So, we made it out of the division.
The supporters and staff deserve a statement today that clarifies the situation with the future of the ownership of the club, apologises for the way the club has operated this season and with those in role taking accountability for their actions or lack thereof.
There are no words that can make up for the total mismanagement of the club since the turn of the year. The open civil war between manager and stewards has been shameful and disrespectful to a club with over 125 years of history.
Josh Staunton should not be the man apologising to supporters. He is the epitome of leadership and the standard-bearer at Huish Park.
The ‘leaders’ at the club have treated supporters with contempt. Since the statement on 28th February before Altrincham and the subsequent press conferences, there has been no official communication regarding the takeover.
Our supporters groups have let us down too. Where are the Alliance meeting notes from the last 12 months? Where’s the evidence of supporters in a privileged position, holding club stakeholders to account. The Glovers Trust, which hasn’t shied away from trying to hold power to account previously, isn’t doing what it did before.
At Christmas, a decision was made to back SU Glovers as the preferred bidder. Evidently people think they’ve made a mistake and are now scrambling for a solution.
Two sliding doors moments have scuppered football experience from getting in the door and we now find ourselves at our lowest ebb since the middle of then ’90s.
We need clarity, today. Let the supporters know what the plan is, if there is a plan. There’s no doubt that administration will be on the cards if the deal collapses. Then what? Vultures will begin circling. It’s not inconceivable that we go the way of Bury or Macclesfield. How does the SSDC rescue deal look then?
Players, staff and supporters have a right to know what is happening.
i think you mean ‘no official communication’
I don’t know which has been the least professional business practice – option 1 – the silence, apathy and bordering on contempt from (is he – isn’t he) the outgoing chairman. [An honest question as I don’t know – is it nearly 18 months since the first round of ‘no one never not put cash on the table’ went public?;]
Then option 2 – the SSDC (is it now SDC?) who have likely washed their hands of responsibility OR never acknowledged “the deal” as it truly was from the moment they pitched it as “rescue package” for one – not one football club!;
Or option 3 (and I really didn’t want to say this while relegation is still fresh) the equal measure of pity and disappointment for the manager and prospective owner(s) going at it. Shame on you – pathetic public bickering, when working together was what was needed to overcome a relegation that has looked increasingly likely shortly after Mr. Hargreaves rocked up. Yet that may have worked were it not for Mr. Priestnal’s silence, apathy….and the cycle begins once more!
Ian, spot on (Josh Staunton’s assessment as well) – an explanation expected (can we say demanded?) by those who allowed the neglectful embarrassment to become a media circus embarrassment and ultimately a relegation. Who will front up? Options 1 and 2 won’t lower themselves – why would they, it’s not their responsibility, so….who’s next in line to the throne? Does anybody know?
I couldn’t agree more.What a shambles.
With the situation being as clear as a very muddy pond, can anyone please explain
a) who is currently paying the wages bill;
b) who is currently receiving the gate receipts;
c) does whatever contract which may or may not exist and is awaiting signature by Scott Priestnall and SU Glovers have a set price for whatever is or is not being sold – because presumably the club is worth less now that relegation is confirmed. If there was not a set price, there would have been no motivation for SU Glovers to expedite the sale (since they might get the club for less) and if there was a set price, there was no need for Priestnall to speed things up – particularly in the light of…
d) if the take-over takes place, does whatever agreement which exists between SSDC and Priestnall get passed to SCC and SU Glovers and does the buy-back right (however that works in reality) go to SU Glovers; and
e) does the land which is the subject of potential planning applications transfer from whomever to SU Glovers?
And I can’t help saying that the current situation is probably the inevitable consequence of a level of mismanagement at the club for many years – mismanagement which has to end. Whatever ownership package emerges, all those with the club’s interests at heart have to be prepared to give any new arrangement time to get established, to identify their priorities for progress and to put in place the plans to deliver those priorities. The public spats between different parts of the club leadership have been monumentally damaging – both off and, as Josh stated post-Wrexham, on the pitch. Whether the bridges so publicly burned between manager and the stewards can be rebuilt is unclear, but with good management, a clear vision and a common commitment by all parties to work together, what is at the moment a rather dark night can lead to a brighter day.
Can anyone answer my questions?
It’s a mess, that’s for sure. The truth about the last 18 months will come out eventually but what happens next is what we really need to know.
Ian, intrigued by your comment about supporters in a privileged position. What kind of privilege are you thinking of? Access, wealth, professional expertise……? But agree with you about supporters groups, sadly including the Trust. We currently seem consigned to a dependency model of twittering about the respective suitability of owners. Not very empowering or edifying.
Given this Gloverscast may be best placed to fill that void and unite us whether we be privileged or not?