Oleg_Mcnoleg

He'll have "a week to 10 days from a return" on his grave stone

He really doesn't look much like Gullit, does he? Usual youtube caveats apply but he looks busy, decent on the ball and good strike. Absolute beauty of a goal@c40 secs

Told you I was clutching at straws

Presumably he still owns his shares. A way around the concert party regs? (Yes, I am clutching at straws).

And the truth is probably that neither have any real idea one way or t'other.

Any team in Q3 could quite legitimately expect to horse us.

Living in 'that London', I've only been to five games this season. Although I've watched almost all the rest, it's not the same. However, that's not going to stop my ill-considered ranting. Finishing third is disappointing but not entirely unexpected in the first season back. We couldn't have anticipated the transformation in the Tims since last season. But the disappointment is the way we played for so much of the season and the total lack of progress. Players we expected to kick on seem to have gone backwards. It seems a long time ago that Halliday, Holt and McKay were overwhelming the Tims or ragdolling Dundee. I honestly thought they'd kick on and even be knocking on the door of the Scotland squad. Fuck knows what's been done to them but it now looks like they might all be gone and, tbh, not that much missed (though that's the case with most of them). I think that's huge shame. I was expecting a slightly mental, gung-ho season with us attacking a lot and getting undone on the break too often. But I thought we went backwards. We seemed to have kept the defensive flakiness but have lost the attack. The complete torpor afflicting the team going forward was almost painful to watch: it was like they'd all overdosed on Horlicks before the game. We seemed to have no pace, awareness of space, or movement off the ball. The midfield often seemed to offer nothing going forward or in defence. After MW's time at Brentford, and the performances against SPL sides in the cups last year, I really wasn't expecting that. We might have gotten away with it with something resembling a goalscorer but needed 15 chances to score one. We can blame the dreadful window last summer in large part. We know MW wanted a better central defence but couldn't get the players he was after and injuries to both Niko and Rossiter were unlucky (though not unexpected). But he did get Barton who, even if you ignore the off-the-pitch bollocks, was mostly crap. Who could think that Niko and Barton in a three man midfield would work? And MW wanted Garner who, the odd cameo aside, has also mostly been crap. If Garner had arrived with his shooting boots, we could have been at least 10 points better off, IMHO, and probably more (Waghorn culpable too, but he cost very little). Under Pedro things have been pretty much the same, haven't they? Hopelessly inconsistent in midfield, though better at the back. Scoring remains an issue. Because we made such a total arse of it, the challenge for this summer remains the same as it was last summer. We need a reliable source of goals, we need some dynamism and control in midfield and we need an experienced centre back (or two if Wilson's not a viable fourth choice yet). And we need to hope that that provides the platform for the rest to step up a level. Be interesting to see how we address that without the dead hand of Frank 'best in the business' McParland overseeing it. That was more negative than I thought it would be: I've tried to keep perspective all season. But seems like we're no further forward than this time last year but without the optimism.

We're not signing 12 players this summer. Four or five decent ones would make a huge difference

Can he be removed or at least blocked by the rest of the board? At least if they all stopped resigning?

I'm mostly putting this down to teething problems. I can understand the irritation many feel but chucking it in completely/refusing to join doesn't really help anything. None of this can't be resolved, at least if board members stop fucking resigning and members stick with it, engage, and hold those elected to account. Five quid a month gets you votes in the next round of elections in which you'll have a chance to stop this crap happening again. The current board is evidently too small to do everything. It's also evidently allowed personal grudges to fester which might have been dissipated on a larger board. It might be better if folk stood for some specific posts within the organisation (chair, treasurer, membership, coms, etc). There can be a proper discussion about the conflict of interest rules, for eg, which is where this mess originated, and they can be tightened. That might exclude those taking a wage from the club from standing if that's the prevailing opinion. Even if it isn't, folk are free to vote against anyone who does and for those who aren't. The underused blog section of the website can be used by members to make their cases for action or change. For those worrying about how we'll deal with fan ownership, it's completely pointless at this stage as it's a pipe dream. At the moment it's about having some influence on and oversight of the club and this shambles doesn't detract from the desirability (even necessity?) of that. It's still early days for C1872. I said at the time I wasn't sure the merger was worth the aggro and wasn't overly concerned that RST and RF were engaged in a similar activity: more the merrier, as far as I was concerned. But it's happened and C1872 is what there is and it's important. Some daft spats shouldn't distract from that.

Double post

I thought July more realistic. But, either way, nowt much gets done in August so wouldn't make a huge difference. I'd hope the summer period might be usefully used by the current board getting it's fucking act together and taking a bit of the heat out th current situation. Of course, if that can't be done then an election seems inevitable and they'll probabaly all get punted.

Term's up for the current board at the end of the summer, isn't it? By the time a new round of voting is arranged (and assuming there's mechanisms in the constitution to allow it: I confess that I just pay my subs and haven't poured over the rule book), is it going to practicable bring them forward by more than a few weeks anyway? If this is just becoming an issue of personal animosity then they can just get fucking well get on with it. And if it's a dispute about something else they can get on with trying to resolve it through discussion like adults with a job to do.

Ideally he wouldn't be. But our midfield's in bits.

Of course. But, if he fancied it, I'd have kept him on got next year. Clearly not a long term option but, as I say, buys us time to sort more pressing issues

Don't think he's been better than Miller but I'd have kept Hill for another season. Given the amount of work the team needs, keeping Hill at least gives another couple of transfer windows to fix that bloody midfield and find some goals. Could then look to replace him next season. I could understand letting him go if the manager was looking for more pace at the back but wouldn't be trying to sign Alves if that was the case.

Not a bad half. Should be further ahead but they look dangerous at set pieces though.

That's the thing though, isn't it. Keep telling my wife I'm George Clooney, except without the looks, charm or money.

Don't mind Berra, tbh. Solid championship defender though a bit of an oaf.

Probably the last you'll hear about him until he turns up at Swindon on loan. Good luck? Meh.

It continues to amaze me that useless pricks like Gannon actually get paid for churning out that sort of balls. Just arse wad.

Should fucking well hope so. I'd be annoyed if it isn't nearer four times as much.

Still think he's better than Walker was. Christ knows what durrant's in there for. Even post-injury, he had more ability than our entire squad combined.

Foderingham, McKay better than your 90s counterpart. Maybe Wallace. None of the others.

Think how bad last summer's window might have been without best in the business McParland. :rolleyes: