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.
Yes, that’s all been talked about numerous times. But each club makes its own decisions based on the information and resources available to them.
Our club has make mistakes that have nothing to do with the EFL.
Other clubs have major investors who underwrite their debts. The EFL is responsible for deciding who is a fit person and who isnt to own clubs, so essentially, like the Premiership, they have concluded that all that matters is letting someone who has enough money to pay the bills run the club. You know the OADT is complete bullsh*t, they know it... how many have been refused? So who does the EFL actually work for?, Did they vet the various Oldham owners and conclude they were fit and proper? How about the Bury clown? Derby? Macclesfield? How can they allow clubs to run up unsustainable debts like Colchester's £29m .. how does that make for a fair competition? A proper organisation would cap club debts and help to develop its clubs, the EFL has essentially presided over a scheme to pay players of little ability far to much much in wages, all paid for by debt owned by "investors" and much to the detriment of smaller clubs who try to do the right thing and live within their means. And I dont think the National League administration is any better.
Other clubs have major investors who underwrite their debts. The EFL is responsible for deciding who is a fit person and who isnt to own clubs, so essentially, like the Premiership, they have concluded that all that matters is letting someone who has enough money to pay the bills run the club. You know the OADT is complete bullsh*t, they know it... how many have been refused? So who does the EFL actually work for?, Did they vet the various Oldham owners and conclude they were fit and proper? How about the Bury clown? Derby? Macclesfield? How can they allow clubs to run up unsustainable debts like Colchester's £29m .. how does that make for a fair competition? A proper organisation would cap club debts and help to develop its clubs, the EFL has essentially presided over a scheme to pay players of little ability far to much much in wages, all paid for by debt owned by "investors" and much to the detriment of smaller clubs who try to do the right thing and live within their means. And I dont think the National League administration is any better.
To reiterate, whilst acknowledging the outside factors that are out of our control, our own club has made plenty of mistakes. Simply that.
Until we, and that means ourselves as fans and those involved at the club, start to concentrate on where the club has gone wrong and what we could have done better, nothing will change.
The Premier League gave £250m to the EFL to help clubs because they had no money through the gate for 18 months, L1 clubs got £450k each and L2 £370k . To cover 32 or 33 lost home games revenue . The rest, £200m+ was offered to the Championship clubs as an interest free loan... how much did they take up and what happened to any unused money is anyones guess. Had it been shared equally 250 / 72 = nearly 3.5m per club. They could have given every club £2m and still have had £86m available as loans. That would have underwritten the £1.5m loss that was shown in our accounts.
We received the same as all the other L2 clubs. The only difference is that the Club has been the subject of a debilitating hostile takeover attempt which must have distracted the Board from matters on the pitch (as well as costing them at least £500k from their own pockets). We know the people to blame for that.
There is no dice to be rolled unfortunately, it rolled and never came back after the Hartlepool game. We are done. All eyes have to be on next season now, which leaves us with a massive quandary.
Bentley simply cannot take us into next season. In an ideal world (but accepting we are relegated) we’d bring in a new manager now and he’ll have time to assess and plan for next season, but I fear that’s unrealistic. A new manager would not want the inevitable relegation on their CV, I expect they’d want to start with a clean slate of positivity too. There were strong rumours that we sounded out Askey last time round and that’s exactly where I’d be looking now.
It’s a big decision and we’ve got to go about it the right way. Be honest with Bentley and tell him they don’t feel he is the man to take us forward. Be open about actively seeking his replacement.
Of course, all of the above doesn’t consider the financial implications. I don’t think any of us could quantify the real cost.
A change of manager bounce is our only hope, I'd ask Hill but can we afford him if we sack JB? Hendo in charge would be a better bet that what we currently have.
Get rid of Bentley and get Shaun Reid in til the end of the season with assistance from Jim McNulty
Will it not cost us more if we don't get rid then get relegated.
[Post edited 19 Feb 2023 17:29]
After yesterdays result i think it is inevitable that Dale will play in the NL next season. So for me it is costing the club aleady with or without JB....
My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds
They've put his "Pre-Math Interview" on the website now, so looks like he's not going anywhere imminently....
Maybe the board is waiting for the gate receipts and bar takings from tomorrow so they've got a bit of extra cash in the kitty to pay him off. I know that's a daft thing to say but I can't fathom other than we literally can't afford to replace him the reason we are sticking with the poor chap.
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
They've put his "Pre-Math Interview" on the website now, so looks like he's not going anywhere imminently....
I know it’s a money thing, but it’s like the board have given up and happy to let things carry on, I would hope that at least we would try to improve things, the way things are we would be down with lowest points haul Come on board make a move
Maybe the board is waiting for the gate receipts and bar takings from tomorrow so they've got a bit of extra cash in the kitty to pay him off. I know that's a daft thing to say but I can't fathom other than we literally can't afford to replace him the reason we are sticking with the poor chap.
Yeah that'll be it. Jim Bentley will be walking out the stadium after the game with a bag full of £1, 50p and any loose change from the bar takings.
Yeah that'll be it. Jim Bentley will be walking out the stadium after the game with a bag full of £1, 50p and any loose change from the bar takings.
I don't mean they'd literally empty the takings of the tills give it to him in a bag with his P45 stapled to it, just tomorrow there should be a decent injection of funds into the club which might provide some money to go towards paying Bentley's severance.
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
I don't mean they'd literally empty the takings of the tills give it to him in a bag with his P45 stapled to it, just tomorrow there should be a decent injection of funds into the club which might provide some money to go towards paying Bentley's severance.
Bentley's severance would cost the club an arm and a leg, James
Even got a mention on the live feed for Watford - West Brom tonight. The players have emerged from the tunnel! Whether you're willing Watford or West Brom on or hoping they'll slip up, join in by getting in touch tonight. Maybe you're a QPR fan with a view on Neil Critchley's dismissal or a Rochdale supporter hoping for a great escape from the foot of League Two.
I don't mean they'd literally empty the takings of the tills give it to him in a bag with his P45 stapled to it, just tomorrow there should be a decent injection of funds into the club which might provide some money to go towards paying Bentley's severance.
They know the money is coming tomorrow, I can guarantee with 100% certainty this will have no baring on their decision. If they were to relieve him of his duties I'd imagine it'd be gardening leave at first.
They know the money is coming tomorrow, I can guarantee with 100% certainty this will have no baring on their decision. If they were to relieve him of his duties I'd imagine it'd be gardening leave at first.
But until the match is actually played the funds aren't guaranteed? I expect you are right about gardening leave.
'Only happy when you've got it often makes you miss the journey'
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
