Jump to content
New forum & current issues/bugs Read more... ×

Sole owner or a board?

Recommended Posts

Whats fans thoughts on the thread title Sole owner or a board. Both of our clubs at present are experiencing problems of some kind at the top.How would you like to see your club ran.I personally would like to see a board made up of four with the owner having the deciding vote in the event of stalemate. At least that way there has to be a discussion about the matter in hand rather than one person saying , we are going to do this, even though he has taken advice for somewhere. I appreciate it,s there cash but they also need to listen to other board members opinions who have a financial interest in the club. Whats your view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whats fans thoughts on the thread title Sole owner or a board. Both of our clubs at present are experiencing problems of some kind at the top.How would you like to see your club ran.I personally would like to see a board made up of four with the owner having the deciding vote in the event of stalemate. At least that way there has to be a discussion about the matter in hand rather than one person saying , we are going to do this, even though he has taken advice for somewhere. I appreciate it,s there cash but they also need to listen to other board members opinions who have a financial interest in the club. Whats your view.

 

I'm a little torn Alan, when I've seen clubs bought by consortiums it usually ends in tears, sole owners have tended to fare better. I think Mr Chansiri made a mistake with not keeping the advisory commitee that were a bit more well versed in the game than he is, we may not have made some of the mistakes we have.

 

Not sure when/where the breakdown between Mr McCabe and the Prince at United occurred but its having an adverse effect on the club at an important time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm a little torn Alan, when I've seen clubs bought by consortiums it usually ends in tears, sole owners have tended to fare better. I think Mr Chansiri made a mistake with not keeping the advisory commitee that were a bit more well versed in the game than he is, we may not have made some of the mistakes we have.

 

Not sure when/where the breakdown between Mr McCabe and the Prince at United occurred but its having an adverse effect on the club at an important time.

 

I was dead set against the advisory committee idea at the time but, looking back, it was far better than what we have now.

Would love to hear from Glenn Roeder about his time at the club and why he left but you can bet your life he'll be bound by a confidentiality agreement made when he was paid off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was dead set against the advisory committee idea at the time but, looking back, it was far better than what we have now.

Would love to hear from Glenn Roeder about his time at the club and why he left but you can bet your life he'll be bound by a confidentiality agreement made when he was paid off.

 

It was very. very short lived and I've often wondered why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Alan, I agree with you and Jim.

My preferred option would be the return of the Committee providing the choice of members is well considered and they're not a bunch of yes men.

That said, surely Lee Bullen and a couple more already at the club could do a similar job.

Does Chansiri think you have to wear a suit and tie to 'make decisions'?

Recruiting players is a separate issue altogether and needs specialist involvement.

 

Reducing the wages paid to players doesn't necessarily mean lower quality, so DC needs to rethink his salary structure and to properly vet the physical condition and past injury records of any future signings.

What's best, a better quality player who plays 22 games a season, or a lesser quality one who plays 40 to 50 games a season?

Edited by Hotmale 1954

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside to this question why does the team manager have to be an ex player.

 

Some other professional sports have had great success with managers who have never played at any level , Sir Chris Brailsford. in cycling , Angelo Dundee among many more in boxing also the guy that trained Jessica Ennis at Athletics .

 

I seem to remember Arsenal having a manager that led them to titles and cups as well as Eric Taylor at Wednesday who was very successful as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As an aside to this question why does the team manager have to be an ex player.

 

Some other professional sports have had great success with managers who have never played at any level , Sir Chris Brailsford. in cycling , Angelo Dundee among many more in boxing also the guy that trained Jessica Ennis at Athletics .

 

I seem to remember Arsenal having a manager that led them to titles and cups as well as Eric Taylor at Wednesday who was very successful as well.

 

Because Football is the worst closed shop in the whole world. From players, to managers, coaches, agents, pundits etc etc, if they let outsiders in then where would that end? Sensible wage structures? Clubs not making losses that would put any other business out of business and in the courts... can't have that can they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is difficult there are examples of allsorts of different set ups that are working well and yet at the same time the same type of set up at other clubs do not.It is getting to a point where a one person owner club is dying out.With over inflated transfer fees for average players being payed I think it is to much to ask one person to fund a football club unless of course they are a Russian Billionaire.Consortiums and unrelated international companies seem to be the in thing now which in turn removes the club further from the normal fan.Sad but I think it is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the chairman confessedly hasn't a clue about football, how does he choose his advisors? Someone must have advised him who his advisors ought to be and it seems to me that's where it all went wrong.

Off the field the club is in a mess and, as a businessman, Mr C only has himself to blame for that. What's this woman from Charlton all about? Why did he appoint her and why do we never hear from her?

Things seem to be wrong at every level in the club. The manager never answers a straight question with a straight answer and his role seems to be a million miles from what a manager's role used to be.

I think Mr C must appoint a director of football even though that's another thing I used to hate. His best bet would be to advertise the post, see who it throws up and choose someone on past reputation but who will advise him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don't know which is best for ownership of a club, but a few years ago I read 'Soccernomics' by Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski, in that book they wrote about the rise of Olympique Lyon in the early 2000s.

They went from being a second division team in the late 1980s to winning seven first division titles in a row from 2002 under four different managers.

It didn't matter who the manager was they always played the same style of football and the manager didn't decide who they would sign, they had a committee who decided that, using what the called 'the wisdom of crowds'.

I think the theory was that a new manager will sign his own choices then when he gets sacked the new manager will sell some of them and start again.

Edited by gomgeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×