Members Monday

Viewing 6 posts - 91 through 96 (of 96 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #13133
    Widnes89
    • Posts: 35
    • South Stander
    • ☆☆☆

    On the funding front if there ever was a wealthy person interested in RL and wanting to get involved now is a great time!!! A ‘name’ club, beaten the administration threat and looking to grow again with a recognised following . Just needs some financial security to make the leap again.

    But aren’t we proof that it doesn’t work? Yes SOC wasn’t a RL man, but he pumped in plenty of money over the years. And we did OK for a while, but when he gets fed up then what? Likewise, Salford had Koukash – and have actually done better since he went and they’ve not got a pot to piss him.

    SO’C said from pretty much day one that the aim was to get Widnes back into SL then make the club self sufficient. I don’t think we were a million miles away from that, but without going over old ground, there were multiple people off the pitch who obviously didn’t have the club’s best interests at heart. Going back to 2016, I personally believe that had we had the right personel in charge, things would have been a lot different.

    Given where we are however, without a big injection of cash to build the momentum, its hard to see how it is possible to complete with the likes of Salford, Leigh, Wakefield and Huddersfield. Very naive to think a money man doesn’t make a difference. Without SO’C coming in in the 1st place it’s questionable as to whether we would have got back into SL in the 1st place. Don’t think SO’C losing interest was necessarily the problem, it was what the other ‘custodians’ were doing with the club was the problem.

    #13134
    Former Chemic
    • Posts: 355
    • First Teamer
    • ☆☆☆☆☆☆

    IMHO a very accurate summary ‘89.

    Whatever criticism is levelled at the current manager and coach, itv is absolutely nothing compared to the reign of Rule et al.

    #13141
    Royston Vasey
    • Posts: 377
    • First Teamer
    • ☆☆☆☆☆☆

    One of the big problems with the club is that there are many, many people who are all care and no responsibility.

    A person, who didn’t go to the meeting, asks what happened and a person, who also didn’t go, replies basing his comments on an interpretation of subjective comments provided by a number of people who may (or may not) have actually gone to the meeting.

    Then people start to bicker about what the club did or didn’t say or did having heard opinions, at best, at second hand.

    #13143
    Mick George
    • Posts: 320
    • First Teamer
    • ☆☆☆☆☆☆

    One of the big problems with the club is that there are many, many people who are all care and no responsibility. A person, who didn’t go to the meeting, asks what happened and a person, who also didn’t go, replies basing his comments on an interpretation of subjective comments provided by a number of people who may (or may not) have actually gone to the meeting. Then people start to bicker about what the club did or didn’t say or did having heard opinions, at best, at second hand.

    Don’t get the no responsibility bit but the rest I do.

    You could/should apply this statement to the people who post after every game and never attend any and try to tell everyone there is nothing wrong.

    #13144
    Frankg
    • Posts: 694
    • Captain
    • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

    One of the big problems with the club is that there are many, many people who are all care and no responsibility. A person, who didn’t go to the meeting, asks what happened and a person, who also didn’t go, replies basing his comments on an interpretation of subjective comments provided by a number of people who may (or may not) have actually gone to the meeting. Then people start to bicker about what the club did or didn’t say or did having heard opinions, at best, at second hand.

    I am not sure that you read my post, but never mind. I have tried to be helpful by pulling together several separate comments supposedly from the meeting and am now responsible for the club not winning a trophy in the past 30 years. I never made any “interpretation” of those comments, just repeated them, and made a personal comment in reaction to those. I think I am permitted to do that. I also made it clear that I had “gleaned” the comments from the thread.

    If James wanted to restrict comments to people who actually attended the forum, he should have said so. I am not sure that posters commenting on decisions taken by the club and disagreeing with other posters can always be described as “bickering”.  Of course, people will have different views than others and will say so in a grown up debate. Isn’t that the nature of a fans’ forum?

    Similarly, why can’t someone comment on a game if they are not actually in attendance. Ever heard of radio or Widnes TV or Our League, or even read threads and comment.

    I am sure the club doesn’t get everything right and fans will always have a moan about something, as they are entitled to do. Some will have a positive view, a few always seem to have a negative view of the club and some just like to watch a game. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and a view. Comments used to be shouted from terrace at individual players or the club management, occasionally constructive but often vitriolic. Now it is often through the anonymity of social media. That’s progress I suppose.

    Rant over. Maybe you can update me on any other points raised at the meeting, either first hand or second hand.

    #13189
    James
    • Posts: 500
    • Captain
    • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

    On the funding front if there ever was a wealthy person interested in RL and wanting to get involved now is a great time!!! A ‘name’ club, beaten the administration threat and looking to grow again with a recognised following . Just needs some financial security to make the leap again.

    But aren’t we proof that it doesn’t work? Yes SOC wasn’t a RL man, but he pumped in plenty of money over the years. And we did OK for a while, but when he gets fed up then what? Likewise, Salford had Koukash – and have actually done better since he went and they’ve not got a pot to piss him.

    And what you say is true, but can you honestly seeing us survive and be successful in SL on our present financial model?

    I think we’d have just about as much chance as Salford, Wakefield etc with the equivalent central funding!

    Certainly without paying six-figure salaries to directors, I’m fairly sure we could have had a good go at things from 2016 onwards; especially given how competitive we were (in relative terms) spending well beneath the salary cap.

Back to Forum Home | Mark Topic Read  | 
Viewing 6 posts - 91 through 96 (of 96 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.