INSIDE WANDERERS: Finding answers is now easier than tracking down those pesky Pokemon monsters

AFTER being dragged for miles around the roads by my sons catching imaginary monsters with my phone, I thank Pikachu that finding stories is that much easier on the feet.

Try as I may, I cannot quite understand what all the fuss is about with Pokemon, it must be an age thing.

Thankfully, I have the day job to worry about, and the fact that after months of reporting on matters which brings us writers out in a cold sweat, we are finally starting to turn our attention towards football again at Bolton Wanderers.

This week I have reported on five trialists, one signing and a host of clubs who are sniffing around one of the club’s top prospects, Rob Holding. It’s almost like being back in the job I signed up for!

Slowly but surely we are seeing Phil Parkinson’s plan emerge, and that will continue through pre-season, building towards that all-important kick-off against Sheffield United.

Working with the club is very different now than it was six months ago, when the uncertainty around the place made it a nervous and sometimes paranoid environment. People feared for their jobs, worried about what change new ownership would bring and it was not conducive to a winning environment.

Things feel more stable, more structured, and on the face of things we have almost returned to normality.

I think that explains the apathy towards standing for the Supporters’ Trust board. The whole concept did not meet with unanimous approval – and to each, their own – but since the takeover was completed the general consensus has been to let Ken Anderson and Dean Holdsworth go about their business.

For just five people to step forward is disappointing, in my view. So many opinions have been voiced on how the Trust should run, why they should look to have a say at board level, but when push came to shove very few were willing to poke their head above the parapet.

Going back to the start of the year when fans turned up in their droves to make impassioned speeches at the open meetings, I wonder where those people have gone? Has the whole concept of a supporters’ trust really lost its relevance in six short months?

There has been a great deal of anger directed at Ian Bridge and Mike Smith, who told this newspaper they would not be standing as board members after getting the steering group off the ground. They are grown men and have agreed to give their own answer in a Q&A we will print next week – but personally I do think some of the bile being spewed on social media is a bit extreme.

The Trust hasn’t gone in the direction some predicted. In some people’s eyes it might even have failed in their objective so far. But the fact it exists at all gives me some comfort, and I hope that view is shared by some Wanderers fans.

After what the club went through at the end of last year Bolton supporters are wary, less trusting. Financial details which were spewed out in the High Court laid bare, and crucially on the record, what had been suspected for many years – it was a right old mess.

The sense of urgency led to the Trust being rushed to the point it is today. Were the same catastrophic circumstances to occur again – and I sincerely hope they don’t – then the structure is in place for them to react quickly and decisively.

I am pleased to say that after years of information being blocked by the hierarchy at Wanderers the club is now communicating again. It isn’t perfect, yet, but we are making progress.

Anderson and Holdsworth have questions to answer about what transfer restrictions – if any – remain in place from the Football League. I understand there are commercial sensitivities involved, so this isn’t a time for ultimatums, more a case of acknowledging it is still a matter to be resolved.

In the short term, many people will breathe a little easier when the club’s accounts are filed at Companies House. I have received some assurances the matter is in hand but like everyone else, I’ll rest easier when I see the numbers in black and white on my desk.

Lastly, we need to see that Wanderers can stabilise after relegation, something they failed to do in the Championship a few years ago. Personally, I have every faith in Parkinson and his staff to achieve that, but he needs his players to step up too.

When the season begins a whole new sphere of discussion begins: players’ form, selection issues, formations, tactics, press conferences and interviews; that is my bread and butter.

Rather like this Pokemon craze which is sweeping the nation the finances, court appearances, takeover talk and boardroom issues did not come naturally to me – and I pray it doesn’t dominate the agenda again.

It won’t stop me having a go once in a while, though. You’ve got to catch them all, you know?

http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/sport/wanderers/14624241.INSIDE_WANDERERS__Finding_answers_is_now_easier_than_tracking_down_those_pesky_Pokemon_monsters/#comments-anchor

Embarrassing.

He's a fucking journalist, if the club cuts off the flow of information it's his job to find another way of getting it, even if it ruffles a few feathers.

I still find myself liking Marc Iles despite everything!

In the last 5 or 6 years two issues have completely dominated Bolton Wanderers, the titanic financial mess that has seen the club plunge down the leagues and just avoid Administration (or worse!) and the rise from nowhere of the Supporters Trust.

Whilst Marc admits that financial dealings 'don't come naturally' to him, one would have thought even he might have wondered why a small little town club like ours was running a trading deficit on the same scale as Manchester United and Real Madrid (the two RICHEST teams in the world!).

You might have thought he could have used the contacts of a large regional paper with its own financial experts, to seek some help, advice and opinion on what was going on at the club and why nobody else in football (Valencia excepted) were running a debt equivalent to some third world country?

The ramifications of how the club was run financially and the size of the debt over the last SIX YEARS - so widely questioned on here and many other forums - were completely missed by our ace reporter (or at best never questioned).

Out of this clearly unsustainable financial mess and ensuing melt down came the 'birth' of the Supporters Trust and our second main topic of conversation that has kept us mildly amused recently.

I use the term 'birth' loosely though, contrary to what many people believe the ST didn't suddenly pop up over night several months ago - just check out their twitter site for instance and have a look when it was established - it might surprise you!

Other things such as the ST domain name was purchased FOUR YEARS ago and by the very man who was 'asked' to found the ST in January of THIS YEAR by the body that oversees such things!

The same man who stated he would not stand for election and of course has just been elected - unopposed!

Iles seems to think the take over of the club by Anderson has lessened the need for the ST and that is why their support has ebbed away - again he has missed the point completely - a majority of people have judged those on the ST by their ACTIONS and not their WORDS since January and most have clearly found them wanting greatly.

The majority of people now seemingly don't 'TRUST' the people who have been running (and now been appointed to) the Board of the Trust.

What a state to be in!

And that is why people have turned their backs on the ST in droves.

For one who makes a living reporting on the club and the issues around it Iles has been a spectacular failure by failing to see the two main issues it has faced this decade - how bad is that!

He does though seem a decent chap with a sense of humour and that's why I still like the bloke but I think if I were to miss the two most fundamental happenings effecting my business over the last several years the last thing I would be doing would be to print and publish my thoughts in an article for everyone to read how clueless I've been!

It is astonishing to me that a man I have spoken to and generally found to be both intelligent and eloquent has managed to so completely miss not one but several incredibly important but simple things. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this latest missive and for once I find myself in agreement with Nat. A journalist's job is not to sit there wringing his hands and wailing "mummy they're mean" when the club won't talk to him, it's to go and find the information from somewhere else, a back-channel of some kind and if that upsets the owners so be it. His job is to find and report the facts.

He may be comforted by the existence of the ST but speaking as one of its members he must be impossibly naive if he is. The current board are not interested in what's best for the fans or the club, only in stroking their own egos and even a dimwit like me can see that.

I've taken a lot of flak on here for defending Iles and I still think some of the criticism thrown his way has been unjust but I can't and won't defend the self-serving pile of steaming garbage he's written here.

The ST story is analogous to the Leave EU campaign. 

Give the people an opportunity to voice their opinion e.g. a ST meeting (or a referendum) and those who are disenchanted with the status quo turn up in their droves to voice their views. Many of them will never have attended a meeting (or voted) before, but they are very pissed off and feeling righteous. Or they just want to shout "Look at me! Look at me! I'm righteously pissed off! How self-important am I?"

But they all have a something slightly different that grinds their gears: the way the finances have been handled, the lack of communication, the signings - loads of reasons for being upset but underpinning everything was the club's lack of success (discontent with their personal circumstances and looking for something to blame it on)

So they all stand around and yell "F*** yeah! Let's do something about it!"

But the "it" is different for all of them and when the meeting (referendum) is over, they all go home and think they've done their part.
After all it's not their job to actually "do something about it" - they just voted for someone else to work out how to make it happen leaving the ST - and the Government - in the poo and no magic wand. All gob - no action most folk.

I admire the ST for trying to make something happen. Their goals are also admirable and if it could be made to work properly it would be a very good thing for the fans and the stability of the club. In the same way that the EU would be good for everyone if it could be made to work properly. 

Problem is it's easier to slag something off and refuse to participate than to make something complicated work because whether it's the ST or the EU, it requires commitment, understanding and a lot of sacrifice and effort before the rewards can be reaped.

Unfortunately, commitment, understanding, self-sacrifice and effort are not very British traits these days so I don't expect the ST will hear from half the people who attended the first meeting again. 

It's all a bit "I don't want those Slovakians working in "our" factories taking "our" jobs. But obviously I wouldn't work in that factory myself. It's just the principle of the thing"
Another lost opportunity IMO.

I'm sorry mate but that is just complete bollocks and all you've done is try to twist the ST story to fit into your clearly bitter view of the outcome of the referendum.

From what you've said on here before you are a businessman that once owned a restaurant I believe, well let me try to apply the ST story to that.

You've just done a load of research and identified a restaurant business that has overstretched itself financially, subsequently cutting its product and started to lose custom.

You realise that by better financial control and pump priming it with a significant wad of cash from your pocket you could turn this business around and probably sell it on for a tidy profit.

A bunch of former regulars however, who are either no longer patrons or very negatively vocal about the business, put in a rival bid to you to buy the place.

You had thought no one else wanted the business so you had planned your finances accordingly, this bid forces you to up your offer and cuts into your finances so much that it impacts on your immediate investment to improve the food and service of the business and effects your bottom line.

After you finally buy the business you find out that the former owner had put these other people up to bidding against you simply to force you to increase your purchase price.

Then these people who claim to speak for the town your business is situated in want to know all your financial details and go running to the taxman (the nearest equivalent to a regulatory body such as the Football League I could think of) claiming you were a bit dodgy!

They then say because they know what is best for the town they want a big say in how you run your business, in fact they would like a seat on your board!

You find out that they don't interfere with the petrol station down the road, or the local butchers, or bakers.  They don't have any involvement with the cinema or bookies.  They don't interfere with the owners of the factory that make widgits or the local dairy.  In fact the ONLY business they want any sort of direct financial involvement with is your restaurant!

They say they want that to represent ALL the customers - even those that no longer even live in the same country anymore let alone the same town!

These people did stir things up initially with the local residents and get some anti the new owners sentiment going - even so far as re-tweeting abusive tweets on their twitter site and an individual key member inferring you were very dodgy on his - but since you opened for business and started sorting the mess out you inherited most sensible folk have decided that you do deserve a chance to get on your feet and no longer support the rantings of these few zealots.

In fact the only two people who do have any time left for these vigilantes is the local papers 'food critic' who was pissed off with the former owner who obviously didn't rate him and the owner of the local comic book store who with his adolescent clientele kick up a storm over anything and everything and even the vigilantes who want a say in the running of your business are now distancing themselves away from their childish ways.

So would you let these clowns in on running your business - of course you wouldn't - and if they can't get their hands on power within the place they want it - and their supporters have left them in droves - then what is the point in being for them anymore - unless of course it is to wish ill things upon you and hope you go tits up, the sooner the better for them.


I think this is a far closer analogy than your Brexit one.

I agree with Sluffy.
It was an opportunistic attempt at getting involved in the club. It was badly handled, they created confusion and chaos, and the opportunity has now gone.
I think they should take a long look at what they can offer, and not what they can take.

I am sorry but I thought Lusty made a good post.

I thought they were both good posts to be fair.

I thought they were both decent but while what lusty's saying in principle about the ST being a good thing is true it has been handled poorly, I don't have the skills to run the ST which is why I didn't put myself forward for it but that doesn't mean I can't identify with the fact that those who are, are making a complete mess of it.
I'm not as convinced as sluffy is about the whole Ed conspiracy to put the price up, I believe it's a case that someone who has seen ST's set up to help clubs in trouble before had the foresight and drive to set one up and admirably so.

Then the problems started where:
a) they got hi jacked with the whole preferred status debacle
b) they got found to be out of their depth and didn't have the skills to take it forward 
c) and then got drunk on power and started making demands they had done nothing to warrant

Given the whole disaster that is the election of the steering group and the fact that the new owners appear to have a good handle on the club's situation, the whole ST is completely irrelevant and this time next year it will be the five of them in a pub chatting about what might have been.

The restaurant analogy didn't work for me as the football club is an integral part of the town and the supporters are the club, there will always be changes to the custodians and direction but the one constant in a club is the fanbase. They won't go and choose a different club because their steak was under-cooked or there was a fly in their soup, they are in it in general for better or for worse so they should have a voice in what goes on, as restaurant you just eat somewhere else if you don't like the way they do things.

Since I moved from Bolton over 30 years ago now, I've never actually resided in a town that has a league football club, so football as certainly not been integral to them and their residents or businesses.

Similarly I lived in Bolton when we've previously slipped down the leagues and attendance diminished alarmingly rapidly too.

My point being that football is only considered 'integral' to those who become 'fanatical' about the game and the team.

Fair play to those supporters in the minor leagues whose average crowd numbers only a few hundred or so - but clearly the vast majority of their community do not see their club as being 'integral' to themselves as such.

Take then my analogy with the restaurant above - it is only a small fraction of the clubs supporters base that the ST purports to represents - it becomes an infinitesimally small fraction when the whole local community's population is taken into account - so why should these zealots (dictionary definition - a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of THEIR ideals) demand to have any say in the running of the business?

They represent less than 3,000 people (and that remember is their high watermark - watch membership plummet when renewal time comes around!) out of a population of 300,000 people of the Bolton area and surrounding districts - a representation therefore of a miniscule 0.01%

Yes it is true that if you don't like the restaurant you go somewhere else - but also if you don't like the football you DO something else - even if that is mowing the garden or doing the washing up!

Once the habit of attending games is broken it is often hard to re-establish it again. many people once they drift off from attending games seldom return as regulars again.

As for your belief that the ST did not directly inflate the price paid for the club by the new owners, then that of course is your opinion to which you are fully entitled to, the FACT remains however that the then owners agent REQUESTED the fledgling ST (who at that time were unconstituted and had not even organised themselves a bank account!!!) to seek Preferred Bidder status and by doing so become a rival bidder for the club (which clearly was extremely beneficial to Davies bargaining position - there can be no doubt about that).

People can interpret these facts how they want - it seems blatantly obvious to me though what the plan was - and explains why there clearly is no love lost between the ST and the new ownership from that time on - which for a body set up specifically to seek and establish influence on the club is somewhat of a massive own goal!

The people who have led the Steering Group and now got themselves on the ST Board have turned themselves and the ST into an irrelevance for the foreseeable future.

Quite an achievement considering the clubs perilous position just a few months ago and the overwhelming goodwill they had from the majority of Bolton fans at the time!