kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 27, 2019 16:49:34 GMT
Our leader has thrown his weight behind the man who headlined an interest in acquiring the club in the Post the other day. A potential stadium site has been identified by this man just north of the M32 and M4 Junc 18. Unfortunately it's only viable for a stadium to operate with a new £400 million motorway intersection being funded and built to serve it properly,this junction could be 15 years away from completion. But don't worry when ever has reality ever stopped in whom we trust researching and understanding anything that involves thinking clearly. I wish he’d make his mind up. Changes his views more than a high class hooker does her knickers !
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 27, 2019 19:08:16 GMT
the timing of the Tommy Widdrington article in the Post also looks like a 'puff piece', maybe with a similar aim More likely he's polishing his cv and getting it out there in front of potential new employers ? hmm...possibly bit risky advertising oneself so 'bigly' if you want to keep your current employer onside tho?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 27, 2019 20:08:25 GMT
More likely he's polishing his cv and getting it out there in front of potential new employers ? hmm...possibly bit risky advertising oneself so 'bigly' if you want to keep your current employer onside tho? Ex-Wimbledon striker Dean Holdsworth, has been appointed as Director of Football Operations, although Richardson and Holdsworth were keen to stress that the pre-existing team of CEO Emanuele Facile and sporting director Rino Foschi are still the “decision makers”. For Holdsworth, formerly a Bolton Wanderers chief executive, the immediate concern is securing promotion back to Serie A. “The promotion would be a key point to trigger many other investments around the club,” Holdsworth says. “In terms of investment in youth, training facilities, building a development centre, the relationships with many other businesses, they would be far better off with the club being in Serie A.” Holdsworth intends to use his contacts within British football to help the club by presenting potential signings to Foschi and Facile this month, with Palermo currently on top of the Serie B table. “We’re actively looking in the English market and I’ve spoken to many football clubs about players’ availability,” he adds. “Hopefully they will take our advice with some of the players and there will be an investment before the end of the transfer window.” For Richardson, who Holdsworth describes as “finally someone in football I can trust”, Palermo can become a launch pad for young English talent struggling to get regular game time. “The Palermo set up are obviously very well connected through the Italian market, but the extra dimension we bring is the connections into the English and UK market, and therefore we’ve been able to give them some good suggestions and give them some options that maybe Palermo would never have had in the past," Richardson says. “We’re already seeing over the last 18 months a lot of the youth players in English leagues, when they’re at the top clubs in the UK, wanting to go and play in Germany and places like that so why not here ? “I think it’d be great for a lot of the English youth players, instead of sitting on the bench, to go and learn a new culture, play in a different league and get some great experience.” "And there's no greater cultural experience than Gloucester Road on a Friday night"
|
|
|
Post by prideofbristol on Nov 27, 2019 20:48:39 GMT
the timing of the Tommy Widdrington article in the Post also looks like a 'puff piece', maybe with a similar aim More likely he's polishing his cv and getting it out there in front of potential new employers ? Do you think there will be many takers? Suggests that the club didn't have the ability to scout players before he arrived. Presumably that explains why it was able to identify and bring through Taylor, Bodin, Carayol, Hoskins, Lambert et al over a sustained period of time? I'd ask Widdrington how his record compares with Richard Everson, to take one example. Cites the fact that he helped Coventry get promoted as proof of his credentials? A club who never should have been in the fourth tier in the first place. He called in a few contacts at Coventry and got lucky with JCH, a last minute deadline-day signing. Then brings in Mark Little, Luke Leahy and, of course, his son. Anybody could have found Jaakola by looking through a list of released players. Then suggests that a few past incidents should be put aside and we should effectively become a feeder club for Bristol City? Hamer was of course crucified for less.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 28, 2019 1:22:22 GMT
hmm...possibly bit risky advertising oneself so 'bigly' if you want to keep your current employer onside tho? "And there's no greater cultural experience than Gloucester Road on a Friday night" :-) In an industry of chancers, these must be among the chanciest, surely?
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Nov 28, 2019 7:13:24 GMT
More likely he's polishing his cv and getting it out there in front of potential new employers ? Do you think there will be many takers? Suggests that the club didn't have the ability to scout players before he arrived. Presumably that explains why it was able to identify and bring through Taylor, Bodin, Carayol, Hoskins, Lambert et al over a sustained period of time? I'd ask Widdrington how his record compares with Richard Everson, to take one example. Cites the fact that he helped Coventry get promoted as proof of his credentials? A club who never should have been in the fourth tier in the first place. He called in a few contacts at Coventry and got lucky with JCH, a last minute deadline-day signing. Then brings in Mark Little, Luke Leahy and, of course, his son. Anybody could have found Jaakola by looking through a list of released players. Then suggests that a few past incidents should be put aside and we should effectively become a feeder club for Bristol City? Hamer was of course crucified for less. That does read a little bit like 'What have the Romans ever done for us'. As for us effectively becoming their feeder club, that is putting some heavy spin on it. I think he just seems to be suggesting that we shouldn't rule out deals between the clubs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2019 9:20:43 GMT
I thought the tommy widdrington article was a really good read with lots of insight and detail. After the outstanding recruitment for the conference season we clearly hit big problems recruiting players for league one. Under the coughlan/widdrington ticket that process has considerably improved so i really cannot fathom posts sneeringly critical of him. The 3 coventry players were not wanted by coventry but have all performed at a high level for rovers and hare and jaakola have clearly improved the team. The club have improved their recruitment/scouting network so well done to everyone involved from the owners to the individual scouts i say.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Nov 28, 2019 10:15:40 GMT
More likely he's polishing his cv and getting it out there in front of potential new employers ? Do you think there will be many takers? Suggests that the club didn't have the ability to scout players before he arrived. Presumably that explains why it was able to identify and bring through Taylor, Bodin, Carayol, Hoskins, Lambert et al over a sustained period of time? I'd ask Widdrington how his record compares with Richard Everson, to take one example. Cites the fact that he helped Coventry get promoted as proof of his credentials? A club who never should have been in the fourth tier in the first place. He called in a few contacts at Coventry and got lucky with JCH, a last minute deadline-day signing. Then brings in Mark Little, Luke Leahy and, of course, his son. Anybody could have found Jaakola by looking through a list of released players. Then suggests that a few past incidents should be put aside and we should effectively become a feeder club for Bristol City? Hamer was of course crucified for less. How many years between Richard Everson being here and Tommy Widdrington arriving?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 28, 2019 19:04:47 GMT
The different topics being discussed under this “Hamer Gone” thread illustrate the trap of polarization which Rovers fans tend to fall into. The “ you are either with us or against us” attitude stifles the kind of constructive debate which might just throw up something of benefit to the club.
Steve Hamer had his good points and whilst I have said myself he wasn’t an inspiring leader that doesn’t mean he didn’t use his knowledge and contacts to try to help make Rovers better. It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers he became expendable. The statement made by the club was mean spirited and Rovers standards should be way above that but if the fans have been conditioned into a polarized way of thinking then of course it is quite acceptable for the February 2016 “ respected football figure” to become yesterday’s fall guy and today’s villain.
Likewise with Tommy Widdrington’s recent interview which I also found enlightening and thought did credit to Tommy. But, as others have commented, there is no harm in discussing what he said and why he said it. We should have enough self confidence to applaud what we like about aspects of the interview but criticise parts we don’t like and explain why we don’t like them. There is no need for a hysterical reaction either way.
Which is why the Clive Richardson quotes I posted (and added to in jest) were intended to stimulate some discussion without polarization. Yes, on the face of it the experience at Palermo makes one concerned that these people are “chancers” but we should give them a chance to explain themselves while making them aware that Gasheads won’t just roll over and accept everything they say at face value.
What is likely to happen is that those who “support” Wael no matter what he says or does will likely fall into line with what he wants without ever thinking of its impact on Rovers. Others, who have lost faith in Wael and can see that under his ownership the club has been stripped of his financial asset, will immediately jump on Clive Richardson’s recent track record and not give him a fair hearing.
My feeling is that as we approach this next stage we should try to avoid polarization and instead take a more reasoned approach than we did with Dwane Sports. When they took over most fans thought we had reached paradise straight after the first press conference and even now some still refuse to budge from that assessment. We need to have the confidence to make any new ownership group earn our respect and not be afraid to subject them to scrutiny. If we do that in a sensible and polite way, and they know we are going to do it, then we are more likely to get owners who will make Rovers a better club and less likely to get ones who are happy to chance their arm knowing if it all goes pear shaped they can walk away with no consequences.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 28, 2019 19:24:25 GMT
It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers you and your Temple Meads puns swiss! the FM peeps say it's still alive. And if the Italian Job doesn't make it past the Alps, which I'm thinking it won't, it might yet still be?
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Nov 28, 2019 19:30:43 GMT
The different topics being discussed under this “Hamer Gone” thread illustrate the trap of polarization which Rovers fans tend to fall into. The “ you are either with us or against us” attitude stifles the kind of constructive debate which might just throw up something of benefit to the club. Steve Hamer had his good points and whilst I have said myself he wasn’t an inspiring leader that doesn’t mean he didn’t use his knowledge and contacts to try to help make Rovers better. It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers he became expendable. The statement made by the club was mean spirited and Rovers standards should be way above that but if the fans have been conditioned into a polarized way of thinking then of course it is quite acceptable for the February 2016 “ respected football figure” to become yesterday’s fall guy and today’s villain. Likewise with Tommy Widdrington’s recent interview which I also found enlightening and thought did credit to Tommy. But, as others have commented, there is no harm in discussing what he said and why he said it. We should have enough self confidence to applaud what we like about aspects of the interview but criticise parts we don’t like and explain why we don’t like them. There is no need for a hysterical reaction either way. Which is why the Clive Richardson quotes I posted (and added to in jest) were intended to stimulate some discussion without polarization. Yes, on the face of it the experience at Palermo makes one concerned that these people are “chancers” but we should give them a chance to explain themselves while making them aware that Gasheads won’t just roll over and accept everything they say at face value. What is likely to happen is that those who “support” Wael no matter what he says or does will likely fall into line with what he wants without ever thinking of its impact on Rovers. Others, who have lost faith in Wael and can see that under his ownership the club has been stripped of his financial asset, will immediately jump on Clive Richardson’s recent track record and not give him a fair hearing. My feeling is that as we approach this next stage we should try to avoid polarization and instead take a more reasoned approach than we did with Dwane Sports. When they took over most fans thought we had reached paradise straight after the first press conference and even now some still refuse to budge from that assessment. We need to have the confidence to make any new ownership group earn our respect and not be afraid to subject them to scrutiny. If we do that in a sensible and polite way, and they know we are going to do it, then we are more likely to get owners who will make Rovers a better club and less likely to get ones who are happy to chance their arm knowing if it all goes pear shaped they can walk away with no consequences. Yes - this was my point when the AQ's took over in the first place.
Whatever you think about previous ownership regimes there was always the (extremely tenuous at times) claim of 'at least they are Gasheads'. The idea being that we could assume they had a residual commitment to the club and would not want to do it any long term harm or put in a position of existential threat. This was often compared with other clubs ownership who had no historic links or commitment to the club and therefore were more likely to act in self-interest which could put the club in jeopardy.
Now whether you believe that or not of previous owners, the takeover by the AQ's permanently ended that narrative. From this moment on it seemed likely that Rovers would be an asset passed between wealthy people who would not have a long term emotional stake in the club (some have even argued that this would be a good development). The point is that we all should have taken a chill pill and recognised that our relationship with the owners of Rovers would be transactional. So there may be times when the interests and fans and owners would be aligned and other times when they were not. So, while impressed with some of what they have done, I always thought it was best to view their actions through a critical eye whereas many seemed to be willing to give them a permanent benefit of the doubt. I'll treat the next owners similarly even if they take us to the Premier League - it's the only way that makes any sense.
It's not whether they're good or bad that matters - it's whether their interests and ambitions are aligned with ours. I think they were at the start and it's pretty clear to me that they are not anymore so we should hope a new group takes over that is. If they pass us on to a new regime that can deliver then I think they will emerge in credit overall but we have reasons to be concerned that this may not happen.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 28, 2019 19:59:04 GMT
It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers you and your Temple Meads puns swiss! the FM peeps say it's still alive. And if the Italian Job doesn't make it past the Alps, which I'm thinking it won't, it might yet still be? As Irishrover has just posted there was no doubt that the previous regimes were totally committed to Rovers and to illustrate this there was never any doubt that they were going to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale to Sainsburys into the UWE Stadium. There was no suggestion of them even thinking about taking the opportunity of repaying their own loans and bonds and putting the rest into the pot for the new ground. But it looks as though the Fruit Market Plan situation was completely different. My gut feeling is that if Dwane Sports had been willing to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale into the Fruit Market Plan then it would have worked. And I think the Mayor and the developers probably thought they would. It must have been a great surprise and disappointment if Dwane effectively said “thanks for the opportunity but we want to take out 75% of what we get for the land and still keep a big stake in the football club”. So The chance for Rovers to become associated with powerful corporate people in a prestigious City Centre development seems to have been lost.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Nov 28, 2019 19:59:18 GMT
The different topics being discussed under this “Hamer Gone” thread illustrate the trap of polarization which Rovers fans tend to fall into. The “ you are either with us or against us” attitude stifles the kind of constructive debate which might just throw up something of benefit to the club. Steve Hamer had his good points and whilst I have said myself he wasn’t an inspiring leader that doesn’t mean he didn’t use his knowledge and contacts to try to help make Rovers better. It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers he became expendable. The statement made by the club was mean spirited and Rovers standards should be way above that but if the fans have been conditioned into a polarized way of thinking then of course it is quite acceptable for the February 2016 “ respected football figure” to become yesterday’s fall guy and today’s villain. Likewise with Tommy Widdrington’s recent interview which I also found enlightening and thought did credit to Tommy. But, as others have commented, there is no harm in discussing what he said and why he said it. We should have enough self confidence to applaud what we like about aspects of the interview but criticise parts we don’t like and explain why we don’t like them. There is no need for a hysterical reaction either way. Which is why the Clive Richardson quotes I posted (and added to in jest) were intended to stimulate some discussion without polarization. Yes, on the face of it the experience at Palermo makes one concerned that these people are “chancers” but we should give them a chance to explain themselves while making them aware that Gasheads won’t just roll over and accept everything they say at face value. What is likely to happen is that those who “support” Wael no matter what he says or does will likely fall into line with what he wants without ever thinking of its impact on Rovers. Others, who have lost faith in Wael and can see that under his ownership the club has been stripped of his financial asset, will immediately jump on Clive Richardson’s recent track record and not give him a fair hearing. My feeling is that as we approach this next stage we should try to avoid polarization and instead take a more reasoned approach than we did with Dwane Sports. When they took over most fans thought we had reached paradise straight after the first press conference and even now some still refuse to budge from that assessment. We need to have the confidence to make any new ownership group earn our respect and not be afraid to subject them to scrutiny. If we do that in a sensible and polite way, and they know we are going to do it, then we are more likely to get owners who will make Rovers a better club and less likely to get ones who are happy to chance their arm knowing if it all goes pear shaped they can walk away with no consequences. I absolutely agree about the 'polarization' ,but I'm afraid this isn't restricted to Rovers fans, but part of modern life- I believe- driven by social media. Brexit is either awful or brilliant. Labour or the Tories are either our saviours , or will lead us to ruination. Football wise, it has led to the ridiculous situation where-as you say- fans seem to decide whether they like a player or not and then stick to that opinion come what may.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 28, 2019 20:27:56 GMT
you and your Temple Meads puns swiss! the FM peeps say it's still alive. And if the Italian Job doesn't make it past the Alps, which I'm thinking it won't, it might yet still be? As Irishrover has just posted there was no doubt that the previous regimes were totally committed to Rovers and to illustrate this there was never any doubt that they were going to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale to Sainsburys into the UWE Stadium. There was no suggestion of them even thinking about taking the opportunity of repaying their own loans and bonds and putting the rest into the pot for the new ground. But it looks as though the Fruit Market Plan situation was completely different. My gut feeling is that if Dwane Sports had been willing to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale into the Fruit Market Plan then it would have worked. And I think the Mayor and the developers probably thought they would. It must have been a great surprise and disappointment if Dwane effectively said “thanks for the opportunity but we want to take out 75% of what we get for the land and still keep a big stake in the football club”. So The chance for Rovers to become associated with powerful corporate people in a prestigious City Centre development seems to have been lost. what you say may be true, but is not yet in the public domain I think (and I couldn't spot it in journalists' questions last week) but if you are right it sounds like the AQs are chasing rainbows to me. No change there then ('beautiful piece of land', 'submitting plans in 4-6 weeks' blah blah blah...), some might say
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 28, 2019 20:41:58 GMT
The different topics being discussed under this “Hamer Gone” thread illustrate the trap of polarization which Rovers fans tend to fall into. The “ you are either with us or against us” attitude stifles the kind of constructive debate which might just throw up something of benefit to the club. Steve Hamer had his good points and whilst I have said myself he wasn’t an inspiring leader that doesn’t mean he didn’t use his knowledge and contacts to try to help make Rovers better. It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers he became expendable. The statement made by the club was mean spirited and Rovers standards should be way above that but if the fans have been conditioned into a polarized way of thinking then of course it is quite acceptable for the February 2016 “ respected football figure” to become yesterday’s fall guy and today’s villain. Likewise with Tommy Widdrington’s recent interview which I also found enlightening and thought did credit to Tommy. But, as others have commented, there is no harm in discussing what he said and why he said it. We should have enough self confidence to applaud what we like about aspects of the interview but criticise parts we don’t like and explain why we don’t like them. There is no need for a hysterical reaction either way. Which is why the Clive Richardson quotes I posted (and added to in jest) were intended to stimulate some discussion without polarization. Yes, on the face of it the experience at Palermo makes one concerned that these people are “chancers” but we should give them a chance to explain themselves while making them aware that Gasheads won’t just roll over and accept everything they say at face value. What is likely to happen is that those who “support” Wael no matter what he says or does will likely fall into line with what he wants without ever thinking of its impact on Rovers. Others, who have lost faith in Wael and can see that under his ownership the club has been stripped of his financial asset, will immediately jump on Clive Richardson’s recent track record and not give him a fair hearing. My feeling is that as we approach this next stage we should try to avoid polarization and instead take a more reasoned approach than we did with Dwane Sports. When they took over most fans thought we had reached paradise straight after the first press conference and even now some still refuse to budge from that assessment. We need to have the confidence to make any new ownership group earn our respect and not be afraid to subject them to scrutiny. If we do that in a sensible and polite way, and they know we are going to do it, then we are more likely to get owners who will make Rovers a better club and less likely to get ones who are happy to chance their arm knowing if it all goes pear shaped they can walk away with no consequences. I absolutely agree about the 'polarization' ,but I'm afraid this isn't restricted to Rovers fans, but part of modern life- I believe- driven by social media. Brexit is either awful or brilliant. Labour or the Tories are either our saviours , or will lead us to ruination. Football wise, it has led to the ridiculous situation where-as you say- fans seem to decide whether they like a player or not and then stick to that opinion come what may. This is a fair point and we’ve discussed before about Harold being booed by the North Enclosure at Eastville and I think Rickie Lambert was also given stick when he first came. But both of them were quality players who worked hard to win over fans, they didn’t feel entitled to respect just because they were pro footballers, they knew they had to earn it. I think this is a problem with some players and some owners who feel fans are lucky to have them and so don’t see the need to work on improving their performance with the aim of earning respect. We saw this with Nick Higgs who upon suffering criticism retreated behind the barricades which his “put up or shut up” supporters erected. And Wael, comparing himself with the Chelsea owner, has never given us the courtesy of preparing for an interview with facts, figures and a detailed vision but relied on his supporters to defend him because he is a nice man who means well. If these owners had been more pragmatic, and not relied purely on their highly polarized supporters but accepted they needed to earn respect, then I think it would have turned out better for them and us. If a new ownership group is on its way I hope there will a strong body of Gasheads who don’t just take things at face value but measure what is being said and done against what we think is in the best interests of Rovers.
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 28, 2019 21:20:41 GMT
As Irishrover has just posted there was no doubt that the previous regimes were totally committed to Rovers and to illustrate this there was never any doubt that they were going to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale to Sainsburys into the UWE Stadium. There was no suggestion of them even thinking about taking the opportunity of repaying their own loans and bonds and putting the rest into the pot for the new ground. But it looks as though the Fruit Market Plan situation was completely different. My gut feeling is that if Dwane Sports had been willing to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale into the Fruit Market Plan then it would have worked. And I think the Mayor and the developers probably thought they would. It must have been a great surprise and disappointment if Dwane effectively said “thanks for the opportunity but we want to take out 75% of what we get for the land and still keep a big stake in the football club”. So The chance for Rovers to become associated with powerful corporate people in a prestigious City Centre development seems to have been lost. what you say may be true, but is not yet in the public domain I think (and I couldn't spot it in journalists' questions last week) but if you are right it sounds like the AQs are chasing rainbows to me. No change there then ('beautiful piece of land', 'submitting plans in 4-6 weeks' blah blah blah...), some might say The current news item about Portsmouth seeking financial support from the local Council for their stadium expansion, with their CEO saying “meet us half way”, shows how these things work. If Dwane Sports want to get their loan repaid and keep a stake in Rovers the options are limited because you can’t meet anyone half way if you have already taken three quarters out.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Nov 28, 2019 21:45:17 GMT
I absolutely agree about the 'polarization' ,but I'm afraid this isn't restricted to Rovers fans, but part of modern life- I believe- driven by social media. Brexit is either awful or brilliant. Labour or the Tories are either our saviours , or will lead us to ruination. Football wise, it has led to the ridiculous situation where-as you say- fans seem to decide whether they like a player or not and then stick to that opinion come what may. This is a fair point and we’ve discussed before about Harold being booed by the North Enclosure at Eastville and I think Rickie Lambert was also given stick when he first came. But both of them were quality players who worked hard to win over fans, they didn’t feel entitled to respect just because they were pro footballers, they knew they had to earn it. I think this is a problem with some players and some owners who feel fans are lucky to have them and so don’t see the need to work on improving their performance with the aim of earning respect. We saw this with Nick Higgs who upon suffering criticism retreated behind the barricades which his “put up or shut up” supporters erected. And Wael, comparing himself with the Chelsea owner, has never given us the courtesy of preparing for an interview with facts, figures and a detailed vision but relied on his supporters to defend him because he is a nice man who means well. If these owners had been more pragmatic, and not relied purely on their highly polarized supporters but accepted they needed to earn respect, then I think it would have turned out better for them and us. If a new ownership group is on its way I hope there will a strong body of Gasheads who don’t just take things at face value but measure what is being said and done against what we think is in the best interests of Rovers.Good luck with that
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 29, 2019 10:40:14 GMT
The different topics being discussed under this “Hamer Gone” thread illustrate the trap of polarization which Rovers fans tend to fall into. The “ you are either with us or against us” attitude stifles the kind of constructive debate which might just throw up something of benefit to the club. Steve Hamer had his good points and whilst I have said myself he wasn’t an inspiring leader that doesn’t mean he didn’t use his knowledge and contacts to try to help make Rovers better. It’s fairly clear he was working on an exit strategy for Dwane Sports via the Fruit Market plan and when that hit the buffers he became expendable. The statement made by the club was mean spirited and Rovers standards should be way above that but if the fans have been conditioned into a polarized way of thinking then of course it is quite acceptable for the February 2016 “ respected football figure” to become yesterday’s fall guy and today’s villain. Likewise with Tommy Widdrington’s recent interview which I also found enlightening and thought did credit to Tommy. But, as others have commented, there is no harm in discussing what he said and why he said it. We should have enough self confidence to applaud what we like about aspects of the interview but criticise parts we don’t like and explain why we don’t like them. There is no need for a hysterical reaction either way. Which is why the Clive Richardson quotes I posted (and added to in jest) were intended to stimulate some discussion without polarization. Yes, on the face of it the experience at Palermo makes one concerned that these people are “chancers” but we should give them a chance to explain themselves while making them aware that Gasheads won’t just roll over and accept everything they say at face value. What is likely to happen is that those who “support” Wael no matter what he says or does will likely fall into line with what he wants without ever thinking of its impact on Rovers. Others, who have lost faith in Wael and can see that under his ownership the club has been stripped of his financial asset, will immediately jump on Clive Richardson’s recent track record and not give him a fair hearing. My feeling is that as we approach this next stage we should try to avoid polarization and instead take a more reasoned approach than we did with Dwane Sports. When they took over most fans thought we had reached paradise straight after the first press conference and even now some still refuse to budge from that assessment. We need to have the confidence to make any new ownership group earn our respect and not be afraid to subject them to scrutiny. If we do that in a sensible and polite way, and they know we are going to do it, then we are more likely to get owners who will make Rovers a better club and less likely to get ones who are happy to chance their arm knowing if it all goes pear shaped they can walk away with no consequences. I absolutely agree about the 'polarization' ,but I'm afraid this isn't restricted to Rovers fans, but part of modern life- I believe- driven by social media. Brexit is either awful or brilliant. Labour or the Tories are either our saviours , or will lead us to ruination. Football wise, it has led to the ridiculous situation where-as you say- fans seem to decide whether they like a player or not and then stick to that opinion come what may. Absolutely spot on. I’ve seen families split over this and the anger is palpable but it used to be that, going to football, was the one place where we felt amongst our own but I haven’t felt that in a long time. I actually nearly came to blows, with a totally pro NH fan, on the Wembley play off v Grimsby. Luckily, there were enough on the minibus to stop it. The guy was rabid
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2019 11:15:00 GMT
you and your Temple Meads puns swiss! the FM peeps say it's still alive. And if the Italian Job doesn't make it past the Alps, which I'm thinking it won't, it might yet still be? As Irishrover has just posted there was no doubt that the previous regimes were totally committed to Rovers and to illustrate this there was never any doubt that they were going to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale to Sainsburys into the UWE Stadium. There was no suggestion of them even thinking about taking the opportunity of repaying their own loans and bonds and putting the rest into the pot for the new ground. But it looks as though the Fruit Market Plan situation was completely different. My gut feeling is that if Dwane Sports had been willing to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale into the Fruit Market Plan then it would have worked. And I think the Mayor and the developers probably thought they would. It must have been a great surprise and disappointment if Dwane effectively said “thanks for the opportunity but we want to take out 75% of what we get for the land and still keep a big stake in the football club”. So The chance for Rovers to become associated with powerful corporate people in a prestigious City Centre development seems to have been lost. There's an element of spin here. Higgs wasn't suggesting, as far as I'm aware, that he was sacrificing his equity to get UWE built, it was just moving the investment. Add to that, at no point did I ever see confirmation that all of the non-football revenue from that project would be driven back to Rovers, and if you wanted to be uncharitable, you have some dots there that you can join up to paint Nick in a bad light. Moving forward. Have Dwayne been given an opportunity to move their investment in a similar way, if so, on what terms? Let's have facts laid out before we decide if there are actually any good or bad guys here. You are a very skilled writer Swiss. Your second paragraph above starts by making it clear that all you have are hunches and a 'gut feeling', but you cleverly conclude with what reads as a damming condemnation of these owners for losing the opportunity to link the club in to 'powerful corporate people' and a 'prestigious City Centre development. Which of those positions do you actually hold please?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Nov 29, 2019 15:40:00 GMT
As Irishrover has just posted there was no doubt that the previous regimes were totally committed to Rovers and to illustrate this there was never any doubt that they were going to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale to Sainsburys into the UWE Stadium. There was no suggestion of them even thinking about taking the opportunity of repaying their own loans and bonds and putting the rest into the pot for the new ground. But it looks as though the Fruit Market Plan situation was completely different. My gut feeling is that if Dwane Sports had been willing to roll over the entire proceeds of the Mem sale into the Fruit Market Plan then it would have worked. And I think the Mayor and the developers probably thought they would. It must have been a great surprise and disappointment if Dwane effectively said “thanks for the opportunity but we want to take out 75% of what we get for the land and still keep a big stake in the football club”. So The chance for Rovers to become associated with powerful corporate people in a prestigious City Centre development seems to have been lost. There's an element of spin here. Higgs wasn't suggesting, as far as I'm aware, that he was sacrificing his equity to get UWE built, it was just moving the investment. Add to that, at no point did I ever see confirmation that all of the non-football revenue from that project would be driven back to Rovers, and if you wanted to be uncharitable, you have some dots there that you can join up to make paint Nick in a bad light. Moving forward. Have Dwayne been given an opportunity to move their investment in a similar way, if so, on what terms? Let's have facts laid out before we decide if there are actually any good or bad guys here. You are a very skilled writer Swiss. Your second paragraph above starts by making it clear that all you have are hunches and a 'gut feeling', but you cleverly conclude with what reads as a damming condemnation of these owners for losing the opportunity to link the club in to 'powerful corporate people' and a 'prestigious City Centre development. Which of those positions do you actually hold please? On the evidence available I came to the conclusion that the Fruit Market Plan (like the UWE Plan) would have given Rovers the chance to compete again with City but it cannot proceed because of financial and other obstacles presented by Dwane Sports. And that in the near future we are likely to be told the Fruit Market failed to go ahead because it was “not in Rovers best interests “which was the same obscure reason given for the UWE Stadium Plan collapse. We will then be presented with an alternative plan which we will be told is the best available option for the club. What we will not be told is that it is actually the only option to get Dwane Sports off the hook financially and which will keep a token presence for Wael but that it condemns Rovers to continued financial instability and a status in the football World which is well below that which would be attainable in other circumstances.
|
|