[malcolmr13]

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

[NOFX]

malcolmr13, on Dec 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

Sadly mate I disagrree that Rico will get us up the table, unless someone comes in and tells him how to sort the defence out. John Duncan in the stands last week maybe that's why he was thee?

[dim view]

malcolmr13, on Dec 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

Sums me up nicely.

'The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.'

Surely even the most cynical won't try and credit anyone else with the achievement, when it happens.

[benbow]

malcolmr13, on Dec 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

Happy New Year. Have a good one.


www.rosmals.co.uk

[BlueRover52]

malcolmr13, on Dec 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

For a time now I have resolved in my head that the ground is nailed on and so what if it is a bit late---sh-t happens! Looking forward to admiring my brick.
Rico will guide us to an end of season mid table position and then be shown the door in time for his successor to build a squad for next season.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

malcolmr13, on Dec 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

Nice.

Subtle sleights aimed at the more vociferously critical amongst us; an attempt to portray the overly protracted new ground/takeover saga as "diligence and patience" on the part of a Board that even their champions describe as bystanders to events; vague suggestions towards what the Manager might achieve that're almost instantly retracted; amateur Agony Aunt aspirations; and all wrapped up in a civil, self effacing package designed to stimulate response.

Well done my friend, you've achieved your aim.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on Jan 1 2009, 02:33 PM, said:

Nice.

Subtle sleights aimed at the more vociferously critical amongst us; an attempt to portray the overly protracted new ground/takeover saga as "diligence and patience" on the part of a Board that even their champions describe as bystanders to events; vague suggestions towards what the Manager might achieve that're almost instantly retracted; amateur Agony Aunt aspirations; and all wrapped up in a civil, self effacing package designed to stimulate response.

Well done my friend, you've achieved your aim.

Your issue, I think, is that you can't accept that the takeover must wait until a key stage of the building work is completed. That being a fact, it is no use clouding the issue by blaming the Board for the delays in reaching that key stage. Sure it's been protracted, but can you name any areas in which the Board has caused delays in the political processes, planning permissions, grant applications or anything else?.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on Jan 1 2009, 02:52 PM, said:

Your issue, I think, is that you can't accept that the takeover must wait until a key stage of the building work is completed. That being a fact, it is no use clouding the issue by blaming the Board for the delays in reaching that key stage. Sure it's been protracted, but can you name any areas in which the Board has caused delays in the political processes, planning permissions, grant applications or anything else?.

My "issue", is that i lack the blind, unquestioning faith in Hubbard that you display. And the "fact" you speak of could be described by cynics as merely another in a long line of excuses.

As for your question, the simple answer is 'no'. But that, surely, is the point. If those that champion the Board would have us applaud then for 'delivering' the new ground, by definition they infer Hubbard and Co have had control of events. But time and time again those that do defend and excuse the Board have told us that 'It's not their fault, Guv' as if they're merely innocent bystanders to events.

What's more any suggestion that no one could've negotiated a better deal or built a new ground for the Club at an earlier stage is, frankly, nonsense.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on Jan 1 2009, 03:23 PM, said:

My "issue", is that i lack the blind, unquestioning faith in Hubbard that you display. And the "fact" you speak of could be described by cynics as merely another in a long line of excuses...........

........ when in actual fact it's a crucial stage in a multi million pound transaction, almost certainly a stipulation by the new man's solicitor that the 10 acres must be owned by the club before the takeover can proceed.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on Jan 1 2009, 04:24 PM, said:

........ when in actual fact it's a crucial stage in a multi million pound transaction, almost certainly a stipulation by the new man's solicitor that the 10 acres must be owned by the club before the takeover can proceed.

So why has Hubbard suggested certain dates in the past when the takeover would be completed if this "fact" is so crucial?

[Wooden Spoon]

malcolmr13, on Dec 31 2008, 07:20 PM, said:

I choose to discount heavily the disparaging, competitively cynical views of the majority of MB contributors - in favour of my own enlightened opinion.
Do I offer my monitor-glass chin for abrupt contact? well , yes.
I believe and think that the new deal- the site handover, new investor revelation and early 2009 build will happen.
That is less controversial than MB contributors would have you think. They nurse the same opinion, quietly.
The more controversial statement is that it is brought about by the diligence and patience of the present board.
Next, as long as LR is manager I want him to be successful and the team too.
Nothing contoversial there - though some harbour other, less sporting thoughts.
Now for the edge-of -springboard dive into the unknown.
I think LR will get us up the table, though probably not enough for a new contract.
I may be wrong but dealing with that eventuality and any other on- field disappointments is for the individual to work out.
I can offer no advice on that score , though the message board works for some.
Happy New Year.

He has not done enough from Jan 08 to earn a new contract.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on Jan 1 2009, 04:29 PM, said:

So why has Hubbard suggested certain dates in the past when the takeover would be completed if this "fact" is so crucial?

In the certain knowledge that secrecy would have been condemned, he's been providing ball park or 'hoping for' dates, as he has openly said. Surely you would acknowledge the crucial importance of acquiring the 10 acres to the buyer?. BH has always said that and has never suggested that the new man would come on board earlier.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on Jan 1 2009, 05:22 PM, said:

In the certain knowledge that secrecy would have been condemned, he's been providing ball park or 'hoping for' dates, as he has openly said. Surely you would acknowledge the crucial importance of acquiring the 10 acres to the buyer?. BH has always said that and has never suggested that the new man would come on board earlier.

I'm sorry Dave, but that's simply not true.

From memory, he suggested the takeover would happen in the Summer, then early in the season, then December, then January, and now it's some vague point six weeks after some other vague point.

Tell you what, i'll offer everyone a date of my own and let's see how accurate it is: our takeover will be completed a few days after Sheffield Wednesday's.

Whenever that eventually happens, of course.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 01 January 2009 - 05:57 PM

[dim view]

MP-Spire, on Jan 1 2009, 05:30 PM, said:

But the Chairman confirmed that we've already sold Saltergate! You couldn't make it up, could you?

Lets say the land is cleared to BH's requirements by the 19th Jan, how long will it take for the legalities of bringing the new investor on board? Surely not another delay?

well, these are detals that are being guessed, but I would have thought it could be implied that we've sold Saltergate ..............subject to contract.

There may well be a delay to allow a shareholders vote, but I would have thought again that his or their identities would have to be publicised in advance to guarantee a 'yes' vote. The CFSS Chairman has agreed that he won't be voting within the CFC Boardroom for any particular person without a mandate from the CFSS Board.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on Jan 1 2009, 05:50 PM, said:

I'm sorry Dave, but that's simply not true.

From memory, he suggested the takeover would happen in the Summer, then early in the season, then December, then January, and now it's some vague point six weeks after some other vague point.

Tell you what, i'll offer everyone a date of my own and let's see how accurate it is: our takeover will be completed a few days after Sheffield Wednesday's.

Whenever that eventually happens, of course.

It is true. The key date is the clean acquisition of the 10 acres. There have been several delays, the most prominent one being the withdrawal of our original major partner in the project.

Are you suggesting that the takeover will be delayed if we are in a position to sign for the land, but the Wednesday takeover is delayed?>

[fishini]

MP-Spire, on Jan 1 2009, 05:41 PM, said:

If the sale of Saltergate has been made public, why can't the details of the investor? Clearly the same clause will apply to both the sale of Saltergate and also the new investment.

If like it has been inferred that Saltergate has been sold then what if the new ground fails do we have a time scale when we have to vacate Saltergate or do we have to pay rent to the owners?