Thank You Gordon Shepherd and Patrick Cryne

RE: two points

i do see your point and if we stay up job done. they way we have gone about the job very poor imho

 

bible basher

Never been called a bible basher before!!!!

I am putting another side to the argument, that has been expressed by others on here. Everyone has a view. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, I love a debate, but what I do not agree with is personal insults and accusations that are made.

Peace be with you

 

He's 25. No spring chicken in footballing terms really... nt

 

That's very nice Owen.

And I'm sure Gordon will give you an extra biscuit for taking the trouble.</p>

Just answer me one question, how many of those complaining about Gordon Shepherd's woeful managerial appointments do you reckon have the slightest complaint about Patrick Cryne?</p>

 

magnificent post!!! why some cockmunch has posted "alert bad post" is beyond me

 

I'm not sure why we have to group the two together for this debate. Its perfectly reasonable for people to have differing opinions on each of them.

Are you trying to say that Andy Ritchie had no influence on this then?

The old club was insolvent and did go bust. However, the administration order would never have been lifted by the court unless a viable ongoing solution for survival was in place at the time. Any problems with the financial viability of the current entity are down to events subsequent to the first administration. However, the club has been through numerous regime changes in that time that its hard to know where the root cause of all these problems began in that time. However, I think its fair to say that no-one believes GS or PC were responsible for the new era of financial adversity.

This is GS' version of events. However, we've seen from the January transfer activity that woefully inadequate bids were made for players (e.g Williamson), and lower league players could not agree terms to sign. It is well documented that AR did not want to sign players who were no better than the ones already here, and the evidence suggests that these were exactly the type of signings that he refused to agree with. There's no evidence yet that any of the subsequent signings, post-Ritchie, are any better than before. In fact, only McCann and Eckersley so far have actually been given a regular starting place in the team.

Show me a team that goes through an entire season without a bad performance. The fact is we got promoted at the end of that season.

You mean the game directly after GS publicly hung AR out to dry?

Who's to say he has applied for any jobs? We've seen him working as a pundit on Sky. Perhaps his treatment by BFC after delivering success where numerous others had failed has put him off getting involved again.

Why incur unnecessary termination costs if you don't have a likely successor in mind? The decision to sack AR was short-sighted in the extreme. GS specifically said that he didn't want to appoint a 'failed manager' so if that's the only people we can attract then it leaves a pretty short shortlist to choose from. The simple fact is they made a CHEAP appointment on an unproven manager and chose the worst possible time to make the announcement.

Leon Knight was a player that AR specifically said he wasn't interested in. Perhaps he saw something that the ones who signed him didn't spot.

Lets look at the deals done post-Ritchie. We spent £100k on McCann, £50k on Mattis, and £250k on Ferenczi, I believe. The others are all loan signings and free agent pick-ups. Offset that against the £250k we got for McIndoe and our net spend is £150k, assuming no income for Tommy Wright. Is this the 'transfer fund' that GS complained about Ritchie not spending?

Ask yourself an honest question, Owen. Given GS' comments regarding Ritchie's sacking, is £150k the amount you expected the club to have spent in the transfer window? Do you think its the amount that a 'typical supporter' have expected from an 'ambitious' board?

Since when has 'we haven't got crowds of 20,000' been a valid excuse for anything? We've NEVER had crowds of 20,000 every week. Surely the business planning takes into account the actual likely income the club will receive. If GS wants to improve revenue streams then perhaps he should take on board comments made numerous times on here regarding, for example, the club shop. Non-football revenue is important to a club like ours and we give it a cursory effort compared to other clubs.

Perhaps too, if GS wants to increase core support levels, he should also make more of an effort with his PR than arrogant comments such as 'I've been a fan longer than you lot', 'What do the fans know, they're outside the game' or the classic 'We have ambition', which is inevitably followed by no actual evidence of such. Talk is cheap. The BFC public is very fickle, and always has been (remember the constant mantra of 'we don't want to go up' pre-1997?) Floating supporters will respond to actions, not the words of a man they don't trust.

Nothing impacts on finances next year more significantly than relegation, and the Board's decisions this season have, IMO, made that more likely than before. Worse still, if we do go down, we'll be left with in a weaker position (financially, personnel-wise and apparently lacking in any fighting spirit whatsoever compared to Ritchie's squad).

The garbage spouted by GS in his response to my letter would have been a perfect excuse for me to stop coming. However, it hasn't done so. I'll still make the trips as often as I can, despite the fact that the football on offer post-Ritchie has been, on the whole, woeful (even the games we've won have been uninspired performances). Come the end of the season I'm certain I'll end up renewing my season ticket, the same as I always do, regardless of what league we're playing in. The difference now is I'll be doing it DESPITE GS being the man in charge, not because of him.

However, I can certainly sympathise with all those who have made comments to the effect that 'they won't be coming back'. Ultimately its a personal decision for each individual and the Club has done little this season (which SHOULD have been one with a massive positive vibe, regardless of where we ultimately finished) to prevent people making a difficult and negative choice.

Again, why lump the two of them together here? GS is the one people are unhappy with. Cryne, for his own reasons, chose to take a back seat with his investment. He may provide the money, but he's not part of the official team responsible for the day-to-day running of the club. Until such time as this changes, then those criticising the running of the club aren't pointing the finger at PC. The day-to-day decisions are the responsibility of GS and the Board and, IMO, they've made countless mistakes over the course of this season. The short-term impact might be relegation, but the longer term issue is that they appear to have wiped out much of the goodwill and optimism that last season's success generated. Personally, I think that is the most damning indictment on their efforts this year, and I don't think we should be thanking them for it.

 

I think you will find that GS and PC come as a package. So that is why they are lumped together as you put it

As to Andy Ritchies signings vs Simon Daveys

Who did Ritchie sign in his last 12 months

From the top of my head there was
Tommy Wright
Anthony PcParland
Colin Healy

Are you telling me that these signings are far better than
McCann
Steve and Peter (Hungarians)
Mattis
Eckerlsey
Ritchie

To be fair difficult to say as they have not been here much time.



Owen

 

they come as a package? how does that work then?

Was gordon shepherd chairman when patrick cryne allegedly offered money to sign ashley ward back?

Was gordon shepherd chairman when patrick cryne put money up for sponsorship?

Was gordon shepherd chairman when patrick cryne arranged for PETER RIDSDALE to take over the running of the club?

the answer to the above is no. Patrick Cryne and Shepherd come together as a package? Well yes, if a package generally comes in two parts that arrive a couple of years apart.

 

maybe, just maybe

andy ritchie only signed mcparland and healy after being pressured by the chairman to sign players but only allowed peanuts to pay them?

 

Why do you use surnames but when it comes to Farenczi and Rajczi you use their forenames? It was bad enough on Saturday people refering to them as Numbernine and Numberthirteen, or "the Hungarian" but you haven't got the excuse on here of not being arsed to try to work out how to pronounce it!

 

Owen

What do you think to McCann and Mattis as a central midfield pairing to the exclusion of Sam Togwell ?</p>

</p>

Nice hatchet job on Ritchie by the way.</p>

Because we're pissed off with our league position does not extrapolate into wanting rid of Patrick Cryne. Everyone with a brain can see that we're in existence only because of Patrick Cryne.</p>

</p>

However, if we aren't allowed to grumble just say so old lad, and I'll take my money and piss off.</p>

 

RE: Owen

McCann and Mattis in central midfield, whilst Howard was pushed out wide, with Togwell and Kyel Reid on the bench - oh aye, quality selection that was!

 

RE: Owen

Just baffling. How we can drop Togwell from central midfield is beyond me. Should be a sacking offence in itself.

 

What about Togwell and McIndoe? Two players who genuinely did improve the squad. You conveniently missed them off your list.

I'm not sure why you find it necessary to try and disown Ritchie's time in charge to defend GS here. He achieved more than could have been realistically expected in getting us promoted last year and its obvious from events this season that he was not being backed to the extent that GS would like us to believe.

 

Team Selection in general!

Did something happen before the game on saturday?

I had the pleasure of sitting in the legends suite on Saturday and it was surprising some of the things overheard, for instance a senior BFC employee receiving a phone call asking him to look for one of the players, half an hour before kick off! One player on the original Team Sheet, not even on subs bench? Made me wonder anyway??? Could be nothing???

 

Are you Tommy Tyke in disguise?

Blinkered
Sycophantic
Delluded
Another one who is fiddling while Rome burns.....
Hope the extra biscuit is worth it

 

Everyone was excited by the signing of Knight?

Really? Are you sure?

 

RE: Everyone was excited by the signing of Knight?

Gordon was. And he is "in football". And he told Owen that everyone was excited.

 

RE: BFC Midfield

Strange as it may sound but my favoured midfield would be

Devaney, Togwell, Howard and McCann. As to whether I think Howard out wide I am not sure, he played that position against QPR and Luton and we won and he scored two. I think Togwell is an essential component at the moment and I would have started with him, and I do think that McCann is a good player.

In an ideal world though Wallwork would have been in there :'(

Owen

 

RE: BFC Midfield

Strange as it may sound but my favoured midfield would be

Devaney, Togwell, Howard and McCann. As to whether I think Howard out wide I am not sure, he played that position against QPR and Luton and we won and he scored two. I think Togwell is an essential component at the moment and I would have started with him, and I do think that McCann is a good player.

In an ideal world though Wallwork would have been in there :'(

Owen