[Archived] John Williams And The Board

[bob fleming]

Thanks thenodrog, but what we all need from the management is in their actions on what they do, who they bring in that makes us all sit up and go wow! and give off a positive feel again.

And how do you propose they do that with our transfer budget?

[RevidgeBlue]

Without wanting to be alarmist we're staring down the barrel of a potential crisis here.

Owners who want out have already driven away an outstanding young manager and backroom team, and if we're not very careful by the time a new man is appointed he may find most of our better players have also packed their bags in readiness for a move.

Meanwhile it is clear from John Williams recent comments that there has been an inkling for some time Hughes was getting restless. However there doesn't appear to have been any real attempt to placate him by offering more funding, nor does there appear to have been any real contingency planning done for what seems now to have been an inevitable exit.

It's really poor long term planning that this situation has been allowed to arise for the sake of a bit of short term penny pinching. It also raises the question once again of whether our Board carries any actual clout or performs any real function.

I know they don't control the pursestrings but surely they could see this situation developing. Did they warn the Trustees accordingly? If so did the Trustees receive that warning but basically ignore it?

[philipl]

Without wanting to be alarmist we're staring down the barrel of a potential crisis here.

Owners who want out have already driven away an outstanding young manager and backroom team, and if we're not very careful by the time a new man is appointed he may find most of our better players have also packed their bags in readiness for a move.

Meanwhile it is clear from John Williams recent comments that there has been an inkling for some time Hughes was getting restless. However there doesn't appear to have been any real attempt to placate him by offering more funding, nor does there appear to have been any real contingency planning done for what seems now to have been an inevitable exit.

It's really poor long term planning that this situation has been allowed to arise for the sake of a bit of short term penny pinching. It also raises the question once again of whether our Board carries any actual clout or performs any real function.

I know they don't control the pursestrings but surely they could see this situation developing. Did they warn the Trustees accordingly? If so did the Trustees receive that warning but basically ignore it?

All these things are possible.

But I think you will find many but not all your fears (sadly) will be misplaced.

The last two paragraphs are way wide of the mark and no I'm not going to PM you.

[Alan75]

Without wanting to be alarmist we're staring down the barrel of a potential crisis here.

Owners who want out have already driven away an outstanding young manager and backroom team, and if we're not very careful by the time a new man is appointed he may find most of our better players have also packed their bags in readiness for a move.

Meanwhile it is clear from John Williams recent comments that there has been an inkling for some time Hughes was getting restless. However there doesn't appear to have been any real attempt to placate him by offering more funding, nor does there appear to have been any real contingency planning done for what seems now to have been an inevitable exit.

It's really poor long term planning that this situation has been allowed to arise for the sake of a bit of short term penny pinching. It also raises the question once again of whether our Board carries any actual clout or performs any real function.

I know they don't control the pursestrings but surely they could see this situation developing. Did they warn the Trustees accordingly? If so did the Trustees receive that warning but basically ignore it?

You could also interpret that an other way. Bearing in mind Bowens comments that the Hughes and the coaching staff had wanted bigger club for some time.

If JW and the board had an inkling that Hughes wanted to jump ship, then quite rightly the board have retained any funds to enable a new manager to fund rebuilding. Heck every manager wants to build his own team dont they, they dont want the stigma of winning something with the previous managers team.

The board have also been crafty by signing most of the players to longer contracts, preventing the out going manager poaching at a reduced cost.

[JAL]

And how do you propose they do that with our transfer budget?

Money does help bob, but Mark Hughes seemed to have done remarkably well on limited funds, surely now though the time has come to stretch the size of that manageable debt we hear about for the new team at Rovers.

At the end of the day i'm open minded as to how things pan out from here, but come whatever, the club needs to maintain a real positive image otherwise the Blackburn fans wont be kidded for too long and will soon disappear rarely to be seen again because thats just how many are.

[RevidgeBlue]

If JW and the board had an inkling that Hughes wanted to jump ship, then quite rightly the board have retained any funds to enable a new manager to fund rebuilding.

That would be all well and good provided the new man is given some funding Alan.

Personally I wouldn't go with that interpretation as significant funding has been denied Hughes ever since he took over, not just in the last twelve months when it might have been evident he was restless.

[roverich]

Meanwhile it is clear from John Williams recent comments that there has been an inkling for some time Hughes was getting restless. However there doesn't appear to have been any real attempt to placate him by offering more funding, nor does there appear to have been any real contingency planning done for what seems now to have been an inevitable exit.

I read the article where JW mentioned that he had begun to feel Hughes' departure was only a matter of time after he was linked with Newcastle in January. JW went on to say that given that he had already begun mentally preparing himself for Hughes' departure and replacement and considering what kind of manager the club needed. IMO the next step beyond that would be drawing up a shortlist of potential managers and beginning interviews, etc. I'm fairly sure that kind of behaviour would have resulted in Sparky saying "OI! What the ****'s going on?!" and walking out the door.

On the one hand you complain that the club/board didn't do enough to convince/force Hughes to stay and yet in that post you suggest we should have been lining up replacements before he left!

On the contrary I think JW has been fantastic. He had the foresight to realise in January that Hughes would be leaving soon and began thinking about the next chapter and specifically about (not who the club would bring in as his replacement) what kind of manager the club needed to continue going forward. I know Hughes' departure has disappointed us all but you can't have a gripe over JW's actions. And finally, as has been said many times already only for someone else to reiterate the same dead point, we can't offer a manager transfer funds we just don't have - I've already read arguments for and against this in terms of what the trustees control and the future of their other investments so please review previous posts regarding this or we'll end up going in circles.

[RevidgeBlue]

we can't offer a manager transfer funds we just don't have -

Don't understand you on that point, are you saying the Trustees have no money?

Or don't control any rather, as it isn't theirs.

Don't they control hundreds of millions of pounds worth of assets which will produce substantial annual interest?

[roverich]

Don't understand you on that point, are you saying the Trustees have no money?

Or don't control any rather, as it isn't theirs.

Don't they control hundreds of millions of pounds worth of assets which will produce substantial annual interest?

I've already read arguments for and against this in terms of what the trustees control and the future of their other investments so please review previous posts regarding this or we'll end up going in circles.

[JAL]

Without wanting to be alarmist we're staring down the barrel of a potential crisis here.

Owners who want out have already driven away an outstanding young manager and backroom team, and if we're not very careful by the time a new man is appointed he may find most of our better players have also packed their bags in readiness for a move.

Meanwhile it is clear from John Williams recent comments that there has been an inkling for some time Hughes was getting restless. However there doesn't appear to have been any real attempt to placate him by offering more funding, nor does there appear to have been any real contingency planning done for what seems now to have been an inevitable exit.

It's really poor long term planning that this situation has been allowed to arise for the sake of a bit of short term penny pinching. It also raises the question once again of whether our Board carries any actual clout or performs any real function.

I know they don't control the pursestrings but surely they could see this situation developing. Did they warn the Trustees accordingly? If so did the Trustees receive that warning but basically ignore it?

Can understand your negative stance on this situation revblue, but when you look at the quality of the candidates wanting to take over at Rovers i'm really suprised how highly esteemed the club is viewed in the footballing world - i really am amazed.

Which kind of reassures me there'll be no bumpy ride for Rovers.

[Paul Mellelieu]

I don't understand your logic Rev.

As far as i can tell the Trust has put £6m into the club on average over the last few years, this year excepted.

Why should they sink ten of millions into the club, when the chance of getting any kind of return is virtually nil.

And that's the reason why, despite the club being up for sale for at least two years, no-one has made a serious bid.

Or am I wrong?

[John]

I am not necessarily going to blame anyone. You can't expect the Trust to pump more millions in, that is just not going to happen.

However, it is clear, to remain competitive in the Premiership, we are going to find some funds from somewhere. It is going to become much more difficult for us to compete otherwise.

Hughes pretty much said the same thing over the past few months. Also, listening to Mark Bowen, he mentioned that they found the financial contraints at Ewood really difficult and frustrating.

The next manager who comes in is very unlikely to be a shrewd as Hughes in the transfer market.

[roverich]

And how do you propose they do that with our transfer budget?

I dunno, they could perhaps... erm... copy Sparky? After the last few years under Sparky and seeing us bring in the like of Santa and Benni, no Rovers fan on earth can ask the question you have done.

[LeChuck]

Can understand your negative stance on this situation revblue, but when you look at the quality of the candidates wanting to take over at Rovers i'm really suprised how highly esteemed the club is viewed in the footballing world - i really am amazed.

Which kind of reassures me there'll be no bumpy ride for Rovers.

I don't understand, who are these people?

Apart from Allardyce, who most of us don't want, we don't have one candidate interested who has a proven pedigree at the highest level. Ten Cate's only really had success as a number 2, McClaren is useless, Ince has only won League Two...have I missed anyone?

I think this is probably due more to the fact that there is a shortage of quality managers around at the moment, rather than Rovers not being an attractive proposition, but the point still remains valid.

[John]

I think this is probably due more to the fact that there is a shortage of quality managers around at the moment, rather than Rovers not being an attractive proposition, but the point still remains valid.

Agree.

[tony gale's mic]

I don't understand, who are these people?

Apart from Allardyce, who most of us don't want, we don't have one candidate interested who has a proven pedigree at the highest level. Ten Cate's only really had success as a number 2, McClaren is useless, Ince has only won League Two...have I missed anyone?

I think this is probably due more to the fact that there is a shortage of quality managers around at the moment, rather than Rovers not being an attractive proposition, but the point still remains valid.

We're not going to attract people with a proven pedigree at the highest level, we need to be realistic. Hughes certainly didnt have that. Plus we're only going on candidates we know are definitely interested, I'm sure theres others who we don't know about.

I'm happy with ten Cate at least we have a candidate who has had a reputation of doing very well with small teams in Holland and who also has had experience at top level football as a number 2, with plenty of contacts within world football for finding young talents and signing players. Sure there's one or two caveats about his temper but clubs wouldnt want to keep hiring him if it was such an issue.

[blue phil]

Why should they sink ten of millions into the club, when the chance of getting any kind of return is virtually nil.

Because they are merely the trustees - acting in accordance with the stated wishes of Jack Walker . I'm not sure they should be viewing the enterprise as primarily an investment opportunity .......especially at a time like this when a new manager might need money to form his own team .

[Darth Paul]

Because they are merely the trustees - acting in accordance with the stated wishes of Jack Walker . I'm not sure they should be viewing the enterprise as primarily an investment opportunity .......especially at a time like this when a new manager might need money to form his own team .

Exactly, this is what bugs me. I have been critical of the trustees, however we don't know what their position is, but that is their own fault. I do however suspect they are doing the bare minimum, but if not, why don't they come out and say what their instructions are, to prevent all the resentment.

My own personal feeling is that Jack wanted the Trust to support the club as he would have continued to do, ie when cash is needed, they would be there when the club states the case for it. If Jack never saw the outlay as an investment opportunity then neither should the Trust, it should be for the benefit of the Club and its progression.

Anyone who compares the fans expecting more from the Trust with the Leeds situation are deluded, it is totally different, because the money should not have to be paid back, just as Rovers never paid Jack back.

It aint the Trust's money, in my mind it is Jack's, and unless any further clarification comes from them on what their position is I can only conclude that they are taking the mick out of the Club, the fans and worst of all Jack's memory.

Someone posted that my views on the trust are disrespectful. I think the Trust are behaving disrespectfully towards us. Prove me wrong...

[Paul Mellelieu]

"Disrespectfully towards us!"

Crazy stuff. The Trustees do not have any obligations to the Rovers' fans, only to the Walker family and Jack Walker's will.

Phil and Paul don't know what's in Jack's will regarding the club's future; I'm not sure anyone on the Forum does. It's for certain that he couldn't have foreseen the financial investment needed to run a premiership club in 2008.

I am willing to be convinced that we've been sold short by the Trustees, but I haven't seen any evidence that that's the case.

[Darth Paul]

Paul, I believe that all football clubs, no matter how big or small have an obligation to thier fans in the sense that even the Champions League Final, with all the millions of pounds worth of talent on display is essentially no better than a park kick around were it not for the fans both in the stadium and watching on tv, making it all possible. No fans, no professional game. Simple.

We are all shareholders of our clubs in a sense, albeit not in the traditional sense of having a direct ownership, but when we see something we do not like I think we have the right to question it.

You are 100% right that I nor anyone else knows what the truth is, but in light of the lack of evidence we are all bound to draw our conclusions. I feel that if Jack could have forseen that events of this week he would have been dealt with things differently, and I also think the Trust are here to do what they can in Jack's stead, in which case they have failed in their duty.

Maybe they are not, maybe they are carrying out instructions to the letter, we don't know, but we wouldn't be the first fans to feel that the "owners" are behaving disrespectfully towards the "Club", and therefore the fans as an entity, take Utd and the Glaziers for example.

After all this time why can we not have details of what their responsibilities are. A simple brief outline would go a long way. They maybe doing a great job, in which case I will respectfully admit I was wrong, but until then my stance remains.

[The Prof.]

Without wanting to be alarmist we're staring down the barrel of a potential crisis here.

Owners who want out have already driven away an outstanding young manager and backroom team, and if we're not very careful by the time a new man is appointed he may find most of our better players have also packed their bags in readiness for a move.

Meanwhile it is clear from John Williams recent comments that there has been an inkling for some time Hughes was getting restless. However there doesn't appear to have been any real attempt to placate him by offering more funding, nor does there appear to have been any real contingency planning done for what seems now to have been an inevitable exit.

It's really poor long term planning that this situation has been allowed to arise for the sake of a bit of short term penny pinching. It also raises the question once again of whether our Board carries any actual clout or performs any real function.

I know they don't control the pursestrings but surely they could see this situation developing. Did they warn the Trustees accordingly? If so did the Trustees receive that warning but basically ignore it?

Oh for heavens sake RB - go in the Sportmans and have a look around - why isn't it a Weatherspoons with big screens volupt...never mind . It won't get huge investment. It's because it's never that full! A little like the rovers. It's got a good reputation and not many people. it does'nt earn enough cash for an investor to put the money in. But it's well run and won't shut and will hold it's own get what I mean. However Rovers are in a better position than the Sportsmans - their big value is in their Premiership Status. They go down and the value will go - we're just another Bury in effect. The Trustees who understand these things know this and if they have to spend to ensure we

a. stay up or

b. go back up or they personally will have let the trust down and be in serious trouble personally for a breach or duty (Phillip L might correct me on this)

It ain't going to happen bud 'cos it's against the trust rules - not to keep the Rovers up but to loose 30-40 million in value.

Get a few pints in the Sportsmans and just remember it's like the Rovers in a small way - but much less bulletproof as it ain't got a £1000m trust that needs us - go on relax in that well run pub on the corner of that nice road you live on. Trust me we'll be fine.