Thanks Elixir - I don't quite understand why but each site seems to develop its own personality and ours - despite good keen debate comes over as a friendly site - and the posters here self-moderate. Perhaps it is something to do with the club we support and we all buy into the "Watford" way?
There was, I seem to recollect, a clause that included three names (GT, JW and A.N.Other), suggesting that ownership revert back to LA if any of the named were dismissed. JW's name was openly removed from it about 4 months ago which, to me, suggested the possibility that he wasn't staying for much longer. Given his role in the club, I cant believe that the removal of his name was done behind his back without his knowledge, ergo he wanted/planned to leave.
Have read all the opinions, pointless going back over them all.A lot I agree with, some I don't. Things I would question...The need of a 4th stand, at this time our ground capacity is in the region of 19,000....did we get a sell-out crowd last year on a number of occasions.... unless my eyes deceived me NO(average gate through the season I would suggest was about 12,500) therefor is a new stand viable, bringing attendance up to 22/23,000 (in case we draw MU,SPURS,ARSENAL,CFC in cup? NO The ground being relaid.....With Saracens playing here throughout the winter months (probably whole season) is it a good investment? NO An influx of new players...Do we need new players (loaned or otherwise) to secure our place in the Championship and do we need to ensure the likes of Tiny,AM,JE are persuaded to stay and build our team around them.....YES The majority of all available funds should be used on players to prevent us going back to the likes of the old 3rd division (south) and 4th division. There I've had my say now I feel a bit better
When you are trying to argue that Mr B is a "good" or a "bad" owner, do not cite the facts that players like Graham, Buckley and Cowie have left early in his regime. That is not evidence one way or the other. Look at other factors. We have Mr B as owner because he was the only person who was not actually a crook who was prepared to meet the terms of the sell-off, as proposed by the previous owners. He is not the owner we needed (nor the kind that Winter spent 18 months trying to find) because he brings no new money to the club. In fact, the terms of the takeover mean that money from player sales will be leaving the club to pay down debt over the next 5 years--to the detriment of re-investment in ground and squad. Anxieties about Mr B as owner focus on several things. His secrecy about his own history , his motives in taking us over and his intentions, (often said) also the curious structure of ownership he has established, his lack of business success etc etc. All these make people nervous. His early actions as owner were not surefooted--poor media management, odd board appointment, encouragement of speculation by his silences etc. The fact that first Winter then Malky left is more worrying than seeing players leave. Why could he not persuade these key people to stay on his team and commit to Watford ? Why did they no longer see it as a project they wanted to be part of? It is also worrying that he wants to be a "hands -on" manager without actually calling himself CEO or being on the board or (rather unbelievably) taking a salary.(You have to be very naive to believe that last bit--he is not a philanthropist is he?). His first steps in this hands -on role were also inept (handling of Cardiff approach) though since then he has made the right noises about "learning" the "Watford way" and there are hints that GT is getting more involved/giving guidance. He was more sure footed in making a quick managerial appointment, and in leaving SD free to appoint his own team--GT's influence again?The next test will be if he does indeed give SD a reasonable budget for rebuilding the squad, and if he can convince some experienced players/coaches that Watford is a club worth joining. The Wiggins/Cowie saga shows that we are having difficulty recruiting/retaining ambitious players who are beyond "stage one" of their career--yet we need such players if we are to make progress as a club. Convincing such players to come to Watford is a process that starts at the top--with a credible, visionary owner. The anxiety is that Mr B is not credible as an owner . Only the presence of GT is keeping us credible at the moment, till SD proves himself as a manager. It is GT who is warning off Malky from more poaching, who is talking to fans and giving reassurance--the owner should be doing that. Mr B needs to come out of the office and be more assertive and more positive--start acting like a leader, in short.
Yes I agree that Roger talks a lot of sense. Baz worries me, its the opaque nature of his dealings - you don't know me, and I'm not about to tell you. From what I have been told there isn't a lot to be told, and what there is ain't good news. The facts are he is a discharged bankrupt who has owned a small property development business and then a car wash - both of which he no longer owns. The detail I have learnt is that Bazini does not have an income, so I agree with Roger when he says "It is also worrying that he wants to be a "hands -on" manager without actually calling himself CEO or being on the board or (rather unbelievably) taking a salary.(You have to be very naive to believe that last bit--he is not a philanthropist is he?)". I am also starting to doubt some of the "GT factor", it is clear he is just an unpaid advisor - his income streams as "football pundit" are clear. But his input into Bazini can only be on a "I would/would not recommend you do that" basis, and typically this is not a relationship which will last as Bazini has stated he wants to make his own decisions. Undoubtedly time will tell, but right now the list of professionals at Watford looks pretty light. I want a good blend of players which Watford own, supplemented by 2 or 3 (maximum) loanees who provide some "top class reinforcements". History has shown that clubs who have "too many loanees" have struggled.
WB didn't have mediocre season in the games i saw him play he was the best player on the pitch He ran Cardfiff ragged and lets not forget the treatment the Middlesbrough players dished out to him . I know DG was leaving but lets see how much money SD gets to spend on new players i bet it will be a fraction of the money generated by player sales.
WB did not play enough games to have been overly influential even if some of the games he had were very good. We all know our financial situation and that only a small percentage of any player sales will go to SD to spend. It is called the legacy of bad management in the past. A bit like we are all now paying for Labour messing up the economy and getting us into too much debt
When he was played, WB played well for 75% of the 75 minutes he was on the pitch. But really didn't get enough game to for us to know whether we got a good deal or not.
MM for some reason thought it would be a good idea to have Sordell and Buckley sitting on the bench for big chunks of last season
I always thought it was to keep him under the radar. MM must have known that we were going to lose DG, so keeping Sordell was important for this season. Weren't Man City and Liverpool sniffing around? (according to gossip columns?). I think the Buckley situation was more down to fatigue, he never looked properly fit.
Don't worry about what I think and do, you should be worried about Bazini. I don't mind having a difference of opinion now, but there are some tough times ahead if what I've been told transpires.
Elixir, I am sure that you have contacts that suggest that Mr B is bad for the club and in many ways I have little faith in the man. However to say that "there are tough times ahead if what I've been told transpires" is not much different to reading something on the beloved rumours site. You have hinted at there being someone behind Mr B and that he could be a property man. That description could mean many things. Any chances that you could be a little more specific?
Rumour had it that Buckley fell out with MM...no idea if that's true or not. I heard also that he was 'resting' Sordell so that he didn't push him too hard in his early development. I didn't buy that one...
All the comments in the original thread are nonsense really, like BHD said there was very little he could do about the majority of outgoings and for me Winter is the only ? mark. The others wanted to leave and there is no point in them staying if that is the case. I will judge both him and Dychey after we see who is being brought into the club, and then after 5 to 10 games next season. The only thing that will change my mind is if GT leaves! Dont get me wrong, I think there is a lot of questions to be answered and Baza does not fill me with confidence, but there is no point speculating and accusing until he does something that is really non beneficial to the club.
That's a bit rich Leo, considering it was the Tories best mates the Bankers (I use the term advisedly) who ruined the economy in the first place with their profligate lending. What Labour was trying to do was to mitigate the effect of the greed of 'chattering classes' on the ordinary person-in-the-street. A bit like what Clegg & Cable are trying (and failing to do) at the moment. We are all now paying for rampant and unfettered speculation - but not by unions or working people.........very much like us ordinary fans are paying for the rampant and unfettered speculation of the Simpson, Cashton & Boothroyd era.
