Saarfend sack Phil Brown

[Acido]

Ok don't worry, Im not suggesting he/Brown as a replacement for herr Schloppy lol (and remember we've still got him, we haven't sacked him yet, and we won't either!).
He used to be a canny manager though and remember when Brown and Southend did a number on us at Oakwell, in what I think was our 2016 promotion year ?.
And now while we think we've got problems, its surprising to see how they have slipped to where they are now and they are another club where fans are protesting against the chairman.
As with any takeover these days at a club, its a gamble and if you don't like the owners and want them out, still be careful what you wish for, we might get rid of them but we might end up with worse... if thats possible.

[animallittle3]

Anyone who hires Brown deserves to be heading for oblivion .

[Acido]

Anyone who hires Brown deserves to be heading for oblivion .

Yeah that was a weird thing he said about their club last week, when he must have known what was just around the corner.

None of us know and touch wood we won't ever know what that feels like to be in that position as a fan, facing relegation from the Conference and being disgusted and angry with the chairman/owner.


This was the thread by the way from when they beat us at our place in 2016, by playing Brown's way of dirty garbage football!.

https://boards.footymad.net/showthread.php?t=38001595

[pass_and_move]

A wonder what happened to Czechtyke, Gwynn, Bloodred etc? They used to contribute very well on this board

[Acido]

A wonder what happened to Czechtyke, Gwynn, Bloodred etc? They used to contribute very well on this board

Yeah look at Czech's reply about Brown being 'tanned'..
"I'm not sure he is tanned he just fell in a cow pat."

Thats the good thing about the archive section on Footymad, you can go back to previous threads which often involved former popular posters on here.
I like to keep looking back at our threads in 2016, where fans from other boards regularly congratulated us on the 2 Wembley wins.

[Young_Nudger]

Ok don't worry, Im not suggesting he/Brown as a replacement for herr Schloppy lol (and remember we've still got him, we haven't sacked him yet, and we won't either!).
He used to be a canny manager though and remember when Brown and Southend did a number on us at Oakwell, in what I think was our 2016 promotion year ?.
And now while we think we've got problems, its surprising to see how they have slipped to where they are now and they are another club where fans are protesting against the chairman.
As with any takeover these days at a club, its a gamble and if you don't like the owners and want them out, still be careful what you wish for, we might get rid of them but we might end up with worse... if thats possible.

………….. its a gamble and if you don't like the owners and want them out, still be careful what you wish for, we might get rid of them but we might end up with worse.


Well that’s the point int it Acido.
There are a number of clubs (most?) in the Championship that have gambled and gambled again.
While they have been doing that they have been able to lord it over Barnsley - they have been able to buy better players and pay much bigger wages.

Most of those clubs now are at best facing points deductions and at worse looking at the trap door that will see them drop like a stone through the leagues.

The owners at Barnsley are very very cute business people.
They have seen other clubs bending the rules - Paul Conway is persistently complaining about them - and although they have the money to out spend most other club owners - the owners at Barnsley refuse to place themselves and the club into debt.
They want a seat at the football table but they are doing it in a completely different way.

Because it’s not the usual way of running a football club then it’s not surprising that supporters as well as football pundits are finding it difficult to get their heads around it.
I’m not saying I fully understand their strategy because I don’t - but I applaud them for trying to achieve success in a different way.

The last thing I would want at Barnsley is a owner similar to Chansiri - owners that don’t understand football - they just think throwing money at a problem will solve it.

Barnsley can’t be so bad if they are attracting CEOs from City Football.
Owners that amass so much money can’t be thick.
If they say they want to improve the ground and improve the squad year on year then we should all give them some slack to let them get on with it.

[Acido]

Nudger, when you replied earlier I knew this would turn into yet another long winded argument about how great you think these owners are here.

[animallittle3]

………….. its a gamble and if you don't like the owners and want them out, still be careful what you wish for, we might get rid of them but we might end up with worse.


Well that’s the point int it Acido.
There are a number of clubs (most?) in the Championship that have gambled and gambled again.
While they have been doing that they have been able to lord it over Barnsley - they have been able to buy better players and pay much bigger wages.

Most of those clubs now are at best facing points deductions and at worse looking at the trap door that will see them drop like a stone through the leagues.

The owners at Barnsley are very very cute business people.
They have seen other clubs bending the rules - Paul Conway is persistently complaining about them - and although they have the money to out spend most other club owners - the owners at Barnsley refuse to place themselves and the club into debt.
They want a seat at the football table but they are doing it in a completely different way.

Because it’s not the usual way of running a football club then it’s not surprising that supporters as well as football pundits are finding it difficult to get their heads around it.
I’m not saying I fully understand their strategy because I don’t - but I applaud them for trying to achieve success in a different way.

The last thing I would want at Barnsley is a owner similar to Chansiri - owners that don’t understand football - they just think throwing money at a problem will solve it.

Barnsley can’t be so bad if they are attracting CEOs from City Football.
Owners that amass so much money can’t be thick.
If they say they want to improve the ground and improve the squad year on year then we should all give them some slack to let them get on with it.

So in essence you support something you don't entirely understand .

Would that be also known as blind faith ?

Susceptible to believing what you want hear ?

Naive even ?

Your assuming that by running the club in the manner they do somehow reduces financial risk .

It doesn't .

A lack of investment is just as damaging as massively overspending .

You believe also that if they get their hands on the stadium they will invest .

The thing is the best they will ever achieve is to only own 50% of it as Cryne did .

That's the model that was sold to them and that's the agreement they shook hands on .

The other 50% owned by Oakwell Community Assets doesn't even come in to this thing what so ever other than to pay them £150k pa rental as Cryne did .

In my opinion they are never ever going to get their hands on the 50% that is owned by Oakwell Community Assets .

So even if you believe this stuff about investing in the club , new West Stand etc etc the fact is they aren't going to get their hands on the whole scenario .

So no matter what you believe is actually irrelevant in my opinion .

Oakwell Community Assets own 50% for a reason and that's to protect the club from property development leaving the club without a home .

There is no local authority going to give that commitment up to a consortium such as these with the track record both historically and currently they hold .

They need an exit plan or they invest in the club under the terms it was sold to them .

Everything else is horse shyte .

[Arblasterfromthepast]

So in essence you support something you don't entirely understand .

Would that be also known as blind faith ?

Susceptible to believing what you want hear ?

Naive even ?

Your assuming that by running the club in the manner they do somehow reduces financial risk .

It doesn't .

A lack of investment is just as damaging as massively overspending .

You believe also that if they get their hands on the stadium they will invest .

The thing is the best they will ever achieve is to only own 50% of it as Cryne did .

That's the model that was sold to them and that's the agreement they shook hands on .

The other 50% owned by Oakwell Community Assets doesn't even come in to this thing what so ever other than to pay them £150k pa rental as Cryne did .

In my opinion they are never ever going to get their hands on the 50% that is owned by Oakwell Community Assets .

So even if you believe this stuff about investing in the club , new West Stand etc etc the fact is they aren't going to get their hands on the whole scenario .

So no matter what you believe is actually irrelevant in my opinion .

Oakwell Community Assets own 50% for a reason and that's to protect the club from property development leaving the club without a home .

There is no local authority going to give that commitment up to a consortium such as these with the track record both historically and currently they hold .

They need an exit plan or they invest in the club under the terms it was sold to them .

Everything else is horse shyte .

That's very true Animal. OCAL aren't going to sell, especially now that it's all blown up and requires a court case. Hence the rumours circulating about moving the club, which must be the consortium's leverage. Wonder if the court case is more about the move i.e. is there a clause in the sale contract that states the club can't be moved and that's where the dispute is?

[animallittle3]

That's very true Animal. OCAL aren't going to sell, especially now that it's all blown up and requires a court case. Hence the rumours circulating about moving the club, which must be the consortium's leverage. Wonder if the court case is more about the move i.e. is there a clause in the sale contract that states the club can't be moved and that's where the dispute is?

Well moving to a ground share massively devalues the club .

Even a 12 mile trip to Rotherham would only be supported by 2k fans if that .

We've both already highlighted that a new stadium is financially out of reach for the ownership unless they are prepared to invest £40m in to the project which we agree is unlikely .

When you strip this debacle down to the bones PMG have absolutely no cards to play with and they should pay up and shut up ......... Or sell up .

Those are the only two options open in my opinion .

All this other stuff is complete horse shyte as I've said .