League Two Rovers (0) v Wrexham (1)

[O4anotherplayoff]

I actually remember a lot of the games from the early months of the 87-88 season and the performances were often good, despite the poor results.

Me too, and they were. It became a standing joke in work on a Monday morning that we’d be praising the team after yet another narrow home defeat. Kingy’s position, despite the stats, was never under threat - not sure he’d have been treated quite so favourably these days though. And once he’d strengthened the spine, with the autumn signings of Chamberlain, Harvey and Steel, we never looked back.

Likewise, but at the other end of the spectrum, one only needed to scratch the surface of Dawes’ ‘5 out of 5’ (albeit actually 4 wins and a draw ) to realise the hype around him at that time was never really justified. As has since been shown.

And, within that spectrum, all those managers named in red…. all poor appointments? More a mixed bag, under varying circumstances, for me. But they’ve been debated to death in the past.

Shades of grey. Far more meaningful than simple red/green or bare stats.

It is always interesting to debate the ins and outs of history but, sadly, we need a change now. Only a few games gone but L2 survival is at stake. We have some decent players but they are not being well managed.

I‘d say that’s been established, other than perhaps in the PP boardroom. Perhaps. For now.

There’s already a sense of inevitability emerging and, whenever I’ve sensed that in the past, a change usually follows. Now I’ve said that, just watch him reel off three wins on the bounce!

 

[roverstillidie]

I can’t believe any comparison is being made between Dawes’ start and King’s.

You only have to spend 10 seconds looking at Dawes and hearing him speak to realise he’s not a leader, manager or anyone who should be anywhere near the role he’s in. King had a real presence and credibility from his playing days.

Leaders come in all sorts of shapes, styles and sizes but some just don’t have it - Dawes is one of them.

When he was appointed he (and Palios) said the aim was promotion, most of us would take 22nd at this point. We’ve only got one win because we fortunately played Harrogate, who look like they may struggle…and are 3 points above us now!

He has shown absolutely nothing to suggest he should be in the job, and Tranmere shouldn’t be treated as a glorified work experience placement for him - send him off to the Cheshire leagues where he belongs!

This isn’t a modern fan thing either as seems to be being suggested (and I’m sure that will be the Palios line). Yes football is more impatient these days, but you can still get shit managers - as Dawes is demonstrating!

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

I can’t believe any comparison is being made between Dawes’ start and King’s.

That’s because it isn’t. It’s a further illustration, beyond what BBTC and Boz had already briefly alluded to, of the gross oversimplification inherent in the graphic in #127.

Red/green and bare percentages mean nothing. Context is everything. The opening few months of Kingy’s first full season back are one of the best examples of that. Dawes’ 5 from 5 is another. The performances of Brabin, Hill, Mellon v2.0 etc, are also significantly more nuanced than a dollop of red (or lazily writing off their appointments as simply failure). And so on.

Shades of grey. Very underrated!

 

[Am on mobile]

Just listening to matt Hibbert on radio Merseyside last night says what we are all thinking i don't know how to get the link up

 

[Sparky]

Just listening to matt Hibbert on radio Merseyside last night says what we are all thinking i don't know how to get the link up

From around 1 hour 4 mins in. Cheers

Total Sport Merseyside - With Paul Salt (04/09/2023) - BBC Sounds

BBC Radio Merseyside bring you the latest sports news, updates and analysis.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[bigmart]

From around 1 hour 4 mins in. Cheers

Total Sport Merseyside - With Paul Salt (04/09/2023) - BBC Sounds

BBC Radio Merseyside bring you the latest sports news, updates and analysis.

www.bbc.co.uk

A very good listen, Mark and Nicola should listen to that and give a proper response to the fans and not the normal stuff they come out with.

 

[Ian]

Competely agree with everything Matt says. Tickets, recruitment, management, progress etc.. All highlighted here of course but at least it's not just us that like to have a whinge. Maybe the class collector analogy was a bit much

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

I haven’t listened to it and, unless anyone tells me it offers anything we haven’t heard over 100 times before, I won’t be. Life’s too short.

That’s not to say any concerns raised aren’t legitimate, or don’t need responding to (again). Perhaps that’s how Radio Merseyside have teed it up, so that they can get MP on again to give that response, in an environment where questions can be much better crafted and pursued than in a Facebook Q&A?

My concern goes wider, though. There is clearly an increasing appetite amongst some elements of our support for Palios to go (just as there was for Mellon to go). Regardless of anything Matt Hibbert may or may not have actually said, the mere existence of this interview has helped highlight that situation. Meaning you can bet your bottom dollar that the kind of potential owner we may not necessarily need or want will have clocked it.

Palios will have already had an exit strategy in mind. If the pressure starts mounting for him to accelerate or otherwise compromise that plan, we could easily end up attracting bids from the kind of potential owner we may not necessarily need or want. Bids that, for his own quality of life, he may become increasingly tempted to accept.

So the worry is that we might be getting into dangerous territory, with fans risking pushing the envelope too far. If there was a known interested party that looked attractive enough for fans to start rallying around, that’d be one thing. But, right now, there isn’t. Maybe the radio interview will help tempt someone to make their interest known? If not, the fans could be angrily sleepwalking into a game of Russian roulette.

As was said towards the anti-Mellon brigade when he left, be careful what you wish for.

 

[bigmart]

The issue with trying to sell the club will be the price required to buy it which is likely to put some off.

 

[Ian]

its only fair that supporters are going to be disheartened to see a clueless manager in charge with absolutely no experience, 1 win in 6 and a style of play that is quite frankly awful to watch.

im fed up on it now and as i have said previously, we are nearly back to where we were when mp took over. no progress has been made and supporters are quite frankly sick of it. especially now we are paying top dollar to watch them! are our season ticket prices really the highest in league two?

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I am a fully paid up member of the 'pro-Mellon brigade' and I would have him back here now if it was a possibility.

However, I do think the club needs new ownership to progress and, as Mart comments, Palios may have to be prepared to make a fairly significant loss to enable a smooth transition.

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

The issue with trying to sell the club will be the price required to buy it which is likely to put some off.

Why?

I’d accept that the value proposition in owning the club probably isn’t that great and, although I’ve no idea what MP would be asking for, few would be better qualified than him to pitch at a realistic price. A price that still leaves room for negotiation, but isn’t so bargain basement that it’ll attract the chancers.

The value proposition may change significantly with the potential new stadium, which is why I’m surprised the feasibility study is still on ice. (EDIT - or perhaps that tells us the value proposition would be unlikely to change significantly after all!)

 

[Ian]

I think the potential new stadium is a 'pie in the sky' idea. It's not going to happen after the feasibility study revealed we would need significant investment from various parties.

 

[bigmart]

Why?

I’d accept that the value proposition in owning the club probably isn’t that great and, although I’ve no idea what MP would be asking for, few would be better qualified than him to pitch at a realistic price. A price that still leaves room for negotiation, but isn’t so bargain basement that it’ll attract the chancers.

The value proposition may change significantly with the potential new stadium, which is why I’m surprised the feasibility study is still on ice.

The feasibility study is on hold as Mark said he hasn't got the wherewithal to get involved with it. We are making large losses every year despite Marks efforts to try ventures that will increase revenue and reduce losses so I'm not optimistic he will be asking for a realistic price

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

It's not going to happen after the feasibility study revealed we would need significant investment from various parties.

The feasibility study hasn’t even been carried out yet.

The feasibility study is on hold as Mark said he hasn't got the wherewithal to get involved with it.

Which also hints he may have realised it’s not as big a deal to the club’s future ambition as he first thought - and therefore not such a big deal to the value of the club, and therefore to the value of his own investment in the club. But who knows.

We are making large losses every year despite Marks efforts to try ventures that will increase revenue and reduce losses so I'm not optimistic he will be asking for a realistic price

One thing‘s for sure, when football club owners get pressured into selling at a reduced price, the risk of things not turning out well increases. We were fortunate that PJ was wealthy enough to hold out for someone with the right intentions, we may not be so fortunate next time if the pressure builds too much.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Palios explicitly said he did not have the 'bandwidth' (ie. the time or resources) to proceed with the feasibility study at the last Q&A. There was no indication that he was scrapping the project as it is not viable.

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

Palios explicitly said he did not have the 'bandwidth' (ie. the time or resources) to proceed with the feasibility study at the last Q&A. There was no indication that he was scrapping the project as it is not viable.

Yes that’s right. So lower priority than what one might have previously thought. Think he also briefly mentioned then that he’d be giving the stadium situation more attention from this autumn.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

He did not state or imply that it was a lower priority than previously.

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

The new stadium was mooted as being a game changer for the club‘s future ambition. To then delay a feasibility study - which would be carried out by an independent external party - because you ‘don’t have the bandwidth’ to deal with it pulls somewhat the other way.

So logic suggests it’s either not quite the game changer it was first presented as, or, if it is, the Paliosi still expect it‘ll be borne out in the results of the feasibility study - which, in turn, would likely have a significant impact on the value proposition to any potential new investor/owner and therefore, of course, on the value of the Paliosi’s shareholding. In which case there'd be a significant incentive for the Paliosi to retain a controlling stake in the club, at the very least least until the feasibility study is complete.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Or alternatively, he simply does not have the bandwidth. As he himself stated.