...All this players back from international duty, yes it’s top class opposition but not exactly a top class team we are sending a player off to represent, get real, Gibraltar would struggle against most national league teams.

Think we have to acknowledge that losing both full backs for three games is going disrupt the balance of a team that didn't have much to begin with.  Personally I think if Issacson is fit then he deserves to keep his place over what I have seen of Clifford but Ronan being missing has taken away a genuine starter and also limited MHs midfield options with Smith filling in at wing back.

I think the big issue for next Saturday will be the gate, lots more season ticket holders this season having to make a decision on whether to pay to watch a team that were already underdogs before yesterdays performance.

Quote from: TonyM on September 06, 2023, 03:17:27 PM

Quote from: Blue_and_Gold on September 06, 2023, 12:44:29 PM

Quote from: TonyM on September 06, 2023, 09:45:00 AM

From Brackley thread...

Quote from: Mallard on September 06, 2023, 09:12:12 AM

Read SC’s programme notes this morning.  Oh my oh my.  Looks like he’s very concerned about pay back that loan.  Shame he put the Club in that situation with his failed attempt at staying in the NL.  What happened to the his brainwave of ring fencing £1 from every admission to pay back that loan ?  As for the money the Club is haemorrhaging. With the figures he’s quoting why do we have a full time playing staff and paying out for such things as overnight stays.   It seems everything is everyone’s fault where Cleeve is concerned.  Maybe the truth lies closer to home.

   *  in 'talks' with DCMS re loan (think it was £400k+ from memory) to convert to shares with these then being donated to the fans, really can't see this as viable and smacks of clutching at straws
   

And only now he wants fan involvement!!!   

I made a point of reading SC's notes last night but hadn't got round to those in the Alfreton programme which I have now got read and where he explains his thinking on this debt equity swap a bit more.  He links it back to the Crouch report with a misunderstanding / misrepresentation of what that says about clubs fan bases needing to be consulted on certain issues (club colours, badges etc) - this consultation does not need fans to own shares. 

I think this comes back to a fundamental issue for SC, he either can't, or doesn't want to, understand the concept of stakeholders, only shareholders.  Just as a point of note, in neither programme does he talk about 'fan involvement', only for a "small holding ... to be donated to a club fan group"

If fans owned shares, the Directors are working for them. Shareholders need to be reported to by the Directors.

Therefore that's "fan involvement".

Majority shareholders would still be in control, but shareholders have the right to know about important matters, such as the finances of the Club.

Reporting to others? I really can't see this appealing to the Chairman unless as you say, it's clutching at straws.

I think 'reporting' can be a pretty broad brush, so could be anything from regular monthly meetings to a very bland annual or bi-annual summary and that is assuming the shares are not a different class of share with corresponding reduced rights.  The other factor to consider is what a 'club fan group' would consist of and who might be on the leadership of that group ;)

From Brackley thread...

Read SC’s programme notes this morning.  Oh my oh my.  Looks like he’s very concerned about pay back that loan.  Shame he put the Club in that situation with his failed attempt at staying in the NL.  What happened to the his brainwave of ring fencing £1 from every admission to pay back that loan ?  As for the money the Club is haemorrhaging. With the figures he’s quoting why do we have a full time playing staff and paying out for such things as overnight stays.   It seems everything is everyone’s fault where Cleeve is concerned.  Maybe the truth lies closer to home.

Think this probably needs a thread of it's own.  For those that didn't get a programme, essentially SC raised a number of issues (seems he took offence to some fan's comments made to him at an away game)
   *  in 'talks' with DCMS re loan (think it was £400k+ from memory) to convert to shares with these then being donated to the fans, really can't see this as viable and smacks of clutching at straws
   *  wants terms of the loan to be renegotiated as we have been relegated so lost £80k in central funding, surely this would have been matched by reduction in expenditure / player wages?
   *  first payment is 2025 - £58840.54 which is interest, whilst I appreciate this is getting closer it is still a good way off.  If it kept him awake at night then surely should have paid some back after Stevenage game to reduce the capital?  Further payments of £20k twice yearly after that starting in 2026.  Good to see some figures at last as to what any potential investor would be taking on
   *  direct quote "I am upset that these next two matches have not been sponsored and the club really needs the town behind it, as otherwise it simply cannot compete at this level".  For the first part of the sentence, SC has no one to be upset with than himself, he fired Rishi half way through last year and irrespective of whether he was doing a good job or not he was, at least, getting out there and promoting the club to the business community.  As SC must surely realise by now, there is not a long queue of potential sponsors lining up to sponsor games / players and these relationships must be worked on over months, seasons even and it is not just a question of putting a post on Twitter the week before a game and wait for the offers to come rolling in.  As for the second part, the club are probably at, or above, their 'natural' level but some (SC included) seem to think that things 'should' be different - the only way this will be true is if someone makes it different, merely wishing it to be the case will only end in disappointment
   *  there is lots of other stuff about how the budget hasn't been cut by that much and costs are horrendous when we are away but you would have thought by now SC would understand the cashflows of a football operation?  Also says that last home game (Alfreton att 948) left a £4500 shortfall, I do wonder if there are more season ticket holders this season and SC hasn't done his sums

All in all not the most positive of Chairman's messages, guess we wait and see what he puts in the column (assuming he doesn't get AI to write it this Saturday) after 753 turned up on a mild September evening when the league leaders were in town.

I didn't go at the weekend but just don't think we are strong enough elsewhere to start Ponticelli, Stephens AND Barrett away from home, it's all well and good saying we can take the game to the opposition but you also have to be able to defend and win the ball back at times, maybe a case for giving Spence his first start this evening?

Forgot to add, thought the ref was excellent today - got most things right (always subjective) and also punished the Hereford delaying tactics which resulted in a better game, if only we had him for Buxton last season!

...Attack still looks thin on the ground to me. For me Ponticelli and Stephens have a lot to prove in terms of regularly hitting the back of the net. I would give them 5 more games………if they don’t come up with the goods…then we have the youngsters recently signed up who must be given a go surely. We need someone who scores regularly……tap ins, pens, nothing spectacular, just regular goals. I am concerned we have forwards who can’t score from a one on one or a gilt edge chance, but occasionally score with a spectacular effort…….that won’t win games on a regular basis. Really hope the experienced front two prove me wrong.

For me Stephens was the most 'natural' goalscorer in the squad last season, the only real question I have is whether he can stay fit this year as he did come off in a number of games last year with 'niggles'.  Ponticelli was outstanding at the start of last season, probably never going to be prolific but created loads of chances for others before getting injured but wasn't really the same when he came back and we were playing a slightly different style then too.  Ultimately it will come down to how MH sets us up and that still seems to be unclear, hopefully he knows and we have to trust that will come off, without having seen anything in pre-season I am as worried about pace at the back and having enough 'nouse' in midfield as much as where the goals will come from.

I am in the 'not panicking' group at present.  There is the core of a squad from last season, albeit with a couple of big losses (with maybe more to come) but we have to be realistic about things - we can't expect SC to continue with the level of financial doping that I would imagine he put in last year, even with the cup run and also, with remaining full-time we have to accept that we are unlikely to be the first choice for many players wanting to remain full-time footballers. 

With that in mind, I am comfortable if we could attract one or two more experienced heads (I can't see Coulson lasting another full season pace wise) and then look for younger players who might be having pre-season trials higher up the pyramid but then don't get taken on.  Not ideal for MH's first pre-season in charge but might be worth being patient to pick up a player or three who fall through the cracks.