Sproson Statue.

[deanleese]

I do remember that was the original plan Paul but I knew it had been changed and thought most who had bought a plaque also knew, especially if you had seen the plinth and its inscriptions!

 

Seems the change was only mentioned at SC meetings Tosh... That in itself is poor form mate when you think of the money involved. They seem to have assumed that good will would stop people complaining even with such a drastic change.

[Tosh]

Seems the change was only mentioned at SC meetings Tosh... That in itself is poor form mate when you think of the money involved. They seem to have assumed that good will would stop people complaining even with such a drastic change.

 

Dean I'm struggling to remember how or when I heard of the change but it wasn't at a SC meeting!

[deanleese]

Dean I'm struggling to remember how or when I heard of the change but it wasn't at a SC meeting!

 

The important point is that quite obviously not everyone knew. I've contacted the two people I purchased for and one isn't too bothered but one definitely is and neither knew of the change.

[Jacko51]

Dean I'm struggling to remember how or when I heard of the change but it wasn't at a SC meeting!

 

I'm pretty sure I heard it at an SC meeting, Tosh. Can't remember when but it was before I ordered my plaque so I knew it was going on the wall. I can understand people being a bit miffed though.

[andy jones]

Just seen this thread.

 

Perhaps if I give you a timeline it will help ...

 

During the time I was Chairman of the Sproson Fund we took the fund from circ £20,000 to circ £50,000 this enabled the statue to go from a mould framework to completion.

 

During this time my mate suggested how he, and he thought many other Vale fans, would like to be associated by name to the statue and what it stood for - and he came up with the excellent idea of having names on the statue plinth.

 

As such we advertised it and also gave the option of a photo of the semi final team lining up for kick off.

 

(I need to point out that at this time the architects drawing for the statue was not to have a 'base that spread out from the bottom' but simply lean and going straight into the ground. - that 'base that spreads out at the bottom was an expensive last minute concession to the Vale's safety officer who would not let the statue be erected in its original form as he was concerned at the possibility of children banging their heads on the outstretched boot.)

 

At the time of the appeal to have names on the plinth no wording had been agreed for the plinth sides other than it would represent brother and nephew on one side each too so there would be one side for names.

 

The success of the appeal exceeded our expectations but brought a problem in that as only one side of the plinth would be available for names there became not enough room to accommodate them all.

 

At this point it became a question of resolving the issue and the suggestion to use the back wall with names engraved on granite the same as the statue was deemed an enhancement of the original idea and we had to make a decision whether to write to everyone who had donated, explain the issue, try and explain what the wall plaques would look like, and get permission to continue. Or to just press on in the belief that all Vale fans would want above all else the statue completing and that the concept of name plaques on the wall would still achieve the original concept of linking names with the statue and the ethos it stands for.

 

Whilst in a perfect world with unlimited time and money it would have been great to consult all 100 plus people individually - However, it was not a perfect world, - far from it -we were not only involved in the myriad of logistical issues that come up with a project of this size where money was incredibly tight and financial goalposts being forever moved. But also embroiled in a war to try and win our club back from the original V2001, a fight that a number of posters involved in the war at the time will empathise with when I say it practically took over my life just as it did theirs.

 

So a unilateral decision was taken by the committee, of which I was Chair, that we would simply press on and try and complete the project.

 

So back to the timeline ....

 

During my custodianship the statue was cast (and displayed at an Open Day at Vale Park, and as if that was not enough ensuring that before resigning as Chair of the SC we (i.e. all the protest groups) were part of the team that finally won the victory to remove Bill Bratt and the original V2001 Board.

 

Subsequently, Pete Williams (who had been both Deputy Chair and Treasurer) along with his wife Liz who continued as Secretary took over the reigns of Chair of the SC supported by his new committee.

 

During their reign Pete and his committee not only completed the fund raising for the statue, but along with fantastic help from Chris Bailey and his team of builders, also enabled a long held dream to come to fruition i.e. the erection of the statue. - And along the way not only brought the removal of V2001 Mark 2 (MOLD) but also were at the centre of an incredibly fraught and stressful time for the club that could have seen our club disappear which, subsequently, IMHO contributed to Pete Williams ill health.

 

So that brings us to the present where a new SC committee is now in place. However one thing Pete has insisted on is that he would ensure that the statue project is completed in its entirety and to the highest specification. So (as Ally the new SC Chair rightly reported) the original offer from Nettlebank was to help to keep costs down by using 'off cuts' of granite. Pete vetoed this and insisted on a complete piece of new granite being sourced that matches that on the statue and that this be used for the inscription plaques - that is why there has been a delay.

 

Pete has telephoned me today, as he is aware of the nature of the posts being put on here, and has asked me to report that the plaques are complete and are being placed on the wall commencing within the next few days.

 

So there you have it ...

 

So did the SC, as Vale fans, create arguably the finest footballing statue in the country? Yes

Did the SC help to remove the original V2001 and its successor in the process? Yes

Did the SC achieve the concept of putting fans names on the statue plinth? No

 

but in all honesty perhaps the wording that is on that fourth side of the statue is a better tribute as it recognises the contributions over the years by all Vale fans to the project.

 

To those who are upset that the original concept was not achieved I say sorry, but please wait until the plaques have been erected and perhaps then you may not be so upset.

 

And the photo of the semi-final line up? I honestly can't see that being honoured - the unforseen costs (particularly the additional plinth alteration) and the much higher cost of purchasing new granite for the plaques rather than a simple inscription of the plinth will have drained the coffers.

 

Rightly or wrongly that's it as I see it.

[deanleese]

Just seen this thread.

 

Perhaps if I give you a timeline it will help ...

 

During the time I was Chairman of the Sproson Fund we took the fund from circ £20,000 to circ £50,000 this enabled the statue to go from a mould framework to completion.

 

During this time my mate suggested how he, and he thought many other Vale fans, would like to be associated by name to the statue and what it stood for - and he came up with the excellent idea of having names on the statue plinth.

 

As such we advertised it and also gave the option of a photo of the semi final team lining up for kick off.

 

(I need to point out that at this time the architects drawing for the statue was not to have a 'base that spread out from the bottom' but simply lean and going straight into the ground. - that 'base that spreads out at the bottom was an expensive last minute concession to the Vale's safety officer who would not let the statue be erected in its original form as he was concerned at the possibility of children banging their heads on the outstretched boot.)

 

At the time of the appeal to have names on the plinth no wording had been agreed for the plinth sides other than it would represent brother and nephew on one side each too so there would be one side for names.

 

The success of the appeal exceeded our expectations but brought a problem in that as only one side of the plinth would be available for names there became not enough room to accommodate them all.

 

At this point it became a question of resolving the issue and the suggestion to use the back wall with names engraved on granite the same as the statue was deemed an enhancement of the original idea and we had to make a decision whether to write to everyone who had donated, explain the issue, try and explain what the wall plaques would look like, and get permission to continue. Or to just press on in the belief that all Vale fans would want above all else the statue completing and that the concept of name plaques on the wall would still achieve the original concept of linking names with the statue and the ethos it stands for.

 

Whilst in a perfect world with unlimited time and money it would have been great to consult all 100 plus people individually - However, it was not a perfect world, - far from it -we were not only involved in the myriad of logistical issues that come up with a project of this size where money was incredibly tight and financial goalposts being forever moved. But also embroiled in a war to try and win our club back from the original V2001, a fight that a number of posters involved in the war at the time will empathise with when I say it practically took over my life just as it did theirs.

 

So a unilateral decision was taken by the committee, of which I was Chair, that we would simply press on and try and complete the project.

 

So back to the timeline ....

 

During my custodianship the statue was cast (and displayed at an Open Day at Vale Park, and as if that was not enough ensuring that before resigning as Chair of the SC we (i.e. all the protest groups) were part of the team that finally won the victory to remove Bill Bratt and the original V2001 Board.

 

Subsequently, Pete Williams (who had been both Deputy Chair and Treasurer) along with his wife Liz who continued as Secretary took over the reigns of Chair of the SC supported by his new committee.

 

During their reign Pete and his committee not only completed the fund raising for the statue, but along with fantastic help from Chris Bailey and his team of builders, also enabled a long held dream to come to fruition i.e. the erection of the statue. - And along the way not only brought the removal of V2001 Mark 2 (MOLD) but also were at the centre of an incredibly fraught and stressful time for the club that could have seen our club disappear which, subsequently, IMHO contributed to Pete Williams ill health.

 

So that brings us to the present where a new SC committee is now in place. However one thing Pete has insisted on is that he would ensure that the statue project is completed in its entirety and to the highest specification. So (as Ally the new SC Chair rightly reported) the original offer from Nettlebank was to help to keep costs down by using 'off cuts' of granite. Pete vetoed this and insisted on a complete piece of new granite being sourced that matches that on the statue and that this be used for the inscription plaques - that is why there has been a delay.

 

Pete has telephoned me today, as he is aware of the nature of the posts being put on here, and has asked me to report that the plaques are complete and are being placed on the wall commencing within the next few days.

 

So there you have it ...

 

So did the SC, as Vale fans, create arguably the finest footballing statue in the country? Yes

Did the SC help to remove the original V2001 and its successor in the process? Yes

Did the SC achieve the concept of putting fans names on the statue plinth? No

 

but in all honesty perhaps the wording that is on that fourth side of the statue is a better tribute as it recognises the contributions over the years by all Vale fans to the project.

 

To those who are upset that the original concept was not achieved I say sorry, but please wait until the plaques have been erected and perhaps then you may not be so upset.

 

And the photo of the semi-final line up? I honestly can't see that being honoured - the unforseen costs (particularly the additional plinth alteration) and the much higher cost of purchasing new granite for the plaques rather than a simple inscription of the plinth will have drained the coffers.

 

Rightly or wrongly that's it as I see it.

 

So you (SC) chose not to inform which would not have been difficult as there are only 100 people and you (SC) avoided offering people the choice of a cooling off period based on such drastic changes?

[Jacko51]

So you (SC) chose not to inform which would not have been difficult as there are only 100 people and you (SC) avoided offering people the choice of a cooling off period based on such drastic changes?

 

If you have a look at post 117 on this thread, Dave has written about the new positioning of the plaques here:

 

http://www.onevalefan.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?67220-Sproson-Statue-17-11-2012/page10&highlight=sproson+statue

 

This was in the thread about the Sproson Statue which started last November or thereabouts. It was also mentioned at SC meetings. I don't know whether it was mentioned anywhere else by I have a vague recollection of it being on the SC website - I may be imagining that though.

[andy jones]

I think I explained it pretty clearly Dean.

[Spunk Trumpet]

 

The success of the appeal exceeded our expectations but brought a problem in that as only one side of the plinth would be available for names there became not enough room to accommodate them all.

 

At this point it became a question of resolving the issue and the suggestion to use the back wall with names engraved on granite the same as the statue was deemed an enhancement of the original idea and we had to make a decision whether to write to everyone who had donated, explain the issue, try and explain what the wall plaques would look like, and get permission to continue. Or to just press on in the belief that all Vale fans would want above all else the statue completing and that the concept of name plaques on the wall would still achieve the original concept of linking names with the statue and the ethos it stands for.

 

.

 

Dave, im amazed at how many times you rattle on about getting rid of V2001 in that post. Whats that got to do with whats happened?

Justify it all you want but, ultimately, this paragraph is the one that matters.

 

Ultimately, it stinks of V2001. We've had their money, we will do what we want without consulting them.

 

Why not starting a thread on here?

Why not contact RobF and put a front page news thread on here?

Maybe a small statement in the sentinel?

Anything but to assume you can just do what you want with other peoples money!

 

It wasnt a donation and im a big SC supporter. Mistakes have been made here.

Im sure it looks good regardless but it feels a little tainted.

 

You cannot just assume that supporters hundreds of pounds can be misused.

[Spunk Trumpet]

If you have a look at post 117 on this thread, Dave has written about the new positioning of the plaques here:

 

http://www.onevalefan.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?67220-Sproson-Statue-17-11-2012/page10&highlight=sproson+statue

 

This was in the thread about the Sproson Statue which started last November or thereabouts. It was also mentioned at SC meetings. I don't know whether it was mentioned anywhere else by I have a vague recollection of it being on the SC website - I may be imagining that though.

Hidden away on post number 117 on a thread isnt really telling people what is going on.

 

I tell you what i think.

The SC knew there would be problems with people maybe wanting their money back and didnt want to broadcast it properly.

 

It stinks.

[Jinkin John Jeffers]

At least you get your name somewhere. My brother and I got a brick on Lorne street for my dads 55th birthday, he is 62 now and still no brick has appeared..... Good old bill.

[Jacko51]

Hidden away on post number 117 on a thread isnt really telling people what is going on.

 

I tell you what i think.

The SC knew there would be problems with people maybe wanting their money back and didnt want to broadcast it properly.

 

It stinks.

 

It was a thread you posted on, Spunkers, after the post above.

 

I think the SC were so ****** busy with other stuff they probably didn't think this would be a major issue. They may have misjudged the situation but to say it was a deliberate conspiracy to keep money which people had donated is a bit daft in my opinion.

 

Personally I'd much rather have a big plaque on a wall which people standing in front of the statue will see rather than a tiny one on the back of the statue which they wouldn't but that's just me.

[andy jones]

ST

 

As I said to Dean I've been open with my comments - and I've simply explained what the SC were involved in during that timeline and the removal of the original V2001 was part of it.

 

It's only fair to state what we were involved in at the time as there is only a limited amount of time in one day. Additionally what I perhaps didn't make clear enough was the escalating cost of the project at that time and if we had taken time out to write to everyone we would in that letter have had to give a set period of time for people to respond before we could accept that a non-response could be accepted as a the go ahead.

 

I would suggest the minimum we could have given would be 28 days from receipt of the letter, add to that the time to design the letter obtain sample pictures of plaques etc etc and the postage and administration time and we could have been looking at 6 weeks? and as anyone who was on the committee at the time would verify the cost was increasing at a phenomenal rate.

 

Also what if we had got it wrong and suddenly faced a set-back of refunding circ £7-8,000? the time to raise the replacement funding would have very seriously affected the statue ever getting completed and if that had happened then what thought should we give to the many people who had donated along the way if they were not to see a statue.

 

ST - I could easily have stayed off this topic, not bothered replying, and in a few days it would have disappeared off the OVF front page because as far as the SC is concerned I am history.

 

But I have replied as openly as I can and there are 2 reasons for that - I have had a call from my good friend Pete Williams who, lets face it, was potentially the one being hammered (undeservedly) and secondly a text from Martin Tideswell which stated 'was I aware of this thread' but really saying can you put in an appearance so that no criticism goes to him and those who were on the SC committee when the statue was erected.

 

At the end of the day ST (and Dean) we have a fabulous statue that pays respect to all funders and will individually pay respect by name to those who paid for their names to go on the plinth.

[deanleese]

I think I explained it pretty clearly Dean.

 

You have admitted that you changed the plans without informing people and that you assumed nobody would mind but do you offer a solution for your explanation? Most of your "explanation" is an extension of your contempt for the people that bought into this scheme by trying to soft soap them with the we were all on the same side getting rid of the crooks at the club waffle and has quite frankly angered me and made things worse. I'm sure I now know how frustrated you must have been when Bratt and co kept moving the goalposts having the same thing done to me by the SC.

[Jacko51]

Dean, the difference between Bratt and the SC is that one was paid £50,000+ a year for moving the goalposts and the other did it in their (limited) spare time as volunteers with many other issues to deal with at the time. I think your criticism is a little harsh in this instance.

 

I was asked by some people to stand for the SC Committee. Seeing the posts on this thread should be ample confirmation of the reason I told them I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.