Our injury woes.

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

X Isle wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

But what if, by running a small squad, with loanees and short contracts we were able to bring in better quality players than we would otherwise have been able to within the context of a self sufficient ethos?

What if we had a manager who could work comfortably within the framework of the cards he's dealt and get the maximum possible out of them?

And what if that policy, I dunno, got us to the promotion places for months on end?

Compare and contrast to the previous seasons when we had more players, of lesser quality. Did we do any better?

Flippant devils advocatism there because clearly we're doing better under Adams.

Looked at pragmatically therefore there's really no need to start pointing fingers. By all means bemoan the bad luck of the injury pile up, but that's all it is, bad luck. It's not the fault of the squad size, loanee or contract policies which has done us very well to date...unless one retains an underlying agenda for 'anti this/that/other' of course.  

   

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there a period of matches last season where we had insufficient players available to fill our bench? In fact, iirc we  could only muster 3 or 4 subs for one match. Clearly lessons weren't learnt and the same lack of strengthening in January and short term loans strategy has been deployed again by the reluctant spender.

You are right Les...

There were 7 occasions where we had less than the permitted subs in the league and FA cup in which, 6 of them we had 6 subs and 1, January 17 at home to Luton we had 4 subs.

There were 2 games in the paint pot cup where we had 5 subs but I'm not sure if that is the limit for subs.

All the information found on the excellent Green on Screens site.

Thanks Mouldy, excellent research. Pretty embarrassing isn't it, even moreso as we appear to be on the verge of doing the same thing again this season. I'm sure X hale will have none of it, after all, wtf do GoS know?

And that was when we had a bigger squad according to X hale. It's totally different this season, all it takes is 4 injuries for our bench to be a man down. Isn't it reassuring to know that the club is in safe hands

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

Bleedy Hell you're boring!!!

Go and get a pink gin and have a lie down Tone. If you wanna talk about the football do it, if you want to defend Brent do it. It's a football forum it's not that hard to understand is it?
Feck off back to pasoti if you want a Brent love in, you joined a site that is pretty well anti Brent, ignore it, join in but if you get bored go to sleep mate.

Les Miserable wrote:

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

X Isle wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

But what if, by running a small squad, with loanees and short contracts we were able to bring in better quality players than we would otherwise have been able to within the context of a self sufficient ethos?

What if we had a manager who could work comfortably within the framework of the cards he's dealt and get the maximum possible out of them?

And what if that policy, I dunno, got us to the promotion places for months on end?

Compare and contrast to the previous seasons when we had more players, of lesser quality. Did we do any better?

Flippant devils advocatism there because clearly we're doing better under Adams.

Looked at pragmatically therefore there's really no need to start pointing fingers. By all means bemoan the bad luck of the injury pile up, but that's all it is, bad luck. It's not the fault of the squad size, loanee or contract policies which has done us very well to date...unless one retains an underlying agenda for 'anti this/that/other' of course.  

   

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there a period of matches last season where we had insufficient players available to fill our bench? In fact, iirc we  could only muster 3 or 4 subs for one match. Clearly lessons weren't learnt and the same lack of strengthening in January and short term loans strategy has been deployed again by the reluctant spender.

You are right Les...

There were 7 occasions where we had less than the permitted subs in the league and FA cup in which, 6 of them we had 6 subs and 1, January 17 at home to Luton we had 4 subs.

There were 2 games in the paint pot cup where we had 5 subs but I'm not sure if that is the limit for subs.

All the information found on the excellent Green on Screens site.

Thanks Mouldy, excellent research. Pretty embarrassing isn't it, even moreso as we appear to be on the verge of doing the same thing again this season. I'm sure X hale will have none of it, after all, wtf do GoS know?

And that was when we had a bigger squad according to X hale. It's totally different this season, all it takes is 4 injuries for our bench to be a man down. Isn't it reassuring to know that the club is in safe hands

Thing is we all realise that this shit happens, a good chairman would give his manager the backing to keep the momentum going but you get the feeling with Brent his budget is set in the summer, that is that. Here we are on the verge of promotion and feck all is being done to arrest the slide. How the feck these idiots can blame it on bad lucks beyond me. We warned it would happen, we were called scaremongers, kneejerkers, surrender monkeys, it has happened and we get denial.

Unbelievable. We've all got an agenda apparently, so anything we say is invalid.

I've never understood why budgeting a football club is so difficult because things don't change that much from year to year. For starters attendances may go up and down according to form but there's also weather, the 6 Nations and Champs League clashes, TV money, cup success and God knows what else. To a certain extent these will all cancel each other out leaving the bigger picture relatively predictable. If club income in one season is £4m then in the same division it is likely to be similar in the following year. Obviously it might not be so allow a safety zone - say 90%. So in this case round that off to £3.5m the following year and you've a cool half million to buffer any downturn.

From there costs like loan repayments, policing, gas, electric, water, upkeep are all predictable. You know what they were last year so assume they'll be the same next. Add 10% again as a safety zone.

From there you have what is left as a team budget so long as it doesn't excede 55% of turnover. Whatever that comes to knock off say 25% this time and say to the manager here's your budget for next season.

All the way along the line you have been over-estimating costs and under-estimating income so the overall picture should be healthy. If great things happen and there's a cup run, Joe Mason money, attendances soar because the team is fab, we get picked unexpectedly often for TV or whatever it's all even more to the good.

If all goes to plan then there's no need to change a damned thing but if, as now, there's a playing numbers crisis then there's a kitty of money sitting there ready to be released.

None of this is rocket science. It is just sensible governance of finance. Why do football clubs fail so appallingly to implement what would be simple standard practice in any other industry in the land? And why do they expect us to swallow a load of gobshite about how difficult it all is to achieve?

Amsterdamage wrote:

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

Bleedy Hell you're boring!!!

Go and get a pink gin and have a lie down Tone. If you wanna talk about the football do it, if you want to defend Brent do it. It's a football forum it's not that hard to understand is it?
Feck off back to pasoti if you want a Brent love in, you joined a site that is pretty well anti Brent, ignore it, join in but if you get bored go to sleep mate.

Not keen on pink gin actually (not sure why that has been mentioned?) I really can't see what qualifies you and others to tell posters ''they are wrong'' If your comments are based on fact then fine - state the facts. Unfortunately we have no idea of the business going on upstairs regarding players. I do larf though when just about any thread on here gets hijacked for an attack on JB. Its getting pretty boring really. Its also mildly amusing that many on here point at the farm and castigate the admins or Nool or ?? for their treatment of some people who dare step out of line when, actually, its the same on here if you dare to step off the ''Brent out' bus. Comments like ''feck off back to pasoti'' when someone says something you don't like just about sums it up. Sad really
Why can't we all just 'support' and get the team over the line and then, if you wish, you can continue your constant moaning about JB.
McCauley out I say!

Supporting the XI on the pitch and being critical of wider club management are hardly mutually exclusive, are they?

Suggesting that they are is a very odd thing to do and completely without basis in fact.

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

Bleedy Hell you're boring!!!

Go and get a pink gin and have a lie down Tone. If you wanna talk about the football do it, if you want to defend Brent do it. It's a football forum it's not that hard to understand is it?
Feck off back to pasoti if you want a Brent love in, you joined a site that is pretty well anti Brent, ignore it, join in but if you get bored go to sleep mate.

Not keen on pink gin actually (not sure why that has been mentioned?) I really can't see what qualifies you and others to tell posters ''they are wrong'' If your comments are based on fact then fine - state the facts. Unfortunately we have no idea of the business going on upstairs regarding players. I do larf though when just about any thread on here gets hijacked for an attack on JB. Its getting pretty boring really. Its also mildly amusing that many on here point at the farm and castigate the admins or Nool or ?? for their treatment of some people who dare step out of line when, actually, its the same on here if you dare to step off the ''Brent out' bus. Comments like ''feck off back to pasoti'' when someone says something you don't like just about sums it up. Sad really
Why can't we all just 'support' and get the team over the line and then, if you wish, you can continue your constant moaning about JB.
McCauley out I say!

As SFD states it is possible to do both. The big difference in your ATD/Pasoti point is that here it is the membership that drives opinion, not the "management". You won't find any of your posts altered in any way and they will remain for all to see. It is quite clear that this is not the case on Pasoti.

Tigertony, the voice of reason
The Aviva who advocates nuking anyone that has a different view to his own.
Having a pop at the owner affects the actual team not one jot. In fact, it may well actually be in accord with some players, given Brent's refusal to negotiate new contracts that are terminating in 3 months. It would appear the owner has less faith in the team than many on here.

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

Bleedy Hell you're boring!!!

Go and get a pink gin and have a lie down Tone. If you wanna talk about the football do it, if you want to defend Brent do it. It's a football forum it's not that hard to understand is it?
Feck off back to pasoti if you want a Brent love in, you joined a site that is pretty well anti Brent, ignore it, join in but if you get bored go to sleep mate.

Not keen on pink gin actually (not sure why that has been mentioned?) I really can't see what qualifies you and others to tell posters ''they are wrong'' If your comments are based on fact then fine - state the facts. Unfortunately we have no idea of the business going on upstairs regarding players. I do larf though when just about any thread on here gets hijacked for an attack on JB. Its getting pretty boring really. Its also mildly amusing that many on here point at the farm and castigate the admins or Nool or ?? for their treatment of some people who dare step out of line when, actually, its the same on here if you dare to step off the ''Brent out' bus. Comments like ''feck off back to pasoti'' when someone says something you don't like just about sums it up. Sad really
Why can't we all just 'support' and get the team over the line and then, if you wish, you can continue your constant moaning about JB.
McCauley out I say!

I see it was mentioned on Pasoti that even the Oxford fans noticed that the ground has became a dump through lack of investment, so not only did we struggle to put a squad out through lack of players we also had to play them on a potato field because.....you name it a lack of cash.
Yes we are third after throwing away a 5 point lead at the top but we wont be third for very much longer if the rubbish form continues, I mentioned on free chat that too many times people have been too happy to just 'settle for a point' its one of the primary reasons of why we are in the shitstorm we are currently in.
Just how crappy do things have to be before you Brenties will wake up and see that the club is being run on a ventilator.
Confident for next season whatever happens ? Im not

X Isle wrote:

So, that's that for the night then. All very fractious and testy...just as it's always been, wouldn't have it any other way

You'll never admit mutual respect but I know you guys really enjoy trying to bait me, it's the gift that keeps giving for you. And if nothing else while I've entertained you at least the Samaritans switchboard has had a break from Argyles 'suicidal of Swilly' brigade

Genuinely, keep up the good work.

EDIT TO ADD - not ducking a response Franny, i'll pop back IDC. It's just I have a life and family too.  

Can only assume your prominent posting is purely to ingratiate yourself on the basis Pork Chop is about to deliver you a PNG on Animal Farm

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

Bleedy Hell you're boring!!!

Go and get a pink gin and have a lie down Tone. If you wanna talk about the football do it, if you want to defend Brent do it. It's a football forum it's not that hard to understand is it?
Feck off back to pasoti if you want a Brent love in, you joined a site that is pretty well anti Brent, ignore it, join in but if you get bored go to sleep mate.

Not keen on pink gin actually (not sure why that has been mentioned?) I really can't see what qualifies you and others to tell posters ''they are wrong'' If your comments are based on fact then fine - state the facts. Unfortunately we have no idea of the business going on upstairs regarding players. I do larf though when just about any thread on here gets hijacked for an attack on JB. Its getting pretty boring really. Its also mildly amusing that many on here point at the farm and castigate the admins or Nool or ?? for their treatment of some people who dare step out of line when, actually, its the same on here if you dare to step off the ''Brent out' bus. Comments like ''feck off back to pasoti'' when someone says something you don't like just about sums it up. Sad really
Why can't we all just 'support' and get the team over the line and then, if you wish, you can continue your constant moaning about JB.
McCauley out I say!

Your style of writing is clearly the same individual with Zero Profile on FB who threatens to expose me with his subtle baiting but hasn't the bollacks to do so, which begs the question what your agenda is

Word for word lifted from FB same as your post earlier........"Why can't we all just 'support' and get the team over the line and then, if you wish, you can continue your constant moaning about JB.

What's the point in talking to Tone?

Punchdrunk wrote:

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

tigertony wrote:

Amsterdamage wrote:

Problem one, when you have a small budget you have to take a chance on injury prone players or players returning from injury, always a gamble.
Problem two, our squad has been too small all season, it was predicted that by January we would struggle with injuries by our more senior posters and come to pass. WTF do we know though?
Problem three, we are too reliant on loan players, their parent clubs and no doubt the players themselves are reticent to be injured hence taking the safe route maybe with a slight knock instead of playing through it.
Problem four, short contracts, Brent has made all contracts as short as possible, players then think if he isn't making a 100% commitment to me and my career why should I commit to Brent?
One name is responsible, Brent, the buck stops with Brent, it's Brent's fault, we need Brunt replaed, we need McHugh replaced we need a full bench FFS, 10k at HP yesterday and the squad was the thinnest it's been since we were literally weeks post admin, for that Brent is to blame, it's Brent's fault.
Blame Brent, nobody else, just Brent.
Brent out.

Bleedy Hell you're boring!!!

Go and get a pink gin and have a lie down Tone. If you wanna talk about the football do it, if you want to defend Brent do it. It's a football forum it's not that hard to understand is it?
Feck off back to pasoti if you want a Brent love in, you joined a site that is pretty well anti Brent, ignore it, join in but if you get bored go to sleep mate.

Not keen on pink gin actually (not sure why that has been mentioned?) I really can't see what qualifies you and others to tell posters ''they are wrong'' If your comments are based on fact then fine - state the facts. Unfortunately we have no idea of the business going on upstairs regarding players. I do larf though when just about any thread on here gets hijacked for an attack on JB. Its getting pretty boring really. Its also mildly amusing that many on here point at the farm and castigate the admins or Nool or ?? for their treatment of some people who dare step out of line when, actually, its the same on here if you dare to step off the ''Brent out' bus. Comments like ''feck off back to pasoti'' when someone says something you don't like just about sums it up. Sad really
Why can't we all just 'support' and get the team over the line and then, if you wish, you can continue your constant moaning about JB.
McCauley out I say!

I see it was mentioned on Pasoti that even the Oxford fans noticed that the ground has became a dump through lack of investment, so not only did we struggle to put a squad out through lack of players we also had to play them on a potato field because.....you name it a lack of cash.
Yes we are third after throwing away a 5 point lead at the top but we wont be third for very much longer if the rubbish form continues, I mentioned on free chat that too many times people have been too happy to just 'settle for a point' its one of the primary reasons of why we are in the shitstorm we are currently in.
Just how crappy do things have to be before you Brenties will wake up and see that the club is being run on a ventilator.
Confident for next season whatever happens ? Im not

Hit the nail on the head there Punchy.

Has the sanctimonious preacher fecked off yet? He has? Excellent.

He must privately be pretty devastated that his fan faring for Brent in the early days has turned so sour with Brent's inability to deliver on so many hollow promises.

No wonder the Sussex Sage keeps his ATD distance, generally.

What gets me is he still thinks he is and was right even though all the facts would suggest otherwise. His assertion that we don't even know whether Adams has asked Brent for more players was the icing on the cake for me. Classic throbbing of the highest order.
Anyway his fan faring of Brent's Openess, integrity and honesty will never be forgotten by me. No matter how much he tries to rewrite history and deny it we all saw it.

Although he'd NEVER admit it, his posterior was handed to him on a plate yesterday, foreshore.

...incoming

So can anyone confirm or deny if this Anthony Lilly on freechat is in fact Tigertony on ATD ??
And if so it could be the pig himself in one of his various guises.

Its not the forum owner as far as we know and you really shouldn't be trying to out people on here Punchy.

Czarcasm wrote:

Has the sanctimonious preacher fecked off yet? He has? Excellent.

He must privately be pretty devastated that his fan faring for Brent in the early days has turned so sour with Brent's inability to deliver on so many hollow promises.

No wonder the Sussex Sage keeps his ATD distance, generally.  

Sorry to disappoint Czar, I promised Franny I'd pop back.

Equally disappointing I'm sure is that I'm not the least bit devastated about the current situation. It's heresy over here I know but I am content with the year on year progress on the pitch and adherence to the policy of self sustainability whilst clearing the administration debts. As for the background 'fan faring', and I know it's boring but so is being constantly misrepresented, see signature

As for Amsterdam's spoutings, my they're producing some quality weed over there these days fella if you think I've 'got the ear of James Brent. I've never met or spoken to him in my life, I doubt he's even aware of my existence.

Now, back to Sir Franny....

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

X Isle wrote:

I'll form an opinion on impropriety/chicanery if and when evidence of impropriety/chicanery is forthcoming.

It hasn't so I don't have one for you. It may never.    

That's real head in the sand stuff.

Perhaps that evidence would emerge were the club to publish full accounts? Perhaps that is why they do not.

Here's the real question: who would ever know and how could anybody ever find out one way or the other?

Obviously they can't.

Now this begs the question of trust. You seem to have 100% faith in Mr Brent despite there being no evidence in any of his actions since he's been here that he has deserved it as the stadium decays, the pitch is fecked, the new grandstand is at least as distant as it ever has been and Brent sits on a pocket of land he has asset stripped from the club while making money by lending the club money at commercial rates because his own feckin budget was so wank the books were unbalanceable.

For my part when somebody stands up and promises "openness and transparency" and then delivers nothing of the sort I have to wonder whether or not I am being scammed. I can't help it. Not after all that went before. Now Brent might be whiter than white and your almost religious fervour for his integrity may be entirely justified but we just don't know, do we? Because there's no evidence of anything one way or the other, is there? And no intention of ever providing any. Now that doesn't strike me as open or transparent at all. Quite the reverse in fact.

I couldn't afford anybody the level of devotion you seem to display for James Brent without them laying it all out in front of me so that I could assess whether or not he was deserving of it.

What was once the mantra of our club president? "Never again", wasn't it? He was quite right to say that too. How does blind acceptance of everything we are told help to achieve never againness? It does not. It makes it far more likely.

The person possessing the deepest and most profound personal integrity that I can think of is the Dalai Lama and even if he was Argyle's owner I'd be a real pain in the ass and be asking all of the same questions because if we don't, if we exhibit blind faith and just hope for the best, despite all the signs being that we were going to hell in a handcart, then we're heading blindly, faithfully, bravely into yet another New World, aren't we?

And how could any genuine Argyle fan want that?

You know what, I'm going to admit a mistake in that response to you. The response wasn't wrong... despite all the huff, puff and guff from his detractors there's never been any evidence of wrongdoing, just noise and annoyance that he's not thrown umpty thrumpy millions at the club, and I can file that in the bin because there *IS* no smoking gun and I support the self sufficiency model anyway. What was wrong was the omission that if there were to be any evidence of wrongdoing, or chicanery as you put it, then I would be mightily pissed and no longer support his tenure. Perhaps I felt that should be obvious but given how yesterday you guys didn't pick up on the obvious, maybe it wasn't.

I often get dogs abuse for long posts and for repeating myself, which is why I set up the signature, to save doing this with a sort of FAQ...or perhaps RRM would be more appropriate, repeatedly regurgitated misconceptions. I've checked what I wrote on the signature and although it was some time ago it still holds true. I backed the best available horse with the better chance of what I wanted transparency, openness and honesty.

You're right to question things, you're right to point out, as I too stated, the levels of transparency, openness and honesty have not been to the gold standard I would have liked. Now opinions will differ on how well things are going on the pitch at the moment but, as stated, I am content with the progress, so i'm in no rush to have those running thingse driven out with pitchforks...and that would be the same for whoever that owner was.

The disclosure that he's rebuffing enquiries from interested parties was interesting and I followed the discussions on both sites as to what people thought. The one glaring omission was any details about who those parties were, what they brought to the table in terms of finances and probity. The assumption on here was that anyone would be better than James Brent, well I simply can't agree with that. AFC Heaney/Ridsdale was not a better prospect so who are you to say in the hands of anyone else in the known universe Argyle would do any better?

Just as I am one of the very last to call for a managers head, the same has been true of owners...but trust me, when I go, I go big style. I don't knee jerk and go off on one lightly, I wait until there is additional verifiable evidence that withdrawl of support is necessary. That will be the case with James Brent, I am sure of that. But until such time as progress isn't happening or some 'chicanery' is properly exposed, I'll keep a watching brief.

Beyond that I don't know what more you want from me. That was my position when I wrote that FAQ 'RRM' and that remains my position now. What can I say, I'm consistent.

What it isn't, despite the wild and inaccurate misrepresentations on here, is blind, unquestioning faith. It's not perfect, I know that. But all the while the dodgy dossier of "proof" includes things like James Brent being responsible for algae on the pitch it's laughable and all too easily dismissed as wild and desperate conspiracy theories.

Anyway, that's me done you'll all be pleased to hear. There's a reason I don't post nearly as much as I read over here, and it's all over this thread. You guys are not nearly as open to considering alternative views as I am.

X Isle wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Has the sanctimonious preacher fecked off yet? He has? Excellent.

He must privately be pretty devastated that his fan faring for Brent in the early days has turned so sour with Brent's inability to deliver on so many hollow promises.

No wonder the Sussex Sage keeps his ATD distance, generally.  

Sorry to disappoint Czar, I promised Franny I'd pop back.

Equally disappointing I'm sure is that I'm not the least bit devastated about the current situation. It's heresy over here I know but I am content with the year on year progress on the pitch and adherence to the policy of self sustainability whilst clearing the administration debts. As for the background 'fan faring', and I know it's boring but so is being constantly misrepresented, see signature

As for Amsterdam's spoutings, my they're producing some quality weed over there these days fella if you think I've 'got the ear of James Brent. I've never met or spoken to him in my life, I doubt he's even aware of my existence.

Now, back to Sir Franny....    

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

X Isle wrote:

I'll form an opinion on impropriety/chicanery if and when evidence of impropriety/chicanery is forthcoming.

It hasn't so I don't have one for you. It may never.    

That's real head in the sand stuff.

Perhaps that evidence would emerge were the club to publish full accounts? Perhaps that is why they do not.

Here's the real question: who would ever know and how could anybody ever find out one way or the other?

Obviously they can't.

Now this begs the question of trust. You seem to have 100% faith in Mr Brent despite there being no evidence in any of his actions since he's been here that he has deserved it as the stadium decays, the pitch is fecked, the new grandstand is at least as distant as it ever has been and Brent sits on a pocket of land he has asset stripped from the club while making money by lending the club money at commercial rates because his own feckin budget was so wank the books were unbalanceable.

For my part when somebody stands up and promises "openness and transparency" and then delivers nothing of the sort I have to wonder whether or not I am being scammed. I can't help it. Not after all that went before. Now Brent might be whiter than white and your almost religious fervour for his integrity may be entirely justified but we just don't know, do we? Because there's no evidence of anything one way or the other, is there? And no intention of ever providing any. Now that doesn't strike me as open or transparent at all. Quite the reverse in fact.

I couldn't afford anybody the level of devotion you seem to display for James Brent without them laying it all out in front of me so that I could assess whether or not he was deserving of it.

What was once the mantra of our club president? "Never again", wasn't it? He was quite right to say that too. How does blind acceptance of everything we are told help to achieve never againness? It does not. It makes it far more likely.

The person possessing the deepest and most profound personal integrity that I can think of is the Dalai Lama and even if he was Argyle's owner I'd be a real pain in the ass and be asking all of the same questions because if we don't, if we exhibit blind faith and just hope for the best, despite all the signs being that we were going to hell in a handcart, then we're heading blindly, faithfully, bravely into yet another New World, aren't we?

And how could any genuine Argyle fan want that?

       

You know what, I'm going to admit a mistake in that response to you. The response wasn't wrong... despite all the huff, puff and guff from his detractors there's never been any evidence of wrongdoing, just noise and annoyance that he's not thrown umpty thrumpy millions at the club, and I can file that in the bin because there *IS* no smoking gun and I support the self sufficiency model anyway. What was wrong was the omission that if there were to be any evidence of wrongdoing, or chicanery as you put it, then I would be mightily pissed and no longer support his tenure. Perhaps I felt that should be obvious but given how yesterday you guys didn't pick up on the obvious, maybe it wasn't.

I often get dogs abuse for long posts and for repeating myself, which is why I set up the signature, to save doing this with a sort of FAQ...or perhaps RRM would be more appropriate, repeatedly regurgitated misconceptions. I've checked what I wrote on the signature and although it was some time ago it still holds true. I backed the best available horse with the better chance of what I wanted transparency, openness and honesty.

You're right to question things, you're right to point out, as I too stated, the levels of transparency, openness and honesty have not been to the gold standard I would have liked. Now opinions will differ on how well things are going on the pitch at the moment but, as stated, I am content with the progress, so i'm in no rush to have those running thingse driven out with pitchforks...and that would be the same for whoever that owner was.

The disclosure that he's rebuffing enquiries from interested parties was interesting and I followed the discussions on both sites as to what people thought. The one glaring omission was any details about who those parties were, what they brought to the table in terms of finances and probity. The assumption on here was that anyone would be better than James Brent, well I simply can't agree with that. AFC Heaney/Ridsdale was not a better prospect so who are you to say in the hands of anyone else in the known universe Argyle would do any better?

Just as I am one of the very last to call for a managers head, the same has been true of owners...but trust me, when I go, I go big style. I don't knee jerk and go off on one lightly, I wait until there is additional verifiable evidence that withdrawl of support is necessary. That will be the case with James Brent, I am sure of that. But until such time as progress isn't happening or some 'chicanery' is properly exposed, I'll keep a watching brief.

Beyond that I don't know what more you want from me. That was my position when I wrote that FAQ 'RRM' and that remains my position now. What can I say, I'm consistent.

What it isn't, despite the wild and inaccurate misrepresentations on here, is blind, unquestioning faith. It's not perfect, I know that. But all the while the dodgy dossier of "proof" includes things like James Brent being responsible for algae on the pitch it's laughable and all too easily dismissed as wild and desperate conspiracy theories.

Anyway, that's me done you'll all be pleased to hear. There's a reason I don't post nearly as much as I read over here, and it's all over this thread. You guys are not nearly as open to considering alternative views as I am.                        

We haven't cleared the administration debt FFS, we just owe money to Jimmy instead!

Predominantly bollocks as per......and being consistent is no biggy, particularly if you're consistently wrong.

Complete and utter bullshit as per. Where did I say you had the ear of JB then Throbby? Where has anybody, excepting you and Tomazapam Tony mentioned the fury of Brent not spending millions? Fact is we haven't. What we are moaning about is despite have higher than average gates for this league we seem to be below other teams that have smaller gates and bigger budgets.
We only had six subs on Saturday FFS!
As for your history rewrite don't bother we all know what was said.

Amsterdamage wrote:

Where did I say you had the ear of JB then Throbby?

Here...

Amsterdamage wrote:

Give me strength. Whilst your here and as we know you have the ear of the open, honest and oozing integrity JB could you find out the actual financial viability of the club? The progress on the debts? Or his plans for the new supporters bar?

"We know". Symptomatic of your revision of history, ATD myths become facts despite them being 180 degrees wrong.

Amsterdamage wrote:

As for your history rewrite don't bother we all know what was said.

Sorry Mr. Pot, what colour are you again?, you don't even know what you said yesterday

You'll forgive me therefore for not giving a whole heap of credence to what you think was said several years ago...and that's even before, both individually and collectively, you twisted and misrepresented it into what you want to believe today.