• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

This this and this again!

Ron will encourage Phil to play the loanee at every turn without fail.
So the idea of playing on merit is false.
brown is under no pressure to play any one player and did say last night any player is signed on Browns terms and no one else's, brown says he picks the side alone and will always as long as he is in charge, said he won't take a player on loan if his club expect him to play every game which is the right way to do it, you have to earn the right to play first:thumbsup:
 
brown is under no pressure to play any one player and did say last night any player is signed on Browns terms and no one else's, brown says he picks the side alone and will always as long as he is in charge, said he won't take a player on loan if his club expect him to play every game which is the right way to do it, you have to earn the right to play first:thumbsup:


In fairness to Phil,

Imagine if he openly stated in public if the loanee doesn't play Ron will become very unhappy as the playing budget is tight and we simply cannot afford any "fines" so to speak.

I believe the deal is mainly in favour of the parent club as they know their charge will play regardless as lowly small clubs cannot afford the levies imposed for failing to play their starlets.
 
When talking about the youth team and those who may come through, he obviously alluded to development in light of Jack Payne most recently, but Bentley and Smith also. He spoke of Paul Smith too, and how although he realises how unpopular he is with the fans in terms of his actual goalkeeping, his part in the development of Bentley and Smith has been vital. He alluded to Bentley being very close to the U21's for England, and Smith's involvement, and this is in no small part due to the relationship they have with Smith. He also confirmed that Ron had turned down a bid for Bentley, although not amounts or whom.

He then went on to say how Timlin had provided Jack Payne with the same support, and it's these players, and overall, the entire squad that supports one another and provide and excellent environment for the pros. That in fact the development players will only ever be as good as the pros. A lesson for us all really, when calling for the heads of the players that we deem surplus to requirements, or question their inclusion to the team.

He was challenged on why we don't employ the reserve team to aid the youth team development. He said it's not viable for a squad of our size. We have 22 players including two kids that have stepped up. Last year Coker played 53 competitive games, if we add in a reserve league of 20/25 games, and the same again for the two youth levels, as soon as injuries and suspensions take place, the squad is under enormous pressure to find teams for a league, that quite frankly holds no competitive sway and means nothing. Players like Jack Payne would be eligible for four squads, and it's how players would burn out. Last year we played around 20 non-competitive friendlies with our own refs and lino's, no suspensions as a result.

Today there is a game at Oxford's training ground. Mads, Barnard, Worrall and Timlin have all asked to be involved, Timlin wanted to be on the bench at York, such is his character and desire!

Steve was asked about rail seats, to allow safe standing. He went into a very long, articulated and clearly educated diatribe about how excellent an idea it is, he's an advocate, but simply, it's not allowed in the UK. He strongly believes the familes of those lost at Heysel should be consulted ahead of any decision, as football is steeped in history, and although tragic, they should not be forgotten or dimissed in the name of advancement. If passed, by the governments and agreed by the Heysel families, they need to then address design, as some stadiums are too steep in design to make it safe, or practical as it blocks the view. But he is an advocate.

Phil spoke about Deegan, about his belief in Jordan and Manny at full back, allowed him to go to Ron and ask for Deegan to be added, despite only having White and Coker on the books. He wanted a nasty *******, someone who bites players heads off and gives us that bite. Although concedes he needs to be kept on a leash at times. In the final inter-team game when he had what he believes was his first team, playing Cougho's reserve XI, Deegan was destroying Clifford, just bullying and stamping all over him. Brown stopped the game, and said team talks, Cougho took his bunch and Brown the first XI. He said to Connor, either you deal with Deegan or you're out the XI. He's stamping all over you and you need to deal with it. Now get out there and sort it. And having Deegan has helped Clifford improve.

On the same topic of dirty *******s, and when we were talking about transfer fees (Bentley is worth £60,000,000.50), he admitted that we aren't a selling club, but he supposes that eventually, if an offer comes in that is too good, he'll go, but we have already turned down a fee for him. So it has to be right for us. He asked about our biggest transfer fee, and was told Collymore. He had an anecdote about his first game back from injury for Forest, when Brown was playing for Bolton, he and Mcginlay had scored, and Collymore had come on to partner Jason Lee. Within minutes, Forest had a throw in, and Pearce launched down the line, and Brown got in behind Collymore calling him a *******, tugging him, and getting tight, Collymore frustrated, whilst all the Forest fans were singing Collymore songs elbowed Brown, skittling him, by the time Brown had know what was happening, Collymore was off again and the fans were baying for Brown's blood. Forest then won 3-2 against ten men, with Jason Lee scoring as well. After the game in the players lounge, Collymore's 'entourage' gave Brown a bit of a hiding. He didn't report it, it's not like today where it all has to go in the book/ He just took the beating and got on with it.
 
In fairness to Phil,

Imagine if he openly stated in public if the loanee doesn't play Ron will become very unhappy as the playing budget is tight and we simply cannot afford any "fines" so to speak.

I believe the deal is mainly in favour of the parent club as they know their charge will play regardless as lowly small clubs cannot afford the levies imposed for failing to play their starlets.

Unless I am mistaken, Shaq was dropped against Pompey ..., came on last 5 minutes, as you would, ie 1-0 up, bring someone with pace to run across the opposing tiring back line. He only came back into the team because Corr was injured.

Have I got the above correct ?

Then, he (ie PB) said last night that he picks the team on merit ..............., so again, you continue, even after your break to ignore everything and even the person himself and stand by your own opinion as fact.
 
Unless I am mistaken, Shaq was dropped against Pompey ..., came on last 5 minutes, as you would, ie 1-0 up, bring someone with pace to run across the opposing tiring back line. He only came back into the team because Corr was injured.

Have I got the above correct ?

Then, he (ie PB) said last night that he picks the team on merit ..............., so again, you continue, even after your break to ignore everything and even the person himself and stand by your own opinion as fact.


Last night Collymore was talking about abuse he gets from having an opinion about the game,Others also said they are fed up with the abuse regarding their opinion which if it goes against the majority they are ridiculed as your post illustrates .

I am beginning to wonder why I bother posting on here at all.
 
In fairness to Phil,

Imagine if he openly stated in public if the loanee doesn't play Ron will become very unhappy as the playing budget is tight and we simply cannot afford any "fines" so to speak.

I believe the deal is mainly in favour of the parent club as they know their charge will play regardless as lowly small clubs cannot afford the levies imposed for failing to play their starlets.

Welcome back MrsBlue - I've missed you changing facts to suit your agenda.

I'll re-itterate. A wage is agreed by Steve Kavanagh that is within the clubs budget - that is set by 55% of our turnover, therefore an expense we can afford. This is reduced if the player performs and earns a starting spot. Only you can call the agreed wage contribution a fine to suit your already disproven flashoods about secret contracts and 20 minute stipulation.

The playing budget isn't tight, as we have paid money for players, and we have scope within the budget to then sign Deegan and bring Williams in on loan, after we agreed the wage with Shaq., and without having to release any additional players.
 
In fairness to Phil,

Imagine if he openly stated in public if the loanee doesn't play Ron will become very unhappy as the playing budget is tight and we simply cannot afford any "fines" so to speak.

I believe the deal is mainly in favour of the parent club as they know their charge will play regardless as lowly small clubs cannot afford the levies imposed for failing to play their starlets.
It was stated also last night that loan fees differ all the time, so not always a fee involved some of the time, it's down to the two clubs to come up with that, more was said last night on that subject but you can see it when shrimpers trust put it all eh:thumbsup:
 
Steve was asked about rail seats, to allow safe standing. He went into a very long, articulated and clearly educated diatribe about how excellent an idea it is, he's an advocate, but simply, it's not allowed in the UK. He strongly believes the familes of those lost at Heysel should be consulted ahead of any decision, as football is steeped in history, and although tragic, they should not be forgotten or dimissed in the name of advancement. If passed, by the governments and agreed by the Heysel families, they need to then address design, as some stadiums are too steep in design to make it safe, or practical as it blocks the view. But he is an advocate.

Heysel or Hillsborough?
 
Welcome back MrsBlue - I've missed you changing facts to suit your agenda.

I'll re-itterate. A wage is agreed by Steve Kavanagh that is within the clubs budget - that is set by 55% of our turnover, therefore an expense we can afford. This is reduced if the player performs and earns a starting spot. Only you can call the agreed wage contirbution a fine to suit your already disproven flashoods about secret contracts and 20 minute stipulation.


Steve and Phil play lip service to the fans that is all,Shaq has played in every game this season and the question you need to ask yourself is has he deserved the total pitch time he has played?

If you think yes he has deserved the total game time then great however I personally do not think he should play game after games because IMO he has not earnt his inclusion.
 
Steve and Phil play lip service to the fans that is all,Shaq has played in every game this season and the question you need to ask yourself is has he deserved the total pitch time he has played?

If you think yes he has deserved the total game time then great however I personally do not think he should play game after games because IMO he has not earnt his inclusion.
He has started on the bench you know:thumbsup:
 
This really is ***** for the last few years we have been told lies and half truths and strung along.We are all paying members of this club and when they ask us for our money and support the very least we deserve is to be kept informed .If at season ticket renewal time we had all held our money back till we were told the up to date picture I'm sure RON would have surfaced

With respect, we are not paying members, merely paying customers. Ultimately the club belongs RM and he can do or say whatever he wants. I'm no advocate of the man, but although we'd like to be kept informed of developments we really have no right to expect them.
 
Heysel.

This was when all-seater stadiums were first introduced as well wasn't it?

All-seaters were introduced as a result of the Taylor Report into the Hillsborough Tragedy.

Hysel was UEFA banning English clubs from Europe following Liverpool fans' hooliganism.

Obviously other aspects of the Taylor Report, such as fan representation on the board, weren't as vigorously implemented.
 
Standing is a thing of the past, all new stadiums will always be all seater to attract the all round supporters, family and so on and makes it a lot safer all round, look ahead and not backwards:smile:
 
Last couple of bits.

Tactial, firstly he said he was to blame for the drop in performance in the second half of the Oxford game. Basically, he overworked them after the Tuesday night defeat to Wimbledon. Having them training Wednesday, Thursday & Friday, and this was the cause of the drop off and lethargy in the second half.

Secondly, he was asked by two supporters who said if they could see Bolger was going to get sent off at Plymouth, why couldn't he? His challenge was Thompson's early card at York, and why didn't they recommend he took him off. Because that worked in our favour, and hindsight management is the easiest job in the world.

Brown also talked about luck of the draw in signing loan players, he said that he spoke with Pulis who gave JBW a Premiership Squad number and took him on pre-season tour. He said as a League Two club you'd almost be mad not to take on a player that had a Premier League Squad number, even blindly, especially as Pulis really rated him. Conversely, Warnock came in, and just didn't fancy him at all, but based on Pulis' recomendation, and the game they saw him play in, they took him on loan. At the same time, they'd looked at senior pro at Leicester, who was coming back from injury so a different risk to the youth team player. And Leicester wanted to use us to bring him back to fitness. Phil wasn't really happy with that risk, and preferred to take a look at JBW whom didn't have league experience (but Conference and development experience) over that of a player returning from fitness. He still sent Cougho to look at the Leicester full back in his next game, who then broke down after thirty minutes and is injured again.
 
Last night Collymore was talking about abuse he gets from having an opinion about the game,Others also said they are fed up with the abuse regarding their opinion which if it goes against the majority they are ridiculed as your post illustrates .

I am beginning to wonder why I bother posting on here at all.

There was no abuse whatsoever in the reply to you.

If you post opinions that the majority disagree with you will get people replying, if there is any abuse we will stamp on it if we see it or if you report the post, but TTS did not post any.
 
There was no abuse whatsoever in the reply to you.

If you post opinions that the majority disagree with you will get people replying, if there is any abuse we will stamp on it if we see it or if you report the post, but TTS did not post any.


I never said there was abuse just the ridicule!!
 
This really is ***** for the last few years we have been told lies and half truths and strung along.We are all paying members of this club and when they ask us for our money and support the very least we deserve is to be kept informed .If at season ticket renewal time we had all held our money back till we were told the up to date picture I'm sure RON would have surfaced

Actually, unless we happen to be shareholders then all we really are, are customers. Would you walk into Tescos and ask when their new store in Southend is going to be built, and why they didn't build at the old B&Q site? Would you tell them you deserve to be kept informed?

As much as we would like it to not be the case, the fact is that buying tickets to watch a football team doesn't make us part of the club.
 
Each to their own. Personally, I believe people are being naive if they don't think that a manager won't be under any pressure to play a loanee. That pressure may be subtle and it won't be the only pressure the manager is under, but the manager will know that he's expected to play the loanee and will face questions if he doesn't.

I don't know how many of you have budgets at work that you manage. This is no different. The manager has a budget and he knows that if he does one course of action it will eat into his budget and if he does a different course of action it will increase his budget.

The manager is under even more pressure to get results, and will face even more questions if he doesn't.

Yes, I have managed budgets at work. I don't see how that is relevant. The loan player's wages (whatever part we have to pay) would already be accounted for in the budget, it's an accounting term called prudence (i.e. you work on a worst case scenario) so playing him or not makes no difference. You've already paid for him, it is now (here comes another accounting term - sorry if I'm sending you to sleep) a sunk cost, i.e. you have already spent it, therefore it should make no difference to your decision making.
 
Back
Top