oxford
First Teamer
Posts: 406
|
Post by oxford on Feb 9, 2017 19:58:42 GMT
Without Hughes relegation is a certainty (IMO).Team is a one man show
|
|
|
|
Post by adycrean on Feb 9, 2017 20:08:08 GMT
Communication from the club / Board has never been a strength, shall we say. But the events of the past couple of weeks have cried out for some coherent, sensible and proactive messages from the club. In actual fact - communications have been random, inconsistent and pretty abject.
There must be some logic behind Hughes going and the club allowing him to leave so benignly - in fact this thread must have concocted about half a dozen theories already.
I am hoping that Geoff Berkeley is asking some direct and tough questions of the Chairman. Although even if he is, I hold out little hope of any sensible answers.
|
|
|
|
Post by ac on Feb 9, 2017 20:14:33 GMT
Interview as he joins Telford:
|
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Feb 9, 2017 20:15:30 GMT
With most players not being contracted, clubs can be given 7 days notice of approach at any time. Clubs in reality generally tell the player of that approach waiving the 7 days ( although again generally the player is fully aware that an approach is about to be made as otherwise why bother ) and of the other clubs interest, and at that stage the player in theory speaks to the interested club. The player is then free to do what he wants. No point keeping a player who doesn't want to be there is the general rule.
In this case, Lee Hughes ( undoubted goalscorer that he is ) is too old to be offered a contract, as he has no resale value, and if he wants to go, then he can go. It's the player's choice to leave. He could have said that he wanted to stay. He obviously didn't.
Players come and go. Time for some of the other players to step up.
|
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Feb 9, 2017 20:18:28 GMT
Having just watched the Lee Hughes interview, the club had " financial difficulty " long before he joined. If he was that bothered, he could have stayed to the end of the season.
|
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Feb 9, 2017 20:21:12 GMT
Alwaysnextyear - thank you for the most sensible post of the day. Players come, players go, that's football.
|
|
dcx
Squad Member
Posts: 289 
|
Post by dcx on Feb 9, 2017 20:38:52 GMT
Having just watched the Lee Hughes interview, the club had " financial difficulty " long before he joined. If he was that bothered, he could have stayed to the end of the season. Unless we can't afford to pay him because we are about to fold? Or we are taking voluntary relegation so there is no point playing for a club that won't be in the division next season regardless. |
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Feb 9, 2017 20:43:04 GMT
Thank you downthelane. It was Lee Hughes choice as a non contract player to leave, and that's what he's decided to do. We've no idea what deal he's been offered nor for how long. Most players leave for money - what's new ?
|
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Feb 9, 2017 20:48:14 GMT
dcx
About to fold, take voluntary relegation ? NO. Players get paid well and on time at WCFC.
Players move for money and security, and always have. Is Lee Hughes saying that he's only heard about our " financial difficulties " since last saturday's interview when he wanted to be manager ? Hardly !
|
|
|
|
Post by ibraslimavic on Feb 9, 2017 21:07:17 GMT
"They have got to get rid of a lot of players and I was one of them". Suggests he was pushed as opposed to jumped. Players do come and go and it seems in the near future more will be going.
|
|
dcx
Squad Member
Posts: 289
|
Post by dcx on Feb 9, 2017 21:10:54 GMT
dcx About to fold, take voluntary relegation ? NO. Players get paid well and on time at WCFC. Players move for money and security, and always have. Is Lee Hughes saying that he's only heard about our " financial difficulties " since last saturday's interview when he wanted to be manager ? Hardly ! If we paid that well we would be further up the league and have better players! Are you telling me we have a top 10 squad and it was the manager holding us back all these years? We have a shoe string budget getting smaller every year, and the players reflect that. I will make a prediction, and I hope I am wrong, but there will be at least 2 more senior exits within a week. This relegation talk could be more than just a rumour. Hughes is probably not letting on all he knows about the club's situation. You think he hasn't been approached by clubs before now?! He's got an insane scoring record for us and most clubs would be glad of his goals. He knows something is seriously wrong and has taken his chance to move. If he wanted to go just for money he would have gone before now. |
|
|
|
Post by ibraslimavic on Feb 9, 2017 23:13:23 GMT
I think there will be more exits then that.. more like an abandon ship type scenario.
|
|
|
|
Post by wcfcnb82 on Feb 9, 2017 23:51:16 GMT
I think there will be more exits then that.. more like an abandon ship type scenario. Definitely abandoning ship! Which current crop of players will want to be playing southern league south & west next season?! |
|
|
|
Post by Dodger on Feb 10, 2017 7:53:55 GMT
This is possibly more concerning that many thought? Lee mentions financial difficulties.........that's been known for ages, so does he really mean that those difficulties are worse than we all thought?
He's going to do his best to keep Telford (currently also battling to stave off relegation) in the NN - we've got a tough run in and still need to play there (last seasons crunch game there springs to mind where thanks to the results elsewhere, we stayed up).
I've been of the belief that more people through the gates etc, would give WCFC funds to keep going at this level in order to buy some much needed time for the Trust's plans to bear fruit and so give the proposed Perdiswell planning application every chance of success.
My concern now is that if we fall out of the NN and crowds diminish, the Perdiswell plan could be scuppered. After all why would the council (planning) give permission for a stadium build with no guarantee of it's use by local people as the team are languishing a couple of levels below NN?
All the good and appreciated work carried out by the Trust members and volunteers would count for nowt.
Maybe that's Hampson's plan 'B'.......if he can't keep WCFC, then no-one else can have it!
Dodger.
|
|
|
|
Post by wcfcnb82 on Feb 10, 2017 8:59:42 GMT
This is possibly more concerning that many thought? Lee mentions financial difficulties.........that's been known for ages, so does he really mean that those difficulties are worse than we all thought? He's going to do his best to keep Telford (currently also battling to stave off relegation) in the NN - we've got a tough run in and still need to play there (last seasons crunch game there springs to mind where thanks to the results elsewhere, we stayed up). I've been of the belief that more people through the gates etc, would give WCFC funds to keep going at this level in order to buy some much needed time for the Trust's plans to bear fruit and so give the proposed Perdiswell planning application every chance of success. My concern now is that if we fall out of the NN and crowds diminish, the Perdiswell plan could be scuppered. After all why would the council (planning) give permission for a stadium build with no guarantee of it's use by local people as the team are languishing a couple of levels below NN? All the good and appreciated work carried out by the Trust members and volunteers would count for nowt. Maybe that's Hampson's plan 'B'.......if he can't keep WCFC, then no-one else can have it! Dodger. That's exactly it. Finances are really that bad, we all know that, they know they are that bad we will have to take voluntary relegation. Perdiswell will always be a non-goer as long as the current board are running the club. The only way way Perdiswell can be built is with money from grants and fundraising etc. The current club as it is cannot build a new stadium and Hampson knows this, he doesn't want to be the one to give in! The only way the club will ever get Bec to worcester in a new ground is reform. But that's brings a whole lot of new issues and that's another story! |
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Feb 10, 2017 9:04:08 GMT
That's a nice theory about Hampson's plan 'B'. However I seem to recall Trust members saying Perdiswell didn't need the football club?
Also wouldn't the business plan to build Perdiswell require the use of the football club's remaining funds? In which case if the club are (as it would seem with the loss of the main goalscorer) cutting back on expenditure then this is a sensible approach and helps Perdiswell, not hinders it.
There are lots of former directors on here who are quick to throw stones Hampson and his board, yet their historic decisions are part of the reason for today's issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by adycrean on Feb 10, 2017 10:16:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Noboddy aka Lord Ealing on Feb 10, 2017 11:27:43 GMT
"There are lots of former directors on here who are quick to throw stones Hampson and his board, yet their historic decisions are part of the reason for today's issues."
Really? Do Boddy; Hallmark; Brown; Lancaster; Sorensen etc. post on this board? Because they were the ones who sold SGL? Others like Paul Curtis left because of the actions of the then board.
It's funny how quickly history is re-written once a plan goes wrong. Now it's the fault of people who post on here. Boddy was quick to blame the financial crash and recession for the ground sale debacle - even though the deals to move from SGL were signed a year before the economy failed.
Real villains never take responsibility for their actions, they just whitewash the facts. Wait and see what happens if/when Brexit fails. The "liberal educated elite" will get the blame. People like Boddy don't have the brains or the courage to admit they've screwed up and been part of a scam to rinse millions from bogus land deals.
100+ years of history, and a once proud club lost to greed.
I suggest those still attending matches re-think. Are you putting money into the club to help it survive? Or lining some directors' pockets?
|
|
steves
Squad Member
Posts: 180
|
Post by steves on Feb 10, 2017 11:48:58 GMT
Well, here we are then. The beginning of the end. Or rather the beginning of the end of the end. So long WCFC.
|
|
|
|
Post by downthelane on Feb 10, 2017 14:03:21 GMT
"Or lining some directors' pockets?" is quite an accusation to make.
Do you have any evidence that is happening? Surely those recently on the board who resigned en masse in the summer would have come out with this before now if there were any truth?
|
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Feb 10, 2017 14:33:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim Munslow on Feb 10, 2017 14:44:09 GMT
That post just adds fuel to the rumours. As I said the other day we don't want rumours - just facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by creaner on Feb 10, 2017 15:03:15 GMT
That post just adds fuel to the rumours. As I said the other day we don't want rumours - just facts. Statement on City site... Statement from the Worcester City board of directors Following the recent resignation of Carl Heeley as Manager, the Board has commenced the process for seeking a successor to take on the management of the First Team. Alongside this, the Board is also continuing to review all aspects of the Football Club’s operation. At the forefront of the Board’s consideration is the future viability of Worcester City Football Club and bringing the Club back to Worcester. This review started before Carl’s departure. He was supportive of the need for such a review and it was not a factor in his resignation. For the last 4 seasons the Football Club has been playing away from its home city and at the second tier of non-league football. Not only are there significant costs attached to this but the opportunities for generating income are significantly less than they would be if the Football Club were playing in Worcester. During this period the Football Club has incurred losses, mitigated by successful cup runs, with a further significant loss to be made this year. In order to safeguard the future of the Football Club going forward it must look at the following matters:- 1. The need to return to play matches in the City (either in a temporary or permanent home) at the earliest possible opportunity by working closely with the City Council and other partners; 2. A rationalisation of the current operating costs (including the Playing Budget) in order to mitigate the losses which the Football Club has incurred in previous seasons and this season; 3. Bringing forward a break even budget for next season (and future seasons) so as to protect the remaining funds the Football Club still has available; and 4.The appointment of a First Team Manager/Coach who the Board believes is best placed to take the Football Club forward in the long term, in light of the above matters. The Board is aware of speculation both in the media and amongst supporters as to the future direction of the Football Club. The Board will not comment on speculation, nor will it comment on any ongoing discussions in advance of those discussions being completed. It will however reassure shareholders and supporters that any future action it decides to take will be with the sole objective of ensuring that Worcester City Football Club continues to be viable in the future. As and when updates can be provided the Board will ensure that such information is released through its official channels. |
|
dcx
Squad Member
Posts: 289
|
Post by dcx on Feb 10, 2017 18:42:16 GMT
I enjoy the fact that Mikey Taylor tells us more about what's going on at City than the board do. |
|
|
|
Post by ibraslimavic on Feb 10, 2017 20:20:00 GMT
|
|
oxford
First Teamer
Posts: 406
|
Post by oxford on Feb 10, 2017 21:28:38 GMT
That's that then.Thanks WCFC for all the years.In hindsight,although I enjoyed the three years at Aggborough,it was all over in its current guise once we lost the Lane.It's not so bad for me as I'm not from Worcester, and I follow Sutton as well, but it must be dreadful for the Worcester born and bred fans.
|
|
dcx
Squad Member
Posts: 289
|
Post by dcx on Feb 10, 2017 23:16:24 GMT
Micah Evans has gone to Altrincham.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim Munslow on Feb 11, 2017 10:46:55 GMT
And we play them later this month: if ever there was a six-pointer it'll be that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dodger on Feb 12, 2017 13:12:30 GMT
On reflection, we could have done with Hughes being held back (7 day approach period) rather than let him go straightaway.......he was destined to score yesterday against Fylde just when we needed Telford to get beat.
Possibly another poor decision by the board to add to the growing list?
Dodger.
|
|
|
|
Post by adycrean on Feb 12, 2017 14:12:32 GMT
On reflection, we could have done with Hughes being held back (7 day approach period) rather than let him go straightaway.......he was destined to score yesterday against Fylde just when we needed Telford to get beat. Possibly another poor decision by the board to add to the growing list? Dodger. You're probably right Dodger. Either (a) we've completely given up this season, in which case let's just throw in the towel or (b) we want to retain National North status and will fight tooth and nail for every point until the end of the season. The Board seem to be trying to take some sort of middle ground.....Which for me doesn't really exist. If I was a player right now, I'd be doing my damnedest to get to another club, for the sake of some certainty and the chance of a deal for next season. Right now this club needs clarity and strong leadership. Right now we have neither, in spite of the valiant efforts of Snape and Jackman. |
|
