Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
First Wazzock

What has been the worst thing the board has done at this club

Recommended Posts

The current board or any other...

For me, it was not seriously investing in the team to keep us in the Premier Division when we had the chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not signing Ashton in the summer of the prem season.

Hanging on to Worthington 12 months longer than they should.

replacing Worthy with a novice.

Sticking all the money they could muster into "off the field activities" when the game is played on the pitch.. not off it.

Replacing Peter Grant with someone who''s track record in football only says failure.

I could go on.. but wont.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totally agree with the above. Not backing Worthington with enough funds was not clever, but then keeping him on and letting him buy a few journeymen midfielders was a stupid idea.But Grant for me was the worst. Followed by Gunn (after relegation). Followed by the Worthington thing. Oh. And Hamilton, that was a bad idea. So I suppose sacking Rioch wasn''t clever either. And waving Green''s future transfer percentage for Grant, that was dumb. Jeeez, there''s been a few howlers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Mook"]Totally agree with the above. Not backing Worthington with enough funds was not clever, but then keeping him on and letting him buy a few journeymen midfielders was a stupid idea.

But Grant for me was the worst. Followed by Gunn (after relegation). Followed by the Worthington thing. Oh. And Hamilton, that was a bad idea. So I suppose sacking Rioch wasn''t clever either. And waving Green''s future transfer percentage for Grant, that was dumb. Jeeez, there''s been a few howlers.
[/quote]

We actually waived the money we would of taken if Ashton played a competitive game for England.... so that worked out very nicely. Still have the clause for a percentage on any profit West Ham make on Green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting back to the Prem and then treating it like a busman''s holiday. Going 14 games without a victory and continuing to smile. Yes, prudence is important but this was silly and it only served to start a chain of poor decisions...Grant...Roeder...Gunn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

not signing Ashton in the summer of the prem season.

Hanging on to Worthington 12 months longer than they should.

replacing Worthy with a novice.

Sticking all the money they could muster into "off the field activities" when the game is played on the pitch.. not off it.

Replacing Peter Grant with someone who''s track record in football only says failure.

I could go on.. but wont.

[/quote]Oh go on! Please . . . . .Getting rid of Worthington after giving him little or no money to spend on players, replacing him with Peter the Pointer who was then given millions to spend and spent it on dross.Getting rid of Grant without learning from the lesson he had tought us, replacing him with Roeder who had no knowledge of this league and a reletively poor track record. Agreeing to fund expensive loan players and allow Roeder to tell us that there was no money.All of this leading to relegation from the Championship when with Worthington you could at least feel he would get us mid table. Right now it looks as though most people would be happy with midtable Champs. I am certainly not hedging bets for anything more next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The BEST thing they have done is to finally realise they made a catalogue of disasterous decisions based upon personalities and emotive thinking.

As a result they brought in proper people to run the Club. Hopefully, this will be the case henceforth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The root of the problems actually go back to well before the current board

 

Investing in land rather than the current squad.  Taking 5 Million for Sutton and not investing back in the playing side

 

Letting Martin O’Neill go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Mook"]Totally agree with the above. Not backing Worthington with enough funds was not clever, but then keeping him on and letting him buy a few journeymen midfielders was a stupid idea.But Grant for me was the worst. Followed by Gunn (after relegation). Followed by the Worthington thing. Oh. And Hamilton, that was a bad idea. So I suppose sacking Rioch wasn''t clever either. And waving Green''s future transfer percentage for Grant, that was dumb. Jeeez, there''s been a few howlers.[/quote]

We actually waived the money we would of taken if Ashton played a competitive game for England.... so that worked out very nicely. Still have the clause for a percentage on any profit West Ham make on Green.

[/quote]That won''t be much either will it, he is out of contract in the summer and he looks to be moving on to pastures new. There is always that problem when it comes to sell on clauses - what happens if a sell on doesn''t happen? You get nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not backing Worthington in the prem and then backing him too long when we went down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

not signing Ashton in the summer of the prem season.

Hanging on to Worthington 12 months longer than they should.

replacing Worthy with a novice.

Sticking all the money they could muster into "off the field activities" when the game is played on the pitch.. not off it.

Replacing Peter Grant with someone who''s track record in football only says failure.

I could go on.. but wont.

[/quote]

You''ve got it spot on Jas! Your points agree with mine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 3-0 win on Saturday, seven points clear at the top of the league, scoring goals for fun.

God, this board has been quiet recently...........

Let''s have a good old fasioned bit of board bashing, that''ll liven them up! [:S]

It was Waz this time for once wasn''t it Wiz? [:^)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="First Wazzock"]

The current board or any other...

For me, it was not seriously investing in the team to keep us in the Premier Division when we had the chance.

[/quote]In one. Not buying Ashton (or even Crouch).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not investing more money when we were in the Premier League was hardly costly in the long run. When these accusations were first made Hull and Reading were the examples used by fans on here to beat the board with. Then the last time I believe Tangie was using Stoke as an example to make this point. Unless it is suggested the board should have invested more than they could afford it seems more than likely that we would have come down sooner or later anyway. If they had invested more than we could afford it seems likely we would have come down and gone into administration sooner or later. We just have to recognise the Premier League for what it is which is not that old top division where we had so much success in the 80''s and early 90''s.

This board certainly made more costly mistakes in replacing Worthy. Grant was probably the most costly but was supported at the time as a good appointment by some of their fiercest critics. With hindsight Roeder should never have been given a second season and that ridiculous loan policy made a huge contribution to our relegation to the third tier. Gunn''s appointment this season was the most ridiculous of them all but ultimately the least costly.

I do wonder if the most costly mistakes were taking bad advice from people on managerial appointments and policy. And how influential were the much heralded Turners who were supposedly sorting out our finances, a job that McNally and Bowkett seem to have had to do again?

Wazzy said this board or any other board so how costly are the mistakes listed here compared to the fiasco that was Chase/O''Neill/Windass?

I reckon it''s about time to look forwards again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Mook"]Totally agree with the above. Not backing Worthington with enough funds was not clever, but then keeping him on and letting him buy a few journeymen midfielders was a stupid idea.But Grant for me was the worst. Followed by Gunn (after relegation). Followed by the Worthington thing. Oh. And Hamilton, that was a bad idea. So I suppose sacking Rioch wasn''t clever either. And waving Green''s future transfer percentage for Grant, that was dumb. Jeeez, there''s been a few howlers.[/quote]

We actually waived the money we would of taken if Ashton played a competitive game for England.... so that worked out very nicely. Still have the clause for a percentage on any profit West Ham make on Green.

[/quote]Yes, you''re right. Having said that, my comment wasn''t based on "how things have turned out" as a result of their deal. It was more to point out that they would (and did) trade possible income on one or more extremely promising player, in order to take a cheap option on an unproven manager. Such a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Go back to 1995,if Chase had given the cash for Windass,we would have kept hold of one of the best managers of a generation and of course what a great player Dean Windass would have been for City !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer to look forward rather than back now. The board has made some shocking mistakes. Delia and Michael are not really up to running a football club. This is shown by them only making one decent appoinment in Nigel Worthington in all the time they have been here. However the appointment of David McNally and a new board is an admission of all those mistakes. I think the guy is the best thing to have happened to this club since we signed Huckerby. For me promotion out of league 1 at the first attempt represents an appropriate apology for many of these mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has to be banning to those heroes for running up to Gunn and for banning the plaonker who got overexcited.

Ok, ok I''m joking.

I would agree with Bly and Donny, but not having the required knowledge with appointment of managers and not backing Worthy with proper dough in Prem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Not investing more money when we were in the Premier League was hardly costly in the long run. When these accusations were first made Hull and Reading were the examples used by fans on here to beat the board with. Then the last time I believe Tangie was using Stoke as an example to make this point. Unless it is suggested the board should have invested more than they could afford it seems more than likely that we would have come down sooner or later anyway. If they had invested more than we could afford it seems likely we would have come down and gone into administration sooner or later. We just have to recognise the Premier League for what it is which is not that old top division where we had so much success in the 80''s and early 90''s.

This board certainly made more costly mistakes in replacing Worthy. Grant was probably the most costly but was supported at the time as a good appointment by some of their fiercest critics. With hindsight Roeder should never have been given a second season and that ridiculous loan policy made a huge contribution to our relegation to the third tier. Gunn''s appointment this season was the most ridiculous of them all but ultimately the least costly.

I do wonder if the most costly mistakes were taking bad advice from people on managerial appointments and policy. And how influential were the much heralded Turners who were supposedly sorting out our finances, a job that McNally and Bowkett seem to have had to do again?

Wazzy said this board or any other board so how costly are the mistakes listed here compared to the fiasco that was Chase/O''Neill/Windass?

I reckon it''s about time to look forwards again.

 

 

[/quote]

This was not intended to stir things up, as I am delighted with the way things are going. But let''s not forget we are in the third divison.

I''m rather surprised to see you say that not investing more in the Premiership season ''was hardly costly in the long run''. Had we have stayed there (and perhaps still be there) we would be doing very nicely in all probability. Also I have to question your coming ''down sooner or later'', overspending does not always lead to relegation, it just means you have spent too much.

Virtually all the money spent on the playing squad was done (I feel) budgeting for relegation, knowing that if (sorry when) we came straight back down nearly all of it would be recouped. The ultimate prudence with ambition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wazzy, the reason I said it was hardly costly in the long run was because I don''t believe that had the board spent everything they could possibly lay their hand on it wouuldn''t have been enough in the long run. Smith and Jones aren''t rich enough to make a difference. Do you really think that Ashton in the summer would have made the difference? In my view investment of millions would have been the only thing that could have made the difference. And the clubs who have that investment manage to just about keep themselves in the league but even then with the feeling they are putting off the inevitable. I believe the managers that replaced Worthy and the policy decisions that took us to League One were far greater mistakes than a decision that may have put off our relegation for a season.I used to love us playing in the top division regularly beating the best teams in the land but that league isn''t there anymore.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yarmyed"]

I prefer to look forward rather than back now. The board has made some shocking mistakes. Delia and Michael are not really up to running a football club. This is shown by them only making one decent appoinment in Nigel Worthington in all the time they have been here. However the appointment of David McNally and a new board is an admission of all those mistakes. I think the guy is the best thing to have happened to this club since we signed Huckerby. For me promotion out of league 1 at the first attempt represents an appropriate apology for many of these mistakes.

[/quote]I personaly can''t agree with that. Rioch was a good appointment but he probably came to us a bit soon in that he had next to no money as it was directly after the O''Neil resignation, Chase out and then new owners in to and the debts announced. He certainly did very well with a limited squad and was unlucky with injuries to some decent players that he signed like Jean Yves De Blasiis and Ancelin.Hamilton was a failure full stop. Grant and Roeder actually gained support for turning our seasons around but then struggled when given a full season to do something. By the time Roeder had gone and we paid him off we had no money left and the only option left was Gunn. I think he knew this and to be fair he wasn''t left with much in the way of depth in the squad.Worthington, Rioch and now Lambert are all good appointments. Hamilton, Grant and Roeder weren''t. Gunn was a knee jerk appointment but at least he signed some decent players. How many of Grant''s and Roeders signings are still at the club? How many are still Worthingtons? Speaks loudly for me.As for Delia and Michael not being up to running a football club, I would say they have been hit and miss in some ways but again it has to be down to the board not just the majority shareholders. Doncaster et al would have had a large say in what went on and I personaly believe that he was one of the key people behind all the spin. I reckon the policy was smile and shake the fans hand and they will believe all is ok.As for looking forward. McNally has been great so far. He doesn''t take any crap and is prepared to do what he wants to do rather than pander to other people''s whims. Colchester is a good example, I reckon that he had already spoken to solicitors etc in regards to Lambert before it even happened. McNally will be a key man in regards to this club going forward. He is a motivated and driven man who will go out to try and get the best we can on the budget we have.I think too many members of the last board had been there for too long and had run out of ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Not investing more money when we were in the Premier League was hardly costly in the long run. When these accusations were first made Hull and Reading were the examples used by fans on here to beat the board with. Then the last time I believe Tangie was using Stoke as an example to make this point. Unless it is suggested the board should have invested more than they could afford it seems more than likely that we would have come down sooner or later anyway. If they had invested more than we could afford it seems likely we would have come down and gone into administration sooner or later. [/quote]

The simple fact is that the old board lacked ambition to sign Ashton before the start of the Prem. season and we had the money to sign him as i explained in a post sometime ago.....the cash was there and it wasn''t a case of taking a risk. Instead we preferred to spend money on tangible fixed assets / maintenance. All it needed was delaying some of that spend.

You''ll never budge me on this Nutty especially given what I was told.

We all know what impact Ashton had in his own right but then there was the impact on McKenzie''s goalscoring and our home form in the second half of the season. With Ashton from the start of the season I''m convinced that we would have stayed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Do you really think that Ashton in the summer would have made the difference?

[/quote]

Yes...just look at our results in the second half of the season.

Look at how many goals McKenzie ascored in the second half of the season compared to the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...