|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 14:07:58 GMT
Isn't that sort of the point though? Saying that after the fact you've held your hands up you were wrong while at the same time just directing the whinging elsewhere to, probably later on, "hold your hands up" about that is just exactly AF's point. The point I’m making is that some of us aren’t being allowed to learn the lesson of complaining when we are winning. The serial compIainers would stop complaining I’m sure if we started winning games with long ball football tomorrow. I would *not* complain now in a heartbeat if we were winning but we aren’t winning and are nailed on for relegation, so as I said- if you can’t complain now then when is it acceptable to complain? But you were complaining under GC when we were winning ...
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 14:06:35 GMT
As I said on another thread - we're even at the point where the radio Bristol commentators should be sacked according to some. Internally we've gone through everyone from the President who pays for us to exist all the way down to the match day announcer and a female physio ... all things that are "embarrassing" according to the timbre of many on this forum. 8 wins in 43 under two managers. That isn’t just a bit of minor turbulence, that is evidence of a deep rooted disease at the heart of the club. Any professional organisation would have had a serious review after Garner left. But not us, we promote the head of recruitment and get straight on the blower to a league one failure of a manager. So rather than talking about blaming everyone isn’t it easier to the ask who escapes blame for falling from 3rd to the relegation zone with 8 wins in 43? Who hired the managers? Who sourced the players over three appalling windows? Who devised the tactics? Who coached the players? Who failed to score the goals? Who failed to stop the goals? There is culpability running through the whole operation because there are barely any football success stories or winners amongst that lot. And we as fans seem scared of winners too, look how many lose their **** when Cotterill is mentioned. The thought of who these clowns will hire next brings me out in a cold sweat, most likely because it will be Holloway as he will be yet another easy and lazy appointment with the added bonus that his professional Bristolian act will win the fans over and distract them from how badly this club is being run. I think you and I have gone round and round about this general point so won't repeat at length my rebuttals but: 1. It's massively overstating the point to call Cotterill a winner - one promotion out of this league to his name - big whoop. 2. New training ground and money spent on players including JCH. I don't think the problem is as endemic as you make it sound. Two bad appointments I don't think can be said to be deep rooted disease at the heart of the club.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 13:36:21 GMT
If you go back and read, for example, the Southend (H) thread from Dec 2019, and that's just the first one I looked at, I'm sure there are plenty more, it's just wall to wall whining. The idea (and I'm not saying you are doing this, but it's part of the answer to your question) that that was some sort of halcyon era where we all agreed on the direction we were heading and we were all buying into and enjoying the football (and thus astounding that we changed direction), and people were turning up to watch, is way off. And, the usual suspects who did very little apart from whine at how things were going, then, are, extraordinarily, or not, if you think about it, many of the people who are whining through this. And they're the same ones who whine through everything. So when you say the club is its own worst enemy, it's as true to say the fans are their own worst enemy, also. I genuinely think it would be helpful if we, as a fanbase, generally, didn't act like a 6 year old kid having a tantrum constantly. It would at least bring down the background noise a tad, and perhaps be slightly less distracting. I know that's a naive thing to ask of football fans, but there you go. So when you say it's genuinely astounding that a club should choose that moment to try to change its identity, it's also genuinely astounding that the fanbase, generally, were not particularly interested in that direction, which you imply was clearly appreciated and ideal. Also, if you buy into the idea that GC's team were not going to go up, which is a reasonable enough view, then you have a reasonable judgement call as to the future of the club. And, remember, without getting into all the funding conspiracy theories, which don't make any sense to my mind, GC chose to leave, more or less out of the blue). It didn;t work, of course, but it's easy to find things astounding with the benefit of hindsight. It's astounding (with the benefit of hindsight), for example, that so many of the whiners on here were critical of us signing JCH. And yet, all the people who whined about that are just continuing whining about everything (including selling him, you couldn't make it up), without thinking for a moment, look how wrong I was, maybe I should just shut up for five seconds. And if PT keeps us up, and moves us forward next season, they will find something else to whine about, and forget their previous whining in their enthusiasm to whine about the next thing. So, essentially, the noise around GC's tenure was mostly negative, and people weren't flocking to see us, so you can understand, I would think, why the board might think that a change of direction was called for. The fact we got it wrong is not massively astounding, imo. Also, I think the idea that we didn't bother to try to recruit a target man is factually wrong. (Not ITK, though). Some fair points but you haven’t given people any credit for realising their mistakes. I’m sure I’m not the only one who has held their hands up and admitted they got it wrong with criticism of GC’s football. I don’t mind long ball football in and of itself but I don’t think it’s the corner stone to build a successful side on in the long term as at championship level you will probably get found out. So yes I complained about the direction of the club. However I started to change my opinion when we looked like becoming a promotion contender, culminating in the win against Ipswich when I was fully on board and ready to sacrifice any high minded ideals about style of football for the prospect of finally having a league derby the following season. I recall browsing otib and the Sh1!heads were resigned to Coughlan taking us up, it was brilliant. In fact I think it was on there post Ipswich that I had seen that Coughlan had left! We all know what happened next.... So I don’t think I’m alone, as no doubt one of the serial whingers you refer to, who has since learnt the lesson of “careful what you wish for” especially with the quality of candidate who replaced GC. The whiners may have got Coughlan wrong but we’ve been right literally every time since because the administration of the club since then has been as chaotic as a jumble sale. That’s probably being unkind to jumble sales. no leadership, no direction, no quality, no wins. If people aren’t allowed to whine now then god knows when they can. It’s not like the custodians deserve much better when they replace a useless clown with a rushed appointment of a guy with a dusty phone who’s best years in the game are long behind him. I’ll make the bold prediction now that Bristol Rovers ended Garner’s managerial career and will end Tisdale’s too. 8 wins between them in 43 games!!!! It hurts my eyes to read that Isn't that sort of the point though? Saying that after the fact you've held your hands up you were wrong while at the same time just directing the whinging elsewhere to, probably later on, "hold your hands up" about that is just exactly AF's point.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 13:12:54 GMT
I’ve said before that this period reminds me of the early 2010s. No direction at all. I totally agree with you mate , it’s quite literally the same thing happening again. GC being Penney, Tisdale is Buckle - who will be McGhee?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 12:08:27 GMT
Cant do any worse then getting mehew back and starting him and walker. They can have Westbrookes unused teamwear. Goodness do you think David Mehew and Richard Walker would be able to stay fit for the rest of the season at their age?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 11:57:03 GMT
It is genuinely astounding that a club in our league position post-Ipswich decided that that was the right moment to completely change the identity of the club from an honest group of battlers, with one or two stars, who punched above their weight to some kind of wannabe post-Premier League 2 finishing school. Enter GarnerBall. We unceremoniously told all the senior players to sling their hooks and happily carved up an entire squad. All of this from a position of strength back in 2019. I know some supporters felt we were in a false position under Coughlan and, to some extent we were, but the facts are that over the twelve months of his tenure his results placed us second in the table. Since the club decided post-Graham to reinvent ourselves under Garner as a stepping stone for younger talent we've won 8 league games in 43. It has been an absolute catastrophe. And look at where we are now. After turning our backs on the unfashionable approach, we're now back to trying to grind out results through regular league one long-ball football, but with a bunch of players recruited for an entirely different project. Look at the absolute state of us now. We didn't even bother to recruit a target man because we were more concerned with finding a youngster more suited to the tiki-taka stuff around the box. We have ZERO presence in either penalty box, our attacking players flatter to deceive, and our entire midfield is indistinguishable from one another. This club is its own worst enemy at times. How can Wael get so much right off the pitch but be so clueless with overseeing the playing side of things? If you go back and read, for example, the Southend (H) thread from Dec 2019, and that's just the first one I looked at, I'm sure there are plenty more, it's just wall to wall whining. The idea (and I'm not saying you are doing this, but it's part of the answer to your question) that that was some sort of halcyon era where we all agreed on the direction we were heading and we were all buying into and enjoying the football (and thus astounding that we changed direction), and people were turning up to watch, is way off. And, the usual suspects who did very little apart from whine at how things were going, then, are, extraordinarily, or not, if you think about it, many of the people who are whining through this. And they're the same ones who whine through everything. So when you say the club is its own worst enemy, it's as true to say the fans are their own worst enemy, also. I genuinely think it would be helpful if we, as a fanbase, generally, didn't act like a 6 year old kid having a tantrum constantly. It would at least bring down the background noise a tad, and perhaps be slightly less distracting. I know that's a naive thing to ask of football fans, but there you go. So when you say it's genuinely astounding that a club should choose that moment to try to change its identity, it's also genuinely astounding that the fanbase, generally, were not particularly interested in that direction, which you imply was clearly appreciated and ideal. Also, if you buy into the idea that GC's team were not going to go up, which is a reasonable enough view, then you have a reasonable judgement call as to the future of the club. And, remember, without getting into all the funding conspiracy theories, which don't make any sense to my mind, GC chose to leave, more or less out of the blue). It didn;t work, of course, but it's easy to find things astounding with the benefit of hindsight. It's astounding (with the benefit of hindsight), for example, that so many of the whiners on here were critical of us signing JCH. And yet, all the people who whined about that are just continuing whining about everything (including selling him, you couldn't make it up), without thinking for a moment, look how wrong I was, maybe I should just shut up for five seconds. And if PT keeps us up, and moves us forward next season, they will find something else to whine about, and forget their previous whining in their enthusiasm to whine about the next thing. So, essentially, the noise around GC's tenure was mostly negative, and people weren't flocking to see us, so you can understand, I would think, why the board might think that a change of direction was called for. The fact we got it wrong is not massively astounding, imo. Also, I think the idea that we didn't bother to try to recruit a target man is factually wrong. (Not ITK, though). As I said on another thread - we're even at the point where the radio Bristol commentators should be sacked according to some. Internally we've gone through everyone from the President who pays for us to exist all the way down to the match day announcer and a female physio ... all things that are "embarrassing" according to the timbre of many on this forum.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 10, 2021 11:50:07 GMT
I know we all think we can manage a pro football team,me included,so I always follow closely team selection,substitutions,tactics etc.I have always thought that Mr.Grimsdale was extremely fortunate to have been a pro manager for so long.He seems to be in the wrong game completely,and would be much more suited to cricket.He could start off running a village cricket team and take it from there. Whilst at Exeter he was prone to wearing a cravat as part of his touch line attire.When asked about it by the Press,he replied that when the players looked over to him on the touch line,it gave them confidence,and already they were 1:0 up.You can research this if you don’t believe me,it’s true.!This could be our only hope for the rest of the season. Yet another thing that made me certain this guy should have been swerved like a crate of watermelons in a TV car chase - going on about how the players would look at how expensive his jacket was and think "We're one nil up already" - what the hell were we thinking going anywhere near this guy??? If you heard someone in every day life say something like that you'd probably feel very sorry for them or a bit wary of them. What you wouldn't do is think "This is the guy I want to take charge of and be the public face of my business". Seriously!
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 21:46:08 GMT
Tisdale said it three times in his interview ... Also saying he thought the teams performance tonight was fabulous. Magician ...? You’re not a football manager you absolutely deluded imposter. This is a sad time to be a Rovers Fan ... Wow! ! The bloke is a Dam narcissistic fantasist. The way he talked about not letting Exeter renegotiate his contract with such glee and bragged about "predicting" they would go down that season before a ball was kicked I knew the bloke was a Dam prick and I wasn't wrong. Paul Buckle's mentor- says it all.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 21:40:17 GMT
Saturday is judgement day for Tisdale. As for our strikers they couldn't even score if there was no goalkeeper to beat. Dreadful. If Tisdale goes the backroom staff should be sent packing too as they are part of the problem. Hmmm, I think Tisdale has been suitably adjudged and adjudged to be unsuitable.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 15:06:53 GMT
If we play with the right attitude I think we will beat this lot. I second that! Tonight is going to be the start of a six game unbeaten run commencing with an Ehmer 93rd minute 1-0 winner. You might want to change your username from Squiffy to "Completely and Utterly Trollied".
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 12:18:42 GMT
I don't really understand why you're being quite so confrontational about any of this. We can just discuss things without bringing any personal conflict into. I'm happy to continue chatting on that basis if you would like to. My questions were: I am not making an issue out of anything I was merely answering Oldmarkets question!!! Look back but if you think I have an agenda you have issues. PM me if you wish I’m not being anyone’s scapegoat on here. Very clever by the way. I am being defensive, you and Gashead81 are being confrontational towards my post seeing something which isn’t there. OK.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 12:17:39 GMT
That's slightly confusing two separate things: 1. There is, apparently, a covenant in relation to Rovers needing a new home before the old one can be sold - this seems to be linked to the club; and 2. There is certainly a covenant on the land that says it is to be available for use as a sports facility (The Rec in Bath is the same). The fact Bristol Rovers would have been moving to UWE would have nothing to do with this particular covenant. I'm fairly sure the memorial garden idea was to get around this issue along with that of the gates being considered a war memorial. Does anybody know for certain that there is such a covenant in place, or has this grown from the Sainsbury's pp requiring a new ground to be built before they could begin developing the Mem? Not trying to be controversial, but wondering if this is something which has become part of Rovers' folklore fairly recently, with no concrete proof. Indeed. I don't know. From a legal perspective I'm not sure how such a covenant could bind a purchaser of land (i.e Wael) whereas I do understand how a purchaser can be bound by a covenant which restricts the use of the land to a sports ground. So I'm certainly sceptical of it. It seems to me it would be a condition of buying the club rather than anything which could be registered as a restriction at the land registry. That said - I don't know for certain either way.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 12:03:21 GMT
I don't think I've got touchy - I think I've asked some pretty sensible questions which you don't want to answer. O, here we go then. What questions don’t I want to answer? You are something else. I’m bored so I will play🤡 I don't really understand why you're being quite so confrontational about any of this. We can just discuss things without bringing any personal conflict into. I'm happy to continue chatting on that basis if you would like to. My questions were: Why are you making an issue of this now when we have an owner who is actively purchasing and developing assets for the club - the Quarters training ground? Why would someone who is buying assets for a football club be inclined to sell the home of that football club?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 11:53:49 GMT
If Nick Higgs wanted to sell the mem he could have sold the mem. If Geoff Dunford wanted to sell the mem he could've sold the mem. If the Glazers want to sell Old Trafford they can. If King Power want to sell the King Power stadium they can. Why are you making an issue of this now when we have an owner who is actively purchasing and developing assets for the club - the Quarters training ground? Ignore the writing off of the debt if you want but why would someone who is buying assets for a football club be inclined to sell the home of that football club? 😂 I make no apologies for hitting a nerve not only with you but with others who have got touchy for me giving a simple answer to Oldmarket who basically said he didn’t understand the..... forget it as I bow to your superiority. I don't think I've got touchy - I think I've asked some pretty sensible questions which you don't want to answer.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 11:51:17 GMT
Most clubs, as we do, have the ground held by a separate company to protect it in the event that the main club goes bust (as happens with alarming frequency with football clubs). As to the wider point about football grounds being protected for the community- there is some degree of protection for some grounds. The mem has a covenant that it be kept as a sporting facility - things like that are not impossible to overcome, as we know because we were going to sell to Sainsbury's - but that's why the plans had to include the memorial garden. That particular covenant was by virtue of the land being given by the original owner not because of a legal protection enacted by parliament as I think you're suggesting. Mainly I suppose football clubs are private businesses that require people to plough money into them and putting too many restrictions on how those businesses are run would discourage people from owning them. I think P.P was given because a proposed new ground was being built as part of the deal. Let's hope the Labour or Conservative group at BCC never allows ever a ground to be ' sold off' . I think there will be widespread collaboration from a range of grounds to stop this . Basically if P.P is not granted then it's not worth much. I can't ever see a historical venue going unless a replacement was agreed. That's slightly confusing two separate things: 1. There is, apparently, a covenant in relation to Rovers needing a new home before the old one can be sold - this seems to be linked to the club; and 2. There is certainly a covenant on the land that says it is to be available for use as a sports facility (The Rec in Bath is the same). The fact Bristol Rovers would have been moving to UWE would have nothing to do with this particular covenant. I'm fairly sure the memorial garden idea was to get around this issue along with that of the gates being considered a war memorial.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 11:24:32 GMT
If there has been NO change in the legal status of the Mem and this can be confirmed. Then I agree it matters Not who runs our club . We can't say Wael is more likely to sell than Higgs and co. However: it is worrying for clubs that a historical venue can be sold off if the owners wanted there money back at some point and that goes for every team. Which begs a fair questions : Why aren't grounds safeguarded or Protected in legal law for community use ? Particularly if owners have NO intention of readdressing their expenditure by selling grounds . Most clubs, as we do, have the ground held by a separate company to protect it in the event that the main club goes bust (as happens with alarming frequency with football clubs). As to the wider point about football grounds being protected for the community- there is some degree of protection for some grounds. The mem has a covenant that it be kept as a sporting facility - things like that are not impossible to overcome, as we know because we were going to sell to Sainsbury's - but that's why the plans had to include the memorial garden. That particular covenant was by virtue of the land being given by the original owner not because of a legal protection enacted by parliament as I think you're suggesting. Mainly I suppose football clubs are private businesses that require people to plough money into them and putting too many restrictions on how those businesses are run would discourage people from owning them.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 10:58:54 GMT
Like I said, the debt has nothing to do with whether or not Wael can sell the mem. The fact that debt has been written off isn't what would allow him to sell the mem. The fact that he owns 97% of the holding company which owns the mem is what would allow him to sell it if he wanted. Debt or no debt. Written off or not. You are dressing up the scenario, and I hope it never happens, quite well but as you just said the fact that he owns 97% of the holding company would allow him to sell the mem!! So basically and you agree, if Wael wanted to sell the Mem he could! Debt it no debt!! If Nick Higgs wanted to sell the mem he could have sold the mem. If Geoff Dunford wanted to sell the mem he could've sold the mem. If the Glazers want to sell Old Trafford they can. If King Power want to sell the King Power stadium they can. Why are you making an issue of this now when we have an owner who is actively purchasing and developing assets for the club - the Quarters training ground? Ignore the writing off of the debt if you want but why would someone who is buying assets for a football club be inclined to sell the home of that football club?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 9:45:09 GMT
That's true but not for the reasons you're suggesting. Debt has nothing to do with that being the case. If a shareholder owns 97% of a company they can do whatever they want with the assets of that company. If BRFC had never been in a single penny of debt ever in its history Wael, as 97% shareholder, could sell the mem. The fact that the cash for those shares was paid into the club by way of loan first of all is irrelevant. Wael owned 97% of the club beforehand and could sell the mem if he wanted. Wael owns 97% of the club after and could sell the mem if he wanted. But this whole selling the mem thing is irrelevant. A total red herring dreamed up by Gasincider and his mates years ago. The football club is clearly being run and funded as a football club. There's no reason to have ever believed that the mem would be sold. who's Gasincider and his mates then ? Long story short, a group of posters on various forums including this one, shortly after the Al Qadi family purchased the club, circulated the rumour that the family did not have sufficient funds to continue running the club. They said that the purchase of the football club had been an elaborate method of purchasing the mem as a property development site. (Some forms of the rumour claimed this had been the intention all along, some said the family hadn't realised the amount of money it took to run a football club and now wanted their money back by flogging the mem). That theory (in any version) didn't make any sense at the time because the "there is no money" line was clearly at odds with the fact we were buying and paying players and managers etc but mainly because it fundamentally ignored the basic economic principle that you can't make money from the sale of something when you've paid more than that asset is worth into it - example if I buy a car for £300 and spend £2,000 maintaining it then sell it on for £300 I haven't made £300 have I? The rumour makes even less sense now to the point that it is laughable because: 1. Debt to the tune of something like £20m has been written off - and before you ask, yes it has been written off. Selling the mem won't bring that money back; and 2. The site for the training ground has been purchased and is being developed. What possible point would there be in selling the mem when the Quarters is being developed? It doesn't make any sense to say "He could get his money back by selling the mem" ... then what? Put that money he's just got back into the Quarters? The whole sale of the mem thing doesn't and has never stood up to even the most basic scrutiny.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 9, 2021 8:56:26 GMT
That's true but not for the reasons you're suggesting. Debt has nothing to do with that being the case. If a shareholder owns 97% of a company they can do whatever they want with the assets of that company. If BRFC had never been in a single penny of debt ever in its history Wael, as 97% shareholder, could sell the mem. The fact that the cash for those shares was paid into the club by way of loan first of all is irrelevant. Wael owned 97% of the club beforehand and could sell the mem if he wanted. Wael owns 97% of the club after and could sell the mem if he wanted. But this whole selling the mem thing is irrelevant. A total red herring dreamed up by Gasincider and his mates years ago. The football club is clearly being run and funded as a football club. There's no reason to have ever believed that the mem would be sold. I totally understand LJG the reasons you have highlighted and along with my point both are relevant. On one hand it looks as tho ‘The club’ has no debt and has been written off by the owner yet on the other hand the ‘clubs’ only asset can be sold to recoup a debt which has been written off by the owner. He wouldn’t have written the debt off if the Mem was worth £10 million IMO. I’m not criticising Wael by the way just trying to answer a question. Like I said, the debt has nothing to do with whether or not Wael can sell the mem. The fact that debt has been written off isn't what would allow him to sell the mem. The fact that he owns 97% of the holding company which owns the mem is what would allow him to sell it if he wanted. Debt or no debt. Written off or not.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Feb 8, 2021 23:34:17 GMT
Reality, that is correct. Realistically, we all hope it never comes to that. I certainly echo that Mr Holmes but in theory and reality we are in no better state than we were before the ‘written off’ debt it just looks good on paper. That's true but not for the reasons you're suggesting. Debt has nothing to do with that being the case. If a shareholder owns 97% of a company they can do whatever they want with the assets of that company. If BRFC had never been in a single penny of debt ever in its history Wael, as 97% shareholder, could sell the mem. The fact that the cash for those shares was paid into the club by way of loan first of all is irrelevant. Wael owned 97% of the club beforehand and could sell the mem if he wanted. Wael owns 97% of the club after and could sell the mem if he wanted. But this whole selling the mem thing is irrelevant. A total red herring dreamed up by Gasincider and his mates years ago. The football club is clearly being run and funded as a football club. There's no reason to have ever believed that the mem would be sold.
|
|