www.altyfans.co.uk
General Category => Altrincham FC First Team => Topic started by: DT on February 20, 2017, 03:34:22 PM
-
The review is now available on the Altrincham FC website..... enjoy
-
A solid looking review and reflecting the thoughts of many (not all) that I speak with. Its clearly what happens next that really matters
-
Yeah I've read it...and didn't enjoy it.
So what's gonna change in the grand scheme of things on the back of this Strategic Plan exactly ? Apart from a recognition about diversity (and the lack thereof) within the current set up, the need for a new website at long last, and acknowledgement that there is general perception about the cliques within the place (which everyone is aware of) then I don't see anything groundbreaking.
Ok, it does say that First Team matters should always take priority ( perhaps in itself this is acknowledgement that in recent times this has not been the case ) ....but if it has taken months to come to that conclusion then I despair. I was hoping there would be more depth to the future plans for the First Team because the current Board have got us into this mess by a series of poor appointments and cover ups since Lee Sinnott left. Do the mainstream support have faith that the Board will suddenly make a sensible appointment to take us back through 2 promotions back to the National after our inevitable relegation this season ....a resounding " no " would be the answer to that.
Are the Board even aware of the lack of atmosphere now on match days, outsung by 15 away fans at the weekend for example, as a general apathy has spread round the place? I'm not sure they do.
There's loads of other things we can improve to help the match day experience. A decent tannoy would be a start, and an attempt to interact with the support .....instead of a rushed team announcement (normally as the teams come out) which no-one can hear because of the lightning speed it is announced at, and the quality of the sound. The Plan praises Alty TV, RR (quite correctly) ...but for the match going fan the experience is very poor. Not a huge thing you might say, but this is all part of retaining support and encouraging new fans.
We are kept in the dark about injury updates on players in general, the whole thing is poor considering the claims to have the fans at heart. I'll be there on a Sunday night to see what is said on the back of this, but I honestly believe there has to be changes at the top for any significant improvements to be made
-
"A stretched but realistic ambition to be a national league club within 5 years"
Stretched? f**k off, We Were one 10 months ago. Nothing but promotion next season, simple as that.
-
"A stretched but realistic ambition to be a national league club within 5 years"
Stretched? f**k off, We Were one 10 months ago. Nothing but promotion next season, simple as that.
We're a National League club now.....albeit not in the National DIVISION of that league. So I hope that's a terminological in exactitude !
-
It's only a summary, to be fully discussed Sunday etc but it spectacularly misses the point that if you cosily do what you've always done you'll always get the same outcome.
Also misses the point that ambitions aren't realistic, they're what you do to better yourselves. Not talking pie in the sky ambitions but my God.
Are we going to show no bollocks whatsoever for another 5/10/15 years now. The mindset does more damage than Maunders or Berman ever did.
And judging by Saturday the angry vocal minority's about 200 people, nearly a quarter of regular attendees.
So we'll see what the board say.
-
Also, the slip that reveals a lot, and is really quite disgraceful really but shows where it's coming from..
. Also because of the extensive involvement of the Rowleys (which is overwhelmingly valued on a day to day basis), the word “family” has become loaded, and opponents target this aspect of the Club culture.
I wasn't aware that the club had any 'opponents', everyone has contributed as a fan haven't they. Or are those heretical enough to question this particular aspect of the club now 'opponents'?
Whatever you may think of the Rowley family (I'll go on record here as saying they're longstanding fans but imo their extensive involvement is not especially conducive due to good governance- and neither do I feel obliged to immediately point out the work they do, although I do of course see it) if you dare to question it you're an 'opponent'. Good grief.
-
The fact the Rowley family do a lot of work behind the scenes and on match days has absolutely nothing to with the the mess the football side of the club has found itself in under the chairmanship of Grahame Rowley and the two shouldn't be connected when the future is discussed.
-
I don't mind the word opponents.
I think it's important and been carefully chosen.
Board members and Rowley members were interviewed during this process so if they see themselves as having opponents then that is a good thing. They realised they don't have the full fans backing. And feel there are two sides currently which there are.
Taking this as fact, the board (not Grahame) must now convince fans that they can deal with this situation properly and if needs be take decisive action
-
"A stretched but realistic ambition to be a national league club within 5 years"
Stretched? f**k off, We Were one 10 months ago. Nothing but promotion next season, simple as that.
5 years is not very ambitious! Surely we should be aiming to come straight back up then be ready to challenge in the North 2 seasons after?!
-
I think it's very badly chosen and does not suggest impartiality. I kind of agree with DJTG but even the most unjustly critical of the Rowleys aren't anything other than fans surely.
-
An interesting read
Few interesting points
What surprised me there is very little if any agreed actions from the review
I would have expected recomendations to have been included given the time taken
For example wages doubling but quality dropping how do we address it and when. I get the youth links but what happens if we don't have the talent
I was surprised not to see some quick wins in there around fan and board relationships
For example . A fan on the board that swaps every year, monthly alty tv interview with Graham, face to face time with Graham monthly in the bar , using social media in different ways to communicate , setting up fund for the ground and how much we will raise and how and over how long
Plans for next seasons recruitment ,openness on the plans for the new manger , admission prices and how we intend to fill the revenue gap
My list is not exhaustive. But I am surprised at least a couple of recommendations were not made for each finding
More time will be taken for this and before you know it we will be playing Nantwich
I don't understand the short medium and long term objectives from this and next season will be here very soon
-
Unfortunately, it is just a review to establish where we are currently, and where we need to be. The board need to digest it and decide which messages they want to take on board and what that means in terms of action.
I don't see any problem with using the word opponent. What better word is there for someone who is opposed to the current way of running the club?
Observations like, the ground is tired and there needs to be paid staff on the footballing side represents a threat to the funds for the team. I'm not saying it doesn't need doing but it does need prioritising correctly.
-
Unfortunately, it is just a review to establish where we are currently, and where we need to be. The board need to digest it and decide which messages they want to take on board and what that means in terms of action.
I don't see any problem with using the word opponent. What better word is there for someone who is opposed to the current way of running the club?
Observations like, the ground is tired and there needs to be paid staff on the footballing side represents a threat to the funds for the team. I'm not saying it doesn't need doing but it does need prioritising correctly.
Yes agree and understand . But without any clear actions and commitments it's just words at present
Time will tell I suppose
But we all know time is ticking and some clear action is urgently needed now to ensure next season that our decline halts and we enter into stability. Then we can think more about 2022
A wise woman said to me once if it's pissing it down and your roof had holes in it you fix that first before worrying about needing a new TV
I'm sure you get the logic
-
I wasn't disagreeing Wayno. Hopefully, a few ideas might be forthcoming on Sunday.
It is interesting that there was an increase in players wages last year but the percentage of expenditure spent on players wages went down. We must have spent lots of money on something else.
-
It lays the right objectives, but not enough specifics on how to reach them.
-
The key paragraph is number 6.
If the board don't take it forward then nothing will change... I still feel that there needs to be at changes at board level and new blood brought in.
Another key thing out of all these proposals is down to one thing... The necessity for a new/right management team to be in place and the right players need to be sourced. We do not want players on contracts who just go through the motions and the club being unable to afford to get rid of them.
Fitness being another vital pre-requisite prior to the start of the next campaign. Without this we will continue to struggle whichever league we are in.
-
I dont think it should be for this report to offer specific solutions. They have highlighted the different issues - there is a lot of strong criticism in there - and its up to the board to respond. They should have the answers, not the two guys who compiled the report.
As others have said, Sunday is what really matters.
-
A few worrying things in there:
The board perceive themselves as weak and divided. Where's the division exactly? How long has that been and why has nothing significant changed?
Five year plan? They don't work, why bind yourself to targets across the whole unit on such a timeline? Seems a poor recommendation to me.
Seems there's more review that strategy. Very high level points made on how to move forward, no real depth to the analysis. Hopefully that's just because it's a summary.
There seems to me to be some alarming misunderstanding of some of the inputs. I don't think people are asking for a single shareholder or being bankrolled. I'm not sure anyone is against the ownership structure. It's the silent partners involved and a shareholding that includes many people that don't represent the level of inclusion the average fan has for the club.
The people who love the club the most are likely to be most vocal and angry at our current plight and they're singled out as opposition as ballers said, but also an angry minority. That's a very poor representation of the clubs most loyal support if you ask me, and I don't count myself as one of them.
Like others have said I'm keen to know what is intended as follow up actions and how they are implemented. In my experience it's very easy to deliver this kind of analysis and very rare it's acted upon accordingly.
To the board: surprise me please.
-
As expected a total white wash written by a Rowley family friend to keep Rowley and family in power
Who expected anything else?
-
As expected a total white wash written by a Rowley family friend to keep Rowley and family in power
Who expected anything else?
That's a bit harsh, as the report does call for the board to refresh itself, although that word "opponents" does nag away at me. It obviously depends in the first instance how the board react and re-establish trust with the "stakeholders", and if any open, inclusive and meritocratic (interestingly, there is no mention of it being democratic) process is put into place.
Maybe I am either a cynic or easily satisfied, but it was less of a whitewash than I was expecting.
-
before you know it we will be playing Nantwich
Since Nantwich are looking good for the glue league playoffs, they may be out of our orbit next season.
-
Just read it. I hope very much to be able to go to the meeting on Sunday but as I have major treatment this Thursday, there is a very large chance that I simply will not be well enough. So I will try to write questions for others to ask on my behalf but I really want to hear what is said and what others ask.
Will there be any recording at all?
Thank you
-
I found it a very well written concise summary of the blindingly obvious.
It does put our current situation and reasons for it into black and white.
Im surprised while it calls in small part for new investment it doesnt make more of the fact that the numerous major shareholders we have are completely apathetic toward the plight of the club.
Surprised also the word thriving wasnt mentioned...
-
I found it a very well written concise summary of the blindingly obvious.
It does put our current situation and reasons for it into black and white.
Im surprised while it calls in small part for new investment it doesnt make more of the fact that the numerous major shareholders we have are completely apathetic toward the plight of the club.
Surprised also the word thriving wasnt mentioned...
teaser
-
Slightly disingenuous in its reference point starting as 2011-12, i.e. Wages have doubled since then. As this was Lee Sinnott's first season and the budget had been severely cut due to paying off GH. I won't comment on whatever amount it was but the point is that it wasn't a normal season budget wise.
Also, inaccurate to say the CSH wasn't done without recourse to club funds. The club loaned it £25k (which became £46k). It may well have been paid back in full (?) and with appropriate interest (??). I'm not decrying per se but surprised at that inaccuracy.
I think how we can funnel more of the CSH profits (which have to be spent as it's not for profit) to the club as costs is a key issue going forward, I'd like to see a target set.
Also, I'm not bothered about a clique, real or perceived, as long as the club is run properly.
-
Good point about 2011 - 12 not being a true baseline. It is trying to show the last five years though and the conclusions (from the graphs) are still the same if you look at the last four years.
Lee Sinnott did OK with the money that was made available to him in 11 -12 though. We didn't visit the glue league :D
-
I get the impression that some statements have been lifted directly from Club releases with no eye to their veracity.( It's not as if Peter Foster doesn't know what monies the club loaned to the CSH is it?) And a thorough report would have cited its sources. As for the meaningless "contributing circa £60K per annum directly to Club funds through increased bar and event takings" that was misleading the first time the club said it and is has not become any clearer in the meantime. The notion of the report being "independent" is ludicrous.
-
Thanks for the efforts involved in putting this together, but it does really suffer from not being independent. I sincerely hope there is a strategic thinker on the Board, or that one can be found rapidly. otherwise it looks like we are heading for managed decline.
I'd also like to see an analysis of the root cause of a) Lee Sinnott's detachment and subsequent departure and, b) the failure of the process for managerial appointments, and some specific actions to deal with the root causes of both.
-
For me, this doesn’t cover anything that hasn’t been mentioned on the forum previously. It’s a useful document for putting all the issues/feedback in one place and I guess you could argue it adds some colour to certain situations, but not much.
Personally I was expecting much more from a review that has taken so long.
It simply seems a useful starting point to begin discussions at the Review Meeting, which is probably no bad thing, but I hope the meeting will provide some clearer answers than this paper has.
-
"There is a minority of fans who are angry and vocal but they are not the majority"
Leaving the tautology aside, are we to infer from this that they think the majority of fans are not angry? Or are they angry but silent? And would it be so bad if the majority were angry? Surely to God every single fan with any feeling for this football club feels angry about what's happened this season, including the chairman?
I think the people compiling this report fundamentally misunderstand what anger represents here. Anger is not the same as hysteria or hatred. Anger is emotional but that doesn't mean it's irrational. Indeed it can be the result of a cool and thorough assessment of a situation. Why couldn't this report say something like 'many fans are angry and they have every right to be'? Instead they have effectively patted us on the head and said 'there, there, you're just angry'.
Fans who are angry are fans who care and they will swing behind this club again with all their might if they can believe ever again in the people running it. But that, for me, requires fundamental changes at the top.
-
The only thing that struck me about this report was the informality of it.
-
Reads like a genuine attempt to identify what is right, what is wrong and those things fans as a whole hold opposing views on
Yes, maybe some words could have been more carefully chosen, but I would not get hung up too much about that because I don't think it matters if the board / new board / new blood on the board can act upon the findings - the review makes it clear that that is their role
Also worth remembering that this review has been done at no cost to the club by two volunteers
-
Reads like a genuine attempt to identify what is right, what is wrong and those things fans as a whole hold opposing views on
Yes, maybe some words could have been more carefully chosen, but I would not get hung up too much about that because I don't think it matters if the board / new board / new blood on the board can act upon the findings - the review makes it clear that that is their role
Also worth remembering that this review has been done at no cost to the club by two volunteers
The bottom two lines sum everything up perfectly though. Instead of signing our 43rd 44th and 45th player of he season is rather they'd have paid for this to be done professionally by an outside agency who have absolutely no affiliation to the club.
That is not a dig at Pete Foster or Nicky Watmore by the way.
-
Reads like a genuine attempt to identify what is right, what is wrong and those things fans as a whole hold opposing views on
Yes, maybe some words could have been more carefully chosen, but I would not get hung up too much about that because I don't think it matters if the board / new board / new blood on the board can act upon the findings - the review makes it clear that that is their role
Also worth remembering that this review has been done at no cost to the club by two volunteers
The bottom two lines sum everything up perfectly though. Instead of signing our 43rd 44th and 45th player of he season is rather they'd have paid for this to be done professionally by an outside agency who have absolutely no affiliation to the club.
That is not a dig at Pete Foster or Nicky Watmore by the way.
Totally agree with that
-
seriously??.....you'd rather we spent a few thousand quid on what is basically a report which tells us what we all knew???
-
The review highlights points,fact and details of information that has become apparent via the review. It's what comes afterwards, Sunday night and subsequent meetings and discussions that are more important in the long term surely
-
The review highlights points,fact and details of information that has become apparent via the review. It's what comes afterwards, Sunday night and subsequent meetings and discussions that are more important in the long term surely
Totally agree.
-
seriously??.....you'd rather we spent a few thousand quid on what is basically a report which tells us what we all knew???
You'd rather we pointlessly spent it on players who won't get us out of a relegation battle?
My point is, an independent review would have succeeded and been more telling than one done "in club".
Again, it shows us as taking the easy option and doing things on the cheap.
-
The review highlights points,fact and details of information that has become apparent via the review. It's what comes afterwards, Sunday night and subsequent meetings and discussions that are more important in the long term surely
Totally agree.
Me too. This is simply the start, and I think Pete and Nicky have done a basically good job in giving us a platform for serious discussion and decision making. And at no cost to the club.
Money will doubtless have to be spent in the longer term and keeping costs down at the start is therefore a important factor.
-
seriously??.....you'd rather we spent a few thousand quid on what is basically a report which tells us what we all knew???
You'd rather we pointlessly spent it on players who won't get us out of a relegation battle?
My point is, an independent review would have succeeded and been more telling than one done "in club".
Again, it shows us as taking the easy option and doing things on the cheap.
I'd rather the money was spent on next years playing budget that may get us back up.....or doing something with the TV gantry which ruins the newest and neatest part of the ground!!!
How much different would an outside job have been?.....maybe an outsider mightn't have got it and got the fans backs up more?
It is basically just clarifying and setting down our current position.......stating the obvious really.....and it doesn't completely shirk criticism of our weak and divided board does it?
It's what the board does with it now......
I'm disappointed it sees the shareholding as just status quo Vs ego maniac ruining the club....doesn't envisage any other safeguarded options....
-
I took part in the review, sort of scan read it on the main site, but have since almost lost interest and certainly lost any glimmer of hope in a constructive way forward being adopted. I sincerely hope to be proved wrong.
I'm not even angry anymore, it's gone way beyond that.
-
seriously??.....you'd rather we spent a few thousand quid on what is basically a report which tells us what we all knew???
You'd rather we pointlessly spent it on players who won't get us out of a relegation battle?
My point is, an independent review would have succeeded and been more telling than one done "in club".
Again, it shows us as taking the easy option and doing things on the cheap.
I'd rather the money was spent on next years playing budget that may get us back up.....or doing something with the TV gantry which ruins the newest and neatest part of the ground!!!
How much different would an outside job have been?.....maybe an outsider mightn't have got it and got the fans backs up more?
It is basically just clarifying and setting down our current position.......stating the obvious really.....and it doesn't completely shirk criticism of our weak and divided board does it?
It's what the board does with it now......
I'm disappointed it sees the shareholding as just status quo Vs ego maniac ruining the club....doesn't envisage any other safeguarded options....
There are no plans to change scaffolding on the popular side. I asked Mr Rowley as I too found it ruined the neatest part of the ground but also a good viewing position.
-
I usually stood (and may eventually resume standing) on the pop side towards the Golf Road end. If we attacked the Chequers end I'd move to a similar position down there. I stopped doing that because the gantry and its trappings were a bigger problem from that end. I've got used to the concept of relying on Alty TV to look later at the things I wasn't close enough to analyse properly.....and donated £50 for the camera update accordingly. So I basically accept the inconvenience caused and get on with it !
-
Is there going to be any mechanism for allowing exiles to put questions to the board on Sunday?
-
If I'm honest I'm almost at the stage of not being arsed at all coming to the meeting. So many things could and should have been done but never were and now it's way too late to realistically do anything about it this season. I don't trust the board to do anything meaningful about it now either, but do have a glimmer of hope they will hold their hands up, do the right thing, and the club can move on to bigger and better things.
I do aim to be there, provided we don't go to the pub after the Sunday morning cycle club ride (unlikely this week, but might happen). I don't expect much of it though as the review is a bit bare bones and the board seem so thick skinned we'll probably all get fobbed off again anyway.
What the heck have they done to our once proud club. We're the laughing stock of everyone now and it hurts.
-
For exiles who are unable to attend, and wish to submit questions, then please email your questions to newsletter@altrinchamfootballclub.co.uk, letting us know who you are.
-
Where are the club up to with this now?
Is there a strategy now.?
What has been agreed etc and what are the timelines ?
What are the priorities in terms of on the field etc ?