By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
15 November ~ The experts were clear in their pre-season assessment of Blackpool’s prospects and the predictions have turned out to be chillingly accurate. It was widely expected that the Seasiders would finish rock bottom in the Championship and after 17 matches, that is precisely where they sit. The squad that was belatedly assembled was just not of the quality required to win games in the second tier, yet chairman Karl Oyston felt compelled to dismiss Jose Riga, appointed manager in the summer, after Blackpool took only six points from their opening 14 league fixtures.
The sacking was a largely unpopular decision with the fanbase, who instead pin the majority of the blame on Oyston. The unenviable task of salvaging the sinking ship falls to Lee Clark, who had been sacked himself by fellow relegation strugglers Birmingham City only a week beforehand.
Clark inherits a squad low on confidence and ability, but also faces a challenge in winning over the section of support still aggrieved that Riga is no longer in charge. That a manager with such a poor record can still command the respect of the fans says much for the tough circumstances he had to endure.
The incoming manager has been bullish about survival, although whether he genuinely believes that the cause is not lost only he can say. His second game in charge might have brought a win at Fulham were it not for a contentious sending-off.
Clark has been able to bring in a few of his own players but is currently limited to loans and those out of contract, such as Jamie O’Hara who arrived last week. Major overhaul of the squad will have to wait until January, by which time the game could be effectively up. Blackpool already need something approaching play-off form for the remainder of the season to reach the magical 50 point mark. It’s a target most Pool fans have given up on.
A tiny glimmer of light exists in the shape of the Latvian minority shareholder Valeri Belokon, who remains engaged in a war of words with the Oyston family. Legal action has been threatened over a financial disagreement and Belokon has intimated he would be willing to be part of a takeover bid. Many consider the Latvian’s original investment during the Simon Grayson and Ian Holloway eras to be the spark that guided the club to the Premier League, but for now the Oyston family seem intent on sticking around. Chris Walker
Very good debate, with some excellent points made.
I think SATW makes the case for direct action well, but to my mind you have to factor in the characteristics of the other party you are dealing with. I don't know the Oystons, but my perception of them is that they are stubborn, pretty thick-skinned and very interested in making a few bob. As such, I don't think abuse, shouting or anything worse is likely to have the desired effect.
You'd be be far better making the case that the right kind of investment can yield spectacular rewards. You'd be far better persuading them to go back and analyse what happened between 2006-10, identify what worked and why, and try to replicate it. You'd be far better explaining to them why people get angry and what would lessen their ire. All of which requires intelligent and measured communication.
[Post edited 9 Dec 2014 12:22]
Robbie,
I've never been an advocate of directly abusing them or even thinking that vocal protests will do much other than bring unwanted attention their way (which is certainly a positive for me.)
When I talk about supporters taking touch decisions its in the mindset of recognising that what is happening at the moment (and for the last 2 years) is a deliberate plan of action to reduce costs, whilst extracting huge amounts of money. Its then about asking what can be done to try and remove the people executing the plan from our club so if we ever find ourselves in such a 'club changing' position again, those in charge actually want the same things as the supporters. That is blantantly not the case right now.
And because it is not the case at present, that's where I think dialogue and the points you reference are totally and utterly immaterial. You can't convince someone of something when they have a totally different plan that involves the diametric opposite of what you want to achieve. And as has been mentioned on many occassions, if there was a time when it was both right and a strong case for measured investment, then it was in the past few years, ideally when Ollie had the basis of an exciting side that had won 3 out of 3, playing some of the best football many of us have ever seen.
Instead, there was no investment. There was an obvious start to the reduction of the wage bill - and subsequent quality of the team - and 2 years and counting of turmoil. 6 managers and God knows how many players coming and going. To cap it all, we wouldn't even invest in ensuring that the pitch could be kept in conditions suitable to a club in the second tier of English football.
I don't doubt for a second that smart, intelligent and passionate supporters like Glenn or Fiona (to name 2 of many I'm sure) hadn't made the pleas to Karl for just a little bit of flexibility. Look where we are now.....
Before dialogue can work, we first need respect and some form of share vision between supporters and the club. We simply won't get that while we're owned by this family. We've had close to 30 years of lie upon lie from them. Why will the future be any different?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
