Jump to content

BPAS PODCAST: 1st Feb '21 Episode 20: Mike Keegan


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Not at all Dave. Did you’ve say listened to the Pod? If you have, you’ll know what I’m saying is particularly salient. 

Yes I listened and it may as well have been me talking as it's exactly how I feel. What are the iFollow numbers, somewhere around 1,000?

 

Is it only those thousand that can comment or are deemed to care anymore? Hope not otherwise the game is up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

First of all, thanks for putting your sweeping generalisation about 'modern journalists' to one side and listening to an hour's free content. Mine (and I'm sure Matt's) pleasure.   I'll leav

Enjoyed the pod, and it was interesting to listen to Mike Keegan’s views. His feeling towards the club are very similar to my own and many others.   Whilst there was nothing ‘new’ essentiall

You asked what’s wrong with what Mike is saying.    I’ll be more blunt.    He claims he’s lost interest, hardly goes to games, and says winning a game is irrelevant. I’ll say that again-

2 hours ago, Dave_Og said:

I really struggle to understand why anyone would disagree with anything Mike said on that.  OK, so you can pick at he odd word there and there in a conversation but there's nothing in there that doesn't reflect exactly how I feel.  Like Mike I have seen fewer games than many on here this season - I tried to work out how many but they were so unmemorable I genuinely can't; it's just over half a dozenish I think.  For that reason I tend not to make many comments on particular players - in fact I struggle to remember the names of half the team.  There are two reasons I haven't seen much:  I have things that I prefer to do on a Saturday and I get close to zero excitement from it win, lose or draw.

 

He's right that a single win is irrelevant and surely we can all see the truth of that?


That’s you and him. 

 

Its not everyone. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kowenicki said:


That’s you and him. 

 

Its not everyone. 

 

If course it's not everyone. It's blindingly obvious that it's not just me and him though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2021 at 11:19 AM, OAFCMIKE said:

First of all, thanks for putting your sweeping generalisation about 'modern journalists' to one side and listening to an hour's free content. Mine (and I'm sure Matt's) pleasure.

 

I'll leave the digs about Saturday (as I'm sure you're well aware that we are all entitled to an opinion) other than to say that if you thought that was anything other than a fluke then you need your head feeling.

 

While, as I said, the stand and the land are an issue (and a big one at that) they are not 'THE issue'.

 

A few of many examples.

 

Did the stand disrupt a season by bringing in busloads of not-fit-for-purpose players?
Did the stand oversee our relegation to the bottom tier for the first time in decades?
Did the stand stop pension payments to staff?

Did the stand sack Frankie Bunn with us a place above where we are now in the table?

Was the stand responsible for Pete Wild turning down his dream job and then pitching up at non-league Halifax months later?
Did the stand bring in Laurent Banide?
Did the stand sign Urko Vera?

Did the stand have a place on the table at Royton Cricket Club?

Was the stand cited by Paul Scholes when he left after 31 days?

Did the stand alienate a series of decent players (including one who is still at the club playing with the kids while our defence ships daft goals every weekend)?
Did the stand get GMP to launch a fruitless investigation?

 

As I said - the vision of a community-owned stadium in town was 'utopia'. I agree that the asking price needs to be lowered. I don't agree that there's no interest from elsewhere, as hard as that it is to believe. I also believe the asking price from AL, if there is one, needs to be made public. 

Enjoyed listening, thanks again to Matt and for Mike for coming on and giving us his views.

 

it is interesting that some on here choose to criticise Mike for his views on the Salford game rather than reflect on the bigger points he spoke about. His mistrust of the Lemsagams has been consistently voiced on social media and he was able to persuade the editor of a national newspaper to give column inches to publicise the facts and truths about what is happening at our club.  I think he deserves a bit of credit for that.

 

I don’t know how to solve our problems, nor what will happen if Al ups sticks and takes his cheque book away. It feels like a long road back from that point if we end up there.

 

All of the above points Mike makes are true and you can add that the Joe Royle  stand didn’t appoint his clueless and unqualified brother to take charge of football strategy, recruitment and to ‘advise’ the likes of Paul Scholes, Harry Kewell, Frank Bunn and Pete Wild on which players to pick and how to set up a team (big plug for Pete Wild on the WDSL pod here, great interview and confirms that PW knew he had no future under our current owner)


The club is in real trouble and that is 100% Al’s responsibility and 0% due to Mike Keegan.
 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Andy Barlow’s dietician said:

Enjoyed listening, thanks again to Matt and for Mike for coming on and giving us his views.

 

it is interesting that some on here choose to criticise Mike for his views on the Salford game rather than reflect on the bigger points he spoke about. His mistrust of the Lemsagams has been consistently voiced on social media and he was able to persuade the editor of a national newspaper to give column inches to publicise the facts and truths about what is happening at our club.  I think he deserves a bit of credit for that.

 

I don’t know how to solve our problems, nor what will happen if Al ups sticks and takes his cheque book away. It feels like a long road back from that point if we end up there.

 

All of the above points Mike makes are true and you can add that the Joe Royle  stand didn’t appoint his clueless and unqualified brother to take charge of football strategy, recruitment and to ‘advise’ the likes of Paul Scholes, Harry Kewell, Frank Bunn and Pete Wild on which players to pick and how to set up a team (big plug for Pete Wild on the WDSL pod here, great interview and confirms that PW knew he had no future under our current owner)


The club is in real trouble and that is 100% Al’s responsibility and 0% due to Mike Keegan.
 


Ffs. Nobody is blaming Keegan.  What is this BS?  The interview had nothing  new.  It was just a rather boring rant about stuff from 12 to 24 months ago. His views on the current team and players were nonsense because they were based on him watching only 3 of our worst performances out of 26 games. It wasn’t just about the Salford game. 

 

Couple of questions for you. Why did we end up with AL and what’s your view of the Blitz situation and the way out of it?  


 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

Yes I listened and it may as well have been me talking as it's exactly how I feel. What are the iFollow numbers, somewhere around 1,000?

 

Is it only those thousand that can comment or are deemed to care anymore? Hope not otherwise the game is up. 

You asked what’s wrong with what Mike is saying. 
 

I’ll be more blunt. 
 

He claims he’s lost interest, hardly goes to games, and says winning a game is irrelevant. I’ll say that again- irrelevant. To me if you REALLY feel like that, you should just fuck it off. What you shouldn’t do is go onto Pod casts pretending you don’t care then contradict your supposed apathy to talk about players you’ve just claimed you don’t watch. It’s cringy and lacks class. 


He sounds desperate for the team to fail- so he can ‘reveal’ that he told us from the start, and that’s just sad.  His ego and being right about something we all know is more important than his team winning.

 

 I, unlike Mike. Can separate our really bad owner with my team winning on a Saturday. I’m still chuffed when we win. Mike derides it, and calls it lucky.  Because being right about AL is more important than a DKD stunner in the last minute. 

 

 

 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Andy Barlow’s dietician said:

Enjoyed listening, thanks again to Matt and for Mike for coming on and giving us his views.

 

it is interesting that some on here choose to criticise Mike for his views on the Salford game rather than reflect on the bigger points he spoke about. His mistrust of the Lemsagams has been consistently voiced on social media and he was able to persuade the editor of a national newspaper to give column inches to publicise the facts and truths about what is happening at our club.  I think he deserves a bit of credit for that.

 

I don’t know how to solve our problems, nor what will happen if Al ups sticks and takes his cheque book away. It feels like a long road back from that point if we end up there.

 

All of the above points Mike makes are true and you can add that the Joe Royle  stand didn’t appoint his clueless and unqualified brother to take charge of football strategy, recruitment and to ‘advise’ the likes of Paul Scholes, Harry Kewell, Frank Bunn and Pete Wild on which players to pick and how to set up a team (big plug for Pete Wild on the WDSL pod here, great interview and confirms that PW knew he had no future under our current owner)


The club is in real trouble and that is 100% Al’s responsibility and 0% due to Mike

He didn’t say a single thing we didn’t know. Nor is anyone suggesting it isn’t true. And what does your last paragraph mean? Who is blaming Mike for the club being in real trouble? That one is bizarre. 
 

I’m simply saying I don’t want to listen to guy with ‘no interest’ of my football team on said teams podcast. 

 


 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2021 at 8:01 PM, Andy b said:

My understanding is that the ACV doesn’t guarantee football at BP. It gives the trust the right to put in a bid to buy the stadium before it is sold to a n other. There is no obligation to accept such an offer. The only thing it guarantees is that if the owner wanted to sell the stadium, that couldn’t happen for six months after an initial notification to that effect. Great to have it but it’s no safety net. 
 

In my last days of involvement with the trust I made it absolutely clear that one of their top priorities should be to do what they can to ensure the sale of BP supports the future of football on site. Layering in legal obligations into the contract of sale that don’t exist at the moment. If Blitz and AL care, they won’t have any issue with putting in restrictive covenants.

 

I sincerely hope the trust is giving that some attention 

HI Andy

 

The Trust set itself new objectives in our January meeting on how we need to be ready to ensure future football in the borough of Oldham. This will include work with the club, landlord, OACT and academy.

 

We need lots of help and support. All are on our website and appeals have been going on twitter and on the OldhamHour.

 

Specifically, the work with the landlord is the ACV on Boundary Park. There are two steps to complete

 

1) The renewal due 2022. This includes work with the council and the landlords. This will bottom out the future of little wembley and we have Sport England on standby. I am supporting a volunteer with this and we thank them for their time.

 

2) ACV pre-trigger work. If the landlords trigger the ACV are we ready to make a bid now? Answer no we are not. Think raising £6 million in 6 months....yikes. However, doing lots of pre-work will help us decide if bidding is a viable option and having those funds in place

 

This includes work like sourcing RICS surveyor - which we are trying to source apparently they are about £600-£800 per hour..yikes, a business plan that covers 3 years, looking at funding streams, looking if we are set up right as a company.

 

I have just put out an SOS for a Freedom of information Act 2000 expert as part of our prep is SAG info on BP and we have hit a snag.

 

We have further planning meeting tomorrow and an additional meeting mid Feb on the ACV trigger work.

 

There are many ways fans can help us all on our website: www.trustoldham.org

1) Use Eaysfundrasing online shopping app - this cost you nothing the retailer gives the kickback

2) Join as a member for as little as £1.00 per month

3) Become a volunteer - help us with the project work, working parties.

 

More stuff will be rolled out after tomorrows meeting, possible lottery, leaving a legacy (like the Rochdale fan has done) and Canaries Trust does.

 

We have 3 plans for fan investment/ownership. I call them ABC

 

A = ACV with landlord

C = Club

B = Both.

 

We are very low on Trust staff too. Ideally, we would like 12 and we have been operating at 5 until last month - both Mark's decided to have heart attacks before xmas, latics results? possible, I was shocked they both had hearts to be honest..hahah

 

We have taken on board the feedback from the podcast too.

 

Cheers

 

 

Edited by underdog
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, League one forever said:


 

I’m simply saying I don’t want to listen to guy with ‘no interest’ of my football team on said teams podcast. 

 


 

 

It isn't the team's podcast. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dave_Og said:

It isn't the team's podcast. 

No- but the team is a vital part of the club wouldn’t you say? Everything being discussed is in the hope of making the team the best it can be. Otherwise what are we talking about- Nasty men that own a private business? 
 

No thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2021 at 2:58 PM, Worcester Owl said:

How does having no assets square with the ACV then? If football at BP is "safe' under the lease until 2033(? can't remember the year) then doesn't that give time at least to find a solution? I can't remember all the details re the ACV so it may be a mirage.

 see trust website page and no, 6 months max if triggered..however.....

 

http://www.trustoldham.org/acv/

Link to post
Share on other sites

This has turned into the ‘do you like Mike Keegan’ thread which is wholly missing the point.

 

whether you like him or not, 90 per cent of what he said was fair. 
 

If Mike believes he is well connected enough to bring people who might change our path to the table (as claimed) then I would urge him to make some moves to that end. He said maybe this is the year he will do it? Well no time like the present. Look forward to seeing this put into action. PTB would be a good vehicle Mike. 
 

That goes for anyone else out there. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, underdog said:

HI Andy

 

The Trust set itself new objectives in our January meeting on how we need to be ready to ensure future football in the borough of Oldham. This will include work with the club, landlord, OACT and academy.

 

We need lots of help and support. All are on our website and appeals have been going on twitter and on the OldhamHour.

 

Specifically, the work with the landlord is the ACV on Boundary Park. There are two steps to complete

 

1) The renewal due 2022. This includes work with the council and the landlords. This will bottom out the future of little wembley and we have Sport England on standby. I am supporting a volunteer with this and we thank them for their time.

 

2) ACV pre-trigger work. If the landlords trigger the ACV are we ready to make a bid now? Answer no we are not. Think raising £6 million in 6 months....yikes. However, doing lots of pre-work will help us decide if bidding is a viable option and having those funds in place

 

This includes work like sourcing RICS surveyor - which we are trying to source apparently they are about £600-£800 per hour..yikes, a business plan that covers 3 years, looking at funding streams, looking if we are set up right as a company.

 

I have just put out an SOS for a Freedom of information Act 2000 expert as part of our prep is SAG info on BP and we have hit a snag.

 

We have further planning meeting tomorrow and an additional meeting mid Feb on the ACV trigger work.

 

There are many ways fans can help us all on our website: www.trustoldham.org

1) Use Eaysfundrasing online shopping app - this cost you nothing the retailer gives the kickback

2) Join as a member for as little as £1.00 per month

3) Become a volunteer - help us with the project work, working parties.

 

More stuff will be rolled out after tomorrows meeting, possible lottery, leaving a legacy (like the Rochdale fan has done) and Canaries Trust does.

 

We have 3 plans for fan investment/ownership. I call them ABC

 

A = ACV with landlord

C = Club

B = Both.

 

We are very low on Trust staff too. Ideally, we would like 12 and we have been operating at 5 until last month - both Mark's decided to have heart attacks before xmas, latics results? possible, I was shocked they both had hearts to be honest..hahah

 

We have taken on board the feedback from the podcast too.

 

Cheers

 

 

Crikey Tracy. I hope they are ok. Pass on my regards 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, League one forever said:

You asked what’s wrong with what Mike is saying. 
 

I’ll be more blunt. 
 

He claims he’s lost interest, hardly goes to games, and says winning a game is irrelevant. I’ll say that again- irrelevant. To me if you REALLY feel like that, you should just fuck it off. What you shouldn’t do is go onto Pod casts pretending you don’t care then contradict your supposed apathy to talk about players you’ve just claimed you don’t watch. It’s cringy and lacks class. 


He sounds desperate for the team to fail- so he can ‘reveal’ that he told us from the start, and that’s just sad.  His ego and being right about something we all know is more important than his team winning.

 

 I, unlike Mike. Can separate our really bad owner with my team winning on a Saturday. I’m still chuffed when we win. Mike derides it, and calls it lucky.  Because being right about AL is more important than a DKD stunner in the last minute. 

 

 

 

How many wins for a win to become significant?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Andy b said:

This has turned into the ‘do you like Mike Keegan’ thread which is wholly missing the point.

 

whether you like him or not, 90 per cent of what he said was fair. 
 

If Mike believes he is well connected enough to bring people who might change our path to the table (as claimed) then I would urge him to make some moves to that end. He said maybe this is the year he will do it? Well no time like the present. Look forward to seeing this put into action. PTB would be a good vehicle Mike. 
 

That goes for anyone else out there. 

Literally nobody is questioning the validity of what he said about the club.  
 

However on a thread about the pod and it’s contributors, I think it’s fair to state I don’t enjoy listening to a bloke who likes to pretend he doesn’t give a toss about the team. 
 

Matt, on the other hand has far more balance and is able to criticise whilst trying to find positives. 
 

I don’t know either, so it’s got nothing to do whether I like them or not. 
 

Matt is enjoyable listen. 
 

Mike isn’t. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Literally nobody is questioning the validity of what he said about the club.  
 

However on a thread about the pod and it’s contributors, I think it’s fair to state I don’t enjoy listening to a bloke who likes to pretend he doesn’t give a toss about the team. 
 

Matt, on the other hand has far more balance and is able to criticise whilst trying to find positives. 
 

I don’t know either, so it’s got nothing to do whether I like them or not. 
 

Matt is enjoyable listen. 
 

Mike isn’t. 

That’s fair enough. My point is simply that Matt has got the podcast going to debate and air issues with the club. That’s healthy. I just think turning the debate into one around whether a particular contributor is liked or not is not really in the spirit of what the pod was set up for and is a distraction from what we should be talking about 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, latics22 said:

Apologies for my ignorance and non understanding of your role. But are u now the baz, daz of the trust?

Yikes....First I am female, second I have worked with all three  reps. Maybe I do have more facial hair then all of them combined - lockdown hair, I am unsure about bigger cahoonas though.

 

Does having Birkett in my face raise my profile? or the club complaining about me over over one word I posted on here in November 2019 (yes the club monitors this board).

 

However, maybe my charisma is wearing thin as I have yet to receive my post AGM call from Barry and having him explain his thoughts on our voting system and fairness of the process...Damn and blast that  missed call. Two directors were very very lucky and had contact.

 

Its almost as long a wait to get ACV and SAG info from the council

 

Anyways, I am distracting from the thread

Edited by underdog
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Andy b said:

That’s fair enough. My point is simply that Matt has got the podcast going to debate and air issues with the club. That’s healthy. I just think turning the debate into one around whether a particular contributor is liked or not is not really in the spirit of what the pod was set up for and is a distraction from what we should be talking about 

I suppose it depends what you tune in for, and what’s important to you. Private businessman who don’t have to be accountable ultimately have little interest to me.  I enjoyed the one with Karl, it give an insight (good and bad) to what is happening day to day.  The next one with the the PTB lads and Paddy had good banter, and was informative in places. This one just went over old ground IMO, we are where we are, and largely we can do very little about it. But that’s just me, I fully appreciate others listen for other reasons or enjoy different aspects. I just don’t agree, and that’s ok. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, League one forever said:

I suppose it depends what you tune in for, and what’s important to you. Private businessman who don’t have to be accountable ultimately have little interest to me.  I enjoyed the one with Karl, it give an insight (good and bad) to what is happening day to day.  The next one with the the PTB lads and Paddy had good banter, and was informative in places. This one just went over old ground IMO, we are where we are, and largely we can do very little about it. But that’s just me, I fully appreciate others listen for other reasons or enjoy different aspects. I just don’t agree, and that’s ok. 

I agree that I have found others more informative. Having a few people on makes for a better conversation.

 

It will be good to see the debate move onto what the route out of this mess may be. I sense the debate, which has so far been focusing on diagnosing the issues, has been therapeutic for many.  Need to consider what fans can do to affect change from that base position. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Andy b said:

I agree that I have found others more informative. Having a few people on makes for a better conversation.

 

It will be good to see the debate move onto what the route out of this mess may be. I sense the debate, which has so far been focusing on diagnosing the issues, has been therapeutic for many.  Need to consider what fans can do to affect change from that base position. 

Yeah, spot on. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Matt unfeatured this topic

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.


×
×
  • Create New...