Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

28 (39.4%)

No

43 (60.6%)

Total Members Voted: 40

Voting closed: November 02, 2016, 12:41:30 PM

[Bath Alty]

They have a very important job to do in selecting the manager and they balls'd this up good and proper a couple of times but I believe that they have now rectified this and hopefully will not have to do that again for many years.  I know they have also committed some PR disasters but frankly if viewed by a neutral rather than a (justifiably) hurting and angry Alty fan the written ones aren't as bad as most feel.  I can't speak to the verbal behaviour  / comments as I wasn't there.

I completely agree that our sudden change in playing staff has not been helpful, and if we kept the bulk of that squad we'd probably be bobbing around mid-table right now.

However, you give the board too much of a pass for two disastrous managerial decisions. The Tolson decision being particularly egregious given every man and his dog knew it was a decision based on loyalty to a friend rather than the good of the club (which should be the primary interest of the board).

Their most important job is to choose a manager. The board choose a manager that was happy to release most of the squad. If continuity at one level constantly brings discord at another, you can't look at the discord and say that this is a good argument to stick with the continuity that caused it.

You might be right that they have finally made a good managerial decision, meaning that they shouldn't be able to cock it up for a while. However, the jury is still out.

Absolutely this. We are looking odds on for two successive relegations and playing at a level we have effectively never played at in our history before. The implications are plummeting home support, minimal away support, reduced sponsorship, little media exposure, having to have a large cut in the gate prices, the list is endless for Evostik football. At this point you have to stop looking at who the current manager is and look at the strategic direction the club is heading in and the decisions that have been made to get us to this point.

This is my point really - the board's job is to appoint a manager to look after the football and then broadly leave him to get on with it and focus on generating support and funds, both of which they have done admirably.

What would a new board do differently between now and the end of the season?  How would that help JH get results?  The board is a long term view and long term they are doing fine, next time they need to appoint a manager they might ask for some help or do things differently but for now the job of the board is the aspects they are generally quite good at.

[Ballers]

I don't think it's quite as easy as that. Obviously you want to let the manager manage but you should be on the ball.

For example, asking if waiting for a player to become available a la Cavanagh and Griffith really a sensible method?

Who signed off the Griffith signing with him not having played all year? (This a seperate issue to the trick he pulled once he signed)

Once Lee Sinnott spat his dummy out after the Barrow game and mentioned that he could resign then a plan b should immediately have been put in place, or a contingency plan in case of that event. We ended up seemingly taken aback by his departure to the extent we couldn't even word it properly never mind deal with it.

Should LS have been pushed to bring players in after the Chester/Barnsley games in anticipation of players workloads?

Could we have announced Neil Tolson's caretaker appointment more clearly and given him a set time while we invited applications including his? Would this have given him a better chance?

What criteria did we end up using that gave us Neil Young? Interviews are as much about questions as they are answers.
Did we use due diligence, check with people at Stockpory, other players, find out any gaps we weren't sure about?

It seems NY had complete control over budget spending, player signings, surely there was some control over this after the Griffith fiasco?

- I don't expect answers to all this. In some ways it's water under the bridge (which is pulling us down a creek without a paddle) but my point is these are medium to long term football management aspects that the board needs to be on top of (rather than just letting the manager get on with it) And to be fair, in previous years that has been there by and large. I'm not patronising anybody here, the board know this. But it's hard to escape the feeling that with the massive and vital project of the Community side of things, collectively the club leadership have taken their eye off the ball with massive consequences.

[alty.fc]

I don't think it's quite as easy as that. Obviously you want to let the manager manage but you should be on the ball.

For example, asking if waiting for a player to become available a la Cavanagh and Griffith really a sensible method?

Who signed off the Griffith signing with him not having played all year? (This a seperate issue to the trick he pulled once he signed)

Once Lee Sinnott spat his dummy out after the Barrow game and mentioned that he could resign then a plan b should immediately have been put in place, or a contingency plan in case of that event. We ended up seemingly taken aback by his departure to the extent we couldn't even word it properly never mind deal with it.

Should LS have been pushed to bring players in after the Chester/Barnsley games in anticipation of players workloads?

Could we have announced Neil Tolson's caretaker appointment more clearly and given him a set time while we invited applications including his? Would this have given him a better chance?

What criteria did we end up using that gave us Neil Young? Interviews are as much about questions as they are answers.
Did we use due diligence, check with people at Stockpory, other players, find out any gaps we weren't sure about?

It seems NY had complete control over budget spending, player signings, surely there was some control over this after the Griffith fiasco?

- I don't expect answers to all this. In some ways it's water under the bridge (which is pulling us down a creek without a paddle) but my point is these are medium to long term football management aspects that the board needs to be on top of (rather than just letting the manager get on with it) And to be fair, in previous years that has been there by and large. I'm not patronising anybody here, the board know this. But it's hard to escape the feeling that with the massive and vital project of the Community side of things, collectively the club leadership have taken their eye off the ball with massive consequences.

strong post.  In terms of young Danny Higginbotham knew him well and is a friend of the club despite his short stay etc. However you only had to read stockports forum and the press release to make a judgment on that manager

[Bath Alty]

I don't think it's quite as easy as that. Obviously you want to let the manager manage but you should be on the ball.

For example, asking if waiting for a player to become available a la Cavanagh and Griffith really a sensible method?

Who signed off the Griffith signing with him not having played all year? (This a seperate issue to the trick he pulled once he signed)

Once Lee Sinnott spat his dummy out after the Barrow game and mentioned that he could resign then a plan b should immediately have been put in place, or a contingency plan in case of that event. We ended up seemingly taken aback by his departure to the extent we couldn't even word it properly never mind deal with it.

Should LS have been pushed to bring players in after the Chester/Barnsley games in anticipation of players workloads?

Could we have announced Neil Tolson's caretaker appointment more clearly and given him a set time while we invited applications including his? Would this have given him a better chance?

What criteria did we end up using that gave us Neil Young? Interviews are as much about questions as they are answers.
Did we use due diligence, check with people at Stockpory, other players, find out any gaps we weren't sure about?

It seems NY had complete control over budget spending, player signings, surely there was some control over this after the Griffith fiasco?

- I don't expect answers to all this. In some ways it's water under the bridge (which is pulling us down a creek without a paddle) but my point is these are medium to long term football management aspects that the board needs to be on top of (rather than just letting the manager get on with it) And to be fair, in previous years that has been there by and large. I'm not patronising anybody here, the board know this. But it's hard to escape the feeling that with the massive and vital project of the Community side of things, collectively the club leadership have taken their eye off the ball with massive consequences.

the first post that has made a coherent case for me and certainly worth thinking about, however my main point remains that you can only seriously consider whether change is worth the risk if you have some idea what you are changing too and that remains a complete unknown and I still prefer what we've got to a complete punt on 'something else'

[taxi Phil]

But actually things CAN get worse than this. Once a slide begins, it can rapidly snowball out of control.

Look at Stockport County if you doubt me. They dropped 4 divisions in a very short time. If WE replicate that it will drop us into North West Counties.

[Teasierbeaver]

Great post Ballers. It points out the details of what's been said many times. The board need more experience in dealing with football matters. You can't just appoint a manager and leave them to it. Callum Charlton, the Portuguese lad we signed to a contract are two examples where the board are as culpable as the manager. The manager at the time made his apologies and left but the board kept hush on misgivings and blamed fans for the managers resignation.

Disasterous PR is also something that shouldn't exist in the modern football club when it has so many options in how to connect with its fans.

[taxi Phil]

Great post Ballers. It points out the details of what's been said many times. The board need more experience in dealing with football matters. You can't just appoint a manager and leave them to it. Callum Charlton, the Portuguese lad we signed to a contract are two examples where the board are as culpable as the manager. The manager at the time made his apologies and left but the board kept hush on misgivings and blamed fans for the managers resignation.

Disasterous PR is also something that shouldn't exist in the modern football club when it has so many options in how to connect with its fans.

Totally agree with both you and Ballers.

[distancetraveller]

Great post Ballers. It points out the details of what's been said many times. The board need more experience in dealing with football matters. You can't just appoint a manager and leave them to it. Callum Charlton, the Portuguese lad we signed to a contract are two examples where the board are as culpable as the manager. The manager at the time made his apologies and left but the board kept hush on misgivings and blamed fans for the managers resignation.

Disasterous PR is also something that shouldn't exist in the modern football club when it has so many options in how to connect with its fans.

The word "Clusterf**k" comes to mind in all this

[Uncle Globnasty]

I hold shares personally in AFC, as does my husband and we will attend the AGM.  I attend as many matches as I can but won't be making the trips to either Worcester nor Lincoln.

I think everyone knows you go to as many as possible and are an example to us all. Pity I'm actually over for the Lincoln game (a birthday treat...lol), it's either going to be incredibly embarrassing on the pitch or we'll amaze everyone, but I fear it will be the former. Still a chance to meet up with people and have a few sherbets.

Take care.

[im not really here]

Understood Paul Cain's Chip Pan, it was a pretty awful night for me I can tell you.  My uncle came over from Liverpool and walked out before the votes and went home, he was disgusted and resigned his membership of the trust, having been an Alty fan for about 70 years at the time.  My friend who also came to give me a bit of support abstained from voting and I was totally exhausted by the end and had to go to the King George for a glass of wine afterwards!  I resigned immediately, of course, as I was obviously not wanted.  I have been an Alty fan, however for 49 years and a season ticket holder, including during my 20 years living in Oxfordshire for over 25 years and a Vice President for about 20 years, so it hasn't put me off being a fan.

It was naughty, you are right, emotions were high, we'd just been, effectively relegated by the FA sand it seemed to the trust members that the organisation they belonged to wasn't giving money to the Club but the aims of a supporters trust were not to just give money to the club without any targeted purpose.  Jenny desperately needed a dishwasher in the bar at the time and we'd done research and asked her what would help her and she was frustrated by the half time rush and lack of clean glasses.  Also, Ian had said that a T shirt printing machine for replica kits in the shop would be a great help to him and we'd found a supplier of second hand machines at a reasonable price.  The money raised and saved from these two projects would have gone straight to the club, it was trust expenditure for club revenue but no-one wanted to listen to that on the night and long term projects were not wanted by the club at the time just a short term cash donation.  So the whole purpose of a supporters trust, what they are and what they do was rejected by Altrincham fans and as an employee of Supporters Direct, it was always quite an embarrassment for me at work but it was a members organisation and if the members did not want it, then it shouldn't exist.  Now it doesn't.

Sausages, that is a question you should put to the club directors of that time.  The shares that STAR owned went back to the football club.  Whether they were the actual STAR shares were given to him isn't definite as the Club may have had some unallocated shares or another shareholder may have transferred some of their shares owned prior to the STAR transfer to the cricketer.  But there was a transfer of some shares to that person sometime shortly after that SGM.  I resigned from the trust board, so the trust's shares were transferred to the club by whoever was the Secretary of the trust with the assistance, presumably of the secretary of the club.

I saw recently that there was a new share offer and that some were unallocated, so there may still be some available for people to buy?

I recollect this as being a truly horrendous evening.

Didn't Geoff Goodwin leave the meeting at one point in order to be interviewed live on radio in relation to the James Robinson/18-points deduction fiasco?

In my view, certain board members capitalised on emotions running high in order to achieve their desired aim to eviscerate STAR.  

I remember being out the of Country when the FA verdict was announced, hence why i don't remember this meeting. This explains the contempt the Board have for the Club's supporters and why it is clearly bizarre that Board members are involved with the current Supporters Club. The 2 most prominent members were also involved back then. I have no idea where the Club goes from here.

[bumble]

The question is does TASC need scrapping, re-forming in a more modern sense?

Fresh faces joining the old guard.

Re-form, Re-brand. Re-launch, Re-sults.

[Jezza]

While i agree with the cult's perception that the board were determined to close star down....in fact i know this was the case.....it was felt at the time that the best way to build trust and get it into the clubs head that the fans and star were there to support and help, was to invite a board rep to our meetings.......
....that is probably tascs thinking as well....although my perception is that rather than entering into the spirit it is being used to make sure the supporters club keep in line.

[Jezza]

It was useful having a club board member at star meetings as it helped communications and for star to understand the clubs reasoning on various issues....i rarely got the impression this understanding was reciprocated though...

If the club and fans want to be understood by each other there should be a 2 way communication and representation at each others meetings surely...

[Pwill]

Rowley's lost interest clearly, and It wouldn't surprise me if he's already looking at his exit strategy. Something needs to happen and fast, as without drastic change, we'll be playing the likes of Witton and Nantwich next season.

[Nom de plume]

At the AGM on Monday 7th Nov Grahame Rowley retires by rotation and he is eligible for re-election for another 3 years. Normally, when a retiring director expresses a wish to continue in that role for another 3 years, the vote from the floor is unanimous and he is re-elected.
It will be interesting to see if there are any abstentions or even votes against his continuing as a director this time round.