|
Post by bluesandtwos on Jul 13, 2020 21:09:09 GMT 1
If he felt the need to get out, why would he want to take the helm again? He was great for us. Gave us the time of our lives but he’s tainted his legacy by wanting his money back in a timescale that financially ties our hands for the foreseeable. I love ya Dean. Thank you for the memories but It’s a no for me. There was no other timescale it could be done. You get the money when the club actually has it.. or you drag it out over much longer when the club doesn't. If the timescale was 10 years, hed have ended up being paid our entire SC income for 6 or 7 years in a row...now that really would be tying our hands financially! As for him coming back in.. absolutely no chance i would have thought, especially if he reads DATM. Absolutely right about the money. One and only chance of taking it back without bankrupting the club. I don't think people realise quite how ill he was and how long it takes to come back from that. He has worked extremely hard to build Card Factory and rebuild HTAFC. It is time now for him to be good to himself and his family.
|
|
|
Post by otium (EPBS) on Jul 13, 2020 21:17:01 GMT 1
2 best days when you buy a yacht....the day you get it and the day you sell it. Get the quote right: The two best days of a yacht owner... (sic).
|
|
|
Post by Christ in Shades (art) on Jul 13, 2020 21:18:16 GMT 1
Unfortunately his legacy is tarnished, would he be welcomed back with burning torches and pitchforks?
|
|
|
Post by Million Dollar Babies on Jul 13, 2020 21:38:25 GMT 1
For those saying he had to take it now because we've got the money and to do it over a longer period would have crippled us
Well he could have set the terms to 50 quid a year for the next million years if he really wanted to
|
|
|
Post by tvor on Jul 13, 2020 22:29:25 GMT 1
Can Hoyle pass, run and shoot, If so, Its a yes from me. I'd accept just one of them at the moment. In that case you’ll be creaming yourself when Diakhaby and Mbenza come back.
|
|
ambryboy
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,647
|
Post by ambryboy on Jul 13, 2020 22:40:15 GMT 1
2 best days when you buy a yacht....the day you get it and the day you sell it. Did you get much for it?
|
|
|
Post by themanfromatlantis on Jul 13, 2020 22:42:45 GMT 1
2 best days when you buy a yacht....the day you get it and the day you sell it. Did you get much for it? Oti wouldn't be seen dead with a side parting... even at 5 years of age...
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 13, 2020 22:42:57 GMT 1
Let's just think about this as a premise. DH comes back, potentially with the club in the position it was when he took over initially. With DH being largely responsible for the position we find ourselves in? He would be on a massive hiding to nothing. He achieved what many considered impossible and then was responsible for the opportunity created being being squandered. Why put yourself in that position?
It's not particularly palatable but someone we pretty much all have a very healthy respect for is largely culpable for where we are. Why would his return, with all the additional baggage, make anything different?
To be fair to PH he has taken on a situation that is far worse than most realised. Beyond keeping Siewert and making a couple of daft comments he has done a reasonable job. Whether he might be having second thoughts is another question of course.
DHs sleeping partner role is best left as it is and allow PH to shape the future as he sees things. Stay up or not there is still a whole lot to do. If PH thinks otherwise, and I am pretty sure he doesn't, then we really do have a problem.
|
|
ambryboy
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,647
|
Post by ambryboy on Jul 13, 2020 22:47:39 GMT 1
Let's just think about this as a premise. DH comes back, potentially with the club in the position it was when he took over initially. With DH being largely responsible for the position we find ourselves in? He would be on a massive hiding to nothing. He achieved what many considered impossible and then was responsible for the opportunity created being being squandered. Why put yourself in that position? It's not particularly palatable but someone we pretty much all have had a very healthy respect for is largely culpable for where we are. Why would his return, with all the additional baggage, make anything different? To be fair to PH he has taken on a situation that is far worse than most realised. Beyond keeping Siewert and making a couple of daft comments he has done a reasonable job. Whether he might be having second thoughts is another question of course. DHs sleeping partner role is best left as it is and allow PH to shape the future as he sees things. Stay up or not there is still a whole lot to do. If PH thinks otherwise, and I am pretty sure he doesn't, then we really do have a problem. I agree with your post with one small alteration.
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Jul 13, 2020 22:59:38 GMT 1
I don't want to come across as being negative, but as our club appears to be on the verge of yet another relegation, I'm wondering whether Dean would have the appetite and sufficient return of good health to take the helm and engineer another revival, or not? I do like Phil, he's down to earth and as far as I am concerned he's honest and hard working and trying his best, but something is missing on his watch, perhaps he's not cut out for the "big league"? It might all be a bad blip and all will be OK at the end of this season and once we clear out some of the dross of our team?
It's just a question, no disrespect intended, but could our club rise again if Dean returned? If he did, what are the chances of him foregoing repayment of his £50 million and re-investing it in the club?
If we drop, could the club even survive without his £50 million, and what happens to the parachute payments if we drop? He still has a 20% share and aparently the right to increase it, but I have no idea of these details.
Perhaps it's too early to ask this question, and feel free to flame me if you wish, but I'm just asking an open question, and I don't have any fixed view either way.
UTT P.S. a fan since 1970 Loved Dean's involvement with Town, he was our 'White Knight.' It's all gone a very sour, since then.' Let's hope we find some form & goals, we need to move on! The mismanagement of the last 2 years is clear, mainly down to Dean! Big Phil inherited a car crash! Not a viable football team! - UTT. Exactly. It's verging on bonkers going on as if all these problems started when PH took over.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jul 13, 2020 23:33:21 GMT 1
Let's just think about this as a premise. DH comes back, potentially with the club in the position it was when he took over initially. With DH being largely responsible for the position we find ourselves in? He would be on a massive hiding to nothing. He achieved what many considered impossible and then was responsible for the opportunity created being being squandered. Why put yourself in that position? It's not particularly palatable but someone we pretty much all have had a very healthy respect for is largely culpable for where we are. Why would his return, with all the additional baggage, make anything different? To be fair to PH he has taken on a situation that is far worse than most realised. Beyond keeping Siewert and making a couple of daft comments he has done a reasonable job. Whether he might be having second thoughts is another question of course. DHs sleeping partner role is best left as it is and allow PH to shape the future as he sees things. Stay up or not there is still a whole lot to do. If PH thinks otherwise, and I am pretty sure he doesn't, then we really do have a problem. I agree with your post with one small alteration. We are where we are now because the vast sums we spent on players was largely wasted on championship or worse standard players. Dean Hoyle didnt pick and choose those players. That wasnt his job. He just provided the funds and backed the manager who'd taken us from nowhere, into the prem. We arent where we are now because hes taken back the first portion of the money the club owes him. The lashing out at him for that is missing the actual reason why it all went south so quickly IMO.
|
|
Amigo
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,842
|
Post by Amigo on Jul 13, 2020 23:37:51 GMT 1
If I was Dean I wouldn't even consider coming back. Have your money back and enjoy your life with your family especially after being so ill, life is too short to worry about people crying over a game which is all it is in the grand scheme of things and not worth some of the comments on here for someone who did so much and brought us experiences we didn't think possible. Things went wrong in the end, better to go wrong at the end than in his first couple of years.
I've supported us for just over 30 years now and will continue to do so what ever league we're in or however good or shit we are. I'm not saying I'm any better or worse than any other fan by the way, just view it a different way to some others seem to. Without Hoyle we would not have been anywhere near the Premier League nevermind have amazing memories of the promotion season and some of the performances at the highest level. Yes he made mistakes but he's just a fan like the rest of us. If he wants his money back, it's his money anyway so let him have it. We're still going to have a club and he's going to have the money he and his wife earned before he took over. It's not "our" money we have no right to it. We are not entitled to it. He earnt it he should do what he wants with it without some of the comments on here. It's like some people are trying to make out he's stealing money like the Oyston's did, he's not coming out with a profit for over 10 years work he'd have made far more money not getting involved.
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 13, 2020 23:55:29 GMT 1
I agree with your post with one small alteration. We are where we are now because the vast sums we spent on players was largely wasted on championship or worse standard players. Dean Hoyle didnt pick and choose those players. That wasnt his job. He just provided the funds and backed the manager who'd taken us from nowhere, into the prem. We arent where we are now because hes taken back the first portion of the money the club owes him. The lashing out at him for that is missing the actual reason why it all went south so quickly IMO. I agree that taking his money back isn't the reason why we are in the position we are. How the deal was arrived at and done where very unlike what we had come to expect from him but he did put the money in so no issue (from me). He is however culpable for the decisions taken in the last 2 years. He is also culpable to a large part for not having a sustainable plan after we had achieved the "impossible". The impression that you are left with is that because we had two fantastic seasons we should be grateful, a moment in time if you like. I am personally disappointed if that is the mindset. It's not what I expected from him. I do appreciate his terrible illness drove the decision to sell but the seeds of this mess were down long before he was struck down. I have sympathy with people who are annoyed he has used the money generated from the Premier League to pay back his loans. I can understand the argument that he was ultimately responsible for money being essentially wasted. I can't argue he is entitled to his cash but a bit of acceptance of responsibility wouldn't go amiss. It's incredibly sad that this debate is actually happening. I find it hard to believe but you can't get away from the reality of the situation. The truth is that we can debate as much as we like but the die looks cast and we can hope for the best. I fear that best maybe continually looking back at what might have been. There is however a glimmer of hope we can move in the right direction but less than 24 hours away from another massive game it is only a glimmer. What is it they say? It's the hope that kills you.
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jul 14, 2020 0:25:52 GMT 1
I can see how , as the man at the very top, the ultimate responsibility lies with him.
But even so, having got into the prem ( which undoubtedly caught everyone out a bit ) all he could do was back the manager whod got us there. And why wouldnt he? Think the attitude was 'we're here, so we might as well have a go'.. and we did.. we outspent a lot of other prem clubs whilst we were in that division. Did the first summer, the following jan window and did the second summer too.
Hoyle didnt chose any of the players,, so yeah as top man he shoulders the ultimate responsibility but them being lame, vastly overpriced players wasn't his direct fault. Wagner was a hero fopr taking us up.. a legend... he worked the transfer market brilliantly to get a team that could go up... but them he wasted almost all our prem money on rubbish,
Should dean have put the brakes on. Stopped the signings... in hindsight , yes. Bet he wishes he had. But at the time, you have a manager who has achieved the impossible, then achieved the impossible again.. so are you really going to lose faith in him at that point and pull the plug on his wish list? Especially when there are a host of clubs trying to lure him away from you? Its very easy to say in hindsight, yes he should have. But in the summer after we'd stayed up I can imagine the outrage, disappointment and screams of lack of ambition on here if he had.
Nothing Dean Hoyle has done in terms of money has put us where we are now.. not in the negative sense anyway.. it is purely down to the people deciding who we spent our money on blowing it all... absolute fortunes of it.
|
|
ambryboy
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,647
|
Post by ambryboy on Jul 14, 2020 0:53:21 GMT 1
I can see how , as the man at the very top, the ultimate responsibility lies with him. But even so, having got into the prem ( which undoubtedly caught everyone out a bit ) all he could do was back the manager whod got us there. And why wouldnt he? Think the attitude was 'we're here, so we might as well have a go'.. and we did.. we outspent a lot of other prem clubs whilst we were in that division. Did the first summer, the following jan window and did the second summer too. Hoyle didnt chose any of the players,, so yeah as top man he shoulders the ultimate responsibility but them being lame, vastly overpriced players wasn't his direct fault. Wagner was a hero fopr taking us up.. a legend... he worked the transfer market brilliantly to get a team that could go up... but them he wasted almost all our prem money on rubbish, Should dean have put the brakes on. Stopped the signings... in hindsight , yes. Bet he wishes he had. But at the time, you have a manager who has achieved the impossible, then achieved the impossible again.. so are you really going to lose faith in him at that point and pull the plug on his wish list? Especially when there are a host of clubs trying to lure him away from you? Its very easy to say in hindsight, yes he should have. But in the summer after we'd stayed up I can imagine the outrage, disappointment and screams of lack of ambition on here if he had. Nothing Dean Hoyle has done in terms of money has put us where we are now.. not in the negative sense anyway.. it is purely down to the people deciding who we spent our money on blowing it all... absolute fortunes of it. Sorry Captain but I can't agree with you here as the terms of the transfer to Phil have put us in a terrible position financially. Yes I know you'll say (as you have many many times) that he had every right to his money back but if he truly cared about Town he could have structured the deal differently. Very few people who invest in football ever see their investment back and as someone else posted earlier he could have arranged payback over a significantly longer period. Why not be reimbursed at a rate of say £500,000 per annum over 100 years which would have been affordable for the club and would have kept him and his family in a very comfortable position for a long time. Why did it have to be repaid so quickly as I'm sure there were a number of ways the ownership could have changed hands whilst ensuring a substantial return on his investment.
|
|
wigster
Andy Booth Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 3,196
|
Post by wigster on Jul 14, 2020 1:03:37 GMT 1
Quite simple for me.
Without Dean Hoyle we probably wouldn't have got to the Premier League - it happened on his watch.
Without Dean Hoyle we probably wouldn't be in the mess we are now - it happened on his watch.
You can't have it both ways,
2 questions - if there was a threat of administration will he still insist on getting his money back at the rate he agreed with PH when DH approached him ? - why did Julian Winter resign ?
|
|
buckers
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,771
Member is Online
|
Post by buckers on Jul 14, 2020 6:18:45 GMT 1
I agree with your post with one small alteration. We are where we are now because the vast sums we spent on players was largely wasted on championship or worse standard players. Dean Hoyle didnt pick and choose those players. That wasnt his job. He just provided the funds and backed the manager who'd taken us from nowhere, into the prem. We arent where we are now because hes taken back the first portion of the money the club owes him. The lashing out at him for that is missing the actual reason why it all went south so quickly IMO. Have Slapp’s and Dean Hoyle ever been seen in the same room at the same time? I don’t know if you’re pally with Dean. If you are you’re a good mate.
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Jul 14, 2020 6:38:02 GMT 1
Some right fucktards on here.
Dean takes the responsibility for the failures of the club, he was the man at the top, but if you blame him for it, then you are a fool. The bloke was seriously ill for most of last season, and prior to that was happy to spend (by our standards) obscene amounts of money to buy players that he was being asked to finance - who pretty much all turned up to be shite.
All that, while letting you watch premier league football for fuck all.
If he did fancy coming back (and I've always suspected the deal he went for allowed him that chance), he'd probably be the only person on the planet with the will and cash to give the club the suppport it would need to re-establish itself.
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 14, 2020 6:59:41 GMT 1
I can see how , as the man at the very top, the ultimate responsibility lies with him. But even so, having got into the prem ( which undoubtedly caught everyone out a bit ) all he could do was back the manager whod got us there. And why wouldnt he? Think the attitude was 'we're here, so we might as well have a go'.. and we did.. we outspent a lot of other prem clubs whilst we were in that division. Did the first summer, the following jan window and did the second summer too. Hoyle didnt chose any of the players,, so yeah as top man he shoulders the ultimate responsibility but them being lame, vastly overpriced players wasn't his direct fault. Wagner was a hero fopr taking us up.. a legend... he worked the transfer market brilliantly to get a team that could go up... but them he wasted almost all our prem money on rubbish, Should dean have put the brakes on. Stopped the signings... in hindsight , yes. Bet he wishes he had. But at the time, you have a manager who has achieved the impossible, then achieved the impossible again.. so are you really going to lose faith in him at that point and pull the plug on his wish list? Especially when there are a host of clubs trying to lure him away from you? Its very easy to say in hindsight, yes he should have. But in the summer after we'd stayed up I can imagine the outrage, disappointment and screams of lack of ambition on here if he had. Nothing Dean Hoyle has done in terms of money has put us where we are now.. not in the negative sense anyway.. it is purely down to the people deciding who we spent our money on blowing it all... absolute fortunes of it. I take the point but the decision to continue without an experienced director of football was odd. Nobody, with the possible exception of Winter, had any experience of running a club in the Premier League. For a man who has been outstandingly successful in business it's incredible to me that there wasn't more of a structured plan. I can accept the period from achieving promotion to Crystal Palace was 100mph and largely a gamble but after that there should have been a long term strategy. That strategy would have enabled us to be more prepared for Premier League season 2 and beyond. Planning should have been in place for relegation and a structure for sustainable development as a club. Let's consider one example, Canalside. The decision was taken to make it a state of the art top ranking facility. How long has that taken to complete? How many changes, probably for perfectly understandable reasons, have been made. It is an example of the way things have gone. I genuinely don't think you could look at the decisions taken since promotion and say they were structured and long term. This is something that could, and you can argue should have been better. You can argue that his illness kicked in and changed things but the die was cast in the 18 months before. The illness merely changed an already flawed dynamic. Only time will tell, and this observation (as with many) is with hindsight, but the decision Norwich made to essentially accept relegation and use the money in a long term way will be interesting to watch. If they return to the Premier League it will surely be justified. Even if they challenge and fail they are likely to be able to go again. Norwich are city club, with a more recent history of top flight success but they aren't so far ahead in attendance and potential. I genuinely find it baffling/ironic that DH was always proud of Town not being a basket case. Yet, we are in danger of, if not being one, performing and perceived as one. The fact is that we are where we are. It is however important that everyone acknowledges this. The lessons must be learned and we need to have a strategy for a sustainable club that can once again have at least the potential of achieving a degree of relative success. If we do scrape up breathing a sigh of relief and expecting things to get better isn't going to work. The trust of the loyal and incredibly resilient fan base has been significantly fractured. Telling us, and I know it was said with the best intentions, to be positive and stick together isn't going to work. The club had an identity for a while that was unique. Everyone was aligned, from top to bottom This has dissolved and needs to be rebuilt. That alignment came from openness, frankness and mutual respect. Although not completely abandoned it is certainly damaged. In times past we could have gone to Canalside and all our questions would have been answered by DH. Although PH is in charge he is not responsible for the position he inherited. DH taking responsibility and taking the pressure off would help. He is still involved so he has an effective voice in what now happens. Of course in raking responsibility he will be challenged with the question "why are you taking the money back"? It's a question that he could reasonably answer "because it's mine". A more reasonable question would be; "What was the plan in structuring the deal (with PH) in such a way and what were you hoping to achieve"? I doubt very much we will get an answer but I make the point because I am sure many people feel a bit let down a man they respect, and more importantly, trust implicitly. Of course the fact is had we won all our games since lockdown this debate would probably not have occurred. That doesn't of course mean that these issues don't exist, they are still there and need attention. The problem that relegation would have is that the interest, belief and pride that many have/had would be dissapated. It took two generations to revitalise that belief in the club and to lose it may take as long to recreate it. I still believe that DH is a good man, he did many great things and without his money it is true we wouldn't achieved many of the things of the past decade. He is however not immune to criticism and to be held to account for the decisions taken. As I say we are were we are. As someone once wrote, "those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to live in it". Everyone needs to learn, if anyone doesn't understand this we then are surely heading that worst scenario, looking back at what might have been. Here's hoping that 11 men in blue and white stripes can set a foundation for recovery over 3 games, starting tonight. UTT
|
|
|
Post by bluestripe on Jul 14, 2020 7:48:59 GMT 1
I can see how , as the man at the very top, the ultimate responsibility lies with him. But even so, having got into the prem ( which undoubtedly caught everyone out a bit ) all he could do was back the manager whod got us there. And why wouldnt he? Think the attitude was 'we're here, so we might as well have a go'.. and we did.. we outspent a lot of other prem clubs whilst we were in that division. Did the first summer, the following jan window and did the second summer too. Hoyle didnt chose any of the players,, so yeah as top man he shoulders the ultimate responsibility but them being lame, vastly overpriced players wasn't his direct fault. Wagner was a hero fopr taking us up.. a legend... he worked the transfer market brilliantly to get a team that could go up... but them he wasted almost all our prem money on rubbish, Should dean have put the brakes on. Stopped the signings... in hindsight , yes. Bet he wishes he had. But at the time, you have a manager who has achieved the impossible, then achieved the impossible again.. so are you really going to lose faith in him at that point and pull the plug on his wish list? Especially when there are a host of clubs trying to lure him away from you? Its very easy to say in hindsight, yes he should have. But in the summer after we'd stayed up I can imagine the outrage, disappointment and screams of lack of ambition on here if he had. Nothing Dean Hoyle has done in terms of money has put us where we are now.. not in the negative sense anyway.. it is purely down to the people deciding who we spent our money on blowing it all... absolute fortunes of it. Sorry Captain but I can't agree with you here as the terms of the transfer to Phil have put us in a terrible position financially. Yes I know you'll say (as you have many many times) that he had every right to his money back but if he truly cared about Town he could have structured the deal differently. Very few people who invest in football ever see their investment back and as someone else posted earlier he could have arranged payback over a significantly longer period. Why not be reimbursed at a rate of say £500,000 per annum over 100 years which would have been affordable for the club and would have kept him and his family in a very comfortable position for a long time. Why did it have to be repaid so quickly as I'm sure there were a number of ways the ownership could have changed hands whilst ensuring a substantial return on his investment. "structured the deal differently" - great euphemism for not getting his cash back 😀
|
|
irverino
Andy Booth Terrier
Posts: 3,589
|
Post by irverino on Jul 14, 2020 8:16:48 GMT 1
Dean has invested heavily into The Works bookstores in the last few years making him a 30% owner & chairman (his annual statement due anytime), so I'm not sure the idea of been full time chairman of Town again would appeal to him, you could argue until he is paid back (contract small print), he is still the owner in effect of HTAFC.......maybe his sons would take over??
|
|
|
Post by clayts on Jul 14, 2020 9:25:59 GMT 1
Quite simple for me. Without Dean Hoyle we probably wouldn't have got to the Premier League - it happened on his watch. Without Dean Hoyle we probably wouldn't be in the mess we are now - it happened on his watch. You can't have it both ways, 2 questions - if there was a threat of administration will he still insist on getting his money back at the rate he agreed with PH when DH approached him ? - why did Julian Winter resign ?Julian had every intention of staying on after Hoyle's departure, however, the working relationship with Phil Hodgkinson was the reason for his departure.
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 14, 2020 9:26:37 GMT 1
Some right fucktards on here. Dean takes the responsibility for the failures of the club, he was the man at the top, but if you blame him for it, then you are a fool. The bloke was seriously ill for most of last season, and prior to that was happy to spend (by our standards) obscene amounts of money to buy players that he was being asked to finance - who pretty much all turned up to be shite. All that, while letting you watch premier league football for fuck all. If he did fancy coming back (and I've always suspected the deal he went for allowed him that chance), he'd probably be the only person on the planet with the will and cash to give the club the suppport it would need to re-establish itself. So if we had paid "full price" for Premier League football we would have been allowed to offer criticism? His illness, as terrible as it was, doesn't excuse the mistakes made, for which he is responsible. Does it make him a bad guy? No. Does it mean he made mistakes that need to be acknowledged and learned from? Yes, in my view, it does. I don't see what we paid has anything to do with how the club was run.
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 14, 2020 9:39:51 GMT 1
Quite simple for me. Without Dean Hoyle we probably wouldn't have got to the Premier League - it happened on his watch. Without Dean Hoyle we probably wouldn't be in the mess we are now - it happened on his watch. You can't have it both ways, 2 questions - if there was a threat of administration will he still insist on getting his money back at the rate he agreed with PH when DH approached him ? - why did Julian Winter resign ?Julian had every intention of staying on after Hoyle's departure, however, the working relationship with Phil Hodgkinson was the reason for his departure. So what does that mean? PH didn't rate JW or vice versa? Fundamental disagreements over the required direction? If you know the facts state them, this suggests that JW didn't rate PH and chose to leave i.e. painting PH in a poor light, if you support the theory that JW was a man we should have kept. The bigger picture is what the plan was following promotion? who was responsible for what decisions and why those decisions didn't work out? If you don't have the detail of what went on (acknowledging everyone has their own spin) you get into the realms of conspiracy theories. Why was Winter leaving such a negative event? What could he have done differently had he stayed? What did he do when he was here? The fact is as long as the team continues to struggle on the pitch these debates will rage. I would love for someone who is frank, open and entirely honest to come out and say; "This is what happened, it resulted in this and we should have done...". Now that would be really open and welcome, but it isn't looking like happening, and perhaps it doesn't need to in the public domain. However, that assessment and frankness is required within the club and those lessons need to be learned. A plan is then required, with delegated authority to trusted stakeholders to deliver and continually review against the outcome we want to achieve. Once again the details of the plan do not need to be shared widely but we need to understand what the plan is and what we are looking to broadly achieve. It is something we knew in the years before promotion to the Premier League and it built trust and respect. I appreciate that people will speculate and offer their insight, and that's fine I suppose. What we do need is the club to get back to an openness that people can trust, they may not like, but ultimately respect. To be fair until the season is over in 10 days then there is little value, but after then that should happen. In the meantime the debate and speculation is nothing more than just that speculation.
|
|
|
Post by clayts on Jul 14, 2020 9:50:50 GMT 1
Julian had every intention of staying on after Hoyle's departure, however, the working relationship with Phil Hodgkinson was the reason for his departure. So what does that mean? PH didn't rate JW or vice versa? Fundamental disagreements over the required direction? If you know the facts state them, this suggests that JW didn't rate PH and chose to leave i.e. painting PH in a poor light, if you support the theory that JW was a man we should have kept. The bigger picture is what the plan was following promotion? who was responsible for what decisions and why those decisions didn't work out? If you don't have the detail of what went on (acknowledging everyone has their own spin) you get into the realms of conspiracy theories. Why was Winter leaving such a negative event? What could he have done differently had he stayed? What did he do when he was here? The fact is as long as the team continues to struggle on the pitch these debates will rage. I would love for someone who is frank, open and entirely honest to come out and say; "This is what happened, it resulted in this and we should have done...". Now that would be really open and welcome, but it isn't looking like happening, and perhaps it doesn't need to in the public domain. However, that assessment and frankness is required within the club and those lessons need to be learned. A plan is then required, with delegated authority to trusted stakeholders to deliver and continually review against the outcome we want to achieve. Once again the details of the plan do not need to be shared widely but we need to understand what the plan is and what we are looking to broadly achieve. It is something we knew in the years before promotion to the Premier League and it built trust and respect. I appreciate that people will speculate and offer their insight, and that's fine I suppose. What we do need is the club to get back to an openness that people can trust, they may not like, but ultimately respect. To be fair until the season is over in 10 days then there is little value, but after then that should happen. In the meantime the debate and speculation is nothing more than just that speculation. Winter left because he couldn't work with Hodgkinson. It's irrelevant whether we should have kept him or not, I don't know the answer, but he was the CEO during our must successful period in the last 50 years.
|
|
|
Post by clayts on Jul 14, 2020 9:52:12 GMT 1
Some right fucktards on here. Dean takes the responsibility for the failures of the club, he was the man at the top, but if you blame him for it, then you are a fool. The bloke was seriously ill for most of last season, and prior to that was happy to spend (by our standards) obscene amounts of money to buy players that he was being asked to finance - who pretty much all turned up to be shite. All that, while letting you watch premier league football for fuck all. If he did fancy coming back (and I've always suspected the deal he went for allowed him that chance), he'd probably be the only person on the planet with the will and cash to give the club the suppport it would need to re-establish itself. So if we had paid "full price" for Premier League football we would have been allowed to offer criticism? His illness, as terrible as it was, doesn't excuse the mistakes made, for which he is responsible. Does it make him a bad guy? No. Does it mean he made mistakes that need to be acknowledged and learned from? Yes, in my view, it does. I don't see what we paid has anything to do with how the club was run. Some of the mistakes preceded his illness anyway, people refer to his illness as a convenient excuse rather than a real reason.
|
|
|
Post by blue1003 on Jul 14, 2020 9:58:25 GMT 1
Here's hoping that 11 men in blue and white stripes can set a foundation for recovery over 3 games, starting tonight. Not 11 in blue and white tonight, I hope Seriously though, good post - thoughtful and well argued.
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 14, 2020 10:06:48 GMT 1
Here's hoping that 11 men in blue and white stripes can set a foundation for recovery over 3 games, starting tonight. Not 11 in blue and white tonight, I hope Seriously though, good post - thoughtful and well argued. I wasn't thinking there, bugger
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Jul 14, 2020 10:15:19 GMT 1
So what does that mean? PH didn't rate JW or vice versa? Fundamental disagreements over the required direction? If you know the facts state them, this suggests that JW didn't rate PH and chose to leave i.e. painting PH in a poor light, if you support the theory that JW was a man we should have kept. The bigger picture is what the plan was following promotion? who was responsible for what decisions and why those decisions didn't work out? If you don't have the detail of what went on (acknowledging everyone has their own spin) you get into the realms of conspiracy theories. Why was Winter leaving such a negative event? What could he have done differently had he stayed? What did he do when he was here? The fact is as long as the team continues to struggle on the pitch these debates will rage. I would love for someone who is frank, open and entirely honest to come out and say; "This is what happened, it resulted in this and we should have done...". Now that would be really open and welcome, but it isn't looking like happening, and perhaps it doesn't need to in the public domain. However, that assessment and frankness is required within the club and those lessons need to be learned. A plan is then required, with delegated authority to trusted stakeholders to deliver and continually review against the outcome we want to achieve. Once again the details of the plan do not need to be shared widely but we need to understand what the plan is and what we are looking to broadly achieve. It is something we knew in the years before promotion to the Premier League and it built trust and respect. I appreciate that people will speculate and offer their insight, and that's fine I suppose. What we do need is the club to get back to an openness that people can trust, they may not like, but ultimately respect. To be fair until the season is over in 10 days then there is little value, but after then that should happen. In the meantime the debate and speculation is nothing more than just that speculation. Winter left because he couldn't work with Hodgkinson. It's irrelevant whether we should have kept him or not, I don't know the answer, but he was the CEO during our must successful period in the last 50 years. But you are making it relevant. This implies we lost a really important member of the senior management team at the club because he couldn't work with PH. This leads to the next question which will then be debated, what is wrong with PH (as it suggests that he is at fault). My point is without the honest story, and the ability to apply context, the headline takes the story in another direction i.e. PH can't get on with people, people don't like PH and this is causing issues behind the scenes at the club. It might be true, but we don't know.
|
|
|
Post by griffa on Jul 14, 2020 10:18:34 GMT 1
So if we had paid "full price" for Premier League football we would have been allowed to offer criticism? His illness, as terrible as it was, doesn't excuse the mistakes made, for which he is responsible. Does it make him a bad guy? No. Does it mean he made mistakes that need to be acknowledged and learned from? Yes, in my view, it does. I don't see what we paid has anything to do with how the club was run. Some of the mistakes preceded his illness anyway, people refer to his illness as a convenient excuse rather than a real reason. Brexit means Brexit, sound familiar! - UTT.
|
|