Jump to content

Berwick Rangers 2017/18


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, hunter said:

That is pretty damning. But the same people who wanted coughlin out because of results seem content to back robbie horn??  Suppose it depends on who appointed horn??  I keep hearing he is john bells appointment?? Is this true??

It certainly beginning to look as if he is someone's "golden child".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 417
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 minutes ago, ShiPi said:

It certainly beginning to look as if he is someone's "golden child".

Yea let's blame JB,  he's been seen stroking a cat, wearing a monocle and feeding dissenters to  a tank  full of sharks, anything to make you feel better.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dougster said:

Yea let's blame JB,  he's been seen stroking a cat, wearing a monocle and feeding dissenters to  a tank  full of sharks, anything to make you feel better.  

I don't think anyone blamed him for anything. I don't think you can blame anyone when it seemed as if the majority agreed with the appointment at the time. There is no guarantee with any appointment. I do not know how good the manager is. I feel that is the remit of the board, only they know what resources they provide. The only evidence I have are my opinion of the performances and more importantly results. Trying to be rational and analytical the results show a downward trend and are not good enough for the expectations of the club or the fans. 

My comment "golden child"  was trying to reflect that Robbie seems to be getting an easier ride than some others.

I don't quite get the tone of your comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ShiPi said:

I don't think anyone blamed him for anything. I don't think you can blame anyone when it seemed as if the majority agreed with the appointment at the time. There is no guarantee with any appointment. I do not know how good the manager is. I feel that is the remit of the board, only they know what resources they provide. The only evidence I have are my opinion of the performances and more importantly results. Trying to be rational and analytical the results show a downward trend and are not good enough for the expectations of the club or the fans. 

My comment "golden child"  was trying to reflect that Robbie seems to be getting an easier ride than some others.

I don't quite get the tone of your comment. 

TBF my comments were aimed at the posts above yours,  we cant keep changing managers every 6 months then giving the new manager the same budget and the same issues and expecting better results. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dougster said:

TBF my comments were aimed at the posts above yours,  we cant keep changing managers every 6 months then giving the new manager the same budget and the same issues and expecting better results. 

Yes I agree. I also can't believe we gave Coughlin a budget, a pre season, signing players, and then get rid of him after 3 league games. If he had to go it should have been the end of last season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said it at the end of last season and it's been proven right - giving Coughlin the Summer was an awful decision. It was obvious his reign was over the club then had to make the decision 3 games in, after he had an absolute horror of a Summer. With all due respect to those still there, he left us with a squad that was always going to be in a relegation battle. 

As a result of that, I'd say Horn can't be blamed entirely for where we are. That being said, we have 1 win in 16 games and Horn has changed things somewhat since. He has to be partly responsible. He's an honest guy who wouldn't want us where we are but I'm sure even he'd happily admit there are areas he's made mistakes in - every manager does. I just don't think it's fair to land it all at his door given the absolute shambles he inherited.  

It isn't all Coughlin's fault either, though. The fact he was given the Summer somehow looks even worse in hindsight. Our board are wholly incompetent. I'm no fan of the constant board bashing, the magnifying glass that is over the board at all times. I know of no club that manages attribute failure to board members, individually or collectively, as much as Berwick Rangers. It's one of the reasons I'm so disillusioned with the club - everyone seems to have forgotten about the thing that matters, our results on the park. But the reality is, our board are not fit for purpose. Efforts have been made to try change things, but it's only getting worse. Instead of bringing in expertise, those who can offer something new, we're bringing in more members of the old guard, whether it be for powerplay or because they know no better. 

The board at current is quite the amalgamation. You have guys on there who are there simply for powerplay - not for bringing ideas, money, resources or anything else to the table. You have guys there who are more interested in their own ego and having to be 'the guy', things being their idea and running to their mates to spread stories. f**k me, we have Moray McLaren. I still don't even know what he looks like. It's with delightful irony that there's even a politician in amongst it all - and he quite beautifully met the stereotype when he denied that we'd lost £80k despite it being announced in our accounts.  There's a genuine argument that our associate directors are more fit for purpose than our actual board. 

Our boardroom is a toxic place. There are nice guys in there and it's very often forgotten that these guys are doing this in their own time - which is more than a lot would ever offer. But I think it's time there was a reality check. There's a quite huge difference between healthy disagreement and infighting. There has been an ongoing boardroom battle for years. We're in the shit and it's well past the point of those at that level pulling together for the good of the club. It's time for change - drastic change. But even that looks further away than ever. Who would touch us? The club can't even engage their own fans, let alone attract investors and/or talent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A word salad above which takes the form of some interesting, and yet hilariously misguided, viewpoints. John Coughlin for all his flaws has stepped in to a very difficult situation with Selkirk recently and immediately galvanised them: who would bet against him taking them up next year, and passing Berwick on the way down? One of the few decisions Bell and the gang (we all know who runs the show) have gotten right recently is to back Coughlin in the summer. It's not his fault that Berwick is such an unattractive proposition for football players; geographically alone, you're a nightmare. The club doesn't have the finances or the facilities to compensate for that. The decision to sack JC so soon in the season (or had he just had enough?) seemed bizarre at the time and that's now being proven, looking at his work with Selkirk.

Horn is a good Berwick man but he will never win promotion with the club as he did a decade ago. With a very healthy budget at Bonnyrigg he did not much more than a decent job. Again, though, Berwick couldn't attract a better candidate. But you'd have been better off giving Coughlin the time, patience and resources needed to build a dynasty. He's worked miracles before - just look at what he did with Berwick in his first spell, and almost getting East Stirlingshire into the promotion play-offs a few years back.

Would hate to see my beloved go down next year, so get the finger out. Take control of your god damn club and give the town an immersive community club of which it can be hugely proud. And, for the love of god, get some young local lads in there too. Bring the passion back to BRFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the_bully_wee said:

John Coughlin for all his flaws has stepped in to a very difficult situation with Selkirk recently and immediately galvanised them: who would bet against him taking them up next year, and passing Berwick on the way down? 

JC left Selkirk last week - http://www.bordertelegraph.com/sport/16133879.Ian_Fergus_rejoins_Selkirk_following_Coughlin_s_departure/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, berwick-the-unbeatable said:

I said it at the end of last season and it's been proven right - giving Coughlin the Summer was an awful decision. It was obvious his reign was over the club then had to make the decision 3 games in, after he had an absolute horror of a Summer. With all due respect to those still there, he left us with a squad that was always going to be in a relegation battle. 

As a result of that, I'd say Horn can't be blamed entirely for where we are. That being said, we have 1 win in 16 games and Horn has changed things somewhat since. He has to be partly responsible. He's an honest guy who wouldn't want us where we are but I'm sure even he'd happily admit there are areas he's made mistakes in - every manager does. I just don't think it's fair to land it all at his door given the absolute shambles he inherited.  

It isn't all Coughlin's fault either, though. The fact he was given the Summer somehow looks even worse in hindsight. Our board are wholly incompetent. I'm no fan of the constant board bashing, the magnifying glass that is over the board at all times. I know of no club that manages attribute failure to board members, individually or collectively, as much as Berwick Rangers. It's one of the reasons I'm so disillusioned with the club - everyone seems to have forgotten about the thing that matters, our results on the park. But the reality is, our board are not fit for purpose. Efforts have been made to try change things, but it's only getting worse. Instead of bringing in expertise, those who can offer something new, we're bringing in more members of the old guard, whether it be for powerplay or because they know no better. 

The board at current is quite the amalgamation. You have guys on there who are there simply for powerplay - not for bringing ideas, money, resources or anything else to the table. You have guys there who are more interested in their own ego and having to be 'the guy', things being their idea and running to their mates to spread stories. f**k me, we have Moray McLaren. I still don't even know what he looks like. It's with delightful irony that there's even a politician in amongst it all - and he quite beautifully met the stereotype when he denied that we'd lost £80k despite it being announced in our accounts.  There's a genuine argument that our associate directors are more fit for purpose than our actual board. 

Our boardroom is a toxic place. There are nice guys in there and it's very often forgotten that these guys are doing this in their own time - which is more than a lot would ever offer. But I think it's time there was a reality check. There's a quite huge difference between healthy disagreement and infighting. There has been an ongoing boardroom battle for years. We're in the shit and it's well past the point of those at that level pulling together for the good of the club. It's time for change - drastic change. But even that looks further away than ever. Who would touch us? The club can't even engage their own fans, let alone attract investors and/or talent. 

What was the "  absolute horror of a Summer" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, the_bully_wee said:

A word salad above which takes the form of some interesting, and yet hilariously misguided, viewpoints. John Coughlin for all his flaws has stepped in to a very difficult situation with Selkirk recently and immediately galvanised them: who would bet against him taking them up next year, and passing Berwick on the way down? One of the few decisions Bell and the gang (we all know who runs the show) have gotten right recently is to back Coughlin in the summer. It's not his fault that Berwick is such an unattractive proposition for football players; geographically alone, you're a nightmare. The club doesn't have the finances or the facilities to compensate for that. The decision to sack JC so soon in the season (or had he just had enough?) seemed bizarre at the time and that's now being proven, looking at his work with Selkirk.

Horn is a good Berwick man but he will never win promotion with the club as he did a decade ago. With a very healthy budget at Bonnyrigg he did not much more than a decent job. Again, though, Berwick couldn't attract a better candidate. But you'd have been better off giving Coughlin the time, patience and resources needed to build a dynasty. He's worked miracles before - just look at what he did with Berwick in his first spell, and almost getting East Stirlingshire into the promotion play-offs a few years back.

Would hate to see my beloved go down next year, so get the finger out. Take control of your god damn club and give the town an immersive community club of which it can be hugely proud. And, for the love of god, get some young local lads in there too. Bring the passion back to BRFC.

Coughlin was sacked, it was not a case of him wanting to go.  Was the sacking all about factions in the boardroom looking for excuses or reasons to get one up on other factions?  I did not think it was horror start to the season, two very bad results, although Stirling were beating everyone at the time. There had been no time to work with the loanees, they stay with their parent club until the end of pre season, There had been no time to settle on his best team. From what I had heard he was doing a good job in  other areas of the club. 

Having taken the decision to sack Coughlin, I think it would only make matters worse if the same was done to Robbie.

Yes the Selkirk scenario is a bit weird but with rumours and accusations flying before Coughlin got there, it is perhaps not a surprise he "left". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 10:54, berwick-the-unbeatable said:

It's with delightful irony that there's even a politician in amongst it all - and he quite beautifully met the stereotype when he denied that we'd lost £80k despite it being announced in our accounts.  

I think you'll find he's a FORMER politician. Even his once loyal Lib Dem voters seen through his bile and half baked ideas.

What's more worrying is the thought that we have directors who voted him into the boardroom.

     
Lawrie ,   Roderick     Malcolm     Gordon        Conservative                            867 ( Elected) 

Parkin,     Brian                                                               Labour                                         132   

Watkin,    Dougie                                                          Liberal     Democrats           729           

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/04/2018 at 09:14, BerwickMad said:

Of course Robbie can be judged now. You take into account that he’s only been here 7 months, but can also judge them on how they’re performing with the players they have at their disposal. It’s very rare a manager will have enough time in a job to be able to put out their own 11.

I’m certainly not calling for his head, but I am worried by what I see out on the park. It’s the worst Berwick team I’ve seen since supporting them and I’m pretty sure it’s the worst run of form I’ve seen from us in this division. We’re 11 points off last seasons derisory total, in a season were we struggled with keepers and didn’t have the good loan players we’ve had this. He’s also had a transfer window where he was able to make quite a few changes. We have Orru starting left back and not McDonald. A young player who’s improving, but not in the same class yet. We have O’Kane in midfield. We have a 17 year old (who has been class) starting up top on his own when it’s clearly not working. We haven’t started playing in recent games until O’Kane goes off and See and/or Murrell come on and we start to inject just a little positivity into proceedings.

Again, I’d not be looking for a change and hoping for a good summer as I have some confidence in Robbie, but Berwick is rotten with ‘he’s a good guy’ or ‘he’s my pal’ so give him more time as opposed to others we’ve had. Even as far back as Sandy Clark we’ve had judgements on managers seemingly based on which people or factions of the board a manager is closest to. Managers shouldn’t be in the slightest bit involved in any of that shite, and they should all be judged on their own performance and merits.

As for the boardroom, and regardless of the deflection that seems to be taking place, I haven’t changed my opinion since last summer. The whole board should recognise they’ve failed, or at least are failing and actively look for totally new leadership, not linked to any of them to take the club forward at the top.

Factionalism has been tearing the club apart for years and you have to wonder how far we will sink before it finally clicks and the good of the club comes before self interest. Unfortunately, rather than calm heads and a group of people working together towards a proper goal, we’ll probably get more mountains out of molehills, shooting from the hip and people prioritising their egos being dented over the club. Why do we even find out about board decisions a day after the meeting that can be presented on here without any details of a reason behind a decision other than because of factionalism? It’s pathetic.

We’re a small football club with a dwindling support of 300-350 fans. This isn’t the House of Commons with a government and opposition, or it shouldn’t be. How much energy is wasted and how many opportunities aren’t grasped while people are even subconsciously thinking about the politics behind every decision? How many clever, clued up people could help the club or be an asset, but wouldn’t go near it with a bargepole? The vast majority of our small support couldn’t care about most of this shite, they just want to see a successful team on the park. Get a grip.

Factionalism has been tearing the club apart for years.

Didn't you sit on a committee that voted to spend 15k on buying a former chairman's shares? The only positive to gain from this was to move ahead of their nearest rival in the supporters trust. More of a Parkin v Bell movement. That money could have gone towards pitch repairs and not poured down a drain. 

I am not politically driven, never been involved in taking any sides, I just want the best for BRFC.  I am opinionated, people don't like that, put speak what I think, right or wrong. 

I want nothing more than a united football club and the reason for my post was to try and bring the failings of the current board into the public eye and initiative change,  nothing more. If we rumble on, nothing will happen until the earthquake strikes and the tremors are getting stronger. 

There are potential investment opportunities out there but not without supporters groups putting a percentage of their shares up for sale.

Dale, do your research on Murray McLaren before spouting absolute shit. He's invested in the club, brought between 50-100k in sponsorship and knows the football side of the business. Meanwhile we have people like 10% Tait doing nothing but bad mouthing the club in taxi journeys to the station. 

I like Len Eyre as a person tbh but we need strong leadership from the top.

Whats happening on the pitch is best left alone until the deeper routed problems are resolved. 

We all want one goal, a healthy and semi successful BRFC, time to have more respect for one another and work together for a successful future. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Factionalism has been tearing the club apart for years.

Didn't you sit on a committee that voted to spend 15k on buying a former chairman's shares? The only positive to gain from this was to move ahead of their nearest rival in the supporters trust. More of a Parkin v Bell movement. That money could have gone towards pitch repairs and not poured down a drain. 

I am not politically driven, never been involved in taking any sides, I just want the best for BRFC.  I am opinionated, people don't like that, put speak what I think, right or wrong. 

I want nothing more than a united football club and the reason for my post was to try and bring the failings of the current board into the public eye and initiative change,  nothing more. If we rumble on, nothing will happen until the earthquake strikes and the tremors are getting stronger. 

There are potential investment opportunities out there but not without supporters groups putting a percentage of their shares up for sale.

Dale, do your research on Murray McLaren before spouting absolute shit. He's invested in the club, brought between 50-100k in sponsorship and knows the football side of the business. Meanwhile we have people like 10% Tait doing nothing but bad mouthing the club in taxi journeys to the station. 

I like Len Eyre as a person tbh but we need strong leadership from the top.

Whats happening on the pitch is best left alone until the deeper routed problems are resolved. 

We all want one goal, a healthy and semi successful BRFC, time to have more respect for one another and work together for a successful future. 

 

 

 

I did vote for that and talked about it at the time. I fully understand the arguments against. I didn’t come at it as an SC v Trust issue and this wasn’t discussed in the debate. In hindsight, maybe we should have asked for half of the shares to be offered to the Trust but that would depend I suppose on whether Brian would want to do that or not. Generally, I thought it was good value, increased supporter ownership in the club and didn’t impact the SCs yearly commitment to the club.

 

I’ve always supported the Trust and have been a member for 15 years. I think it’s a good thing to have a supporters group who can raise money and have a say on how that’s spent when it’s given to the club, as opposed to just handing money over. When I’ve heard people argue against the the Trust in meetings or in the pub or whatever, I’ve defended them. I don’t think it should be an ‘either or’.

 

The argument that says that the money spent on shares could have been spent on this, that or whatever is a valid one. But it’s 2 and a half years down the line. You could say that for anything, like when the supporters groups put money forward to help fund a new striker under Cameron and it didn’t work.

 

Specifically with pitch repairs, I think it would be a good idea to raise money for specific issues like thing. A fundraising event, buckets at the gate or some other thing that means we aren’t always relying on the same sources. You might even get some new people involved who aren’t, or don’t want to be involved in the supporters groups. Additional money could be made that way for a specific issue rather than looking at the same pots. But typical with Berwick, it’s a political football, boardroom leaks and there’s finger pointing before most fans even knew about any options or have a chance to think about it. We won’t get a united football club if they continue to behave as they are.

 

And I totally agree we need strong leadership, something that certainly isn’t there at the moment. It needs someone new which is why I say they should be actively looking for it. Although I generally think supporter ownership is a good thing, if new investment and leadership involves a percentage of shares from supporters being involved as you say, it has to be seriously considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Disc Potato said:

Factionalism has been tearing the club apart for years.

Didn't you sit on a committee that voted to spend 15k on buying a former chairman's shares? The only positive to gain from this was to move ahead of their nearest rival in the supporters trust. More of a Parkin v Bell movement. That money could have gone towards pitch repairs and not poured down a drain. 

I am not politically driven, never been involved in taking any sides, I just want the best for BRFC.  I am opinionated, people don't like that, put speak what I think, right or wrong. 

I want nothing more than a united football club and the reason for my post was to try and bring the failings of the current board into the public eye and initiative change,  nothing more. If we rumble on, nothing will happen until the earthquake strikes and the tremors are getting stronger. 

There are potential investment opportunities out there but not without supporters groups putting a percentage of their shares up for sale.

Dale, do your research on Murray McLaren before spouting absolute shit. He's invested in the club, brought between 50-100k in sponsorship and knows the football side of the business. Meanwhile we have people like 10% Tait doing nothing but bad mouthing the club in taxi journeys to the station. 

I like Len Eyre as a person tbh but we need strong leadership from the top.

Whats happening on the pitch is best left alone until the deeper routed problems are resolved. 

We all want one goal, a healthy and semi successful BRFC, time to have more respect for one another and work together for a successful future. 

3

If I recall rightly, I wasn't at the meeting where it was voted for. I'm pretty sure I recall saying at the time, I'd have likely voted against it if I had been, but looking at it objectively, I really don't see much of an issue with strengthening fans stake in the club, both then, and now. If anything, it's a decision that might age well with the club in a time of turbulence and with our future looking fairly uncertain. For me, there needs to be someone holding the board accountable and certainly, during my time on the SC Committee, we drove for that at every meeting.

If you want honesty & transparency though, it's my view that neither the Trust nor Supporters Club do a good enough job. For me, the Trust play the card of being sheep in headlights very well. They create a feeling of being 'helpless', that the SC have bullied them with this share purchase and that John Bell, arguably the director with the closest ties to the trust, isn't listened to.

The reality is John is just as guilty as any other board member of causing factionalism. On a different but related note, I resigned from the Trust board about ten years ago because he outright refused to pass on the feelings of the Trust to the board - a good example of the Trust also being poor at holding the board accountable.

One thing that is admirable is their stance on donations - I couldn't believe what I'd hear from some of the old guard on the SC, who felt that the Trust should simply hand money over no questions asked and for any purpose. I also told them that they were wrong.

Elsewhere, for all the effort mentioned above to drive accountability at board level, define roles for directors, establish working groups across different disciplines, progress was incredibly slow with the Supporters Club. Constructive feedback was often met as criticism and shot down furiously.

The club were good enough to open up somewhat - the communications working group is a good example of a success. But the reality is that as the biggest shareholder, the SC is atrociously bad at holding the club accountable, astonishingly naive in handing across funds and very much stuck in their ways.

When we got involved, there was a hope from some of the 'older' folk on the committee that we'd be able to drive some change. The reality is, that even with a well-sized group of fairly young people looking to improve the future of their club and the one or two who welcomed a fresh outlook, we were outnumbered, outvoted and often wasting our time even trying to open the minds of some of those who sat on the committee.

The two organisations think on very different wavelengths. I think ST are more micro, whilst SC are more micro. That doesn't mean the SC are better - their whole process is by far the more flawed. There are arguments for and against there being just one supporters organisation - the macro/micro argument being a great example.

Personally, I think it should be one. It's been suggested for years now, and talks were even had while we were on the committee. Yet people are still in denial - there are claims that no rift exists anymore. It's a myth peddled to maintain the status quo by those who deep down, don't want it to happen. If they did, it would have by now.

I think the sad reality is that until a few folk who hold grudges die and a younger generation are actually allowed to steer the club forwards, the club will remain this way. I thought the very much realistic threat of losing league status might be enough to change some ways, but there are too many people in the club's setup who are way too comfortable with failure. Of course there are problems at board level. I said myself in the last post that I don't think the board are fit for purpose.

But your last sentence sums it up. We all want the same thing, yet have people in fan groups who outright refuse to work together in anything bigger than a 'co-hosted event'. Change starts with the fans - especially at a club that is lucky enough to be owned in the majority by supporters. There are two ways out of this mess for us. Gamble, put shares up for sale and hope a mystery buyer has a fetish for disaster, or work together, find a way forward, engage fans, identify talent in different discplines and work forwards as a club. I'd take either at the moment, but I know which one should be easier.   

His name's Moray by the way. Do your research!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, berwick-the-unbeatable said:

If I recall rightly, I wasn't at the meeting where it was voted for. I'm pretty sure I recall saying at the time, I'd have likely voted against it if I had been, but looking at it objectively, I really don't see much of an issue with strengthening fans stake in the club, both then, and now. If anything, it's a decision that might age well with the club in a time of turbulence and with our future looking fairly uncertain. For me, there needs to be someone holding the board accountable and certainly, during my time on the SC Committee, we drove for that at every meeting.

If you want honesty & transparency though, it's my view that neither the Trust nor Supporters Club do a good enough job. For me, the Trust play the card of being sheep in headlights very well. They create a feeling of being 'helpless', that the SC have bullied them with this share purchase and that John Bell, arguably the director with the closest ties to the trust, isn't listened to.

The reality is John is just as guilty as any other board member of causing factionalism. On a different but related note, I resigned from the Trust board about ten years ago because he outright refused to pass on the feelings of the Trust to the board - a good example of the Trust also being poor at holding the board accountable.

One thing that is admirable is their stance on donations - I couldn't believe what I'd hear from some of the old guard on the SC, who felt that the Trust should simply hand money over no questions asked and for any purpose. I also told them that they were wrong.

Elsewhere, for all the effort mentioned above to drive accountability at board level, define roles for directors, establish working groups across different disciplines, progress was incredibly slow with the Supporters Club. Constructive feedback was often met as criticism and shot down furiously.

The club were good enough to open up somewhat - the communications working group is a good example of a success. But the reality is that as the biggest shareholder, the SC is atrociously bad at holding the club accountable, astonishingly naive in handing across funds and very much stuck in their ways.

When we got involved, there was a hope from some of the 'older' folk on the committee that we'd be able to drive some change. The reality is, that even with a well-sized group of fairly young people looking to improve the future of their club and the one or two who welcomed a fresh outlook, we were outnumbered, outvoted and often wasting our time even trying to open the minds of some of those who sat on the committee.

The two organisations think on very different wavelengths. I think ST are more micro, whilst SC are more micro. That doesn't mean the SC are better - their whole process is by far the more flawed. There are arguments for and against there being just one supporters organisation - the macro/micro argument being a great example.

Personally, I think it should be one. It's been suggested for years now, and talks were even had while we were on the committee. Yet people are still in denial - there are claims that no rift exists anymore. It's a myth peddled to maintain the status quo by those who deep down, don't want it to happen. If they did, it would have by now.

I think the sad reality is that until a few folk who hold grudges die and a younger generation are actually allowed to steer the club forwards, the club will remain this way. I thought the very much realistic threat of losing league status might be enough to change some ways, but there are too many people in the club's setup who are way too comfortable with failure. Of course there are problems at board level. I said myself in the last post that I don't think the board are fit for purpose.

But your last sentence sums it up. We all want the same thing, yet have people in fan groups who outright refuse to work together in anything bigger than a 'co-hosted event'. Change starts with the fans - especially at a club that is lucky enough to be owned in the majority by supporters. There are two ways out of this mess for us. Gamble, put shares up for sale and hope a mystery buyer has a fetish for disaster, or work together, find a way forward, engage fans, identify talent in different discplines and work forwards as a club. I'd take either at the moment, but I know which one should be easier.   

His name's Moray by the way. Do your research!

Excellent post as was Brian's. 

Stirling Albion another fan owned club are in the process of selling their shares and have attracted over half a million of investement with over 50% being paid upfront.  The structure of the club is very similar to BRFC with the council owning the ground.  Personally, I think this has to be the first option in the way forward of change.  If that fails then the next option is to merge the two supporters groups into one with a setup as you detail above.

As the club is losing money at speed, tough decisions need made at an early stage, non playing staff cuts are unavoidable in a bid to balance the books. Any cuts on the playing squad will only enhance our chances of dropping out the league.  There is major re-construction of the league setup on the way, by acting now, we could gain an advantage on other clubs as well as stopping the rot.

The team are currently on a poor run of form but I take great encourgement from the size of the crowds, I would have expected to see crowds around the 200 mark but we are well above that. That is a big positive to take from the current turbulance.  

Lets get over that line in securing our league status and take this forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...