Smurf on the radio

[philmpv]

Norman has this knack for opening his mouth and leaving us understanding less than we did before.

 

Crikey that's a bold statement.... ;-)

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

Dont get this. Wants a bloke reporting to him on the team, but he doesnt want give him a job. Surely, if his opinion offers any value we would be looking to bring him in. If it doesnt, hes just like any of the other 4000 ****** that watch them lot try and kick it each week. Surely it just under values Browns work.

 

He's a professional, we are not I guess.

[Paul6754]

I'll give him another perspective...we're utterly toothless upfront, have very little pace, craft or steel in midfield and on the flanks and so the defence is under constant pressure and so always likely to concede. Essentially, if we go behind, especially away, then invariably we lose these days.

 

There, think that just about covers it. And I didn't even need the comfort of a directors box.

 

Couldn't agree more, I predicted Vale would end up in this mess in June 2016 after Bruno's appointment and his signings.

 

There's no harm in getting a different perspective from someone who's been in the game, particularly when there's a new manager.

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

What wasn'tthere to not understand?

 

Is that a triple negative?

 

Completely agree thought he was open and honest and was quite clear and concise. Some people would find fault in winning a gazillion pounds on the lottery!

[Paul6754]

If that be the case I wish they had paid Rudgie a one off fee...... 3,000 of us could tell him that for nothing.

 

Rugie may not have been available or interested, no fee may have been involved.

[toyahw]

Interested in one of the two, wouldn't be fair to say which.

Colin the Vampire slayer is in charge, other than the purse strings.

Norman hopes he is doing the job, came from Rochdale to a bigger club [sic]

Dig at Rob "go again" Page.

Santos wanted to go when Bruno went. Johnny foreigners who want to **** off and play on their play station can [presumeably at the Vale's expense] .

Some of the younger ones who are not good enough, hard to get them to look at their options.

Alnwick, just swelling.

Brown, in the wings since Exeter, frozen out. No time scale. Assess at the end of the month. Good connection. At some point will be manager. Will remain at least as assistant. Involved until summer 2018. Will not be cast aside.

Pantyliner has been assisting Norman. Will not be manager.

[Essex Vale]

I am in despair. I accept that this is an attempt by the Chairman to provide reassurance. Let's analyse the things he has said.

 

Mr Garlick is CEO - I am sure he is in name but clearly not in deed. He has been completely anonymous since taking up the post with no public facing activity and no apparent indication that he is in charge of anything. If he is a CEO by actions as opposed to title then he would have been leading during the current concerns. I offer no criticism of Mr Garlick, he is under the close control of our Chairman and clearly limited as to his actions.

 

There is no timescale to appoint a permanent manager - There certainly needs to be one. The transfer deadline is on 31 January any new manager must have time to asses then act. By default this means it is Michael Brown until the season end. I am not unhappy with that but our Chairman should articulate it. The Chairman has severely limited both Michael Brown and/or his possible replacement by deciding there is no deadline when events external to the club and outside of the Chairman's control impose a deadline on specific actions associated with the team which by their very nature force decisions within a specified timescale.

 

If Michael Brown is not appointed he will work with the new man as Assistant Manager until Summer 2018. This shows a total lack of understanding of the requirement of any decent incoming manager. It did not work when Lee Sinnott had Dean Glover forced on him and it did not work when Bruno Ribiero had Michael Brown forced on him. Our Chairman has no capacity for learning. Any so called consultant will be able to advise him on that simple matter of staff management and recruitment and to advise him that to force an Assistant on a Manager will help no one.

 

Garlick and Brown are running things. If that is the case why is Paatelainen tasked with reporting on the team directly to the Chairman? Clearly he is by passing Garlick and Brown by that simple action. If Michael Brown is fully in charge of the team it is for him to decide who he wants to advise him on the players. The Chairman chose someone with no experience of our league and no recent experience in this country to apparently watch one game against much higher opposition and make a telling assessment, for a fee! FFS how bad a decision can this be as well as being totally contradictory about Brown and Garlick being in charge. I am sure that if John Rudge and Phil Sproson were asked to give an assessment of the players they would do so, quickly, efficiently, at no financial cost, and it would be an accurate assessment. This one simple statement taken in isolation causes me more angst and despair than I have ever felt. When it is added to the other desperate comments I am left staggered at the rationale that underpins this and other similar decisions.

 

The Chairman says we will sign one of Hitchcock or Eagles but not the other! That is really great motivation for the players to hear that already! Any way I thought he said that Michael Brown was in charge of the team so it should be his decision. Colin Garlick is apparently in charge of the club so he should make arrangements for the announcement of signings. This is yet another example of meddling, inappropriate tweeting and classic de-motivation all in one swoop.

 

I have been a CEO of a multi million pound business, and am currently a non Executive Director of another multi million pound business where we have a CEO who runs all business activities. If those organisations had a Chairman acting in the way that Port Vale's Chairman is acting there would have been an immediate response to move him out. The way that Port Vale is structured no one can do that, only the Chairman can remove himself. I ask that he removes himself to a role of Non Executive Chairman soonest please. I have no personal animosity towards our Chairman but frankly his ineptitude, poor decision making, overly sensitive public persona,constant attempts at self justification, his persistent meddling and failure to support his own appointments all combine to suggest that he is completely out of his depth but fails to recognise it. He has invested his money and I genuinely believe he wants good things for the club, but sometimes you need tough love to make you see and understand that your actions are harming the thing that you profess to care for. Please ask a business consultant to assess your contribution Mr Chairman. I have offered my assessment I hope there is value in this assessment for you. Your actions are harming the club.

[Santa]

I am in despair. I accept that this is an attempt by the Chairman to provide reassurance. Let's analyse the things he has said.

 

Mr Garlick is CEO - I am sure he is in name but clearly not in deed. He has been completely anonymous since taking up the post with no public facing activity and no apparent indication that he is in charge of anything. If he is a CEO by actions as opposed to title then he would have been leading during the current concerns. I offer no criticism of Mr Garlick, he is under the close control of our Chairman and clearly limited as to his actions.

 

There is no timescale to appoint a permanent manager - There certainly needs to be one. The transfer deadline is on 31 January any new manager must have time to asses then act. By default this means it is Michael Brown until the season end. I am not unhappy with that but our Chairman should articulate it. The Chairman has severely limited both Michael Brown and/or his possible replacement by deciding there is no deadline when events external to the club and outside of the Chairman's control impose a deadline on specific actions associated with the team which by their very nature force decisions within a specified timescale.

 

If Michael Brown is not appointed he will work with the new man as Assistant Manager until Summer 2018. This shows a total lack of understanding of the requirement of any decent incoming manager. It did not work when Lee Sinnott had Dean Glover forced on him and it did not work when Bruno Ribiero had Michael Brown forced on him. Our Chairman has no capacity for learning. Any so called consultant will be able to advise him on that simple matter of staff management and recruitment and to advise him that to force an Assistant on a Manager will help no one.

 

Garlick and Brown are running things. If that is the case why is Paatelainen tasked with reporting on the team directly to the Chairman? Clearly he is by passing Garlick and Brown by that simple action. If Michael Brown is fully in charge of the team it is for him to decide who he wants to advise him on the players. The Chairman chose someone with no experience of our league and no recent experience in this country to apparently watch one game against much higher opposition and make a telling assessment, for a fee! FFS how bad a decision can this be as well as being totally contradictory about Brown and Garlick being in charge. I am sure that if John Rudge and Phil Sproson were asked to give an assessment of the players they would do so, quickly, efficiently, at no financial cost, and it would be an accurate assessment. This one simple statement taken in isolation causes me more angst and despair than I have ever felt. When it is added to the other desperate comments I am left staggered at the rationale that underpins this and other similar decisions.

 

The Chairman says we will sign one of Hitchcock or Eagles but not the other! That is really great motivation for the players to hear that already! Any way I thought he said that Michael Brown was in charge of the team so it should be his decision. Colin Garlick is apparently in charge of the club so he should make arrangements for the announcement of signings. This is yet another example of meddling, inappropriate tweeting and classic de-motivation all in one swoop.

 

I have been a CEO of a multi million pound business, and am currently a non Executive Director of another multi million pound business where we have a CEO who runs all business activities. If those organisations had a Chairman acting in the way that Port Vale's Chairman is acting there would have been an immediate response to move him out. The way that Port Vale is structured no one can do that, only the Chairman can remove himself. I ask that he removes himself to a role of Non Executive Chairman soonest please. I have no personal animosity towards our Chairman but frankly his ineptitude, poor decision making, overly sensitive public persona,constant attempts at self justification, his persistent meddling and failure to support his own appointments all combine to suggest that he is completely out of his depth but fails to recognise it. He has invested his money and I genuinely believe he wants good things for the club, but sometimes you need tough love to make you see and understand that your actions are harming the thing that you profess to care for. Please ask a business consultant to assess your contribution Mr Chairman. I have offered my assessment I hope there is value in this assessment for you. Your actions are harming the club.

[REP]Some people will just look to find fault with the chairman for any minor thing[/REP]

[Spunk Trumpet]

Essex Vale sums it up perfectly.

It's frightening that we have this man running our football club.

Absolutely frightening.

[Wereskintandweknowweare]

I am in despair. I accept that this is an attempt by the Chairman to provide reassurance. Let's analyse the things he has said.

 

Mr Garlick is CEO - I am sure he is in name but clearly not in deed. He has been completely anonymous since taking up the post with no public facing activity and no apparent indication that he is in charge of anything. If he is a CEO by actions as opposed to title then he would have been leading during the current concerns. I offer no criticism of Mr Garlick, he is under the close control of our Chairman and clearly limited as to his actions.

 

There is no timescale to appoint a permanent manager - There certainly needs to be one. The transfer deadline is on 31 January any new manager must have time to asses then act. By default this means it is Michael Brown until the season end. I am not unhappy with that but our Chairman should articulate it. The Chairman has severely limited both Michael Brown and/or his possible replacement by deciding there is no deadline when events external to the club and outside of the Chairman's control impose a deadline on specific actions associated with the team which by their very nature force decisions within a specified timescale.

 

If Michael Brown is not appointed he will work with the new man as Assistant Manager until Summer 2018. This shows a total lack of understanding of the requirement of any decent incoming manager. It did not work when Lee Sinnott had Dean Glover forced on him and it did not work when Bruno Ribiero had Michael Brown forced on him. Our Chairman has no capacity for learning. Any so called consultant will be able to advise him on that simple matter of staff management and recruitment and to advise him that to force an Assistant on a Manager will help no one.

 

Garlick and Brown are running things. If that is the case why is Paatelainen tasked with reporting on the team directly to the Chairman? Clearly he is by passing Garlick and Brown by that simple action. If Michael Brown is fully in charge of the team it is for him to decide who he wants to advise him on the players. The Chairman chose someone with no experience of our league and no recent experience in this country to apparently watch one game against much higher opposition and make a telling assessment, for a fee! FFS how bad a decision can this be as well as being totally contradictory about Brown and Garlick being in charge. I am sure that if John Rudge and Phil Sproson were asked to give an assessment of the players they would do so, quickly, efficiently, at no financial cost, and it would be an accurate assessment. This one simple statement taken in isolation causes me more angst and despair than I have ever felt. When it is added to the other desperate comments I am left staggered at the rationale that underpins this and other similar decisions.

 

The Chairman says we will sign one of Hitchcock or Eagles but not the other! That is really great motivation for the players to hear that already! Any way I thought he said that Michael Brown was in charge of the team so it should be his decision. Colin Garlick is apparently in charge of the club so he should make arrangements for the announcement of signings. This is yet another example of meddling, inappropriate tweeting and classic de-motivation all in one swoop.

 

I have been a CEO of a multi million pound business, and am currently a non Executive Director of another multi million pound business where we have a CEO who runs all business activities. If those organisations had a Chairman acting in the way that Port Vale's Chairman is acting there would have been an immediate response to move him out. The way that Port Vale is structured no one can do that, only the Chairman can remove himself. I ask that he removes himself to a role of Non Executive Chairman soonest please. I have no personal animosity towards our Chairman but frankly his ineptitude, poor decision making, overly sensitive public persona,constant attempts at self justification, his persistent meddling and failure to support his own appointments all combine to suggest that he is completely out of his depth but fails to recognise it. He has invested his money and I genuinely believe he wants good things for the club, but sometimes you need tough love to make you see and understand that your actions are harming the thing that you profess to care for. Please ask a business consultant to assess your contribution Mr Chairman. I have offered my assessment I hope there is value in this assessment for you. Your actions are harming the club.

 

This is the best post on here for years take note Norman.

Can we please please see the club up for sale.

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

[REP]Some people will just look to find fault with the chairman for any minor thing[/REP]

 

Can't help yourself can you, I've told you we are through, you have to get over me, you will one day maybe when you grow up

[blackdog]

[REP]Some people will just look to find fault with the chairman for any minor thing[/REP]

 

[PVTony]

Thought that Smurf spoke with authority and good business sense.

 

M.Brown. 9 points by the end of Jan. He will be manager (IMO)

6/7 out from the maximum nine points. Ditto.(IMO)

Less than four from max. nine points. Brown Assistant manager.(IMO)

[soothsayer]

Can we please please see the club up for sale.

 

The club is always up for sale (as is my house) if someone wants to offer the right money.

Saying the club is up for sale just destabilises it and I don't see a queue of buyers stretching down Hamil Rd.

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

Thought that Smurf spoke with authority and good business sense.

 

M.Brown. 9 points by the end of Jan. He will be manager (IMO)

6/7 out from the maximum nine points. Ditto.(IMO)

Less than four from max. nine points. Brown Assistant manager.(IMO)

 

Probably about sums it up for me too. The only issue with that is that our performances have been pretty abysmal in the last 3 games and I'm not sure we will get 4 points. That could leave a new manager with no transfer window and an assistant he may not want which would be an exceptionally hard job.