Worst start to the year in the clubs history.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:Let me put it this way, Natasha. This is the first year since 1952 that I've not attended a BWFC match. I bought my first season ticket in 1958 and I've been buying season tickets or corporate tickets continuously since 1992 for myself and, at different times, eight other members of my family.
But not this season.

Nothing to do with FV or Ken Anderson but quite a bit to do with the vile and toxic atmosphere generated over the last few seasons.

I do have to travel a distance to get to matches but to answer your question directly, the last match I attended was on 19 April 2019 against Aston Villa. And btw I am a  Lifeline member and a shareholder, until it gets liquidated. How about you?

You clearly have a love for the club, so it's in your blood like the rest of us.

Yet you seem to delight in mocking our fans because they don't share your love of facts and figures. Don't you see that most people just want to watch the game on a Saturday afternoon, see some friends or family, and then talk about the match on the way home. Most don't care how the Reebok was financed, how much cash FV have (or don't have) or whether Iles is a finance expert.

It doesn't make them thick, or make you a better person.

You know what, Natasha, I've never had the ambition of being 'most people'. I've always preferred to be able to think for myself irrespective of what 'most people' think.

If 'most people' want to buy into bullshit, horseshit, dogshit or any other kind of shit that's their privilege but don't expect me to buy into it.

And BWFC has always meant more to me than turning out on a Saturday to watch third-rate footballers lose to third-rate footballers. I think it means more to you too.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Don't you see that most people just want to watch the game on a Saturday afternoon, see some friends or family, and then talk about the match on the way home. Most don't care how the Reebok was financed, how much cash FV have (or don't have) or whether Iles is a finance expert.

It doesn't make them thick, or make you a better person.

All that is true but it leads to them making judgements and opinions based on half the facts - look at the hatred it created over Anderson.

Bob and I are only trying to explain the full picture as to why it is important to understand how the club runs in order to understand how what happens on the pitch is effected.

Wheater plainly said in his interview to the Bolton woman who had been on The Apprentice, that he agitated for the Brentford player strike because he thought it would force KA to put his hand in his pocket to pay the wages. So even the players had no comprehension nor understanding that that was never going to happen because it was the 'club' they were contracted to and paid by and not the 'owner'.

I would have thought that after going through what we have in the last twelve months that people would want to know more about the new owners financial abilities and plans (we certainly have enough Chiefs but can't/won't fill all our squad places with 'Indians' - why is that then?) but quite clearly most don't!

Each to their own I guess but the basic truth is that it is the business that matters and not necessarily what happens on the pitch.

If you want a stark reminder of that then Bury fans were overjoyed with winning promotion last season but found themselves without a club just three months later!

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Don't you see that most people just want to watch the game on a Saturday afternoon, see some friends or family, and then talk about the match on the way home. Most don't care how the Reebok was financed, how much cash FV have (or don't have) or whether Iles is a finance expert.

It doesn't make them thick, or make you a better person.

All that is true but it leads to them making judgements and opinions based on half the facts - look at the hatred it created over Anderson.

Bob and I are only trying to explain the full picture as to why it is important to understand how the club runs in order to understand how what happens on the pitch is effected.

Wheater plainly said in his interview to the Bolton woman who had been on The Apprentice, that he agitated for the Brentford player strike because he thought it would force KA to put his hand in his pocket to pay the wages.  So even the players had no comprehension nor understanding that that was never going to happen because it was the 'club' they were contracted to and paid by and not the 'owner'.

I would have thought that after going through what we have in the last twelve months that people would want to know more about the new owners financial abilities and plans (we certainly have enough Chiefs but can't/won't fill all our squad places with 'Indians' - why is that then?) but quite clearly most don't!

Each to their own I guess but the basic truth is that it is the business that matters and not necessarily what happens on the pitch.

If you want a stark reminder of that then Bury fans were overjoyed with winning promotion last season but found themselves without a club just three months later!

I'm not so sure it is true, Sluffy. How many supporters do you think there are that don't turn up on a Saturday? It varies, of course, but I suspect there are frequently more that don't turn up than those that do, but they still care.

P.S. Took my first look at Cousin Vinny's accounts this morning.

Are you into Shakepeare? I'm not really but one of the first things that came to my mind was the short straw or the 'poisoned chalice'. The Ides of March are not yet come but it didn't stop Simon Crowfoot's 'termination'. I'll explain later when I've taken a better look.

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Don't you see that most people just want to watch the game on a Saturday afternoon, see some friends or family, and then talk about the match on the way home. Most don't care how the Reebok was financed, how much cash FV have (or don't have) or whether Iles is a finance expert.

It doesn't make them thick, or make you a better person.

All that is true but it leads to them making judgements and opinions based on half the facts - look at the hatred it created over Anderson.

Bob and I are only trying to explain the full picture as to why it is important to understand how the club runs in order to understand how what happens on the pitch is effected.

Wheater plainly said in his interview to the Bolton woman who had been on The Apprentice, that he agitated for the Brentford player strike because he thought it would force KA to put his hand in his pocket to pay the wages.  So even the players had no comprehension nor understanding that that was never going to happen because it was the 'club' they were contracted to and paid by and not the 'owner'.

I would have thought that after going through what we have in the last twelve months that people would want to know more about the new owners financial abilities and plans (we certainly have enough Chiefs but can't/won't fill all our squad places with 'Indians' - why is that then?) but quite clearly most don't!

Each to their own I guess but the basic truth is that it is the business that matters and not necessarily what happens on the pitch.

If you want a stark reminder of that then Bury fans were overjoyed with winning promotion last season but found themselves without a club just three months later!

I'm not so sure it is true, Sluffy. How many supporters do you think there are that don't turn up on a Saturday? It varies, of course, but I suspect there are frequently more that don't turn up than those that do, but they still care.

Not sure you've read this as I intended it to be?

I'm not saying supporters don't care about the club but what I am saying is they don't care/not interested in the company that owns the club and which casts a mighty shadow of what goes on, on the pitch.

A large amount of the toxicity last season came about because most people thought/believed that as owner Anderson was obliged to pay all the bills - he wasn't.

Similarly Bury fans didn't seem too bothered what the business was up to and enjoyed winning on the pitch instead.

All I'm trying to say if people tried to understand how the company/business effects what goes on to happen on the pitch there would be more comprehension of what is to expect that will be shortly coming!

Surely that's better than living in ignorance?

It is to me.

Sluffy wrote:

Ten Bobsworth wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Don't you see that most people just want to watch the game on a Saturday afternoon, see some friends or family, and then talk about the match on the way home. Most don't care how the Reebok was financed, how much cash FV have (or don't have) or whether Iles is a finance expert.

It doesn't make them thick, or make you a better person.

All that is true but it leads to them making judgements and opinions based on half the facts - look at the hatred it created over Anderson.

Bob and I are only trying to explain the full picture as to why it is important to understand how the club runs in order to understand how what happens on the pitch is effected.

Wheater plainly said in his interview to the Bolton woman who had been on The Apprentice, that he agitated for the Brentford player strike because he thought it would force KA to put his hand in his pocket to pay the wages.  So even the players had no comprehension nor understanding that that was never going to happen because it was the 'club' they were contracted to and paid by and not the 'owner'.

I would have thought that after going through what we have in the last twelve months that people would want to know more about the new owners financial abilities and plans (we certainly have enough Chiefs but can't/won't fill all our squad places with 'Indians' - why is that then?) but quite clearly most don't!

Each to their own I guess but the basic truth is that it is the business that matters and not necessarily what happens on the pitch.

If you want a stark reminder of that then Bury fans were overjoyed with winning promotion last season but found themselves without a club just three months later!

I'm not so sure it is true, Sluffy. How many supporters do you think there are that don't turn up on a Saturday? It varies, of course, but I suspect there are frequently more that don't turn up than those that do, but they still care.

Not sure you've read this as I intended it to be?

I'm not saying supporters don't care about the club but what I am saying is they don't care/not interested in the company that owns the club and which casts a mighty shadow of what goes on, on the pitch.

A large amount of the toxicity last season came about because most people thought/believed that as owner Anderson was obliged to pay all the bills - he wasn't.

Similarly Bury fans didn't seem too bothered what the business was up to and enjoyed winning on the pitch instead.

All I'm trying to say if people tried to understand how the company/business effects what goes on to happen on the pitch there would be more comprehension of what is to expect that will be shortly coming!

Surely that's better than living in ignorance?

It is to me.

Sorry if I didn't express myself well enough, Sluffy. What I meant was that there are a lot of  people who care about BWFC who don't turn up on a Saturday (or not very often). I think they ought to know the facts not the fiction.

Just to get back on topic for a moment I'd just like to point out that at the beginning of the season "most people" thought that we'd either a) not exist or b) settle in for the worst (entire) season we have ever had.

The team and manager are not disappointing us so I don't understand the implied criticism. Or any criticism for that matter.

As for Phil Parkinson  - well he jumped ship to avoid having to live with Anderson's legacy so it's hardly a surprise that he's doing OK relatively speaking. Unfortunately, we do have to live with it and most of us have accepted the situation and are dealing with it.