Loving the Clive-style rants. Strange that he got such a bad rep straight off when regulars get away with the same day in day out. GFH have made it quite clear that they are looking at LUFC as a long-term project, want a good ethos of playing to run through the club from the kids through to the first team, do not expect to get promoted this year or next because they are taking a proper long-term view with real foundations rather than the quicksand of just throwing money at it. That's a sure fire way for us to end up like Portsmouth, which we were so close to being. The club's long-term view is also a tacit and implied statement (albeit not explicitly stated for obvious reasons) that they can't get rid of players who are on high wages that no-one else wants, so a lot of the rebuild process requires their contracts to have run down. I, for one, am extremely happy with the long-term view. I understand the frustrations of the short-termists with their "we have to get up this year" view, but I am very glad we have a chairman that does not listen to them. I remember all these types of arguments about who was to blame when Bates came in.
I know we won't get promoted this season, but I am wary of GFH, I don't trust them. All this long term stuff is all well and good, but the way we are playing we may end up in L1, how would that work in their long term strategy. As for Clive or whoever he is, I've never had a conversation with him, but I'm sure he had history on the old 606, anyway he has been replaced by Ross.
I don't think being wary is a bad thing - we've had that for the last 12 or 13 years (ie including our last two in the Prem), but there's little reason to throw in the towel and throw out the toys yet.
I agree with you. Like a lot of supporters we'll be around a lot longer than the manager or GFH. Blind faith I think it's called.
Like I said Cheshire, thought he had history on the old 606. Although I never had any run ins with him, that I can remember.
I respect your opinions and views Sheldon - I just do not believe GFH. They are making the sounds they believe will keep us patient and hoping it will get the fans through the gate. On the request of the manager they have widened the practice pitch but what else have they done or invested in to get the foundations right? A few basic decisions anyone would have and could have made like dumping a failing radio station and lowering an extortionate ticket price. My mate who is an Arsenal supporter was telling me how he went to see them play West Brom in the cup as the ticket price had been reduced to £10 and £15 common sense to lower prices if you want more fans which creates more sales opportunities. GFH are quick to get on Twitter and other news sources talking the talk and I respect them for giving the manager 1.2m for Murphy but is our manager that stupid to blow his budget on that one player when we are crying out for creative wide players or a striker who knows where the back of the net is? What is the part of the story we are not being told?? Byram was going to be sold or the manager was promised more but an investor never came through in time maybe? That is another gripe of mine, the more bit part investors the more fingers in the pie having a say and an expectation.
I'm as cautious about GFH as ou are, Ristac. I want to pick up on a couple of your points: 1. We have NOT spent £1.2m on Murphy. At best, we will have paid an installment. The £1.2m figure suggests that more money was made available than actually was! People have fallen for this spin (intentional spin or otherwise). 2. Investors - all GFH is doing is selling chunks of the club to people who buy a share of a finite cake, so to speak. GFH trouser the proceeds of the sale (including a profit, nodoubt), and there is no net gain of investment for the club - i.e. the cake is still the same size (with no extra money to spend on players).
Fair enough, no issue with the opinion I don't know that any of that statement is anything other than opinion again, as opposed to reality. We've seen the major problems that some owners can bring - Blackburn, Portsmouth, Luton, us - and probably many others. I just prefer the slow approach - the attempted fast approach has failed for a decade or more now, I just want to see that there is some kind of long term plan. I agree they are saying the right things that are getting me on board - whether they are telling the truth in that is something that (at the moment) I can only take on trust for the moment. The only facts I know are that a) we kept Byram - big plus b) we kept McCormack - big plus (even if he is off the boil at the mo) c) we got rid of Bates - big plus d) we have other kids coming through - big plus - Mowatt, Poleon, possibly others e) we have a new manager that most are happy with - big plus - but I understand some people's concerns f) we are stuck with some players on long contracts that may be preventing others coming in - minus g) we have the fair play rules preventing money being thrown into players - same for every club
Have to take issue with you, Sheldon (now there's a surprise!). You've rated getting Bates as a 'big plus', the same as keeping Rossco etc. Surely this deserves an exponential description at the very least?
Getting "rid" of Bates is a big plus. No description required. Keeping McCormack - he is a marvellous player, but has to be used inthe right way. I have no idea if the problem is him at the moment or the rest not knowing how to play him in properly or the manager playing a system that does not work for him
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe gfh have said on a few occasions they intend keeping control for period of eighteen months and this was backed up by some articles on their annual accounts. To be honest I've read so much in the last year about them I can't remember exact sources. Smiley salad then says supporters cannot expect promotion in next two years. My reading of that is gfh won't be playing any part in a promotion push but waiting for some other investor/sugar daddy to finance that. If that is so, I'd prefer them to go sooner than later
a) we kept Byram - big plus b) we kept McCormack - big plus (even if he is off the boil at the mo) c) we got rid of Bates - big plus d) we have other kids coming through - big plus - Mowatt, Poleon, possibly others e) we have a new manager that most are happy with - big plus - but I understand some people's concerns f) we are stuck with some players on long contracts that may be preventing others coming in - minus g) we have the fair play rules preventing money being thrown into players - same for every club A....he was injured B....his agent played the club C...oh I can't be bollox
It can be spun any way you like, but I'm only looking at the facts rather than the conspiracy theories. Eire makes a very good point though. I believe they have stated that they are not in it for the long haul at some point, I just don't know if that position has changed. As I said above, I don't know if they are telling the truth or just playing us with a good game. I am wary, but not going to slate them just yet until we have seen a bit more of the fruits of their labours
YEP, he was injured. If he wasn't, there is no evidence he would have left. Any statement different is just spin or conspiracy. The statement you made about McCormack is also spin/conspiracy Then you couldn't be arsed to carry on. I don't know why
I don't have any doubt in my own mind that Byrams injury prevented him from being sold, either that or we have a manager who is clueless. As I do not believe the manager is clueless it leaves only one possibility (in my mind) as to why the transfer budget was blown on Murphy. Again though no evidence to back my own theory up but January could be an interesting month. I also believe that we might well not have BMD in charge come the end of January, I have a feeling the results are not going to improve and the board will panic.
Lets just say on the balance of probability, Byram would have been sold if fit. Not based on fact of course, it's just the way we do things still
Sheldon I think the blokes you are having a conversation with are all reasonable and long term fans (Long suffering) like you. None of us can really state facts about players leaving/arriving but the only fact about GFH came from them. You mentioned that they were here for the long term, but they will not be bothered one bit about the long term as they have planned on been away within 18-months to 2-years. So short termism for them and make a fast buck to go. I have been a lot happier about GFH than the last robber who stripped the club to the bones. I also appreciate the amount of cash GFH have had to put in to keep us trading because Bates took everything and mortgaged the rest, leaving us in debt. However I get sick of hearing statements from GFH about looking after the future because thats just hogwash. The best thing they can do is find us a rich investor/owner and leave with our thanks for stabalising the ship until selling. Every year we spend in this division means another thousand lost fans. Every season we fall further behind smaller clubs making it impossible to compete with them on a level playing field. Every year the teams who have parachute payments goes up and they have the payments for 4-years at over £12m each year. Unless we invest fast in our playing squad, we can forget promotion and start worrying about life in League one again.
