I'm intrigued by it as, rather than thinking it's an over-inflated fee, the announcement didn't have any of the usual 'undisclosed fee' or 'interest in his future' mentioned in it. For this reason, I've interpreted the deal as being a free transfer. I may be wrong on this, but that's what the press release seems to indicate, for me.
I think you're probably right. Would be good to know more about the relationship between the two clubs and whether we will benefit from any players coming in the opposite direction etc.
Think it's more to do with the majority not Trusting our owners so everything is questioned.. and rightly so Might I also add in my opinion that Conway and co have brought it upon themselves
Yeah l agree they still a lot to improve upon, especially on the coms front. Dane is getting a bit better but still needs to work on it
But Dane and the owners are not the same thing. Dane is an employee of the owners that's all. No matter how many times, or how sincerely, Dane tells us that he disagreed with the owners disgusting treatment of the fans regarding Daniel Stendel it doesn't change the fact that the owners did indeed treat us like that. As far as I can see there hasn't been ANY improvement on the communication front from our owners, in fact I'd say it's gone backwards as since con way started ignoring the supporters and treating them like crap he's done interviews in scotland and in Belgium but has maintained a radio silence towards barnsley fans.
I don't like the two deals, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt currently. We can't be holier than thou regarding other clubs in the division and their financial policies if we start to bend the rules a little. I'll see how it plays out.
Dane is an employee with a number of functions and one of them, in my opinion, is to provide a link between them and us, to be the spokes person on their behalf. Patrick Cryne was never big on speaking to the public but instead relied on Ben and then Gauthier to provide the link, which I thought Ben in particular was very good at. Dane still falls well short in this respect. Jim Iley was the first manager when I first started supported the club and as best as l can remember Norman Hunter was the first to be dismissed. The club has sacked many more since then and I cannot recall one that was as controversial as the sacking of Daniel Stendel. All of the others, with the possible exception of Mark Robbins, were greeted with an ambivalence or a general if not universal approval. Did the club expend many words of explanation on all of these sacked managers? I doubt it. Daniel was the still very popular with most supporters and adored by many and as such deserved a better obituary than what he was given, but what could they have said? Given greater acknowledgement to the success he had in his only season? Undoubtedly, but they were never going to recognise their own part in his undoing. As for Conway, in retrospect he probably said too much when he was running the show after Gauthier went to Nice. Now Dane really needs to step up to the plate to fill the gap on the communications front.
Guess laying the blame at Danes door is the easy option and id say we've all been guilty of that in some form..myself included but on second thoughts if Conway and co are pulling his strings and instructing him not to say anything then he's limited to what he can say or do...so he has to just smile and play dumb at the moment ..unfortunately no matter how good a job he does there will come a time if he's got anything about him whereby he gets fed up and cheesed off at being censored whilst taking the flax for Conway and co's misdemeanors and no doubt when he does go it might only be then that we realise his worth...
What could Conway have said when Stendel was sacked? He could have afforded Barnsley fans the same courtesy that he afforded fans in Scotland. Can't stand the bloke as you can tell
You’ll not get much from the club anyway, as a few are on holiday (rightly so). The Belgium division has just restarted, so GG would be able to give more.
We archive every interview we put out, onto a hard drive. Be that video or written. In the last 12 months that he's been in situ, Dane has attended three lengthy Supporters Trust Q&A's, done numerous written pieces, and a few video pieces, as well as the bits he's done with external media etc. It is just 10 days since his last website piece, which came just four days after another, which came just three days after another (that had 75,000 page views). There has been no difference in terms of such communication between himself and GG, save for the extra six months the latter was in situ. I personally don't believe communication should be any more frequent, just for the sake of it. And whilst I know most Barnsley fans will not be following what other clubs get up to, I can assure you (as someone who follows them all keenly) there are very, very few CEO's at football clubs that speak as often as ours does. Everyone is working hard to prepare for a new season that is fast approaching.
One of the first victims of the salary cap apparently. Portsmouth couldn't meet McGeehan's wage demands.
For me it's the silence, refusal to apologise, and general contempt shown by the owners that is the problem, not Dane. Although I do think Dane should do more video interviews than written ones as it's how he really comes across best.
Trouble is the communication line is not equal, in that I mean a lot of public want to hear very regular, but the Club (rightly IMO) communicate when they feel appropriate. On the point that some make about Owners not Dane, I think this is more of a anti biased view of those owners as opposed to the actual objection. I done believe we are any different to almost all clubs in the top 2 divisions where the actual owners very rarely speak but have communications through club officials.
Don't get me wrong, I don't expect regular communication from the owners, what I do believe though is that when it is specifically the owners who stopped Dane and the club from treating supporters correctly around the Stendel issue and it is specifically the owners who went blabbing to football fans in Scotland then the owners have a responsibility to use their own gobs to apologise and attempt to rectify things. It shouldn't have to be Dane who tries because he isn't them
I think there has been a marked improvement in communications in recent months from Dane. He recognised in one interview that he had not been communicating actively enough, if my failing memory is correct?
One of the reasons that owners are somewhat distanced from the fan base is simply that Barnsley fc is only a small part of their business empires & that is why Dane is employed . I personally do not get this clamour for communication from the owners , Dane is their spokesperson & I am quite impressed on how he conducts himself with the fans . We would have all liked a fan to have taken over from Patrick but that never happened , our new owners may not be everybody"s cup of tea but some of the abuse from the fans they get is bordering on obscene & to be honest I find it embarrassing , if we drive these owners out in the current financial world, then we might be hard pressed to find replacements . We have just pulled off the great escape & to me it is the perfect time for unity , all pulling together & hopefully progression will follow .