Jump to content

A New Group of Attention Seekers


BraddersTim

Recommended Posts

55 minutes ago, OzzieOwl78 said:

I’m not going to nit pick with each player.

But firstly - where on earth do you get that from? It seems made up ‘facts’ are accepted one way in here.

 

And if it is true - again, I rest my case!

What's made up? 

It's in the public domain if you know where to look, and as for 'made up facts' - i assume you're from OT/one of the Nevs  where there's so many lies and conjecture being bandied around as fact and "pRoOf Dc iS a CroOk" as to be laughable.

Look at your nonsense regarding the ground ownership.

I'm not going to bother going into it, but there's enough commentary on here over the past 24/36 mths to cover off all financial aspects, based again on published data. Looking at your posts, there's nothing but conjecture and subjectivity that wouldn't be accepted as any form of evidence in whatever this 'case' is you're trying to rest.

I think @Reesh has more or less nailed it as far as you're concerned.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OzzieOwl78 said:

We then lost our manager, took an age to recruit a new one due to a lack of strategic planning.

We then signed a load of loan players and short term fixes yet again.

Yet there seems to be a blind faith that Chansiri has changed for the better - apparently through no other reason - than he’s signed Musaba and Gassama - for whom the jury is still out.

All the evidence, says he’s not learned a thing.

I've said before, it was on DM not being able or willing to stick to the 433/4231. All of ourrecruitment was for it, DM didn't use it.

Basically he went all in on Gregory in the first season, he couldn't play alone up front so we went 2 up, Bannan couldn't play in a 2, so 352 became the formation. We slowed play down as that suited Bannan and Gregory, playing up to feet through Gregory in the D as our main attacking play.

So all the wingers and young players just sat on the bench or had a pop at WB.

As for DM going, why would you plan for a manager who had just triggered an extension, well into the off-season, who was the 16th longest serving to play silly buggers and force  his departure?

Let's be honest, DM thought he was going to WBA but Corboran to Leeds fell through the day he officially left us.

I've said about why our recruitment was why it was,however, what we lacked, pace and youth, we got.

The one thing that I don't get about Wednesday fans is the 'we need to develop youth and sell it on' then go mental when the young player actually needs development. If they're not amazing every game, it's back to the National league for you, boy. They're supposed to be a bit shit. You make them better and sell them then. If they were already great, they wouldn't be here.

We aren't the pull we were last year, were a small fish in a large pond where the opposite was true last year.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, OzzieOwl78 said:

In 14/15 our losses were only £4.5m and we finished 13th in The Championship.

DC bought SWFC during this season and funded all the transfers, repaid all the external debt that MM had secured against the ground (with the exception of the cashflow/operational loan which is still in force today) 

The last season without DC's cash we finished 18th, had a turnover of £13m, lost £5.5m and over £10m owed to third parties secured on Hillsborough. 

Happy with the last transfers before DC's cash?

https://www.transfermarkt.com/sheffield-wednesday/transfers/verein/1035/saison_id/2013 

Edited by Andyben
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Andyben said:

What's made up? 

It's in the public domain if you know where to look, and as for 'made up facts' - i assume you're from OT/one of the Nevs  where there's so many lies and conjecture being bandied around as fact and "pRoOf Dc iS a CroOk" as to be laughable.

Look at your nonsense regarding the ground ownership.

I'm not going to bother going into it, but there's enough commentary on here over the past 24/36 mths to cover off all financial aspects, based again on published data. Looking at your posts, there's nothing but conjecture and subjectivity that wouldn't be accepted as any form of evidence in whatever this 'case' is you're trying to rest.

I think @Reesh has more or less nailed it as far as you're concerned.

 

Seriously as Owlsonline reached the stage where offering a different opinion now gets you banned.

Fuck me we are NO better than Stalk and Hargreaves if we descend to that level.

We are told "fact" that we have the 3rd lowest wage bill in the Championship, do we that seems to be conjecture. Maybe educated conjecture but this won't be fact until about April 2025 when all the year end accounts for season 2023/24 have been released.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mkowl said:

Seriously as Owlsonline reached the stage where offering a different opinion now gets you banned.

Fuck me we are NO better than Stalk and Hargreaves if we descend to that level.

We are told "fact" that we have the 3rd lowest wage bill in the Championship, do we that seems to be conjecture. Maybe educated conjecture but this won't be fact until about April 2025 when all the year end accounts for season 2023/24 have been released.

 

 

you know what to do @Reesh :classic_biggrin:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tewksbury said:

Our particular case was a bit different, we had an old squad, slow play and were on a decline over the season. The other 2 teams were young, fast and played a style that suits the step up.

 

2 hours ago, OzzieOwl78 said:

Your honour, I rest my case!

We had two years in League One to sort out our squad and rebuild Instead we signed old players, loan players and re-signed players!

@OzzieOwl78 Last season Ipswich spent close to £5.5m, in transfers and loan fees putting that squad together and that's before you factor in the signing on bonuses, wage bill, and promotion bonuses. And when Ipswich publish their accounts feel free to take a look at their eye watering wage bill for L1. 

Similarly Plymouth spent over £2m on transfers and loan fees. 

After the FFP points deduction and various soft embargoes (yes, all Chansiri's fault) we had to dip into the free agents and loan market and we brought in what we could to be competitive in L1. But more than anything we started the current wage structure policy. We replaced £30k a week Fletcher with proven L1 goalscorer on £11k a week. A £25k defender with a proven L1 £10k defender. I could go on but you're probably one of these that believes Bannan was still on £25k in L1. 

We could have gone with youth. We could have scoured the lower leagues and premier league youth set ups and still be in League 1. I will guarantee you that if we'd have done so then anyone we'd have brought in from L2 would have been deemed not good enough before even putting on a blue and white shirt. Any kid that didn't quite make it (Alex Mighten?) Would have just been called shit. And Chansiri would still have been called out for doing the wrong thing. But have a think back to the buzz around the fanbase when Smith appeared in a Wednesday shirt. Giving the Rotherham fans abuse about him coming to a 'big club'. 

Or would you rather Chansiri have spunked close to £10m extra (transfer fees, bonuses) following the Ipswich gamble? Because Ipswich were fucked if they hadn't gone up this season. The EFL would have hit them hard for wages spending breaches. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Andyben said:

DC bought SWFC during this season and funded all the transfers, repaid all the external debt that MM had secured against the ground (with the exception of the cashflow/operational loan which is still in force today) 

The last season without DC's cash we finished 18th, had a turnover of £13m, lost £5.5m and over £10m owed to third parties secured on Hillsborough. 

Happy with the last transfers before DC's cash?

https://www.transfermarkt.com/sheffield-wednesday/transfers/verein/1035/saison_id/2013 

I am no supporter of the Mandaric regime that's for sure. The reverence he now gets fails to address salient points

1) the lack of any spending on infrastructure

2) the secured debt against the stadium with loans from some shady characters

3) that the holding entity was offshore with zero transparency as to funding or ownership

He steadied the ship, made a turn on us and actually Chansiri is not the devil he is painted as someone to sell to

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Andyben said:

you know what to do @Reesh :classic_biggrin:

Be the bigger person and not ban people who offer educated different opinions even if they vary from your own

Or be a **** and silence them like Hargreaves

I know what I would prefer to be viewed as 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mkowl said:

You will need to refer to him as Hargreaves the 2nd forthwith 

We are absolutely a better forum in that we permit debate 

Debate is fine. it's the blatant lies aimed at disparaging DC I abhor.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tewksbury said:

Can't we all just get along?

Absolutely

The merit of this place is that alternative views are always allowed if they are reasoned and fairly articulate.

We suddenly seem to have become a fan base of either you are Chansiri lover or hater. I readily admit I am a fence sitter.

Not thrilled at how he has run the Club, absolutely think we should have used the resources better, can see signs of the change in tack that I have long called for and totally fearful that the protesters fail to address what comes next if you succeed in removing him - which I don't think will happen anyway 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, OzzieOwl78 said:

I hope not.

One of the main defences put forward for Chansiri is that he’s learning.

If we are 23rd with this squad - and close to FFP limits - I’d say that totally quashes that argument.

FFP aside ( who really knows on here).  I'll agree that the learning process took too long but change often brings initial setbacks. Appointing a Warnock type for example early in the season, if history is anything to go by, might well have seen us in relative safety.  Would it have been right for the longer term though? Arguably a Rhöl type of appointment at the start of last season, along with recruiting players like Gassama and Musaba (as opposed to Smith/Ihekwei) and blooding youngsters like Cadamarteri might well have seen us still in the league below.

I hope that we avoid the drop this season but I can live with relegation if the current coaching team remains in place and the embryonic shift in approach is continued.

Edited by Teddy Nickelarse
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, mkowl said:

Absolutely

The merit of this place is that alternative views are always allowed if they are reasoned and fairly articulate.

We suddenly seem to have become a fan base of either you are Chansiri lover or hater. I readily admit I am a fence sitter.

Not thrilled at how he has run the Club, absolutely think we should have used the resources better, can see signs of the change in tack that I have long called for and totally fearful that the protesters fail to address what comes next if you succeed in removing him - which I don't think will happen anyway 

100% agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OzzieOwl78 said:

We then lost our manager, took an age to recruit a new one due to a lack of strategic planning.

We then signed a load of loan players and short term fixes yet again.

Yet there seems to be a blind faith that Chansiri has changed for the better - apparently through no other reason - than he’s signed Musaba and Gassama - for whom the jury is still out.

All the evidence, says he’s not learned a thing.

Agreed the appointment of Munoz took far too long in what was already a shortened pre-season. Consequence of which was rushed player recruitment. That said the signings of Musaba, Gassama (and even the 1 year Bernard) were a departure from what we had come to expect. Whether the jury is out ( for some) on the former two it was and is an encouraging  shift IMO.

Whilst not agreeing with your blind faith description I'd accept that in the face of the rabid anti- Chansiri rhetoric then sometimes the vigorous push back by more neutral opiners might encourage that impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reesh said:

I love how you think this place is a democracy, bless your pure hearts....

We understand its not a democracy but we respect that the admins are generally not ***** like Hargreaves

And if he thinks this is bullying take a fucking look in the mirror

My over-riding bugbear these days is social media is so shit, this place is a bastion and we should fight to keep it that way, not descend to the level where folk get banned, cancelled, no platformed etc just for expressing an opinion.

The main exception should be hate speech - I appreciate that is a matter of judgement that evolves over time - lies, or those using it as a front. 

We should encourage educated decent debate not close it down 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on MK, you express a different opinion most weeks and I don't think you're censored, there's a healthy (usually) enjoyable debate and you're pragmatic enough to see others views.

The issues arise when new people join either on the windup or start spouting the same untrue bollocks that has been disproven time and again. 

Maybe we need a pinned locked thread that dispells all the myths and we can point people to?! Fucked if I could write it mind 😄

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Otto_Man said:

Come on MK, you express a different opinion most weeks and I don't think you're censored, there's a healthy (usually) enjoyable debate and you're pragmatic enough to see others views.

The issues arise when new people join either on the windup or start spouting the same untrue bollocks that has been disproven time and again. 

Maybe we need a pinned locked thread that dispells all the myths and we can point people to?! Fucked if I could write it mind 😄

No I don't feel censored - I just think some others migrating across from Stalk aren't necessarily Nevs or infiltrators. Perhaps they just want to come on here to join the debate in a way that is not permitted over there.

And I think it's healthy to have differing views or alternative takes on stuff. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Otto_Man said:

Come on MK, you express a different opinion most weeks and I don't think you're censored, there's a healthy (usually) enjoyable debate and you're pragmatic enough to see others views.

The issues arise when new people join either on the windup or start spouting the same untrue bollocks that has been disproven time and again. 

Maybe we need a pinned locked thread that dispells all the myths and we can point people to?! Fucked if I could write it mind 😄

I have done something on the stadium sale - be on a thread somewhere. I always stress it's an opinion, because frankly the facts are not available to prove or indeed disprove my musings.

And totally agree that when I view stuff on Stalk that is misunderstood or downright wrong I go get frustrated that these mistruths become fact, are shared around other social media sites as gospel and are then used as fact against Chansiri.

I know it happens because my oldest lad in particular will state said facts from Facebook etc and I have to tell him it's bollocks 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mkowl said:

And totally agree that when I view stuff on Stalk that is misunderstood or downright wrong I go get frustrated that these mistruths become fact, are shared around other social media sites as gospel and are then used as fact against Chansiri.

Sorry to raise this but....Same MO as the antiBrexit Mob

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Andyben said:

Sorry to raise this but....Same MO as the antiBrexit Mob

Well yep why I don't use X for political shit if I can avoid it and never used Facebook other than for local stuff and Dull Mens Club.

Why I defend this place and how it works 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d tend to agree that the facts of D.C. ownership  have been so misconstrued in recent times and such a frenzy has been reached it’s hard to apply rational thought over what has happened! 

I agree with the Brexit hill debate hint if am honest.

I have settled happily with rationale that the successes of “smaller clubs” have in part come about due to lesser pressure from pent up expectation whilst the success of “larger clubs” have come about due to significant funds spent on a gamble that paid off!

I 100% know D.C. has made big mistakes - I’ve settled on 3 .. a) not selling players b) cocking up the sale of the ground c) the stupid outburst this season re 2 million

The rest have been run of mill management of the club errors some by our own making some by others. 
The worst falsehood is the idea that the North as the owners name because he’s arrogant (he maybe) but it was done to justify extra investment just like D Taxi!

 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was from Maguire's little summary, again a little bit of information and fuck all comprehension (but enough about Maguire) but that was the accumulated losses - not erm debt.

And no one actually fathoms that it's the owners money - which he could convert to equity if he wanted.

Oh wait that is what St Mandaric did to leave us debt free

Oh no wait that was also Chansiri putting in money to pay off the secured debts that Mandaric had used to fund the club

Oh we have secured debt now that Chansiri once explained was a legacy liability from the Mandaric era. There is no way of verifying that either way from the accounts 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mkowl said:

Oh we have secured debt now that Chansiri once explained was a legacy liability from the Mandaric era. There is no way of verifying that either way from the accounts 

There is if you trace it all the way through from MM period and counter check in companies house as I did  but will not be doing again....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Tewksbury said:

I've said before, it was on DM not being able or willing to stick to the 433/4231. All of ourrecruitment was for it, DM didn't use it.

Basically he went all in on Gregory in the first season, he couldn't play alone up front so we went 2 up, Bannan couldn't play in a 2, so 352 became the formation. We slowed play down as that suited Bannan and Gregory, playing up to feet through Gregory in the D as our main attacking play.

So all the wingers and young players just sat on the bench or had a pop at WB.

As for DM going, why would you plan for a manager who had just triggered an extension, well into the off-season, who was the 16th longest serving to play silly buggers and force  his departure?

Let's be honest, DM thought he was going to WBA but Corboran to Leeds fell through the day he officially left us.

I've said about why our recruitment was why it was,however, what we lacked, pace and youth, we got.

The one thing that I don't get about Wednesday fans is the 'we need to develop youth and sell it on' then go mental when the young player actually needs development. If they're not amazing every game, it's back to the National league for you, boy. They're supposed to be a bit shit. You make them better and sell them then. If they were already great, they wouldn't be here.

We aren't the pull we were last year, were a small fish in a large pond where the opposite was true last year.

To be fair the smartest clubs always have a contingency plan if a manager who’s doing well gets poached/leaves. or if a key player is sold. We can definitely improve at this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Beaconowl said:

Sorry to come across as an old ignorant git, but to help me keep up with you youngsters, can you tell me what does the 'Z' stand for after LOL?

I mean, I'd love to Beacon, but I'm in my 50's so I'd have to ask my grandson to explain it to me. 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/02/2024 at 09:03, mkowl said:

The one thing it proves is we have / had no plan when it comes to recruitment. And you simply have to put that at the door of the owner and his advisors - we are perhaps seeing green lights of a change in tack thankfully.

The problem is this should have been done in League 1, again like the recruitment post the Hull play off the reasons for the approach I understand but that short termism killed us.

In terms of what Chansiri wants for the Club does he really believe a 3rd party would fully compensate him for some piss poor decisions. 

At the same time the capital investment, or lack thereof, would need to be factored into any 3rd party investor cash flows. Can any of the Chansiri supporters on here defend that part of his running of the Club. People have raised why players are hard to recruit, I suspect part of the answer is the relative poor state of training facilities, our track record on injuries and recovery are all pertinent. The fact that wages are known to have been paid late in the past etc. The lure of playing for Sheffield Wednesday isn't sparking innit

 

Don't overlook the lure of free tennis balls.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...