Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
butt lane vale fan

Smurf interview

Recommended Posts

And l will be still interviewing 2 strikers next week

Smurf, the interview with Radio Stoke and subsequent titles on here and Sentinel all suggest negative spin. Please get on the blower to radio stoke or sentinel and tell it how you want it to sound including the 2 strikers... positive spin ....as long as they are 2 good guns!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've brought my season ticket today so that's another one. So that is 5 of us (there is 7 in the group of mates who usually attend matches) the other two I suspect will also renew before the deadline when they get paid, we have all had ST together for over 20 years so I'm 99.9% sure they will renew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all wanted a clear-out in the summer but the only clear-out has been of the quality players.

 

Instead we're left with deadwood like Yates, Birchall and Doods and only the suggestion of strikers before August 8th.

 

Looks like a major communication error between Page and Smurf or total incompetence. Or both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We all wanted a clear-out in the summer but the only clear-out has been of the quality players.

 

Instead we're left with deadwood like Yates, Birchall and Doods and only the suggestion of strikers before August 8th.

 

The only 'deadwood' that re-signed were those three (I'd actually dispute your phrasing) and, considering the fact that we only have maybe 10 experienced outfield players in the squad, I'd suggest this may be a positive thing. I don't understand how our current players have accounted for so much of the budget but I would add that I think that all teams in our league would have a GK, substitute GK and a youth team GK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not complaining just keeping you all informed

That interview was given whilst l was driving at 70mph on the A46 so responded to direct questions

I know facts are not a good marketing exercise but l would of thought by know Fans would of had enough of lies or silence

Now l will not lie but maybe you should not be informed then you would not mis judge me as complaining

 

Is the speed limit 70mph on the A46?

If you know facts arent a good marketing tool why give them?

Why do you think lies or silence are the only options to facts?

 

Its not the facts that do the damage its how they are presented, if your not good at doing stuff like this off the cuff its better to be prepared before you release the information/get interviewed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not complaining just keeping you all informed

That interview was given whilst l was driving at 70mph on the A46 so responded to direct questions

I know facts are not a good marketing exercise but l would of thought by know Fans would of had enough of lies or silence

Now l will not lie but maybe you should not be informed then you would not mis judge me as complaining

 

Anyone who thinks you are complaining is clearly crackers. People want communication then they don't want it! Chairmen will never win.

 

For me it's a marketing ploy for me, whether it works or not we will see but it's good to be kept informed.

 

Oh and A46, I thought you only played on the M6? :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm disappointed we offered players like birchall a deal knowing how short of cash we are?

 

I would imagine the chairman is too (though he could never possibly say) with the likes of Yates, Lloyd, Dodds etc all taking up the budget but that's the managers problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is my problem Page will get the blame and yet he has been ALLOWED to use up all the budget,it shouldnt get to a bailing out.

 

But that's the managers responsibility, he's given a budget and uses it how he sees fit, millions of people in all industries do the same and are then held accountable for performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for response... fair enough... just wondering how many are waiting to see a decent striker sign before buying a ticket ?

 

I'd imagine there will be some but then again there will be some who won't go again until Pope is player manager, some who won't until we complete the double signing of Ronaldo and Bale and some who won't until they can eat their wrights pie off the floor of the bycars bogs! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, I like the fact Norman is passionate and he's million times better than the last lot. I also like the fact he's upfront and honest. However I think at times he gets critics because it comes across as though his figures are different from interview to interview.

Let's take the comments from a few weeks ago, Page would have a £1.7million budget to work with. Smurf then revealed that if all players including Pope, Williamson, Marshall ect signed their contracts it would leave around £350k/£400k for 5 to 6 new players.

Now since then we've lost Pope so from the original £350k we've say gained £100k there to add to the budget (going off a reduced contract of say £2000 a week), then we've lost Williamson, say £50k, then we've lost Marshall say around £100k and Versali say around £50k. The players we've lost add another £300k to the budget giving Page a figure of around £650k / £700k for new players. So then including Streete and Innis we've brought in 6 players. 6 new players out of a £650/£700k budget, minus agent fees, accommodation, bonuses ect, say leaves the new players on £1800-£2000 a week. More feasible as I guess Streete won't be on peanuts.

Perhaps where Smurf went wrong was saying £350k would get us 6 new players, meaning fans expected 9 new players with 4 going, whereas in reality 6 new players have cost £650k not £350k as first quoted.

Norman as you know I fully appreciate your efforts but perhaps if you are releasing figures to fans it might just pacify a few of the more vocal ones if you just explain the figures in more depth. OK some would say don't say anything and I guess that would stop some of the negative comments, however I for one like your honesty. However if your using that approach, please remember the fans have been very hurt by past owners so now will pick up on every little thing and will analize it to death.

Carry on the good work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd imagine there will be some but then again there will be some who won't go again until Pope is player manager' date=' some who won't until we complete the double signing of Ronaldo and Bale [b']and some who won't until they can eat their wrights pie off the floor of the bycars bogs![/b] :)

 

:ohmy: That is one heck of a scary prospect indeed Bon'Ami...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes it even more important to test out just how much Bristol Rovers want Chris Lines.

 

We should be looking for a fee in my opinion given they've stated he's their number one priority, it's clear he wants to join them and his signing would sell tickets for them given his popularity.

 

Lines' wage + a fee would be plenty enough to sign a decent striker. If we're playing one up front (looks that way with our abundance of midfielders), then 3 forwards might just about suffice. If it's clearly not, then we can use the loan market to bolster the forward line as and when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are people so ****** off? The budget won't be far off spent , for a start is was reduced from last season , then we lost Pope, veselli, Marshall and Williamson , we have then signed Foley, purkiss, Kelly, Grant and street. Plus o connor resigned , possibly at a pay increase?? I'm happy with the dealings so far, we have roughly 150 k left? Maybe more , this is 3k a week, which gets you either one maybe two decent players add in a couple of loans like inniss and we aren't far off a top half side.

 

.................Neal

Purkiss..street..Iniss...dicko?

Moore..o connor..grant...Foley/Kelly

..........new forward...loan?/Dodds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine Lines is a decent-ish earner, so selling him to Bristol will free up some funds. And I do hope we get a fee for Lines as he is our player and Bristol want him.

 

Just a shame we've given the likes of Lloyd & Birchall a contract as they won't start many games. And I'd like to ship McGivern out as he isn't a footballer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't giving me any faith in page at all.

 

Ultimately he will be judged on who he has brought in and who he has retained and what results these deliver. I suspect he's kept some of the deadwood in order to maintain some continuity/ team spirit, but probably to the detriment of bringing better players in. For my money, smurf is playing a clever game by insisting we haven't got much money. It might encourage one or two to get a ticket but it might also suggest to greedy agents that we haven't got loads of money to splash around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me, I like the fact Norman is passionate and he's million times better than the last lot. I also like the fact he's upfront and honest. However I think at times he gets critics because it comes across as though his figures are different from interview to interview.

Let's take the comments from a few weeks ago, Page would have a £1.7million budget to work with. Smurf then revealed that if all players including Pope, Williamson, Marshall ect signed their contracts it would leave around £350k/£400k for 5 to 6 new players.

Now since then we've lost Pope so from the original £350k we've say gained £100k there to add to the budget (going off a reduced contract of say £2000 a week), then we've lost Williamson, say £50k, then we've lost Marshall say around £100k and Versali say around £50k. The players we've lost add another £300k to the budget giving Page a figure of around £650k / £700k for new players. So then including Streete and Innis we've brought in 6 players. 6 new players out of a £650/£700k budget, minus agent fees, accommodation, bonuses ect, say leaves the new players on £1800-£2000 a week. More feasible as I guess Streete won't be on peanuts.

Perhaps where Smurf went wrong was saying £350k would get us 6 new players, meaning fans expected 9 new players with 4 going, whereas in reality 6 new players have cost £650k not £350k as first quoted.

Norman as you know I fully appreciate your efforts but perhaps if you are releasing figures to fans it might just pacify a few of the more vocal ones if you just explain the figures in more depth. OK some would say don't say anything and I guess that would stop some of the negative comments, however I for one like your honesty. However if your using that approach, please remember the fans have been very hurt by past owners so now will pick up on every little thing and will analize it to death.

Carry on the good work.

 

Not a bad assesment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why are people so ****** off? The budget won't be far off spent , for a start is was reduced from last season , then we lost Pope, veselli, Marshall and Williamson , we have then signed Foley, purkiss, Kelly, Grant and street. Plus o connor resigned , possibly at a pay increase?? I'm happy with the dealings so far, we have roughly 150 k left? Maybe more , this is 3k a week, which gets you either one maybe two decent players add in a couple of loans like inniss and we aren't far off a top half side.

 

.................Neal

Purkiss..street..Iniss...dicko?

Moore..o connor..grant...Foley/Kelly

..........new forward...loan?/Dodds?

 

Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For me, I like the fact Norman is passionate and he's million times better than the last lot. I also like the fact he's upfront and honest. However I think at times he gets critics because it comes across as though his figures are different from interview to interview.

Let's take the comments from a few weeks ago, Page would have a £1.7million budget to work with. Smurf then revealed that if all players including Pope, Williamson, Marshall ect signed their contracts it would leave around £350k/£400k for 5 to 6 new players.

Now since then we've lost Pope so from the original £350k we've say gained £100k there to add to the budget (going off a reduced contract of say £2000 a week), then we've lost Williamson, say £50k, then we've lost Marshall say around £100k and Versali say around £50k. The players we've lost add another £300k to the budget giving Page a figure of around £650k / £700k for new players. So then including Streete and Innis we've brought in 6 players. 6 new players out of a £650/£700k budget, minus agent fees, accommodation, bonuses ect, say leaves the new players on £1800-£2000 a week. More feasible as I guess Streete won't be on peanuts.

Perhaps where Smurf went wrong was saying £350k would get us 6 new players, meaning fans expected 9 new players with 4 going, whereas in reality 6 new players have cost £650k not £350k as first quoted.

Norman as you know I fully appreciate your efforts but perhaps if you are releasing figures to fans it might just pacify a few of the more vocal ones if you just explain the figures in more depth. OK some would say don't say anything and I guess that would stop some of the negative comments, however I for one like your honesty. However if your using that approach, please remember the fans have been very hurt by past owners so now will pick up on every little thing and will analize it to death.

Carry on the good work.

 

I agree with you. He can't do right for doing wrong. He gives people the information they want, then gets hounded for giving them the information because it's not what they want to hear. I don't think Smurf has to give any more depth though. As a fanbase, we must know more about our general budget situation than 95% of the clubs in the country. I'm glad the chairman is so open and honest. Some may not like it but I find it a refreshing change.

 

I would imagine loan players may be a focus, as they will generally be at a lower cost than signing permanent players. If we can maybe bring in 1 permanent striker, then Innis and one loan striker. I think with the signings we've already made I'd be comfortable with the squad going into pre-season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy