FAO The Club

[flammableBen]

Spending money on the team is not necessarily the answer to our problems.  Norwich spent heavily this summer including 1/2 a million on Grant Holt, and they got completely stuffed at home by Colchester.  

I think calling Fitton tight is a bit unfair considering how much money he has invested in town so far.  Also he did back Wilson when attempting to sign Robinson (275k) and OTJ (250k) before the Cox deal was complete.

Losing on the first day of the new season is bad enough but to lose so heavily to a supposed rival is even worse.  We do need strikers in and soon but I think the players Wilson has been trying to sign would have been good for the next few years of STFC and not just in the short term.  Trying to sign these players may see us miss out on more than we get but it's got to be in the best interests of STFC to be looking at players who have either played at a higher level or show the potential to make the step up.

Let's at least try to be a little bit more patient and see what pans out over the next month before we all call for Wilson and Fitton to be lynched.

I agree with everything you've said to a point. But starting the season with one striker is incompetent, and not good in the long term however you spin it.

[jonny72]

I don't think it's that he's tight, but it seems like he's only interested in players which can be seen as investments. Spending on players isn't always about the financial return when you sell them on later, the football return is just as important.

I agree that a large part of the problem is that Fitton is still learning and that his inexperience has played a major role in the striker fiasco. But Wilson doesn't have any excuse and shouldn't have let it happen, and I can't believe that Fitton wouldn't have listened if Wilson had pushed him on it.

I reckon Fitton sees all players as investments, but I'm not sure they all have to return a profit. Look at Greer, Lucas and Douglas, none of whom are likely to return a profit - sure they were all freebies but I'd imagine they're amongst the highest paid players at the club now.

[china red]

Out of interest was it ever stated how long Douglas had signed for?

[flammableBen]

I agree that a large part of the problem is that Fitton is still learning and that his inexperience has played a major role in the striker fiasco. But Wilson doesn't have any excuse and shouldn't have let it happen, and I can't believe that Fitton wouldn't have listened if Wilson had pushed him on it.

Then one of them is to blame, which is it?

[jonny72]

Then one of them is to blame, which is it?

Its difficult to say without knowing all the facts. But I'd say Wilson as with all his years experience in football he should have seen the possibility of this happening and ensuring that it didn't. I'm sure Fitton would have yielded to him as any good businessman would listen to those more knowledgeable than them.

This is all getting blown out of proportion though, its one game. Looking at the goals on the BBC highlights it appears the main issue was the same as happened in a lot of games last season - the entire team went in to "shit mode". They're just as likely to go in to "not bad mode" on Tuesday and stuff Southampton.

[Dozno9]

It was no suprise that Cox was going to leave this summer, we all expected it at the start of last season. Surely enough time to look for strikers??

I agree with Ben, it's simply incompetence. If Paynter was injured pre-season what then? We don't even have a couple of kids coming through as strikers.

[Arriba]

ben is spot on, and is raising the right questions.
we have missed out on loads of potential players and managers,have been hammered first game of the season with players looking like sluggish sunday league fatties,and others out of position.

[RobertT]

I'm not sure having an extra striker would have saved us yesterday, and as pointed out, Norwich showed just how well spending cash can work for you in a one off game.

All very odd.

On Fitton, the strategy is clear, spend on potential youth talent, do not spend on players of a certain age who are here to do a job.  If we weren't happy with it, we should have moaned while he was buying the club so the old regime could hang on a bit longer and see if someone else came in or we got to start over in the non league arena.

It's going to take something huge for them to change tack, maybe 1 whole season of struggle at the foot of the table and crowds below season ticket sales?  I doubt mid table drudgery will force a change in policy.

As for why did they buy the club, I'd guess that it may have been something to do with a local club facing liquidation and being available for a relatively affordable purchase price may have had something to do with why a business man and his friends shelled out when they had been trying to buy a football club for years purchased us.  I don't think they have some grand scheme about making money, West Ham are proving how that doesn't even work at the top table, and clearly knew the ground development buffet had proved to be a cold finger one at best.  They just happen to be able to afford to buy a football club and wanted to have a better toy than FM2009 or the Hornby train set, plus an idea that they could make it work.  Time will tell.

[Luci]

Heres hoping its not just for sheer amusement factor as we are already a laughing stock.

[Nemo]

Si Pie, are you in any way responsible for somebody being positive on 606?

[RobertT]

Heres hoping its not just for sheer amusement factor as we are already a laughing stock.

I don't think it was, but I do think it's a sort of "wouldn't it be good to own a football club and see if we can run it well" type of thing.  Hence, why he tried to get Newcastle years ago, it's clearly an ambition (one a few of us woul probably share with enough cash in the bank).  The fact they have well off friends who can back them is good for us, it means it's on old style ownership just with a bit of extra capital to support the idea.  It's why huge sums won't be splashed, they could have purchased a good team if that was the case.

[JOHNNY REEVES]

His stance on players agents although honourable stops us getting the targets we want and need.

[Don Rogers Shop]

His stance is no different to others look at last seasons list of who paid what to agents.

[Simon Pieman]

Si Pie, are you in any way responsible for somebody being positive on 606?

Not at all, what did it say?

[Nemo]

A text from Simon in Swindon, saying that while the result was shit, we needed to thank Fitton and Wilson for a long list of stuff off the field, but finished saying that at the end of the day we need to move forwards on the field.