Let it go

Their behaviour has been disgraceful. They deserve hammering at every opportunity as they have done absolutely nothing to improve relations with supporters. They treat us with utter contempt and therefore will get the same treatment back.

Is that the fault of supporters or of supposed businessmen who have created the situation?

 

No it’s not the fault of supporters of course not.
But equally they are human beings are allowed to make mistakes.
If they don’t learn from those mistakes then it is correct to hammer them.
They ****** up big time in the Summer with their recruitment policy there is no doubt and I doubt anyone would disagree with that.

 

These people are business people, they make business decisions. Those decisions are always open to scruitiny and if required praise or criticism.
Because we are dealing with our football club (our passion) it becomes emotive. They do not have the same love,.......we do.
We all want to get behind the lads every week, the recruitment has been terrible, the lads on the pitch have given absolutely everything and are still doing so........The board need to be more explicit with the fans in their dealings and we need to do what we do best....support the reds.
We have done this....it isnt our fault the suits wouldnt listen to everyone (inc the experts), when we required experience. They also need more flexibility in their outlook of "the plan ".

 

I agree in essence with what you have said, I just don’t see why there has to be a ‘need’ for them to explain every move, yes communication could/should be better but I’ll hazard a guess most clubs might communicate a little better but are not far off.
In terms of the plan was the actions in January not a sign of flexibility and without saying it an admission of error?

 

It will be pure blind luck on the owners part if Struber and this team stay up, nothing more.

 

These owners had six months on purchase to our previous relegation to see what this league requires on the pitch yet still did what they did last summer. That is inexcusable for me.

 

I agree ...i dont advocate explaining everything they do....just be more open. As an example we have a guy they have brought in to do PR work (murphy)who hasnt stated anything of any note. They have to be far more engaging....i bought into their expertise, when they first arrived but tbh, i just dont see the vast improvement for international business people.
The idea the January window was flexible.....i dont accept. They have had since August to rectify the experience issue and a new coach, who finally would be listened to.
The plan (imho) is still to make money from player sales first and have a succesful team a poor second. I concede we have to be financially secure but there are far more ways to do this.

 

Surely all three signings in Jan wasn’t part of the plan though, age, loanee etc.

 

They have to be far more engaging....i bought into their expertise, when they first arrived but tbh, i just dont see the vast improvement for international business people.
Think this is bang on.
I suspect most people’s issues with the owners actually really stems back to this.
IMO everyone (including me) got swept up in all the hype at the point of purchase and got carried away with expectations.

 

No i guess not but it could be argued these changes were possibly forced upon them by the new coach, who publicly stated his requirements (just like the last one). Therefore they get a decent coach they wanted but he only did it on some of his terms. Then they had to concede to save face.....errr maybe.
My point is, the board didnt act efficiently enough to the problems in hand, nor did they engage with the loyal fan base, that i would consider acceptable. Not many succesful businesses ....refuse to be flexible or act quickly to problems/situations.

 

You’re entitled to your opinion (and many share it). But IMHO it makes no sense.
The plan as stated it to increase the value of the club whilst staying financially secure. Player sales are simply a factor in achieving that.

They have certainly made mistakes (who hasn’t) but to assume malice when it doesn’t even make financial sense is bizarre.

 

If i am assuming malice then my opinion is badly written or you have misjudged my intent. I am merely saying by the way they do business here and at Nice.... that selling players is their primary remit. You are entitled your views and you may be correct.
I dont see a lot of things in their tenure to suggest otherwise ......errrr imho.

 

Have you seen any evidence that the owners are taking the profits from player sales rather than reinvesting as stated (however badly)?

 

The board didn't knock on every season ticket holders door and tell them who we were signing and didn't warn them that they were about to sack Stendel.

 

No and it is not my idea to suggest they are. I am saying in imho they are not using a "football" ideal in their outlook.
Otherwise we would have had experience in much much earlier.

 

But of course if we were 10th and they’d acted the same you’d still call them.
They made a call and got it wrong, maybe they got all giddy and excitable and thought they cracked it after league one.

 

I think they were taken by the way Stendel had the team playing too and the 4-3-3 system. I don't think they had a scatter gun approach. Thomas, Chaplin, Wilks were signed to compliment Brown and Thiam and play alongside a central striker in Woodrow. I think that's why they cashed in on Moore because out of the two it was going to be Woodrow who got the nod. After Moore's departure I think Schmidt was brought in as back up for Woodrow. Due to poor results and touch wood no injury to Woodrow, Schmidt has only been used sparingly by both Stendel then Struber.

The defence looked good against Fulham on the opening day so I haven't got a clue what happened there. However, Halme, Sibbick, Andersen and Diaby were brought in alongside Radlinger and Collins to replace Pinnock who wouldn't sign a new deal and Lindsay who wouldn't enter negotiations. Davies wouldn't sign either. I'm glad the board sold them instead of possibly losing them for nothing in the summer. Yes Moore had two years to run but he wanted out.

I'm with the board. It isn't their fault the tactics were inept for the first 16 games.

 

You do realise there's more than one way to run a football club?

It'd be utterly reckless to ruin a business by sticking to a business plan that's shown to be failing - or indeed to embark on a business plan that was loaded with so much risk*.

So unless they're pocketing the profits from player sales (as some suggest), it makes no sense for them to prioritise player sales over success (financial success can only be achieved on the back of sporting success).

So if they're not pocketing the profits, and it's stupid to run the club into the ground, the only option left is that they've made some bad recruitment decisions, but then my experience of people is that incompetence is far more common than malevolence.

*the point missed by many is that whilst the owners may not be putting their own money into the club on an annual basis, if the club fails they'll be out of pocket.

 

You do realise there's more than one way to run a football club?

It'd be utterly reckless to ruin a business by sticking to a business plan that's shown to be failing - or indeed to embark on a business plan that was loaded with so much risk*.

Yes ....i do.
That is not the point though.....they are running it and are doing it their way. Whats that phrase about the definition of madness!!!???

 

I'd like to believe it but I dont.