Mr Lansdown's Comments In The Ep Re. Cotts

[Antman]

We didn't really need to sell Cotterill, yes we have debt but we're in no immediate danger whatsoever.

We sold him because it was more money than he's worth and he wanted to go to a bigger club, EXACTLY the same reasons Tottenham sold Carrick.

We will likely spend some but not all of the money, as will Tottenham.

Can't see what's in any way disingenuous about that, I think pretending we had any other choice once £2m from a bigger club at a higher level was on the table is completely naive.

I'm not arguing about whether the sale for £2M was worth it - I thought that would have been clear.

to say we're in no immediate danger 'whatsoever' is the somewhat naive perspective in my mind. as any loss making scenario only undermines the club in the long term. Are you happy with a financial strategy that demands our better players be sold to balance the books on an ongoing basis? rather than one that sees a sale like this as a strategic advantage which will allow us to substantially re-invest and forward plan, building around other bright talent that we can better persuade to stay.

If you claim we're ok enough that this sale was only to keep Dave Cotterill happy then that is patent nonsense.

I suppose the easiest way to judge this is to wait and see exactly how much this board gives the manager to work with.

we make losses because the club is ambitious and is striving to get out of this division - were that not the case we could spend less on wages and commit to staying where we are. While on the subject every time the club tries to makea little more money to fund the playing side as much as possible they get criticised - but then for some of you nothing but the Premiership in two years would be enough........

Fair enough point of view - but then they've not made a terribly good job of it have they?

I don't expect premiership status in 2 years, jeez I've followed this lot long enough to know that!

When you scrutinise the decisions made at board level over the last decade, they are littered with fundamental mistakes that have been repeated ad nauseaum, costing us millions of pounds.

Are you arguing that an ambitious striving club cannot acheive promotion and progress without sustaining the losses we do at present? I can't agree.

We should be able to utilise the fund acheived through DC's sale as fully as possible for signings over a period of time, my gut feeling tells me it will be hoovered up into the black hole that has swallowed all our other recent transfer funds (Lita - Miller - Coles - Hill - Goldbourne etc)

[Nibor]

I'm not arguing about whether the sale for £2M was worth it - I thought that would have been clear.

to say we're in no immediate danger 'whatsoever' is the somewhat naive perspective in my mind. as any loss making scenario only undermines the club in the long term.

I have the impression that whilst we have overspent in the past we are not doing so now and significant cost reductions have been made since. We'll see when the accounts are out.

Are you happy with a financial strategy that demands our better players be sold to balance the books on an ongoing basis? rather than one that sees a sale like this as a strategic advantage which will allow us to substantially re-invest and forward plan, building around other bright talent that we can better persuade to stay.

I believe we already have the latter. I wouldn't claim we're implementing it well though.

If you claim we're ok enough that this sale was only to keep Dave Cotterill happy then that is patent nonsense.

I've never claimed this. There were two reasons we sold. It was much more money than he was worth and he wanted to go. No club keeps a player under those circumstances.

I suppose the easiest way to judge this is to wait and see exactly how much this board gives the manager to work with.

Kind of. Gj may choose not to spend money, he seems thrifty to me. Doesn't mean it isn't available.

The board making large amounts of money available to spend on players transfer fees and wages is, after all where the debt came from in the first place.

[surreyred]

A short time ago on Radio Five Live West Ham were described as a feeder club for Chelsea, Arsenal and Man utd.

If a club in the top half of the Premiership are concered a selling club, and feel they must let players go if they want to, what hope do we have of retaining our most talented players when clubs above us come a calling with mega bucks offers for them.

The reality of modern football is that apart from Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool and Man Utd every club in the country is a selling club. (An argument can also be made that, after the COLE sarga, Arsenal are also a selling club).

Anyone who thinks that 2 million for an 18 year old who had only just broken into the first team, and whose performances were at best hot and cold, really do need to wake up and smell the coffee.

The club does not run on fresh air. Large amounts of money are needed for the place just the tick over.

Every income steam has to be maximised, premier seating being a prime example of the club effectivley getting more money for the same seat, exactley as train and airline companies do with first class seating.

In an ideal world we would all go to a game and pay the same, be able to stand and watch the football, and keep all the players we develop. However this is not not 1940 and everyone does not wear cloth caps.

Football to a fair extent has become gentrified, and different people want different things from the match day experience, and the club has to cater for this the stay in business.

Anyone who remembers nearly loosing the club in the 80's most know that when 2 million comes a calling it cannot be turned down.

[maidenheadred]

I can't believe what I have just read. He is saying that we should be proud of the fact that 3 of our ex-academy produced players are now playing in the Premiership. Is he taking the piss or what ?

Proud, no Steve, extremely disappointed that your small time Chairmanship has allowed this to happen one way or another. This club should be aiming to get 11 of it's players playing in the top league but we never will whilst you remain in control. Take the money and run - you need it to finance the debts caused by all the other costly mistakes you have made over the last 4 or 5 years. It's working quite nicely though isn't it because the more mistakes you make the more of the ground you own....

You have no intention of spending any of the £2m anyway. You knew Cotts was leaving early on Wednesday morning and yet did nothing to fill the void by Thursday midnight. Bad joke.

As was sung at the ref at half time today - 'You don't know what you're doing'........You clearly do not have a clue what it takes to build a successful football club.

firstly - selling players to the premiership. Have made the argument elsewhere to SimplyRed - but to believe we can do anything about an 18 year old being offered anything up to £450k a year and the chance to play against Man U, and increase international chances is just deluded. It's a fact of football life - weird that after decades of seeing lower division clubs sell players to higher division clubs that more fans havent sussed this. oh, and if we do stop them going - they stop playing. So we lose out twice (on the field, and on the balance sheet).

secondly - it is a good thing we are sending players to the premiership. It shows we're producing talent - and it's naive to think the club won't benefit from that talent. Both on the pitch (Leroy scored enough goals to get us up; Cotts had a good season last year; other future young stars like Skuse and even Brown are doing well), and through the money it releases for new signings. We do spend money on new players and new wages - we do every year. Its not lack of investment in the playing staff that lets us down every year.

thirdly - i actually *want* a team of players desparate to play in the premiership. i want the majority of the team to be out there putting themselves in the shop window desparately trying to improve their own careers - i don't want the majority of the first team playing at 70% safe in the knowledge they are earning more at Bristol City than they could at any other place in the world (like so many have done in the past). I also want those same players to reject a move to a championship club because they like playing for City, like the setup, and think they can be in the championship in a year - we seemed to have that a while back, not so sure now.

[LSR]

I can't believe what I have just read. He is saying that we should be proud of the fact that 3 of our ex-academy produced players are now playing in the Premiership. Is he taking the piss or what ?

Proud, no Steve, extremely disappointed that your small time Chairmanship has allowed this to happen one way or another. This club should be aiming to get 11 of it's players playing in the top league but we never will whilst you remain in control. Take the money and run - you need it to finance the debts caused by all the other costly mistakes you have made over the last 4 or 5 years. It's working quite nicely though isn't it because the more mistakes you make the more of the ground you own....

You have no intention of spending any of the £2m anyway. You knew Cotts was leaving early on Wednesday morning and yet did nothing to fill the void by Thursday midnight. Bad joke.

As was sung at the ref at half time today - 'You don't know what you're doing'........You clearly do not have a clue what it takes to build a successful football club.

perhaps you should run bcfc..and make sure you ask the bank manager to release your millions before hand.

[maidenheadred]

Kind of. Gj may choose not to spend money, he seems thrifty to me. Doesn't mean it isn't available.

The board making large amounts of money available to spend on players transfer fees and wages is, after all where the debt came from in the first place.

very true re: GJ. He doesnt strike me as a 'kid in a sweetshop' kind of manager who will go out and empty his kitty for the sake of it - i believe his talk on getting the 'right' players with the right attitude (i.e. will give their all, which doesnt seem much to ask..!), and think this will both reduce the pool of players available to him, and potentially disuade him from spending big money on say, and older lower division player who might cost a fair bit, but might consider playing for city as the peak of their career. evidence for this being the players he has got rid of, plus that stockport striker he turned away for not showing enough enthusiasm. Whatever your opinions on this, it can't harm to try; two of the arguably most damaging periods in the last ten years were the £3.5m spent by Ward when we went up - which destroyed the dressing room - and the £000s spent by Pullis for reasons only known to his tiny mind.

so, i think there's a good chance we wont see much of this spent. and it's banked for the championship season. doesnt mean the chairman isnt ready to back him when ready though..

[SimplyRed]

What's their age got to do with it?

All of those players had multi year contracts outstanding and all went from big clubs to very big clubs when a lot of money was offered.

That proves that even clubs in the Premiership HAVE to sell players when one of the top four comes in with lots of money, and hence they are as much selling clubs as we are.

Their age has everything to do with it. You stated that every club apart from the top four are selling clubs. My challenge to you was to name clubs who have sold young (teenage, if you like) starlets with multiple years remaining on their contracts. Apart from Rooney, I note you haven't yet done that.

[SimplyRed]

firstly - selling players to the premiership. Have made the argument elsewhere to SimplyRed - but to believe we can do anything about an 18 year old being offered anything up to £450k a year and the chance to play against Man U, and increase international chances is just deluded. It's a fact of football life - weird that after decades of seeing lower division clubs sell players to higher division clubs that more fans havent sussed this. oh, and if we do stop them going - they stop playing. So we lose out twice (on the field, and on the balance sheet).

I give up. You are still missing the point.

My issue was not that we couldn't do anything about it, but that the club appears to have not even attempted to. One minute he was our player under a long contract then Wigan come waving £2m under Lansdown's nose and he grabs it with both hands.

Why bother tying down players on long contracts if they can just say 'I don't want to play for you any more' and go somewhere else?

They may as well just become employees and allow players to move around as they wish. If a player signs a legally binding contract, why shouldn't he be held to it and, if necessary, sued if he breaches the terms of that contract? What makes them think they're above the law?

I just don't understand what a hold Lansdown has over fans. We've struggled on both financial and football fronts since he's been running the club and he's made fundamental changes to the club structure that can only be described as 'dubious' at best.

[maidenheadred]

I give up. You are still missing the point.

My issue was not that we couldn't do anything about it, but that the club appears to have not even attempted to. One minute he was our player under a long contract then Wigan come waving £2m under Lansdown's nose and he grabs it with both hands.

Why bother tying down players on long contracts if they can just say 'I don't want to play for you any more' and go somewhere else?

They may as well just become employees and allow players to move around as they wish. If a player signs a legally binding contract, why shouldn't he be held to it and, if necessary, sued if he breaches the terms of that contract? What makes them think they're above the law?

I just don't understand what a hold Lansdown has over fans. We've struggled on both financial and football fronts since he's been running the club and he's made fundamental changes to the club structure that can only be described as 'dubious' at best.

and you're absolutely, completely, and entirely missing mine.

in earlier posts you acuse me of 'speculative poppycock' - but the cruxt of your argument is that the "club did not appear to even attempt to make to him stay". How on earth do you know that? The only possible evidence you could be using to back this up is the fact he left. Whereas i'm pointing out the factors such as potentially once in a lifetime financial opportunity, chance to play in the premiership and improved international chances could also have been a factor. But, neither of us know exactly what conversations took place - so all we'll ever be doing is speculating. So lets let this one drop - you can continue to think we could/should have stopped him, i'll continue to think that would never have happened. becausehewouldquadruplehisbloodymoney!

and your second point, i wholeheartedly agree with - but "that's football". i can't think of too many examples of clubs taking a stand against a want-away player - for all Chelsea's talk, they still let Gallas go in the end. If a player wants to leave and there's a good offer there then he will leave. Fact of football life - not Bristol City's fault. and away from all that, surely in this case letting him go was the the right choice 'morally' as well! The kid had a potentially once in a lifetime opportunity to play in the premiership and secure his financial future.... force him against his will to turn that down and play for a league one side with three players in prison and supporters who in some cases don't rate you anyway? what would that do for the moral of the other ambitious players who want to play in the top flight?

and SL doesnt have a 'hold' on me - but i personally don't buy into the knee-jerk reactionary thing of blaming the man at the top if my football team don't win enough football games. There are a whole host of reasons, individuals, decisions (some of the them SL's) and bad luck that have caused our plight - have put this to NickJ at length elsewhere, but as long as i fundementally agree with decisions at the time they are made, and as long as i don't see an alternative - then i will back SL, and argue at length on this forum when i see people have a pop letting frustration replace reason.

[bh_red]

firstly - selling players to the premiership. Have made the argument elsewhere to SimplyRed - but to believe we can do anything about an 18 year old being offered anything up to £450k a year and the chance to play against Man U, and increase international chances is just deluded. It's a fact of football life - weird that after decades of seeing lower division clubs sell players to higher division clubs that more fans havent sussed this. oh, and if we do stop them going - they stop playing. So we lose out twice (on the field, and on the balance sheet).

secondly - it is a good thing we are sending players to the premiership. It shows we're producing talent - and it's naive to think the club won't benefit from that talent. Both on the pitch (Leroy scored enough goals to get us up; Cotts had a good season last year; other future young stars like Skuse and even Brown are doing well), and through the money it releases for new signings. We do spend money on new players and new wages - we do every year. Its not lack of investment in the playing staff that lets us down every year.

thirdly - i actually *want* a team of players desparate to play in the premiership. i want the majority of the team to be out there putting themselves in the shop window desparately trying to improve their own careers - i don't want the majority of the first team playing at 70% safe in the knowledge they are earning more at Bristol City than they could at any other place in the world (like so many have done in the past). I also want those same players to reject a move to a championship club because they like playing for City, like the setup, and think they can be in the championship in a year - we seemed to have that a while back, not so sure now.

find it scary that people can't understand why he left?

1) couple of weeks ago due to his form he was dropped by the welsh squad down to the u21's, he got his move, got pushed back to the full squad, played last night against Cech Rep and is facing Brazil midweek, otherwise would have been tranmere away

2)this time last year prior to his new contract, he was rumoured to be on £80per week, he is now rumoured to be on 10k per week!

if he hadn't been given the chance to talk to either club he would have gone mad! and that would have been counter-productive to team spirit at the club and in the team!

plus finally last season Spurs signed Aaron Lennon for £1m from Leeds in the championship

we got £2m for a player who is very much hit or miss in league 1! and since he broke into the 1st team hasn't really improved that much, still made the same basic mistakes

Lansdown said to him, he had permission to talk to the clubs as it was a good deal for the club, but if he wanted to stay he was more than welcome! what else could he say!

Selling him is best for the club all round,

[SE23Red]

I give up. You are still missing the point.

My issue was not that we couldn't do anything about it, but that the club appears to have not even attempted to. One minute he was our player under a long contract then Wigan come waving £2m under Lansdown's nose and he grabs it with both hands.

Why bother tying down players on long contracts if they can just say 'I don't want to play for you any more' and go somewhere else?

But isn't this all off at a tangent from what actually happened, which is we were offered more than a good price for the player and accepted it? Are you seriously suggesting that had you been in SL's shoes you would have turned down the £2m offer?

[Nibor]

Their age has everything to do with it. You stated that every club apart from the top four are selling clubs. My challenge to you was to name clubs who have sold young (teenage, if you like) starlets with multiple years remaining on their contracts. Apart from Rooney, I note you haven't yet done that.

Selling club doesn't mean selling just teenagers it means they sell when a larger offer comes in from a bigger club and the player wants to go, at least to me. And that's certainly what I meant when I said every club outside the top four is one.

However since you're stuck on young players, note that Alonso was just 22 when he went to Liverpool, Cristiano Ronaldo was 18 when he went to Man U, Defoe was 21 when he went to Tottenham... There are more out there. The big four are at the top of the food chain and can feed on anyone. They normally tend to buy players from abroad under 21, and then buy UK players from 23-24 only when they're already established in the top flight. The next 8 or so clubs tend to feed off the Championship, and the bottom end of the Prem and top of the Championship feeds on us.

Every single club outside the top four sells players when they're offered more than the player is worth and the player wants to go. Even the top four have to when Real come calling. Just the same as we did with Cotterill - in that respect age is irrelevant. If we're a selling club so are they.

How about you name some examples of a club at a higher level of football making an offer for a player vastly exceeding his value, the player wanting to go and being SUCCESSFULLY kept against his wishes by his current club? (And not just refused asking for more money).

[Nibor]

Why bother tying down players on long contracts if they can just say 'I don't want to play for you any more' and go somewhere else?

So that we get £2m and not £100k from a tribunal.

They may as well just become employees and allow players to move around as they wish. If a player signs a legally binding contract, why shouldn't he be held to it and, if necessary, sued if he breaches the terms of that contract? What makes them think they're above the law?

They're not, the employment contractual situation in law is such that if a player breaks his employment contract and refuses to play the club can tear it up. They can try and seek recompense (which they likely won't get), but they cannot force a player to play. The retention of a player's registration thus preventing him from playing for another club is illegal and that is why the clubs aren't anxious to test the matter in court - they all remember Bosman. Freedom to work is an inalienable right, you cannot sign it away.

The situation described above benefits noone, least of all the clubs, so they face up to reality and get the best price they can. I think more fans should do this!

I just don't understand what a hold Lansdown has over fans. We've struggled on both financial and football fronts since he's been running the club and he's made fundamental changes to the club structure that can only be described as 'dubious' at best.

Having been a happy clappy Lansdown fan up until the last 18 months or so I'm becoming increasingly dubious and alarmed at the direction he's taking the club in. I don't doubt the man's motives but I feel he takes core supporters for granted and is taking the club down a sanitized PC plastic road I don't want to see.

The problem, as ever, is finding someone with enough dosh to get rid of him.

[cidercity]

So would you rather have £2 million or promotion? It may come to that. Who do we have with Cotterill's pace and promise? Players that can make a difference between gaining promotion and being also-rans?

Jennison Williams.