Andy b

3 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Oh dear. . I thought we agreed to leave it Andy? No? Ok.
 

Tell me again why you can’t accept another person’s view? 
 

You claim you don’t know what ‘influence on games’ means then admit you would have a 38 year old pro in his place. You’re either being deliberately provocative, or you don’t read what you type. 4/5 points is speculation. What isn’t speculation is where we finished with him playing every game. We conceded less with him the side last season, but ultimately we lost a lot of narrow games and took a few hammerings.  This year we’ve lost a lot of high scoring games. A 1-0 defeat is the same as 3-2, but it appears you’re expectations have gone so low you’d have in the side to take a 1-0 defeat. 
 

You rate him- nice one. 
 

I don’t, he’s been a very poor signing. 

 

 

Crikey you have bitten haven’t you. 
 

38 year old pro’s in whose place?

Pop round mate and I will give you a lesson in structuring a logical evidence based argument which avoids internal contradiction. That’s where you are struggling at the moment I feel. 

16 minutes ago, League one forever said:

I said he wouldn’t make a huge difference IMO. You’ve just said yourself 4/5 points - hardly storming up the league is it? 
 

Would he get in this side? Yes. 
 

Do I think he’s been a good signing, who has given us his best and been value for money. No. 
 

Being good enough to play in front of a non league plodder and a young kid on loan is hardly a ringing endorsement for someone of his supposed ability and stature. He coasted through games, and maybe that was enough to get by in this league, but I want more from my top earner. And by way of comparison I would take 38 year old Peter Clarke over DW any day of the week. 
 

 

5 points would be 17 per cent more

points than we have right now and would put us in the top ten. That is a very significant difference by any account 

tell me again why would you not play a player who would have that sort of impact on your points total and league position ? 

Just now, League one forever said:

I’d take Peter Clarke’s ‘influence on games’ over DW 
 

But, fair enough. I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one. 
 

Good post- fair do’s. 

I will agree to agree on peter Clarke. I’d also say, on balance, that DW would be less effective than Virgil Van Dijk in that regard. However that’s a moot point as neither he, nor Peter Clarke, are part of our current shower of a defence. Moreover neither are contracted players of oldham athletic at the present time nor are they likely to be in the near future. 

5 minutes ago, League one forever said:

That’s a good point. 
 

Comparing our best player (a young loan player) to our highest earner with vast experience. 
 

One affected games. The other didn’t. 

He was also part of a defence which shipped significantly fewer goals than this seasons offer. As a centre back I will judge his performance last season on that not his ‘influence on games’ whatever that means. 
 

Just now, League one forever said:

I’m not playing it down. It does happen to us more than other clubs, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand how difficult it must be to work for him. But I don’t follow a support group for the treatment of footballers players. I support a football team, and the inner workings of the club and how it’s treats players and staff aren’t my primary concern. In fact, it’s non of my business. I just want to turn up on Saturday and watch us win. There is a difference between perceived nonchalance and an understanding of what one can effect. 
 

 

 

There’s lots you can’t influence, including many of the bigger issues at our club which you say we should be focusing on instead of DW.

Doesn’t mean you can’t bemoan the manner in which the club is being run, including the treatment of players. It doesn’t mean you can’t attribute some weight to that treatment as the reason why we are where we are. What can we do about it? Not a massive amount, but it’s good to put the CE under the spotlight in relation to this matter as it is an issue, and a live one at that.

If there are things we can control/influence that our more worthy of fans focus then I am all ears. The treatment of players like DW is up

there as a big issue for me. Granted there are others equally

deserving of our attention.

17 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Your always a better player out of the side. He played in nearly every game last season in a side that finished in the bottom six. 
 

Why does that keep getting forgotten? 

Jonny smith played in that team. Would you not bother with him either? 

2 minutes ago, League one forever said:

You’ve lost me Andy. 

To me, the common theme is players who won’t do as their told or challenge him. 

 

Who is the number of players other than Wheater? I’m only aware of him in the last 12 months. I know there were quite a few in his first year in charge- Gerrard/Byrne/Davies. 
 

 

Nepo. Gardner. Point is it’s still happening isn’t it. And I agree with the reason why he is doing it (as far as we know) but it doesn’t appear to happen at other clubs to the same degree.

What if Rowe or Dearnley says something which AL doesn’t take kindly to next week? That’s no way to run an organisation. It’s an issue for me and I wouldn’t be playing it down in the way you are suggesting

11 minutes ago, League one forever said:

I don’t think it’s players who have something to offer, it’s players who say no or challenge him. He has proved he has no ability to see the bigger picture and will cut his nose off to spite his face. It wouldn’t surprise if part of AL’s anger is his own decision in giving him a fat contract. But he has a habit of not knowing what he’s paying for. He’s clearly very authoritarian, but as a punter his style doesn’t really concern me- winning football matches does. And in pure footballing terms there is no proof Wheater would make any huge difference. 
 

 

My point isn’t that he is cutting out players because they have something to offer rather, as matter of fact, a number of the players he has cut out do happen to have something to offer. There’s a big difference. 

I will leave others to judge whether DW would offer something or not. Goals against might give you a clue to my personal view on that.

Just now, League one forever said:

That’s a fair point about symbolism. But it does depend from which perspective your looking at it.

 

What does his situation symbolise in your view? 
 

The only damaging perspective I can see is from potential signings, but you put enough money in front of most players (particularly at our level) and I would argue they wouldn’t give a toss about Wheater’s ‘treatment.’ 
 

From my fan perspective I couldn’t care less about a player who was bang average, who played in a side that finished bottom six, and while playing last season was very poor value for money in a limited budget. If the player was our top scorer I may feel differently. Why? Because I’m fickle and I just want a winning football team. 
 

Brush what things? A private dispute between a player and the club. That has got nothing to do with you, I or anybody else. 

 

Agree he’s average but he would be our best defender.

it is symbolic of a continued strategy of freezing out players who have something to offer. Why does it keep happening and is still happening. There’s your bigger picture issue 

2 hours ago, League one forever said:

 

I’ll rephrase. 

 

I’m suprised people still dissect Karl, when it’s blatantly obvious why he’s contradicting himself, and further that people still think this is a solely ALMO issue. It just isn’t, it happens regularly at clubs when players and clubs fall out. 
 

We asked him to compromise. 
 

He said no. 
 

Both sides blame each other, and Karl gets to look silly playing piggy in the middle. That’s it. 
 

We just need to move on. The issues are far bigger and deeper than one player IMO. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No. You don’t just brush these things under the carpet. That’s what the club wants you to do 

3 hours ago, League one forever said:

I can’t believe people still comment on Wheater. Of all the problems at the club his situation isn’t one of them. 
 

I’ll have a listen later Dublin, cheers. 

Yes but it’s illustrative of the way the club is run. Sometimes something can be symbolic and highlight important issues without being that important in its own right. 

Good post that wiseowl

The Trust gets the current mood and the reasons for it. 

However it would be a gross over

simplication of the situation to assume that all out war is automatically the best choice. I am not saying it is or isn’t but there are conflicting views on this board on this which illustrates the point.

At the request of fans, the Trust turned up the heat on the owner in March. The concensous was for the course of action taken. 

To some degree he has responded well to that in terms of the expectations we set out and like it or not he was given the opportunity to prove whether he could be better. He has been given the close season to prove that thus far.

We have to now look at the direction of travel with the benefit of some games under our belt and with club operations back up and running. Have we seen anything to suggest we are on a positive (or at least flat) trajectory on and off the pitch? (thats a retorical question by the way). 

Then it’s a question of what the right move is. 

Trust meet on Monday. 

https://trustoldham.co.uk/our-home-2019-20/

https://trustoldham.co.uk/board-appointments-2019-20/

Darren Ratcliffe’s appointment to the Club Board also (finally) confirmed today.

5 hours ago, kowenicki said:

 

Didn't look like a bog last season. 

 

Bore off with you 100% negativity. 

I actually agree the pitch faired reasonably well last season. There seems to be a 4 week period around mid feb where it struggles but looks ok again come mid March. Don’t see what all the fuss is about  myself 

If such a statement has been made then that’s clearly not a positive endorsement.  However any such statement has to be viewed in the context of the matter in question and not outside of this.

What this actually means and any associated alleged failing are not currently clear to the Trust. We are looking into it.

1 hour ago, Frankies6 said:

They all had won promotions prior to them taking jobs at Oldham..  

Royle and Sheridan certainly hadnt 

14 minutes ago, disjointed said:

Perhaps the club is being run correctly which in turn breeds a great feeling of being in it together. 

This.

45 minutes ago, Stevie_J said:

 

 

I appreciate that there are some very unrealistic expectations of the Trust, in terms of what it can communicate and what it is able to achieve but I don't think responses like this are the way to go, if you want to engage the wider fanbase.

I get that but I and others on the trust will not be treated like crap.

What I am trying to illustrate, and my counter point in all this, is that approaching the trust in the manner that a number do on here will not get fans very far either. No one wins then. 

We want the same things. Pls try and remember that. 

If you have no faith in the trust do something about it. 

2 minutes ago, maddog said:

 

I work in the NHS and minutes are taken live, agreed live, and given/sent within the time frame of the meeting. 

Good to know.

Not my experience of business. 

24 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

Not the best of phrases, sounds dictatorial like AL is accused by some of being.

You have illustrated my point perfectly. Thank you 

3 minutes ago, Midsblue said:

 

Depends upon the sensitivity of those minutes and gauging the audience willing to read those minutes.  This wasn’t a regular, standard review but a meeting that’s been chased for months.

 

This isn’t a criticism of Darren because he’s taken on a role that the majority of us fans wouldn’t want.  I just ‘thought’ that as we’ve waited so long for this meeting then the minutes would have been issued sooner.

 

Onto your second paragraph -

 

Wasn’t it more than just one Trust member present - therefore content can be agreed and signed off pretty quickly?

 

The Trust role operates outside of working hours and not typical 9-5 so what’s working days got to do with it?  Yes it’s unpaid but I do unpaid work too alongside my job and often produce stuff over weekends etc to compensate if I know the content is in demand.  I guess we all operate differently - not a good nor a bad thing.

 

 

 

 

You are being unrealistic and demands to act quicker won’t be well received I am afraid. We won’t be bullied into doing things that we are not comfortable with or moving at a pace which is unreasonable. In fact, it’s likely to have the opposite effect. 

Fans will have to live with that. 

8 hours ago, Midsblue said:

 

I’m admittedly impatient to read these minutes and still question why they cannot be released sooner, which implies that they need Mr Lemsagam’s clearance and this further implies censorship.  Hopefully I’m wrong on this.

 

However, some of the accusations levelled at the Trust members tonight and what was or wasn’t discussed at this meeting is downright insulting.  We’re all fans here and we all want the same result - a successful football club with a long-term future.   

 

I do though, have to challenge the last paragraph of Andy B’s post above.  We are very much in control of the resources - if we boycott ST purchases, shirt purchases and any other form of income then we can influence our future.  Some may say this is the wrong approach but I fear that the days of mediation are behind us and regardless of our requests face-to-face, they will be ignored or met with lip service.  Furthermore; what is the latest on the fan-led purchase of the ground?  Surely this has a much larger influence on matters?

 

Take the retained list issued today.  Did it have to be released this week or next and before we’ve appointed a new manager?  This obviously indicates that Mr Lemsagam will be responsible for player recruitment regardless of who comes in.  Releasing Clarke without the decency of a contract negotiation is a major own goal.  This is a player who was ever present this season and scored 3 goals - 2 more than Benteke who’s receiving a contract extension.  Surely this should be the new managers decision but I fear that their appointment will not happen until deep into the transfer window and not until Lemsagam has blown most of the budget in his players.

 

Im still trusting the Trust to improve our position and influence the future direction of the club but again I question why can the minutes be issued sooner and what is causing the Trust optimism following this meeting?  Losing PW and dictating who stays and goes before a manager is appointed doesn’t fill me with much optimism.

 

Ive tried to remain civil in this post by referring to our owner as Mr Lemsagam.  However, I’m certain this will not last long as I anticipate yet another act of contempt to surface in the coming days.

You posted on a Wednesday complaining about the absence of minutes from a meeting which happened 2 working days ago. 

Dont know what line of work you are in but minutes from my meetings aren’t typically produced, signed off and issued in that timeframe.

1 minute ago, yarddog73 said:

Typical impotent response I was expecting.

Many thanks.

best wishes