KrolMong

5 hours ago, Chelters said:

I’m playing today, still getting round the pitch in vets football. Anyone else still not hung their boots up yet? 

I still play.

Primarily futsal and 6-a-side. Our futsal season finished last weekend and I play in two 6-a-side leagues that start in April (two different teams). I’m over 40 but still play in the normal leagues and not in the over 35’s.

I’m signed to an 11-a-side team but only play if they are short of players, which last season, was way more than I wanted it to be.

The Poles are not confident @Tylluan.

On paper, Poland should win. But they are awful away from home and awful in hostile atmospheres.

My dad jokingly said last night.

’The local media are desperate to have Warnock in charge at Wednesday aren’t they?’

I sat and watched Poland hammer Estonia last night, which means it’s Wales v Poland on Tuesday night for a place at the Euros.

Bernard and Iorfa only. I’d offload Bambo and Smith if we can get fees.

I’d like us to try and get Beadle, Poveda and Ugbo. We will need to bring in 12 including the three above.

Massive rebuild.

23 minutes ago, Andyben said:

Strongly believe if DR had joined in June and had his players in we'd be up there or thereabouts 

We’d not be in relegation trouble, but we wouldn’t challenge the top 6 without spending several million. That group of teams from 5th down to Sunderland all have several players each who would get in our team even now.

14th to perhaps 10th might be achievable.

But, year two after Rohl being here for a full season, with the right recruitment, we’d have a shout.

As it stands right now, and assuming we stop up, we want to achieve mid table mediocrity next season and have a pop in year 3.

As the season has wore on. I happen to think that the actual overall standard of the Championship has turned out to be absolutely piss poor.

What you’ve got is four very good sides in the current top 4. You’ve got West Brom to Cardiff who are just average. Sunderland to us are poor. And Rotherham will struggle in L1 next season. That group from Sunderland down it’s a mix of the sublime and the ridiculous.

Really poor league this.

We need 13 points from 8 games including games at home to West Brom and Norwich and away trips to Boro and Sunderland.

2 minutes ago, Reesh said:

If only we'd cheated our debts and been in administration we could be like Ipswich. Odious club full of entitled yokel sister shagging ***** as fans.

Yes. And there are a lot of clubs who have sailed past us by just doing that.

Southampton, Palace, Coventry, Bournemouth, Ipswich, Leeds, Luton… it’s a very very long list.

Very interesting comments from Rohl when he compared Ipswich and Wednesday. A barbed attack on the infrastructure of our own club?

Lord. It’s unacceptable to lose 6-0 to anyone.

And after a defeat like that, there needs to be an inquest and some form of apology to the fans.

Losing in that manner and not competing is not great for confidence with a critical run of games that are all must win.

If we give Rohl time, and a bit of backing, that’s what we will be like.

Mckenna is a top coach who has recruited to a style. Rohl seem to be that way too.

They are absolute country mile ahead of us in every single position and in every single department. What has really surprised me though is the sheer physical dominance they have showed, we know about the football they play and the front 4 they have. But, they’ve made us look like kids at times. This is the biggest physical battering I have seen us take for years.

Some of our players don’t want it.

This is the first time I’ve looked at Rohl and gone ‘have you watched Ipswich?’

His set up amplifies all of the strengths of Ipswich. They’ve ripped us apart out wide, created overloads and allowed their forwards to drop in unchecked. It’s been a coaching error today.

Its also not been helped by Gassama, Ugbo and Poveda being physically dominated and the ball not sticking when physical pressure is put on them.

Very poor.

@Jake and @bazapeps

I do have some questions about the 1867 groups overall plan?

1. Is your goal JUST to force the owner to sell the club? Or do have aspirations beyond the sale? What are those aspirations?

2. If you were to bring a potential buyer to the table, what would your conditions with that buyer be?

3. If the current owner secures a buyer, are you wanting formal engagement with any new owner? If so, how does that engagement work?

4. Would you potentially want a minor shareholding, or would you seek it from any owner if they were willing to engage?

5. What if a new owner comes to the table that you don’t agree with? 

6. Would you want to put a member of the 1867 group at board level in the club? If so, how is that going to be determined?

27 minutes ago, Andyben said:

Yes, but it's starting at 85% not 70% and I think they're waiting t see what new regulator is appointed.

This is why they didn't sign off the increased efl cash 

Ahh. Makes sense.

This makes sense because you have to become a commercially viable business. UEFA think this might get rid of the PL monopoly. It won’t.

The people who run the prem are commercial and marketing monsters. The one in places like Spain, Germany and Italy are not.

They are aligning with the 70% of revenue rule, I don’t actually have an issue with this but, it straight away benefits the biggest clubs anyway. Man City made 700 million last year. In theory that allows them to commit just under 500 million to the war chest.

For Wednesday, who do about 22 million in revenue, that means 16 million in wages and transfers.

It does put a lot of onus on clubs getting it right commercially and also getting academies running, and it I remember, owners are allowed to commit money as well,  but it can’t be counter as debt, and it is a fixed number.

My overriding feeling is that they are a good side, a much better side than we are all over the pitch. But, that for the first 35 minutes we caused problems, and got undone by a bit of quality and us switching off on our left side of the defence.

You can see that the top 4 is a long way ahead of the rest. 

Leeds really caused us issues in the second half and our shape went, to be quite frank. I think 2-0 flattered us a little bit given their utter dominance from the 46th up to the 80th minute. Beadle was really good.

Our survival is not going to hinge on Friday, but, we do have some tricky games including Ipswich away and West Brom at home. I think we need 15 points for 9 games. I now think that if we finish on less than 50, we get relegated.

1 minute ago, Jake said:

Yes and yes. 

Excellent. We will pull some stuff together.

Just now, Jake said:

I’m all for going one step further than that and actually sitting down with people willing to have reasoned debate. This is how the club should approach criticism also. 

Great, so let’s turn this into a normal conversation. Are you actually part of the 1867 committee? If so, we can collect questions and concerns and you and the group can try and get answers.

2 minutes ago, Jake said:

Where have a done that? I actually only responded in here because of some of the bile I read. I’ve thrown no insults or forced any opinions, I certainly haven’t questioned anyone’s support. The fact of the matter is I’m being shouted down because I have a differing opinion, which ironically is your apparent issue with the 1867 group. 

Jake. Your first post is you saying there is not much to argue about the statement from the 1867 group. When actually, there is. And then when people have actually pointed that out, rather than listen to that opinion and counter it and to try and debate it. You haven’t.

I will repeat, this is what we see from the 1867 group.

So, why don’t we do this, why don’t we list out a load of questions and then have you pass them onto the 1867 group and you get answers? I think that’s a fair approach and will be a good test of how they engage with those people who don’t agree with some or all of what they do?

Just now, Jake said:

You’ve literally only got to read the responses to my posts on here to see how hypocritical it is to criticise Owlstalk. 

Because Jake, what you have done is brought that OwlsTalk dictatorship approach here. You’ve come in, tried to force an agenda, had people question that agenda and then you have got defensive. If you start at page one of this thread, you will see arguments both ways. Because the responses don’t fit your agenda, and because you won’t answer pertinent questions, the issues remain.

This is what we are seeing with the 1867 group as a whole. Like I have said, every single supporter will agree with some of what 1867 are doing. But many will not agree with all. But - the issue is that if you don’t agree with all of it, and god forbid, question some of it, then you either don’t get an answer to a question, or you get told you are not a supporter of the club.

Like I said, any supporters group has to at least listen to all points of view and cater for as much as possible, and that’s how you force change. 1867 have come in swinging for a fences, created division amongst the supporter base and then complained they are not getting backed. And if Friday is anything to go by, actually losing support.

Herein lies the issue, and this has been solely what the 1867 group has sought to do.

They want to create division. It is either you are with us, or against us and the club.

You can’t have a reasonable debate with them even if you agree with some points and disagree with others. it’s an all or nothing approach, a quick search on X, Facebook etc, and you can find people being hammered for not 100% backing them. That view is echoed on OwlsTalk, where anyone who goes on and offers an alternate view is shot down. That’s called a dictatorship.

I’ll make a big claim. It would be very easy, if the 1867 group wanted to actually get traction, to change the approach and be able to engage with the club.

The fact that the group does not see this is frankly, shameful. In my line of work, we have a saying; ‘You have to win hearts and minds.’. This means be open, willing to engage, work to an end goal but take on all points of view. In some cases, change from the inside.

Now, the pertinent point is always going to be, what does ‘forcing him out’ mean? Is it to force him to sell the club? The only way that happens is actually if he runs out of money or funding. The 1867 group has got as far as driving him out of the club, but hasn’t thought beyond that point - they are right, it’s not there job to find a buyer, but they need to understand the impact of what forcing him out means. I can tell you right now, they have not got that far which is a major failing. That’s why I can’t back them, and more so due to the embarrassing tactics they take when people disagree with them.

The reactions they are getting is directly as a result of that. I don’t condone any physical activity in the slightest, that is just wrong, bit if a fan wants to verbally have a go, no issues because that’s the exact approach they have taken on social media and in other forums.

That’s Ngannou finished as a boxer. AJ destroyed him and I mean destroyed him.

Ngannou as soon as he took the right hand, he became a novice. Reacting to flinches, crossing arms, square on. Obliterated him.

They’ve gone up a gear. Our shape has gone in our back three. Stuck between sitting in and squeezing. And they are mopping up every single second ball. Their wide players are running off the inside of the wing backs.