Printable View
"there is a difference between success and progress. On-field – the definition of success for the club in 21/22 is promotion to League One. Failure is not achieving that success objective.
There are other definitions of on and off-field success, but they are all secondary to the top objective of promotion.
There are other definitions of progress which are needed to be made to contribute the success."
That's the official word from the club.
It's kind of weird there's no middle ground, just a black and white definition, but there you have it.
Failure is starting season 22/23 below tier three level.
To the club, progress alone does not constitute success. We could win the CCU PapaLazaru Trophy, get to the fifth round of the FA Cup, beat Manchester City in the League Cup, but if we lose in the playoff final or worse, the club has failed.
Fair enough.
At least we know how to judge the performance of the manager and director of football next season, it's clear as a Fox's Glacier Mint.
It's interesting to consider the consequences of failure and the questionable faith we're showing in the master of excuses. Next season any excuse is meaningless because "all is secondary to the top objective".
At the first (major) of the two fora Clibbens defined success as promotion. But success / failure is not a one bit binary state. There are degrees between success and failure. He stated words to the effect that there is success, then the step below that is progress.
So, having finished 10th in season 2020/2021 for the team to finish in 8th place in 2021/2022 would not be success. But it would be progress. He did make that clear at the forum without stating those specific figures.
I have only heard what was stated on this topic and not seen what was written in full but I do not doubt your transcript. It could be that what was written was an edited version of what was said either at the forum or elsewhere. Of course what is written is clear but may be an error in the sense that it does not represent what it was intended to represent.
It's here, in writing, on the official club website for all to view.
No mistakes. What you see is what you get.
https://www.carlisleunited.co.uk/new...ions-answered/
No "errors" it's a direct answer to a direct question.
The consequences of failure? There seem to be none at CUFC. In most businesses failure to hit targets (promotion in our case) would lead to some form of punishment - removal of bonuses, transfer to another task, demotion even - but at our Club staff just seem to be told to try again, and we all know the definition of failure, don’t we? Of course the manager is a different matter; the collective failures of the plethora of Directors that we have + Holdsworth could cost him his job. Who’d be a football Manager?
Ah, there may be no errors but possibly there may be omissions.
Indeed he is answering questions three days after the second forum so it is as you, Piglet, say. In the second forum there are two questions which allow him to define success / failure. The second time he seems to refer to overall club performance including on the pitch and he refers to success / progress.
However, we must take his latest answer on the club web site three days after the second forum as his definitive statement on the issue. I believe that from his point of view it is a substantial hostage to fortune but at this stage he has to be positive and demanding. There are always 24 clubs aiming for promotion at this time of year.
Nothing forced Clibbens to define success and failure so narrowly.
He could easily have said: "Success in 21/22 will be finishing at a minimum in the top seven. Failure would be relegation"
Hence the middle ground I mentioned.
Or he could have said: "Success in 21/22 will be fighting for promotion and achieving profitability by exceeding attendance targets. Failure would be lower crowds than predicted and finishing in the bottom half of the table."
Success for other sides in the division would be defined as consolidation not necessarily promotion.
Quite