14:07, NickJ said:

This seems like the perfect opportunity.

Can't claim to "know" either but I have met both and I would guess their different skills and characters would have been beneficially complimentary.

Believe it or not I also think both are very good chaps.

I just wish Mr L was as good at running a football club as he was at building a financial services company. We would be in Europe never mind the Premiership.

But do I think there is anyone better? As much as I disagree with the change in structure and ownership over the past several years, no, assuming his heart (and cash!) is still in it.

But I do think that if not replaced there should at least be additional more appropriately qualified personnel on the board of the football club, as in Bristol City Football Club Ltd. Plus a supporters representative please.

Hope that frustration and fanaticism doesn't sometimes come across as anything more than that, sometimes there are many people on here who wear their heart on their sleeve and it can boil over into something which shouldn't.

So although the nature of forums like this is that the disappointments are commented on disproportionately more than the good days, for the record, while I am sober and in a chilled mood, I hope Mr L keeps up the good work, and yes, because he is too clever not to learn from past mistakes, I do believe with Mr L we will end up in the Premiership. I guess you could say Mr L has served his apprenticeship!

Incidentally, that is my main problem with the departure of the previous manager. Whatever did or did not happen last summer, I do think he also would have been clever enough to learn from mistakes. Whatever happened, big shame.

I have the impression that SL is a number cruncher , an accountant and a very good one .

I don't believe he is a flair businessman with an extraordinary vision but he ain't stupid and has brought in people who can help realise the dream of a successful football club .

i trust his guardianship and hope he réalisés his ambition of making us a sustainable Premiership club .

[Alessandro]

33 minutes ago, spudski said:

I'll give you a fact...

I've spoken personally to many managers that have worked for us...and each to a man said they struggled because (A) What they were often told at Interview was one thing, when in reality it was different...often 'goalposts being moved' and (B) the Club didn't have in place. people, who could do their jobs well....which led them to have to do it themselves.

A quote I heard was...'I don't have a clue what that person actually does at the Club'.

As I mentioned in another thread...managers fail long term here, because of a poor infrastructure in the past.

We might have had short term success, some players might have had success and moved on to better things...but as a Club and team...in the big picture of things, considering the amount of money thrown at it....we have seriously under achieved.

Put the 'infrastructure in place...a united board....and a decent Coach/Manager...pull all in the same direction and we get somewhere...but our past has been a joke.

Ask anyone in football about our past scouting 'system' from development football to first team and it would be laughed at.

To anyone....if you were the owner of a football club with £billions....wouldn't you make sure you had all the 'working bits' a football club needs in place, before trying to be successful?

We might look promising from the outside...like a brand new gleaming Ferrari....but take a peek under the bonnet and it told a different story.

Hi Spudski, I've spoken to managers too, and one in particular at great depth. There were certain things that were not right for sure, I've never argued against that. But some of the things I have heard, I know or a fact have been put right. 

My argument is one of relativity. Compare us to clubs of other size and revenue. I wonder what our average gate is vs. say Sheffield United and compare our current positions. On the other hand you could look at clubs like Stoke and Swansea, both clubs I remember going to away days at their old grounds. They are the success stories, but my point is these success stories are few and far between. Look at Blackpool and Portsmouth as clubs who made the 'promised land' but have plummeted since. 

Talking of facts, I don't know exactly how much money has been thrown at the club, as you say, do you? I think claiming we have 'seriously under achieved' is an opinion, and one that is hard to argue one way or the other. I would argue SL has, albiet slowly, with mistakes along the way, built a club with a fantastic new stadium, training facilities, relatively low debt, increased revenue opportunities and now a managerial infrastructure in place. These things take time to do and he has done them, despite of the mistakes, and we are (ignoring current league position) a club in good condition, ready to move forwards and upwards. So i'm not so sure we look like a Ferrari, but our engine is certainly in better condition than you make out!

[spudski]

39 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

aYou have far more recent 'knowledge' than me Spud but we've always seemed to be two steps behind off the pitch.

If I'm honest I think this started with the near death of the club in the 80s

There was no infrastructure left and as we've all reminisced on here TC and a few other diamonds did the lot.

For example Through the 80s 90s our 'scouting set up' was definitely poor to say the least if non existent, and behind any decent clubs you could think of

Thinks have changed / altered it would seem for a long while have still left us behind the eight ball , off the pitch.

 

On a Positive note

Intereested to hear Scott Golbourne say how impressed he was with the facilities / training ground since he'd been away

Talked of a set up that impressed and said spoke of Premiership potential.

Im completely out of touch regarding training ground facilities but nice to hear the opinion of a Championship player coming from Wolves and having been at Reading

(What a cracking lad he is in his interviews - a delight to listen to)

 

22 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Hi Spudski, I've spoken to managers too, and one in particular at great depth. There were certain things that were not right for sure, I've never argued against that. But some of the things I have heard, I know or a fact have been put right. 

My argument is one of relativity. Compare us to clubs of other size and revenue. I wonder what our average gate is vs. say Sheffield United and compare our current positions. On the other hand you could look at clubs like Stoke and Swansea, both clubs I remember going to away days at their old grounds. They are the success stories, but my point is these success stories are few and far between. Look at Blackpool and Portsmouth as clubs who made the 'promised land' but have plummeted since. 

Talking of facts, I don't know exactly how much money has been thrown at the club, as you say, do you? I think claiming we have 'seriously under achieved' is an opinion, and one that is hard to argue one way or the other. I would argue SL has, albiet slowly, with mistakes along the way, built a club with a fantastic new stadium, training facilities, relatively low debt, increased revenue opportunities and now a managerial infrastructure in place. These things take time to do and he has done them, despite of the mistakes, and we are (ignoring current league position) a club in good condition, ready to move forwards and upwards. So i'm not so sure we look like a Ferrari, but our engine is certainly in better condition than you make out!

Agree in many instances with both of you chaps...I tried to use the past tense regarding our failings...as I understand we are slowly trying to redress the balance of the Club.

But we are definitely playing catch up...I would say we are still way behind other clubs as far as 'Infrastructure' goes.

I do feel the 82 shambles still haunts us to this day...we are still reeling from it in many ways. The infrastructure has never really been addressed properly since then...we've just thrown money at short term fix's...no long term strategy in place.

I understand we are trying to change things...but even that evolves...remember the 'five pillars'...

We definitely have the potential...it's just getting all the 'cogs' working efficiently and in the same direction. It only needs a few to 'wobble' and it throws the whole momentum out of kilter....hence our summer.

I remember watching 'Boro and Stoke in our league 3 days and thinking we were on the similar level...yet look at how they have moved on....and like Alex implied, screw the management up and regardless of wealth you end up like Blackpool or Portsmouth.

[LondonBristolian]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

 

Agree in many instances with both of you chaps...I tried to use the past tense regarding our failings...as I understand we are slowly trying to redress the balance of the Club.

But we are definitely playing catch up...I would say we are still way behind other clubs as far as 'Infrastructure' goes.

I do feel the 82 shambles still haunts us to this day...we are still reeling from it in many ways. The infrastructure has never really been addressed properly since then...we've just thrown money at short term fix's...no long term strategy in place.

I understand we are trying to change things...but even that evolves...remember the 'five pillars'...

We definitely have the potential...it's just getting all the 'cogs' working efficiently and in the same direction. It only needs a few to 'wobble' and it throws the whole momentum out of kilter....hence our summer.

I remember watching 'Boro and Stoke in our league 3 days and thinking we were on the similar level...yet look at how they have moved on....and like Alex implied, screw the management up and regardless of wealth you end up like Blackpool or Portsmouth.

What I would say is I do think Mark Ashton may prove to be a shrewd appointment.  We've been missing someone with experience or running the business side of the club and the things I've heard about him from his time at Oxford make me think he's efficient, ruthless and not a man to be messed about.  He certainly isn't someone I think you'd easily get one over on in a negotiation and I think that may be something we've missed on the organisation side.  Hopefully he can get cogs working as they should be and that ought to make it easier for the manager to get things done on the pitch.

[spudski]

59 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

What I would say is I do think Mark Ashton may prove to be a shrewd appointment.  We've been missing someone with experience or running the business side of the club and the things I've heard about him from his time at Oxford make me think he's efficient, ruthless and not a man to be messed about.  He certainly isn't someone I think you'd easily get one over on in a negotiation and I think that may be something we've missed on the organisation side.  Hopefully he can get cogs working as they should be and that ought to make it easier for the manager to get things done on the pitch.

I'm keeping a close eye on whether our Dof is going to be kept on for various reasons as well.

[EnclosureSurge]

Not sure this article tells us too much we hadn't already speculated at/heard whispers about/also dreamt up.

But for me, personally, its authenticity goes out the window when the 'author' suggests McInnes even contemplated talking about football matters to either Ernie Arathoon or Martin Griffiths. The former, our silent bruiser, the latter, the bloke who ordered the seats on the new stands.

The thought of McInnes speaking to either about team affairs is, frankly...

...possibly what happened?

(plus I don't recall that many fans ''voting with their feet'' and ''staying away'' - average dropped marginally, but not that much. That's only one phrase away from being Stockhausen Syndrome: "fans staying away in their droves". Rubbish).

[Jack Dawe]

5 hours ago, Alessandro said:

 

My argument is one of relativity. Compare us to clubs of other size and revenue. I wonder what our average gate is vs. say Sheffield United and compare our current positions. On the other hand you could look at clubs like Stoke and Swansea, both clubs I remember going to away days at their old grounds. They are the success stories, but my point is these success stories are few and far between. Look at Blackpool and Portsmouth as clubs who made the 'promised land' but have plummeted since. 

Talking of facts, I don't know exactly how much money has been thrown at the club, as you say, do you? I think claiming we have 'seriously under achieved' is an opinion, and one that is hard to argue one way or the other. I would argue SL has, albiet slowly, with mistakes along the way, built a club with a fantastic new stadium, training facilities, relatively low debt, increased revenue opportunities and now a managerial infrastructure in place. These things take time to do and he has done them, despite of the mistakes, and we are (ignoring current league position) a club in good condition, ready to move forwards and upwards. 

How long can we "ignore current league position" though? 

If we do go down, will you still be saying "ignoring current league position" while listing all the many positives you rightly list there?

In the end, all that stuff is designed to improve our league position. League position is everything, and top half of L1/ bottom third of Championship yo-yoing is all we have done for 35 years. We can do that without SL's millions. We've done that for almost a century!

 SL himself said recently he wants us challenging at the top of this league next season. The club have declared that the PL is the aim. At some point, SL and this board have to be judged against their own stated aims and objectives, do they not? Saying, well, we're not Blackpool/Pompey, is that enough?

I think it is fair to say that now is too soon for that judgement, that we need to give the completed ground and the extra income generated, for example, time to have an effect, to allow us to compete with richer clubs. But we cannot "ignore league position" forever. And the fear is, for the sceptical, that this hugely disappointing season is just more evidence that despite the many off-field positives and developments, things - ie league position - are not about to change all that much.

That's the fear. We just hope and pray we are wrong, we really do.

In a way, we have to hope that the failure since last May, is pretty much all SC's fault. But if that were so, you'd then have to wonder why on earth we waited until Jan 14th to sack him.

[Alessandro]

1 hour ago, Jack Dawe said:

How long can we "ignore current league position" though? 

If we do go down, will you still be saying "ignoring current league position" while listing all the many positives you rightly list there?

In the end, all that stuff is designed to improve our league position. League position is everything, and top half of L1/ bottom third of Championship yo-yoing is all we have done for 35 years. We can do that without SL's millions. We've done that for almost a century!

 SL himself said recently he wants us challenging at the top of this league next season. The club have declared that the PL is the aim. At some point, SL and this board have to be judged against their own stated aims and objectives, do they not? Saying, well, we're not Blackpool/Pompey, is that enough?

I think it is fair to say that now is too soon for that judgement, that we need to give the completed ground and the extra income generated, for example, time to have an effect, to allow us to compete with richer clubs. But we cannot "ignore league position" forever. And the fear is, for the sceptical, that this hugely disappointing season is just more evidence that despite the many off-field positives and developments, things - ie league position - are not about to change all that much.

That's the fear. We just hope and pray we are wrong, we really do.

In a way, we have to hope that the failure since last May, is pretty much all SC's fault. But if that were so, you'd then have to wonder why on earth we waited until Jan 14th to sack him.

I can't argue with what you said here chap,

All we can do is hope we stay up. I think, without being happy clappy, we have enough about us to do that. 

But it will be close.

[NickJ]

12 hours ago, Alessandro said:

 Happy to carry on chatting, but when you have an opinion that is based upon any kind of fact.

Let's get this out of the way first. I never "twist" things. I say it as I see it, straight, honest opinion.

Furthermore, I never "hide" behind other people. Happy for you to know who I am and what I think. In fact to suggest I'm "hiding" because I think "many" people found the article thought provoking is frankly pathetic.

So, who are you? Or do you prefer to hide behind your pseudonym? You do? Thought so. OK. I find that very irritating, nevertheless, I will be civil, if you will.

 

Just out of interest, do you think I wrote the article? (I didn't).

Do I agree with all of it? No.

Do I believe all of it? No.

Do I think the article describes certain aspects of the clubs plight 3 years ago which have similarities to that which it is in now? Yes. Hence "deja vu".

Your ranting diatribe refers to many areas which I have not commented on in this thread, so you are having an argument with yourself.

I won't respond to your comments above because these are comments which you have invented from your perception of what I have said in other threads. By all means find other threads and ask specific questions to specific points I have made, in those threads, I will happily answer, and if I think you have a fair point, I will say so.

 

As for "facts", my opinions are always based on fact or, in the absence of known facts, what I think are most likely to be the facts. That is all anyone can make a judgment on.

So, turning to your random question to me in the "Dodgy Cotterill" thread from earlier today (which incidentally even if I'd had time I wouldn't have distinguished that appalling thread with a comment), which I cannot respond directly to as unsurprisingly it has been removed, "what do I think"? You know, about that.

 

I'll tell you what I think, which is exactly what I have said in my various other comments on the subject.

As background, I was told at the start of this season that transfers had been put on hold as it was felt that there were some unexplained financial issues. That I was told that, is a fact.

During the summer, it is a fact that the press reported that Bristol City were offering all sorts of (for us) crazy money for a couple of strikers.

I read with interest the post by Tetbury Massive on 31 December. That it was written, and that I read it, is a fact.

Now in the absence of any other information from the club or anywhere else, it seemed to me that the post by TM was very plausible, particularly as it would explain what I had been told earlier in the season. That I thought this might be the case, is a fact.

I also thought, and said, that if I were SL and I thought I was being had over, I would act exactly as he is said to have done. I also said SL was not only entitled but indeed obliged to take this action, and in that sense I fully endorsed his action. That I said this, is a fact.

I also came to the conclusion and said that, as nothing appears to have come of the alleged financial issues, I would assume there had been a misunderstanding, but this had, IF (it is a fact that I spelt out the word "IF" in capitals) TM's article is to be believed, caused the failure of the summer transfers. Yes, I said this, and therefore although I may be wrong, it is a fact that I will believe this until if and when any evidence is offered to the contrary.

 

So, you may not like my conclusions, based on the facts which I am aware of, but there is a thought process, a thought process based on the known facts and in the absence of known facts, what I think are most likely to be the facts (see above).

 

Incidentally it is also a fact that I believe that our ex manager is the best we have had in 30 years. "Some" (I won't say "many" as it seems to offend you) people agree with me. It is however also a fact that "many" (sorry) people think otherwise (I think you are in this group). "Many" of those (sorry again) wrote our former manager off before he even started (not sure if you are in this group).

Is there anything likely to change my opinion of our ex manager's football management abilities, particularly while he was at Bristol City FC? Nope.

 

Returning to the "Dodgy Cotterill" thread, nothing was said by the OP which could logically change anybody's opinion, as no detail was offered. Nevertheless I note that "many" (hope I have that right) gleefully saw it as an opportunity to reinforce their opinions, some (you know who you are Will !!) even managed to libel a certain well known south coast based footballing character in so doing.

So your question, what do I think, it's a very wide ranging question, but to answer what I think you're getting at, I don't judge a man's character unless I have met him and I certainly wouldn't be a part of the kangaroo court that that thread was about to become.

 

What do you think?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[citywest30]

A good, clear post @NickJ.

From that I take it that you think one of two things happened in the summer, a) nothing untoward was found to be going on and so no action was taken however we lost out on said targets and that led to a very unhappy man or, b) whatever it was was dealt with internally as it was only 'misunderstandings' and not anything illegal that had happened but this led to a break down in relations and the rest as they say is history.

Either way, what bothers me most is that our club lost the momentum that Cotterill had built (and will forever be remembered by) the previous season. Whatever did go on, I just wish it hadn't as the club we all love and us fans are the ones that have been affected most by all of this. 

[Alessandro]

5 hours ago, NickJ said:

Let's get this out of the way first. I never "twist" things. I say it as I see it, straight, honest opinion.

Furthermore, I never "hide" behind other people. Happy for you to know who I am and what I think. In fact to suggest I'm "hiding" because I think "many" people found the article thought provoking is frankly pathetic.

So, who are you? Or do you prefer to hide behind your pseudonym? You do? Thought so. OK. I find that very irritating, nevertheless, I will be civil, if you will.

 

Just out of interest, do you think I wrote the article? (I didn't).

Do I agree with all of it? No.

Do I believe all of it? No.

Do I think the article describes certain aspects of the clubs plight 3 years ago which have similarities to that which it is in now? Yes. Hence "deja vu".

Your ranting diatribe refers to many areas which I have not commented on in this thread, so you are having an argument with yourself.

I won't respond to your comments above because these are comments which you have invented from your perception of what I have said in other threads. By all means find other threads and ask specific questions to specific points I have made, in those threads, I will happily answer, and if I think you have a fair point, I will say so.

 

As for "facts", my opinions are always based on fact or, in the absence of known facts, what I think are most likely to be the facts. That is all anyone can make a judgment on.

So, turning to your random question to me in the "Dodgy Cotterill" thread from earlier today (which incidentally even if I'd had time I wouldn't have distinguished that appalling thread with a comment), which I cannot respond directly to as unsurprisingly it has been removed, "what do I think"? You know, about that.

 

I'll tell you what I think, which is exactly what I have said in my various other comments on the subject.

As background, I was told at the start of this season that transfers had been put on hold as it was felt that there were some unexplained financial issues. That I was told that, is a fact.

During the summer, it is a fact that the press reported that Bristol City were offering all sorts of (for us) crazy money for a couple of strikers.

I read with interest the post by Tetbury Massive on 31 December. That it was written, and that I read it, is a fact.

Now in the absence of any other information from the club or anywhere else, it seemed to me that the post by TM was very plausible, particularly as it would explain what I had been told earlier in the season. That I thought this might be the case, is a fact.

I also thought, and said, that if I were SL and I thought I was being had over, I would act exactly as he is said to have done. I also said SL was not only entitled but indeed obliged to take this action, and in that sense I fully endorsed his action. That I said this, is a fact.

I also came to the conclusion and said that, as nothing appears to have come of the alleged financial issues, I would assume there had been a misunderstanding, but this had, IF (it is a fact that I spelt out the word "IF" in capitals) TM's article is to be believed, caused the failure of the summer transfers. Yes, I said this, and therefore although I may be wrong, it is a fact that I will believe this until if and when any evidence is offered to the contrary.

 

So, you may not like my conclusions, based on the facts which I am aware of, but there is a thought process, a thought process based on the known facts and in the absence of known facts, what I think are most likely to be the facts (see above).

 

Incidentally it is also a fact that I believe that our ex manager is the best we have had in 30 years. "Some" (I won't say "many" as it seems to offend you) people agree with me. It is however also a fact that "many" (sorry) people think otherwise (I think you are in this group). "Many" of those (sorry again) wrote our former manager off before he even started (not sure if you are in this group).

Is there anything likely to change my opinion of our ex manager's football management abilities, particularly while he was at Bristol City FC? Nope.

 

Returning to the "Dodgy Cotterill" thread, nothing was said by the OP which could logically change anybody's opinion, as no detail was offered. Nevertheless I note that "many" (hope I have that right) gleefully saw it as an opportunity to reinforce their opinions, some (you know who you are Will !!) even managed to libel a certain well known south coast based footballing character in so doing.

So your question, what do I think, it's a very wide ranging question, but to answer what I think you're getting at, I don't judge a man's character unless I have met him and I certainly wouldn't be a part of the kangaroo court that that thread was about to become.

 

What do you think?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What do I think?!?

Firstly, I think I'm going round in circles with you and wasting my time. And frankly wasting the time of everyone else here who has to read through it.

Secondly, I think you need to calm down. Referring to me hiding behind a pseudonym is absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. I've asked you once before, I'll ask again, please stop putting words in my mouth.

Thirdly, "ranting diatribe". I mean, I can't believe I even have to acknowledge that comment, but I guess you've dragged me to your level. Really?!? Ranting diatribe. Get a grip mate.

And lastly, highlighting the word 'fact', doesn't make it anymore of a fact. I think you need to reassess what the word fact means. Because the way I read it, everything you've written above (except about the transfer bid reports) refers solely to opinion.

You have been vocal about the board supposedly stuffing up our transfer dealings, an opinion based purely on rumour. You took that story and ran with it as it suited your opinion about SC ("the best we've had in 30 years").

I argued against this, as it was all based on speculation. 

And low and behold, look what happened yesterday. A thread about Cotterill which shed a very interesting new light on the situation. Still rumour, but it goes to show doesn't it?? Of course you refer to it as something that is irrelevant as no details were offered. Oh they were. And as many details as were offered regarding the boards alleged cancelling of these transfer deals.

And I'm not one bit surprised that your warped logic would see you not join the kangaroo court for SC and yet you were in your very own Kangaroo court for the board over the last few weeks.

Anyway, rant on if you wish. I'm done with you my friend.

[Red Army 87]

21 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

What do I think?!?

Firstly, I think I'm going round in circles with you and wasting my time. And frankly wasting the time of everyone else here who has to read through it.

Secondly, I think you need to calm down. Referring to me hiding behind a pseudonym is absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. I've asked you once before, I'll ask again, please stop putting words in my mouth.

Thirdly, "ranting diatribe". I mean, I can't believe I even have to acknowledge that comment, but I guess you've dragged me to your level. Really?!? Ranting diatribe. Get a grip mate.

And lastly, highlighting the word 'fact', doesn't make it anymore of a fact. I think you need to reassess what the word fact means. Because the way I read it, everything you've written above (except about the transfer bid reports) refers solely to opinion.

You have been vocal about the board supposedly stuffing up our transfer dealings, an opinion based purely on rumour. You took that story and ran with it as it suited your opinion about SC ("the best we've had in 30 years").

I argued against this, as it was all based on speculation. 

And low and behold, look what happened yesterday. A thread about Cotterill which shed a very interesting new light on the situation. Still rumour, but it goes to show doesn't it?? Of course you refer to it as something that is irrelevant as no details were offered. Oh they were. And as many details as were offered regarding the boards alleged cancelling of these transfer deals.

And I'm not one bit surprised that your warped logic would see you not join the kangaroo court for SC and yet you were in your very own Kangaroo court for the board over the last few weeks.

Anyway, rant on if you wish. I'm done with you my friend.

Out of interest, which thread was the cotterill one? Wouldn't mind a read of that.

[Alessandro]

8 minutes ago, Red Army 87 said:

Out of interest, which thread was the cotterill one? Wouldn't mind a read of that.

It was started yesterday in reference to SC's part in this summers' transfer 'dealings' and soon deleted. No doubt on legal grounds as some potentially libellous accusations were made.

[NickJ]

12 hours ago, citywest30 said:

A good, clear post @NickJ.

From that I take it that you think one of two things happened in the summer, a) nothing untoward was found to be going on and so no action was taken however we lost out on said targets and that led to a very unhappy man or, b) whatever it was was dealt with internally as it was only 'misunderstandings' and not anything illegal that had happened but this led to a break down in relations and the rest as they say is history.

 

Yes mate it appears it could have been either. Of course it could be a lot worse but I'm not going to judge a man without some sort of evidence and/or detail.

9 hours ago, Alessandro said:

What do I think?!?

Firstly, I think I'm going round in circles with you and wasting my time. And frankly wasting the time of everyone else here who has to read through it.

Secondly, I think you need to calm down. Referring to me hiding behind a pseudonym is absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. I've asked you once before, I'll ask again, please stop putting words in my mouth.

Thirdly, "ranting diatribe". I mean, I can't believe I even have to acknowledge that comment, but I guess you've dragged me to your level. Really?!? Ranting diatribe. Get a grip mate.

And lastly, highlighting the word 'fact', doesn't make it anymore of a fact. I think you need to reassess what the word fact means. Because the way I read it, everything you've written above (except about the transfer bid reports) refers solely to opinion.

You have been vocal about the board supposedly stuffing up our transfer dealings, an opinion based purely on rumour. You took that story and ran with it as it suited your opinion about SC ("the best we've had in 30 years").

I argued against this, as it was all based on speculation. 

And low and behold, look what happened yesterday. A thread about Cotterill which shed a very interesting new light on the situation. Still rumour, but it goes to show doesn't it?? Of course you refer to it as something that is irrelevant as no details were offered. Oh they were. And as many details as were offered regarding the boards alleged cancelling of these transfer deals.

And I'm not one bit surprised that your warped logic would see you not join the kangaroo court for SC and yet you were in your very own Kangaroo court for the board over the last few weeks.

Anyway, rant on if you wish. I'm done with you my friend.

I think it is quite clear that I do not entirely blame the board, "over the last few weeks", and also you mistake a kangaroo court (judging of whether somebody is guilty of a criminal act) with criticism.

Once again, if you think I have "blamed the board", I once again invite you to respond in the thread where you think I have said this.

I have a number of questions.

Which words have I put in your mouth?

Can you tell me specifically which parts of my post I have referred to as fact, is not a fact, in your opinion?

How does one person saying "SC is dodgy" thrown any light on the situation?

I know I won't receive a reply as you are done with me. Oh well.

9 hours ago, Alessandro said:

It was started yesterday in reference to SC's part in this summers' transfer 'dealings' and soon deleted. No doubt on legal grounds as some potentially libellous accusations were made.

Precisely. Libellous. Not just potentially, I would say.

Anyway, as you aren't going to reply, I will just finish by saying that on the information which most of us are aware of, the guy deserved better. If any new evidence comes up that could change things, but as things stand, it hasn't.

[twodogs]

I really cant be arsed to read all of this but had an interesting chat with a mate last night who has a mate/relative/dead mother who is and is etc etc his info was quite simple there were no rumours of misdemeanours etc it was a case of a transfer team who came up with a target list of 5 he said no and we then lost he then went. Other stuff he came out with was we only offered 6k a week to one of the strikers we tried signing during the summer.

 

[Alessandro]

19 minutes ago, NickJ said:

Yes mate it appears it could have been either. Of course it could be a lot worse but I'm not going to judge a man without some sort of evidence and/or detail.

I think it is quite clear that I do not entirely blame the board, "over the last few weeks", and also you mistake a kangaroo court (judging of whether somebody is guilty of a criminal act) with criticism.

Once again, if you think I have "blamed the board", I once again invite you to respond in the thread where you think I have said this.

I have a number of questions.

Which words have I put in your mouth?

Can you tell me specifically which parts of my post I have referred to as fact, is not a fact, in your opinion?

How does one person saying "SC is dodgy" thrown any light on the situation?

I know I won't receive a reply as you are done with me. Oh well.

Precisely. Libellous. Not just potentially, I would say.

Anyway, as you aren't going to reply, I will just finish by saying that on the information which most of us are aware of, the guy deserved better. If any new evidence comes up that could change things, but as things stand, it hasn't.

Really Nick?? I think you do live in a world of your own. I've learned two things the hard way: You can't fix stupid and you shouldn't use up your patience to fix stupid.

But I will say (I don't know why) in the thread titled something like 'do you still not  blame the board' 24th Jan, you are vocal in your support of SC and in agreement with blame aimed at the board for what went wrong in the summer transfer dealings. You then go on in a long paragraph to outline details about Grey's potential wage demands and various other 'facts' you have gleaned from hearsay. None of it is fact. 

I have clearly argued all along that there is more to this than meets the eye, and the tantalising thread about SC the other day only goes to serve that. You talk of evidence, but you have NONE. All speculation. 

And here we are, full circle again. What was I saying about 'stupid'? Sorry I'm tired of repeating myself.

[NickJ]

2 hours ago, Alessandro said:

Really Nick?? I think you do live in a world of your own. I've learned two things the hard way: You can't fix stupid and you shouldn't use up your patience to fix stupid.

But I will say (I don't know why) in the thread titled something like 'do you still not  blame the board' 24th Jan, you are vocal in your support of SC and in agreement with blame aimed at the board for what went wrong in the summer transfer dealings. You then go on in a long paragraph to outline details about Grey's potential wage demands and various other 'facts' you have gleaned from hearsay. None of it is fact. 

I have clearly argued all along that there is more to this than meets the eye, and the tantalising thread about SC the other day only goes to serve that. You talk of evidence, but you have NONE. All speculation. 

And here we are, full circle again. What was I saying about 'stupid'? Sorry I'm tired of repeating myself.

Excuse me, thought you were "done" with me. Will just check....

13 hours ago, Alessandro said:

Anyway, rant on if you wish. I'm done with you my friend.

....Yep. That's what you said. But I knew that you would of course, that's why I said you wouldn't reply, because I knew you would and I am smarter than you.

So are you a liar or is there a grey area in what you say.

How ironic.

And you will be back for more.

With veiled insults and with more references to things I am supposed to have said because you are too lazy or too stupid (to throw that back at you) to refer directly to them.

I think you have an agenda, as in, you have a reason to "protect" the board from perceived criticism.

I know you don't like answering direct questions, but here is just one more and I REALLY want to know the answer to this one.

How old are you, and approximately how many times did you watch City play, before about 3 years ago?

[Alessandro]

1 hour ago, NickJ said:

Excuse me, thought you were "done" with me. Will just check....

 

....Yep. That's what you said. But I knew that you would of course, that's why I said you wouldn't reply, because I knew you would and I am smarter than you.

So are you a liar or is there a grey area in what you say.

How ironic.

And you will be back for more.

With veiled insults and with more references to things I am supposed to have said because you are too lazy or too stupid (to throw that back at you) to refer directly to them.

I think you have an agenda, as in, you have a reason to "protect" the board from perceived criticism.

I know you don't like answering direct questions, but here is just one more and I REALLY want to know the answer to this one.

How old are you, and approximately how many times did you watch City play, before about 3 years ago?

What an interesting post Nick.

The mere fact that you've had to resort to attempt a frankly pathetic personal attack shows you've lost. Because you cannot debate the matter at hand, so you want to deflect. You've been defensive for the majority of the time I've been debating this with you, I knew it wouldn't be long till you lashed out. And you did. But I'm not offended in the slightest, amused at best.

The fact that you brought up age shows a distinct lack of maturity yourself. The fact that you felt the need to state 'I am smarter than you' shows an ignorance. An adult wouldn't need to bring up age, unless they're very insecure. Are you insecure Nick? Only child maybe? Or did you have an older brother who always put you down??

And even more pathetic is your attempt to somehow question my support of BCFC. As if somehow people should justify themselves to you, or anybody for that matter. As if you are some beacon of support. That arrogance shows your true colours. What, do you want to compare years as a season ticket holder? Pathetic Nick. 

I'm thinking student maybe. But frankly I don't give a damn.

Oh but actually, if you're stupid enough to forget your opinions and posts from only a few days ago and you need me to copy and paste them for you, maybe you've lost your marbles.

[twodogs]

Gents why not take it to PM rather than contesting d..k size on here?

[Alessandro]

14 minutes ago, twodogs said:

Gents why not take it to PM rather than contesting d..k size on here?

You're right, this has gone on long enough, sorry everyone for this thread. It's frankly embarrassing. 

[TETBURY MASSIVE]

13 minutes ago, twodogs said:

Gents why not take it to PM rather than contesting d..k size on here?

That's boring..... 

[twodogs]

5 minutes ago, TETBURY MASSIVE said:

That's boring..... 

not really trust me