Legod Second Coming

Agreed but as everyone keeps telling me , the game has moved on, you need effective quality football

 

And we lost

It was effective, just not for 90 minutes due primarily to one player who is old enough to bury a header from six yards in the net, and not gift it to someone in the third row...

Victory is fundamental of course.

But victory and defeat are no measure of a team's capability after two games.

And one thing that would aid the Bank to extend support, is for a few more fans to get into the stadium and make a judgement for themselves.

But, I guess it's always the way. The sheep outnumber the shepherds.

Just wish a few of them would stop bleating on... baaaaa....

It's not a case of giving up it's a case of being realistic.

 

Only 4 teams were worse than us last year, since then we have lost over 15 first team players, brought in a few on the cheap and hired a manager with no experience of English football. Staying up would be a massive achievement, there isn't a manager alive who could get that team promoted this season IMO.

 

Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee, us staying up this year will be as good an achievement as Hull or Stoke staying up in the Prem.

Just before the 2000 European Championships, do you think the Greek manager sat down with his squad and gave them the following team-talk:

"So, boys, we'll be lucky to come away from this tournament in last place, what with having to play England with Beckham, Portugal with Figo, France with Henry, Spain with Raul, Germany with Bierhoff...."

At the top level, the difference between Club teams is often monumental - we could never compete with a Chelsea.

But at this level, as was evident throughout last year, the difference between clubs is miniscule. As we showed on Saturday. And one of the biggest differences is not the playing talent of individuals but the performance of the team.

Look at the teams that finished in the top 6. Even the Champions did not start the season with a squad of football luminaries.

If you aim for promotion, you may not get there and end up mid-table. If you aim to avoid relegation, you may not get there and will end up relegated.

But one thing is for sure. The lower you aim, the lower you'll finish.

Our aims should be points based in my book. Let's see how quickly we can get to 50 points, and then 60, and then 70 and so on. But NEVER by writing off any possible positive outcome.

Call me old-fashioned but Saturday showed me the difference between us and Birmingham was a little bit of composure. not Kevin Phillips....

Unfortunately to get those extra 5000 bums in seats then we've gotta play good football which is negated by selling our quality players like Davies and Surman.

Which is not true.

We played good football without Davies last Saturday - albeit Surman did play, but did not shine during the game.

FWIW, last Saturday we played 45 mins of the best quality football I have seen since Keegan, Channon, et al.

The problem is that you don't get to see that from an armchair, which is the apparent position of authority from where our most verdent critics like to watch games... (withering, rolly eyes)...

Even to finish in mid-table we need to take a lot of points - 60? - ; most of us realise there is little hope of anything coming our way in the first six games. By then, team morale may be too low to generate a winning culture to bounce back quickly. Jan will be under pressure to change things around to get results and will be "encouraged" to give the more experienced (sic: older and slower) guys a game and suddenly everything will be back up in the air and fragmenting. Long ball footie would be back with a vengeance. Things could be bad from then on.

 

To have won promotion was always a long shot with all that has gone on here but it was essential to start with a winning run and mentality. That chance has slipped by and probably any hopes of avoiding a relegation scrap with it.

I understand at QPR they have already taken their cyanide pills and that after two games the engraver is on his way to the trophy workshop to start annointing the new champions...

Freakin Hell.

Two games in and the season's over.

I wouldn't want to be your missus on birthdays and Christmas if you finish everything else as quickly....

We know from every season in this league that it (unlike the Premiership) is totally competitive. Anyone can beat anyone.

There was so little between us and one of the favourites on Saturday despite many of our players playing only their second competitive game at this level.

When we first fell into this league, I posted that a QPR supporting mate of mine said there were two things teams cannot cope with in the Championship: PACE and WIDTH.

And nothing I have seen in three years has made me doubt this view.

Nor do I doubt the WGS strategy that "hard work will beat talent unless talent works hard". Nothing I have seen in three years contradicts this (save for an occssional stroke of fortune).

With these thoughts in mind, I haven't given up any hope of promotion at all.

If anything, I hope that our champagne football will shake up a few in this league and if nothing else we will have a season of building for a realistic assault on the league next year.

But why shouldn' t our players believe in themselves and their abilities?

They're young and genuinely capable of anything.

They have to believe that and disregard all else, particularly those whose sense of frustration and failure to accept the reality of our situation boils over into unfair, inaccurate and biased criticism.

I'll give up on promotion when it is mathematically impossible and not before.

I doubt JP is at all bothered.

Think about it.

YOU are plucked from obscurity to land a plum job as a photographer for Page 3.

Initially you're led to believe that you'll be working with Lucy and Keeley.

But turns out, it's actually Jodie Marsh and Jordan.

Alright, so it's not ideal.

But WAKE UP.

You're still a photographer for page 3!!

Does he? Feel free to point to an article where he states this.

He did say it in an interview, and he is right in the sense that he has no control over whether to sell a player when the need for cash is so paramount.

I appreciate what you are saying, but the problem I have with all of this is that Lowe was tinkering with this idea of using the dutch guys and playing the youth before he was ousted, and yet he basically states now that these new reforms have been forced on him because of our financial state.

 

I tend to smell a rat in all of this and in my opinion, after making good profits in the past by selling our home grown talent, he intends to do the same but more frequently. In one way, this is good business, but on the other hand it is no good for the fans of this club as it causes instability with the numerous comings and goings of playing staff, and does not guarantee success because of that.

You could well be right you know.

Everything has fallen right for Rupert and he can use the lack of funds to do exactly what he always wanted anyway!

This way he cuts players salaries to the bone, promotes youth and marginalises the role of manager to coach.

And the bank have bought it. And he has all the evidence he needs to prove it courtesy of the previous adminsitration!!

someone needs to hold their hands up and apologise for taking us well beyond our means. The £7m gamble did not pay off, then some joker thought it was a good idea to gamble again, this time with money on the never never...

I must admit I was/am the first to encourage 'speculate to accumulate'. For my money there is nothing wrong with risk-taking and gambling providing you know the possible outcomes and the decisions that might have to be taken as a result.

I (like 99% of people I am sure) was all FOR blowing £7million on a promotion push.

BUT, the standard should have been set, that nothing less than automatic promotion was acceptable for this investment.

By setting a target of sixth, the board of the time were saying this:

We will gamble £7m on a chance (ie. a further gamble) of promotion through the play-offs.

That was madness.

Most observers I am guessing would now accept that GB's target should have been automatic promotion and perhaps a different mindset and set of supporting factors would have come into play.

The problem we had was giving Burley £7m with a target which he acheieved (6th) which did NOT repay the gamble (investment).

So we effectively won but lost. It was a case of Heads you Win, Tails I lose...

A rather elementary mistake...

Indeed.

 

Alan Shearer, sold for £3.3m in 1992, replaced with Kerry Dixon and David Speedie for sod all

Tim Flowers, sold for £2.4m in 1993, replaced with Dave Beasant for £300k

Kevin Davies, sold for £7.5m in 1999, replaced with James Beattie for £1m

Dean Richards, sold for £8.1m in 2001, replaced with Michael Svensson for £2m

 

And those are just a handful off the top of my head dating back 16 years.

That's a 50% success rate. I'd settle for that.

Results do bear that out at the moment but time will indeed tell on that one as I know it is early days.

Agreed, but Lowe says the bank are fully supportive of his approach and that no doubt included the acquisition and installation of a new management team and reliance on youth, etc.

Now imagine the bankers.

They get these presentations from companies all the time.

Only usually not from a director of another bank who was no doubt extremely convincing.

So the bankers make a choice. Do they buy the strategy?

And in this case, they have. But only with certain caveats no doubt.

"The financial results will show an increase in the level of borrowings which has necessitated extensive discussions with the Company's bank..."

R Lowe

You know this for a fact ?

Err yes. Lowe talked about it openly either on the OS or at a forum somewhere.

I am sure banks will also raise an eyelid if you asset strip your own business to such an extent that it is no longer a viable business.

But results don't bear that out do they?

We are no worse having reduced debt than we were with it.

If anything we are better.

They simply want to see coste restrained.

If SFC/SLH are managing their interest payments, is the debt not being serviced ???

No, they had to go cap in hand to the bank and increase their borrowing.

At which point the bank no doubt agreed providing they could see costs reduce significantly.

Which is what is now happening.

But the bank will be meeting with them every few days to make sure that this is the case, I am sure.

And they probably have given a 'revenue/amount' target that they want to see paid off by the end of the transfer window.

Well, it coincides pretty well with what Nigel Pearson played against Sheffield United in our last game, one of the best teams in the league.

 

That day, the team was R Wright, Wright, Powell, Perry, Surman, Viafara, Safri, Idiakez, (Licka) Euell, Saganowski (Lallana) John.

 

It was a team capable of scoring three goals against decent opposition whilst conceding two. At least they have done better than our current team in that respect, scoring more than they concede.

 

But then it seems to me that Pearson was a good motivator of those older players, whilst the current regime has told those that remain that they are surplus to requirements, which is hardly the best way to motivate people, is it?

Not really true is it?

The older players were higher earners who had to be shifted on.

We are not talking about new loans. We are talking about servicing current debt.

 

As I said, they could have bumped up the interest rate, and they would have been happy-as-larry.

I doubt that the debt is not agreed already at say LIBOR +1 or something, so 'bumping up the rate' is hardly likely to be an option.

And it is the servicing of current debt that the banks are sh!tting themselves about.

They have NO liquid funds of their own. They need ALL their debts serviced or they simply will run out of cash.

That's why they had to ask the markets for 12Billion. Do you watch the news at all in Vienna??

Maybe I should have expanded that point. I dont buy that the global credit crunch has any impact on Barclays attitude in their dealings with SFC.

It will.

I'm sure their lending criteria across the board will have been tightened. Four years with RBS and 17 years marriage to one of their senior managers tells me that...

They will be sh!tting themselves about their debts to SFC. Doesn't take too many £30M debts going TU to feck up your accounts.

Look at A&L - if they are not bought by Santander, they'll probably go bust.

Like Freddie and Fannie.

I sometimes wonder whether people really get the size of the storm, or whether they are simply happy with the brollies because they can only feel a spatter right now...

But someone from Barclays might come on and know better.

...from the squad at the end of last season. Not a bad side.

 

R Wright

Ostlund Lucketti Davies Vignal

Viafara Safri Idiakez Licka

Rasiak Saganowski

 

Subs:

Pericard

Powell

Hammill

J Wright

Makin

That missed relegation by a Coventry goal...

Alpine/Warwick, might I suggest you take this off-line and maybe have a punch-up??

You would like to think so, wouldnt you ? Putting aside their officiousness, bankers arent complete dullards (apart from the dropouts that work for CCC football clubs).

 

I would have argued that if Barclays play too much hardball, they are likely to get less money back than with a softly-softly approach.

 

I dont buy this global credit crunch bollllox. That sounds like a convenient excuse. They could just raise the interest rate on the overdraft, and as long as we kept paying, they wouldnt give a shiny one.

Bankers apply only banking business brains to the issue.

They want to see costs coming down and the business making a concerted attempt to live within its means. Right now, they'll care about precious little else.

And if you don't buy the credit crunch ****** might I suggest you buy a tin hat??

I would have thought of all people, you would recognise when the sky is falling in...

my point is...so many are going mental at the club for the state we are in but at the time...those "so many" were think it was all a great idea..

 

you see, we are all to blame...me, you, rupert, wilde, crouch, arry, burley, wigley, woggy, SCW, every one of us..

 

maybe look within and see what you can do to help make it better instead of damanding to know what sandwich the directors had this morning or whether rupert took a few days off..

 

never in my life have i seen a group of people think a football club is so much bigger than it actually is...I very much doubt we would see as much griping should even arsenal get relegated this summer

DD what is wrong with you man? Have you been to Amsterdam???

The major mistake was to sack sturrock after two games - one of which the team one - weeks and months of preperation out the window. That was the decision of one man and one man only - I don't recall a ground swell of anger towards sturrock - it was the chairmans decision and everything that followed was down to him. You can't blame Harry either - came into late and could n't undo the mess created by lowe and wigley - FACT. Take as much issues as you want but get your blinkers off

Or to appoint him.

But to appoint him and not back him against the players.

That's criminal.

How would Rupert have reacted in business if an underling came to complain about the company director??

Would he have fired the director??

So what the hell was he thinking?

Where was his bloody up-bringing??

The one decision you would have staked your life on a toff calling correctly...

If you love him so much why don't you marry him

Let's be honest, he's probably already ****ged his missus....

(Of course he won't get that as he doesn't come to games...)

LOL. Met a lot, have you ?

Well as it 'appens. I am quite well connected in banking-cum-farming-cum-football chairmen...

Which is why I sometimes find this site a little 'grubby'...