Dan and Windy have commented - on the thread relating to the East Grinstead game - about the Chairman's forum which was held in the Clubhouse after that game. I am surprised there has been no further comment on this forum, which seems particularly quiet at the moment. Although, as Dan has said in the other thread, a large number of questions to the Chairman were taken up with matters to do with first team 'training' - or rather the evident lack of it, there were a number of other matters which were touched upon as well. I thought congratulations should go to all concerned for organising the event and to the Chairman for dealing frankly with what was put to him and to Steve for keeping matters on track. If the forum did not quite get in depth into all the issues which concern us, the blame for that falls squarely upon those who didn't ask the questions.
Agree, GeoffM. From a purely personal point of view, I couldn't attend the forum and thus was not permitted to submit any questions. I have a list of about 10 questions which I believe should have been asked on the night. Rather than post them on this forum, I feel it would be better for me to put them in writing to the Club directly. I will also request the Club's permission to publish the responses they provide on this forum. If the club then decides that such responses should not be published, I will certainly respect that decision. At least I will have some answers and a bit of peace of mind!! I hope others agree with this approach?
I've always put it on record that I like Dave. He always makes time to speak to me whether we bump into each other home or away, he's passionate, he hurts like all of us are at the moment and he always gives me straight honest answers (I think)to my questions and we have even spoke on the phone. He also appears to have given his last few managers one of the biggest budgets, if not the biggest in the league. On the other hand a lot of people do appear to dislike him and that includes a lot of people I have a lot of respect for So I guess it's down to what stories you believe as to which side of the fence you sit.
I thought he came over very well at the forum and he probably did expect a harder time. Cannot believe not one person asked about Dom, although that is admittedly old news now. I was surprised by his answer with regards to the poor training facilities being used by Terry, when he said he was aware but did nothing about it. I, along with others were also surprised about how dismissive he was about relegation. I think we all agree we are right in the s**t and the last 2 performances under the new management team have done nothing to dispel that. But what left me utterly stunned and shocked was being told that the first team had barely trained all season. Are you serious? No wonder we look the most unfit team in the league and are struggling near the bottom. It would be no surprise if my supporters team were fitter. At least we train week in week out whatever the weather 52 weeks of the year.
So that's really my take on things. Some good passionate questions from Windy, Dave and AC's old man and some silly questions In between . It was a shame the likes of Barry, Chris , Gaz, Overthehill etc were not there as I do respect their views and would have liked to hear their questions but In the end it was all left to my poor old mate Timmy and the lack of ice in the clubhouse
Agree, Thought it was very tame in terms of searching questions. It sounds like the training situation going onwards till the end of the season is to make the best of a imperfect situation. If William Parker did break a written agreement for facilities that were the only ones in town good enough to train the 'football' side on then hopefully we'll be recompensed as was hinted at. ( not that does help the real problem )
Sounds like there are non 3G 3/4 size pitches available, not ideal but better than nothing but surely imo the major issue is that a personal fitness regime should be a given when a player signs for the club an agreement in their code of conduct involving membership of a gym and players to take responsibility of their own basic fitness including stamina & conditioning should be agreed even at this level of non league. As others have mentioned a once weekly fitness based session could be done with relatively basic equipment.
I'm probably naive in thinking this is required / should be expected but surely I'm not the only one?
It's a basic responsibility that if you are expecting people to pay to watch you play, you are fit and you look after yourself. Yes, the club should help you with that, but if not, take responsibility. Paying public at this level do not expect Messi type performances but do expect players to be able to run about for 90 minutes. What worries me now is that we are in a battle and other teams are fitter than us. We almost need a pre-season (in mid-season) which to my mind, is scandalous. IMO, this aspect is not the responsibility of the Board. When I managed teams in Sussex, we had poor training facilities but we were the fittest team in the league - players would meet up on non-training nights and go for a run, challenge each other and be ready to make that lung-busting run on the Saturday. I had a team that wanted to play but when they couldn't, they ran and ran. They respected those who paid to watch them. As you have probably gathered, I have serious concerns about the senior management of the club, but this is simply not their fault. I think that if a player is being paid, he should have the decency to be fit whatever it takes. Blaming the club for not providing the right environment is no excuse. One more thing - if you only train twice a week, you want to assume that the players have certain fitness levels and may only need to top up occasionally. This allows you time to look at patterns of play, defensive set ups, restarts, transition etc. You don't want to waste valuable time running.
-- Edited by Overthehill on Monday 12th of January 2015 09:30:55 PM
Fair points Dan, I'm not sure how we could make it work asking the players to become members of a gym when they sign to be honest as obviously that would accrue an additional cost and I'm sure they wouldn't be very happy footing the bill for that themselves, however I know players could quite easily go for a run that would cost nothing.
My point in a previous thread regarding anywhere is better than nowhere in relation to the two venues sourced locally which were deemed not good enough was, as you have touched on been good enough for basic fitness sessions surely.
I will say though I know that Nigel WILL find somewhere to train if he hasn't already so have no fear about that.
Surely mate that people who are paid to play football should be fit and if that involves paying £30 a month to attend a gym ( prob less than half most of a games wages ) then that's not a big hardship. Loads of people who don't have to be fit for a living do it for personal pride to be fit mainly.
Fitness has got to be part of a reason for a player being of a decent standard too, not just technical ability surely? So the cost is part of the lifestyle choice of being a semi pro.
Forgot to mention earlier - I was at Crewe v Gillingham on Saturday and a friendly steward told me that she had witnessed Crewe players running up and down the main stand to top up their fitness, when weather conditions prevented their usual training patterns! Anecdotal I know..................
I was talking today with someone closely connected with Westfield Fc ..apparently they train twice a week and have the use of the 3G pitch at Filsham Valley ...something has gone badly wrong for us . Where is the desire ? The least amount we get train with the supporters club team is 8 , every week !! Sometimes we've had as many as 14,...It was not that many years ago when you would see the first team running up and down the seafront and on the beach . Somebody pointed out at the forum " you can't learn tactics on the beach " ....we'll ask Brazil about that shall we ? Let's get everybody fit first anyway ! Was very grateful to be given the chance to ask questions on Saturday ,,,,thanks to all involved
Surely mate that people who are paid to play football should be fit and if that involves paying £30 a month to attend a gym ( prob less than half most of a games wages ) then that's not a big hardship. Loads of people who don't have to be fit for a living do it for personal pride to be fit mainly.
Fitness has got to be part of a reason for a player being of a decent standard too, not just technical ability surely? So the cost is part of the lifestyle choice of being a semi pro.
Don't think I'm putting up barriers Dan I'm not I completely agree with you that players should be training by themselves additionall, I'm sure that a number of the players have gym memberships anyway but I just think it may be difficult for the club to enforce those players who don't have memberships actually take out memberships out of their own pockets without asking for more money.
One question the Chairman asked of those who attended the forum was: what did we expect of him? I am sure he meant that as a real rather than as a rhetorical question. One aspect of what I took him to be getting at was whether we wanted him to intervene regularly in the footballing side of the club's management, or whether we would prefer him to leave the appointed management team to make unfettered decisions in that area. What came over to me was that those who attended would prefer the Chairman to make strategic decisions and to leave the football side of things to the management team. Certainly that would be my general preference, which I stated.
But, like John, I was genuinely shocked at just how inadequate the training regime for the first team had become; particularly given that that apparently went back beyond Dom's tenure to at least Terry's time as manager. The Chairman was very clear that the (limited) availability of Pilot Field for first team training had been made clear to Dom when he applied, that he expected Dom to work within that, but that matters for various reasons (including the William Parker issue) did not work out; however, he was sure that Nigel would ensure a higher level of fitness in the future. Let us hope that Nigel does indeed.
As for the general issue of the respective roles of the Chairman and Manager; I think the key is that there should be maximum clarity about who does what and who decides what. That can never be entirely prescriptive though - there will always be some matters which will require a joint decision. Even better if there can be something of a consensus on major issues among all those who are interested in and involved with the club.
Are we saying, therefore, that over the last couple of years, there has been a lack of consensus and clarity around who does what with a succession of managers? I would have thought that the likes of John Maggs, Terry White and Dom would have wanted to concentrate solely on football and quite rightly so. And yet I've seen, unless I'm mistaken, the word 'untenable' relating to some of the departures. That would seem to indicate other factors not directly relating to on-field activities. I just get an uncomfortable feeling when so many managers come and go, players chop and change, and nobody ever gets the bottom of this 'untenable' or 'mutual consent' bit. I always thought that managers managed, with responsibility for the on-field bit, and owners did the strategic, grow the business stuff. It seems to have gone a bit pear shaped in my opinion and I can only think that for some reason, that structure doesn't work for us.
Overthehill: No, I'm not saying there was a lack of consensus about the appointment of Dom - which was all but unanimous - and I think the majority of us supported Terry's and John Magg's appointments too. But plainly, there were issues which have come into the public domain about what Dom saw as constraints on him doing the job his way. What I think - and it is only my interpretation - is that at the forum the Chairman was genuinely trying to get a better feel for what we expect of him, what level of 'intervention' by him in footballing affairs might be appropriate, and what might be done for the club and those who support it to achieve a greater level of unity. Sadly, that discussion never got very far on Saturday.
It's a shame that the discussion didn't go any deeper. I think that most supporters would expect the same thing - a welcoming club with a clear path and firm belief in its goals and ambitions. Well-respected in the community and with good relations with key stakeholders. On the pitch, a team that tries hard for every minute of every game. A stable set up with infrequent change. And a Chairman who allows managers to manage without the need for 'interventions' of any kind. I'm just not sure how many of those boxes we tick.
Overthehill, as you have had nothing to do with the club under its current ownership and as you have stated yourself you live miles away now and get very few opportunities to come to The Pilot Field let me inform you,as I'm a bit more aware of what goes on within the club. Despite those few who believe that the chairman gets too involved with the on pitch affairs they couldn't be further away from the truth, in fact one supporter basically accused him in the forum of not being involved enough! There obviously has to be some communication between the manager and chairman when it comes to the squad, IE signings etc but I don't really see that as interventions more basic running of a football club.
No one is more frustrated in the amount of managers we have gone through than them Chairman, I have had numerous conversations with him and as JohnW pointed out, he is hurting that we have not achieved anywhere near our full potential this season and indeed last season. Being part of the panel that appointed Dom I can categorically state that Dom was a unanimous decision to become the next manager and was by far the best candidate for the job at that time.
The reason why maybe some of the questions you would of liked cleared up a bit more in depth didn't happen is probably because of a couple of individuals going over old ground and this made it hard to progress the questions along, having said that the opportunity was given on a number of occasions for members of the supporters to ask the panel questions but as has been said it nearly always a came back to the issue of a lack of training facilities.
I would like to think that the majority of supporters do find the club a welcoming club, and as The Chairman said on Saturday our immediate goal is to get promoted out of this league and then for the future is to try and achieve Conference South football, with the facilities we currently have this is probably the highest we can aim for, the ground is graded up to that level and without significant investment if indeed it's possible that is realistically the highest we can achieve right now.
Hopefully that has made you a little more aware but did you not say that you intend to email the club with your questions? Maybe The Chairman will be able to enlighten you some more.
