FORMER Watford manager Dave Bassett acted as a consultant to Aidy Boothroyd last season, the Watford Observer can reveal.
Bassett was employed by the Hornets at a reported cost of around £1,500 per week during their ill-fated Premiership campaign and was a regular at home and away matches last season.
Boothroyd met with Bassett on a weekly basis for up to an hour-and-a-half at Bassett's home in Denham, talking tactics and discussing the best way to try and keep Watford in the Premiership.
The Watford boss has made no secret of the way in which he picks other manager's brains and he has sought the advice of the likes of Alan Pardew, Paul Jewell, Sir Clive Woodward and Sir Alex Ferguson in the past.
Bassett was renowned for deploying a direct style of play during his time as a manager. Boothroyd came under fire from many fans for adopting the same tactics last season and tried to develop a more measured approach towards the end.
Bassett, 62, is not thought to have had any involvement in team selection but he is believed to have overseen atleast one training session at the club's London Colney training ground. Bassett was keen to keep a low profile following a disastrous half-a-season spell in charge of the Hornets in 1987/1988.
advertisement
Appointed as the successor to Graham Taylor after six years at Wimbledon, Bassett was thought to be too quick to dismantle the side that had finished ninth in the league the previous season.
Crowd favourites such as Kevin Richardson, who went on to be a member of Arsenal's championship-winning side in 1989, David Bardsley, Lee Sinnott and Mark Falco were all sold as the Stanmore-born Bassett removed backroom staff and brought in his own men.
Watford started the 1987-88 season terribly and Bassett was eventually sacked in January 1988 when relegation to the Second Division looked certain.
Bassett was back in employment just days after leaving Vicarage Road, taking over at Sheffield United but failing to prevent the Blades from sliding in the Third Division.
However, he then turned things around, enjoying back-to-back promotions and steering the Blades to the top tier of English football for the irst time since the 1970's.
United finished in 13th place and an impressive ninth in the next two seasons and took their place in the newly-formed Premier League.
Following a 14th-place finish and a run to the semi-finals of the FA Cup in 1993, Bassett's reign at Bramall Lane finally ended on the last day of the 1993-94 season when they lost 3-2 at Chelsea and were relegated.
An eighth-place finish in the 1994-95 Division One campaign was not enough to land them a play-off place and Bassett resigned the following December.
Bassett went on to reach the Play-off finals with Crystal Palace but was unable to prevent Nottingham Forest from being relegated in 1997. He brought the Division One championship crown to the City Ground in 1998 but was sacked again in October of that year. Forest have remained outside the Premiership ever since.
The former Hornets boss then enjoyed a mixed spell at Barnsley between May 1999 and December 2000 and was then in charge at Filbert Street as Leicester dropped out of the top flight for the first time in six years in 2002.
Bassett briefly became director of football at the club but took over as manager again in October 2004 after Micky Adams resigned.
His next job took him to Southampton where he assisted Harry Redknapp and he then became caretaker manager, along with Dennis Wise, once Redknapp moved across the south coast to Portsmouth.
He eventually left the club in 2005 after George Burley was appointed full-time manager.
A Watford spokesman said: "Dave Bassett is a long-standing friend of Aidy Boothroyd's and was simply invited to attend Watford's games on occasion last season for his thoughts."
Posted by: Winston, watford on 3:28pm Fri 29 Jun 07
I trust WFC have dumped this so called consultant. Its time Aidy implements his own vision in team selection and training programmes, and whats more show the supports the true Aidy without old hasbeans!
I trust WFC have dumped this so called consultant. Its time Aidy implements his own vision in team selection and training programmes, and whats more show the supports the true Aidy without old hasbeans!
Posted by: DoctorOfLetters, Cambridge on 3:29pm Fri 29 Jun 07
Jaw-dropping stuff. That's £1,000 per hour. Can I be Aidy's friend, too? I'd only charge him £750.00 per week. Don't know if I can stretch to one & a half hours, though. And there'll be no refreshments. (I bet Dave didn't pay to get in either. Blast. If only I'd known, I'd have nominated him for Supporter of the Season.)
Jaw-dropping stuff. That's £1,000 per hour. Can I be Aidy's friend, too? I'd only charge him £750.00 per week. Don't know if I can stretch to one & a half hours, though. And there'll be no refreshments. (I bet Dave didn't pay to get in either. Blast. If only I'd known, I'd have nominated him for Supporter of the Season.)
Posted by: Peter, Chiswell Green on 4:40pm Fri 29 Jun 07
What a waste we could have funded a young player for that money and at least had some sort of return for the investment. It's lucky there were none of our supporters around the directors box where Bassett presumably sat as I'm sure he would have been subjected to much verbal abuse being solely responsible for the destruction of our club inside 6 months.
What a waste we could have funded a young player for that money and at least had some sort of return for the investment. It's lucky there were none of our supporters around the directors box where Bassett presumably sat as I'm sure he would have been subjected to much verbal abuse being solely responsible for the destruction of our club inside 6 months.
Posted by: Bob Bell, Norwich on 5:38pm Fri 29 Jun 07
I hate Bassett more than these pages will allow me to express.What he did to our club first time around was disgraceful...what did he achieve second time ? Please god not a third !! Get this idiot out of the door for good and that includes him as a spectator.
I hate Bassett more than these pages will allow me to express.What he did to our club first time around was disgraceful...what did he achieve second time ? Please god not a third !! Get this idiot out of the door for good and that includes him as a spectator.
Posted by: JD, Berkhamsted on 7:14pm Fri 29 Jun 07
Why is everything so secreative at the club these days? If it's not boardroom rows, it's hiden employees, not wonder we went down if bassett had something to do with the club.
Why is everything so secreative at the club these days? If it's not boardroom rows, it's hiden employees, not wonder we went down if bassett had something to do with the club.
Posted by: Robbo3, Hampshire on 7:41pm Fri 29 Jun 07
Directors at large companies often employ consultants at these types of prices. Does it really matter? If this was to have happened during our promotion season we wouldn't have cared one bit.
Directors at large companies often employ consultants at these types of prices. Does it really matter? If this was to have happened during our promotion season we wouldn't have cared one bit.
Dave Bassett was a disaster as Watford Manager, however he has an excellent managerial record equal to Graham Taylor in terms of promotions i think.
Aidy was about 16 years old when Bassett was here so why shouldnt he consult with an experienced former manager?
Dave Bassett was a disaster as Watford Manager, however he has an excellent managerial record equal to Graham Taylor in terms of promotions i think.
Aidy was about 16 years old when Bassett was here so why shouldnt he consult with an experienced former manager?
Posted by: Michael Hr., Cambridge on 11:44am Sat 30 Jun 07
'Directors at large companies often employ consultants at these types of prices. Does it really matter?' Ah, Robbo! Such cynicism encapulates precisely why I've all but lost my interest in the Watford FC 'business.' More fool those who continue to pump their money into it via the turnstyles. In 6 months, Bassett caused 10 years of disaster. And now supporters are rewarding him at four times the rate of the average wage.
'Directors at large companies often employ consultants at these types of prices. Does it really matter?' Ah, Robbo! Such cynicism encapulates precisely why I've all but lost my interest in the Watford FC 'business.' More fool those who continue to pump their money into it via the turnstyles. In 6 months, Bassett caused 10 years of disaster. And now supporters are rewarding him at four times the rate of the average wage.
Posted by: Luther Blissett, Brinkley on 2:43pm Sat 30 Jun 07
Well said, Michael Hr; what Robbo & the racketeers running corporate football fail to include within their cost-ledgers is supporter memory & intelligence. Paying Bassett is a moral outrage & an insult to us all. He's also a failure & cretin. This club has travelled a long, long way since the 1970s & '80s - mainly downwards.
Well said, Michael Hr; what Robbo & the racketeers running corporate football fail to include within their cost-ledgers is supporter memory & intelligence. Paying Bassett is a moral outrage & an insult to us all. He's also a failure & cretin. This club has travelled a long, long way since the 1970s & '80s - mainly downwards.
Another day, another WO negative story on Aidy and the Board. You have been desparate to say 'I told you so' ever since the Lewington exit and, as it
hasn't happened on the pitch to talk us there.....
I am no fan of Bassett as with anyone who lived through that era at Watford but get this in perspective - high profile ex managers are employed on a regular basis to do ad hoc work at clubs up and down the land.
Why don't you shock us sometime and try a positive story......it's not three years ago or even twenty so stop living in the past.
Another day, another WO negative story on Aidy and the Board. You have been desparate to say 'I told you so' ever since the Lewington exit and, as it
hasn't happened on the pitch to talk us there.....
I am no fan of Bassett as with anyone who lived through that era at Watford but get this in perspective - high profile ex managers are employed on a regular basis to do ad hoc work at clubs up and down the land.
Why don't you shock us sometime and try a positive story......it's not three years ago or even twenty so stop living in the past.
Jack
Like those running the club, it seems you have decided the only stories the WO is 'permitted' to run are happy, good news stories.
However, they have to generate good news for it to be possible to be written about.
Off the field, the club is secretive and scoffs at us fans by barely telling us anything. As paying customers, we've a right to know what is going on.
Last season was miserable, in terms of results and performances.
Now we discover that a man who (bar Vialli) has done more in my lifetime to destroy my club is being paid to advise the manager.
You're right, there are lots of ex-managers being paid for consultancy work - so let's find someone who is a less contentious choice in the minds of Watford fans.
And for me, this begs one very important question: the manager has been held up by so many happy clappers as a forward-thinking, innovative, ground-breaking manager, who is very much his own man.
So, why do we need to be shelling out £6k to seek the opinions of a manager who is far removed from those qualities?
Perhaps we should go the whole way and get Vinnie Jones in for some training sessions - or perhaps Dave Beasant is available to explain to Poom and Lee the key to whacking the ball 80 yards down the pitch.
The Watford Observer has run a story because it is of interest to the fans. The fact you think is a negative story reflects on the fact that employing Bassett as a consultant is indeed that - a negative.
Why do you think the club didn't say anything themselves?
Jack
Like those running the club, it seems you have decided the only stories the WO is 'permitted' to run are happy, good news stories.
However, they have to generate good news for it to be possible to be written about.
Off the field, the club is secretive and scoffs at us fans by barely telling us anything. As paying customers, we've a right to know what is going on.
Last season was miserable, in terms of results and performances.
Now we discover that a man who (bar Vialli) has done more in my lifetime to destroy my club is being paid to advise the manager.
You're right, there are lots of ex-managers being paid for consultancy work - so let's find someone who is a less contentious choice in the minds of Watford fans.
And for me, this begs one very important question: the manager has been held up by so many happy clappers as a forward-thinking, innovative, ground-breaking manager, who is very much his own man.
So, why do we need to be shelling out £6k to seek the opinions of a manager who is far removed from those qualities?
Perhaps we should go the whole way and get Vinnie Jones in for some training sessions - or perhaps Dave Beasant is available to explain to Poom and Lee the key to whacking the ball 80 yards down the pitch.
The Watford Observer has run a story because it is of interest to the fans. The fact you think is a negative story reflects on the fact that employing Bassett as a consultant is indeed that - a negative.
Why do you think the club didn't say anything themselves?
Posted by: gordon kelly, CONSULTANTSVILLE on 10:55pm Sat 30 Jun 07
as a MNGMNT consltnt i`m unhappy with "harry" offering cut rates! some of you guys need to stop being paranoid & over the top about EVERYTHING! You are distorting the hourly rate through malice/stupidity/ign
orance,etc
If he was NOT seeking other input i would worry!
as a MNGMNT consltnt i`m unhappy with "harry" offering cut rates! some of you guys need to stop being paranoid & over the top about EVERYTHING! You are distorting the hourly rate through malice/stupidity/ign
orance,etc
Fascinating that bassett is employed as a consultant but then why are Watford paying an experienced assistant manager KB. The risable Mr Ashton says they call KB Ledge as he is a legend but are they saying not enough experince to be consulted?
Fascinating that bassett is employed as a consultant but then why are Watford paying an experienced assistant manager KB. The risable Mr Ashton says they call KB Ledge as he is a legend but are they saying not enough experince to be consulted?
Herbie,
thanks for the lecture! You have your opinion I have mine.....ever so sorry for having the temerity to disagree with you again which I am going to.
Read my words correctly and stop your spin.........I haven't 'decided' anything! I am just making a request for balance in the WO's coverage........larg
e coverage given to the Kabba case (a non story) and our alledged failure to sign two forwards that most other websites don't even seem to think we are after versus the virtual non coverage of the Poom signing being the latest example. There are countless others the last 3 years.
Given the sort of response they have got I am not shocked the club is not communicating with the WO......I can only say any 'secrecy' is the complete opposite of the openess I have experienced at club events etc....
And if thinking Aidy did miracles to get us promoted the year before last makes me a 'happy clapper' then thanks for that as well......
Herbie,
thanks for the lecture! You have your opinion I have mine.....ever so sorry for having the temerity to disagree with you again which I am going to.
Read my words correctly and stop your spin.........I haven't 'decided' anything! I am just making a request for balance in the WO's coverage........larg
e coverage given to the Kabba case (a non story) and our alledged failure to sign two forwards that most other websites don't even seem to think we are after versus the virtual non coverage of the Poom signing being the latest example. There are countless others the last 3 years.
Given the sort of response they have got I am not shocked the club is not communicating with the WO......I can only say any 'secrecy' is the complete opposite of the openess I have experienced at club events etc....
And if thinking Aidy did miracles to get us promoted the year before last makes me a 'happy clapper' then thanks for that as well......
Jack
I love the debate, and please, keep it coming. That is what life is all about - two differing points of view held between two adults who can have a reasoned debate and, most possibly, agree to disagree at the end of the day.
And that is exactly what Watford don't want. They don't want debate. They don't want to hear other viewpoints. And they msot certainly don't want (or expect) anyone to disagree with them.
Watford FC has changed out of all recognition in the last three years. There has been progress - but it has come at a hefty price.
Watford isn't a friendly club anymore. They don't really value the fans - other than the hard-earned cash they part with. Their communication with us is appalling.
Take this bassett story. Put aside whether we think it's right or wrong - why didn't they tell us? If it's a secret, why is it a secret? perhaps, as another poster points out, we are already paying one former manager with years of experience a full-time wage (Burkinshaw) so why are we paying another one?
You may have experienced openness at club events. On the other hand, I have written letters to the chairman and the CEO, neither doing anything more than asking a couple of questions. No response.
Not talking to the Watford Observer will not help the paper - but is it good for the fans either?
If the club are only going to talk to us through the programme and website, then we are only going to get more of their unbalanced, rose-tinted view of life.
How can the paper present both sides of the story if the club won't give their side?
If the club decides to stop communicating with evert paper that writes stories based on rumours or reports something it doesn't like, we'll be lucky to get to Christmas before they aren't talking to anyone.
I go back to my original point Jack - you and I are having debate and we appear to disagree. But if I now refuse to talk to you, does thta me more right than you or better than you?
Nope, it just makes me look stupid.
As for thinking the manager did a great job in getting us promoted, I agree.
But how long can he continue to trade on that success?
We may do well this season - if we don't, how many months of mid-table life in the Championship do we take before we are allowed to question him?
I can see where you're coming from Jack, but with the club not talking to the paper, they have to write something.
I am sure many fans are interested to know the club has been paying Bassett. Personally I can't see many positives in it (especially bearing in mind the Burkinshaw point), so I can see why the WO story is painted with a negative tone.
However, if you and others find it positive, that's a viewpoint you are perfectly entitled to.
The fact remians we are both interested in the story - but we wouldn't have known if we had waited for the club to tell us.
Makes me wonder what else they're not telling us!
Jack
I love the debate, and please, keep it coming. That is what life is all about - two differing points of view held between two adults who can have a reasoned debate and, most possibly, agree to disagree at the end of the day.
And that is exactly what Watford don't want. They don't want debate. They don't want to hear other viewpoints. And they msot certainly don't want (or expect) anyone to disagree with them.
Watford FC has changed out of all recognition in the last three years. There has been progress - but it has come at a hefty price.
Watford isn't a friendly club anymore. They don't really value the fans - other than the hard-earned cash they part with. Their communication with us is appalling.
Take this bassett story. Put aside whether we think it's right or wrong - why didn't they tell us? If it's a secret, why is it a secret? perhaps, as another poster points out, we are already paying one former manager with years of experience a full-time wage (Burkinshaw) so why are we paying another one?
You may have experienced openness at club events. On the other hand, I have written letters to the chairman and the CEO, neither doing anything more than asking a couple of questions. No response.
Not talking to the Watford Observer will not help the paper - but is it good for the fans either?
If the club are only going to talk to us through the programme and website, then we are only going to get more of their unbalanced, rose-tinted view of life.
How can the paper present both sides of the story if the club won't give their side?
If the club decides to stop communicating with evert paper that writes stories based on rumours or reports something it doesn't like, we'll be lucky to get to Christmas before they aren't talking to anyone.
I go back to my original point Jack - you and I are having debate and we appear to disagree. But if I now refuse to talk to you, does thta me more right than you or better than you?
Nope, it just makes me look stupid.
As for thinking the manager did a great job in getting us promoted, I agree.
But how long can he continue to trade on that success?
We may do well this season - if we don't, how many months of mid-table life in the Championship do we take before we are allowed to question him?
I can see where you're coming from Jack, but with the club not talking to the paper, they have to write something.
I am sure many fans are interested to know the club has been paying Bassett. Personally I can't see many positives in it (especially bearing in mind the Burkinshaw point), so I can see why the WO story is painted with a negative tone.
However, if you and others find it positive, that's a viewpoint you are perfectly entitled to.
The fact remians we are both interested in the story - but we wouldn't have known if we had waited for the club to tell us.
Is Herbie the club's pet poodle? As for the balanced coverage, if the club doesnt talk to the paper then they have to write the stories the club obviously prefer to hide. As for non coverage of the keeper signing, it was reported and he was interviewed. End of story.
Is Herbie the club's pet poodle? As for the balanced coverage, if the club doesnt talk to the paper then they have to write the stories the club obviously prefer to hide. As for non coverage of the keeper signing, it was reported and he was interviewed. End of story.
Herbie - fair play, we will agree to disagree. I do also see where you are coming from and agree with much of it but, like I said, I have always personally found the people at Watford really open including recently and it takes two to tango........
Boris - I am guessing you are talking about me rather than Herbie but you struggle with names so I won't get offended by that. I guess the concept of 'why that is the case' might be beyond you.
Was hoping I could say 'end of story' as well to make my point look really hard and conclusive - sadly I guess as a 'poodle' I can't because I am not as big and tough or self-righteous as you.
Oh well I will just have to give up then.....
Herbie - fair play, we will agree to disagree. I do also see where you are coming from and agree with much of it but, like I said, I have always personally found the people at Watford really open including recently and it takes two to tango........
Boris - I am guessing you are talking about me rather than Herbie but you struggle with names so I won't get offended by that. I guess the concept of 'why that is the case' might be beyond you.
Was hoping I could say 'end of story' as well to make my point look really hard and conclusive - sadly I guess as a 'poodle' I can't because I am not as big and tough or self-righteous as you.
Jack - very refreshing to have debated with you!
I think one thing we can hopefully agree on is that the club do need to look at their channels of communication. While you may well have found them open with you in person, that level of contact is something few fans can experience for themselves.
The club has had periods of non contact with the paper before (I remember the Vialli era) but such a stance always ends at some point.
The paper will continue to cover the club, and if the club suits continue with their 'vow of silence', the only people I can really see being affected are the fans.
I think we deserve better than to be the victims of the club's stance with the local paper.
Jack - very refreshing to have debated with you!
I think one thing we can hopefully agree on is that the club do need to look at their channels of communication. While you may well have found them open with you in person, that level of contact is something few fans can experience for themselves.
The club has had periods of non contact with the paper before (I remember the Vialli era) but such a stance always ends at some point.
The paper will continue to cover the club, and if the club suits continue with their 'vow of silence', the only people I can really see being affected are the fans.
I think we deserve better than to be the victims of the club's stance with the local paper.
I agree with much of these comments above. Bassett is not fit to lace the shoes of an average football fan, and less so for a Watford fan in light of what he did to us. I am becoming a little disillusioned with the "visionary" label applied to much of what is going on now. Much of it may be useful, but when there does bnot appear to the outside to be a definitive strategy to the tacticcal elements being assembled, then questions will get asked. It would be more useful if the WO (for example) did this rather than populate two thirds of a worthwhile news story with stats of DB's "achievements". Likewise stories of Clarke Carlisle going to Plymouth because he worked with Holloway a while back. On that basis..............H
o Hum. A bit more structure rather than an assemblage of pieces would be a good thing to see.
I agree with much of these comments above. Bassett is not fit to lace the shoes of an average football fan, and less so for a Watford fan in light of what he did to us. I am becoming a little disillusioned with the "visionary" label applied to much of what is going on now. Much of it may be useful, but when there does bnot appear to the outside to be a definitive strategy to the tacticcal elements being assembled, then questions will get asked. It would be more useful if the WO (for example) did this rather than populate two thirds of a worthwhile news story with stats of DB's "achievements". Likewise stories of Clarke Carlisle going to Plymouth because he worked with Holloway a while back. On that basis..............H
o Hum. A bit more structure rather than an assemblage of pieces would be a good thing to see.
Putting aside the role of Observer so eloquently discussed above and focusing on the employment of Basset, doesn't AB have the right to employee who he wants? I always find it amusing that football fans consider themselves more knowledgeable on the beautiful game than those who have spent their lives working in the industry. It is one thing to highlight the ludicrous decision to sell Kevin Richardson or purchase of Ramon Vega but quite another to suggest that your average football fan could do a better overall job. That is not to say we should bow to those more knowledgeable or experienced than ourselves but lets keep a sense of perspective.
Putting aside the role of Observer so eloquently discussed above and focusing on the employment of Basset, doesn't AB have the right to employee who he wants? I always find it amusing that football fans consider themselves more knowledgeable on the beautiful game than those who have spent their lives working in the industry. It is one thing to highlight the ludicrous decision to sell Kevin Richardson or purchase of Ramon Vega but quite another to suggest that your average football fan could do a better overall job. That is not to say we should bow to those more knowledgeable or experienced than ourselves but lets keep a sense of perspective.
Jonathan - it costs me about £20 a year to buy the WO. I only get about one game at Vicarage Road for that. I think we are getting a better return for our investment in the paper than the club right now.
And I would ask you this question - if the club will not supply the paper with anything, what other methods of reporting do you suggest?
DW - I wouldn't claim to be an authority on coaching, tactics or anything else. However, I do believe I have a stake in Watford FC (having paid to support them home and away for 30 years). So, I feel I have every right to be critical of, and question, the sense, value for money and thought behind paying £1,500 a week for an ex-manager to be 'consulted'. Especially as we have another ex-manager with even more experience on a full-time salary probably sitting in the same office as the manager.
If Bassett is a good friend of the manager's, as the club suggested in last weeks' paper, why does he feel the need to charge the club such a large sum for his wisdom? The club are trying to make us believe this was an ad-hoc arrangement with Bassett merely asked for a bit of advice. As they have made no attempt to deny the fact he was being paid, that would suggest to an outsider that this was more than some informal arrangement.
Putting personalities aside, as a fan, are you not a little concerned that we might have paid as much as £70,000 for advice from an out of work manager - and the club wanted to keep it a secret?
What else are they paying for and not telling us about?
The Watford Observer has merely brought to the surface something that many fans will have a strong opinion on.
Perhaps the club are doing themselves more harm than good by not talking to the paper.
If they were more forthcoming the WO wouldn't need to unearth such stories - and we fans might also have a better idea of what is going on at OUR club.
Jonathan - it costs me about £20 a year to buy the WO. I only get about one game at Vicarage Road for that. I think we are getting a better return for our investment in the paper than the club right now.
And I would ask you this question - if the club will not supply the paper with anything, what other methods of reporting do you suggest?
DW - I wouldn't claim to be an authority on coaching, tactics or anything else. However, I do believe I have a stake in Watford FC (having paid to support them home and away for 30 years). So, I feel I have every right to be critical of, and question, the sense, value for money and thought behind paying £1,500 a week for an ex-manager to be 'consulted'. Especially as we have another ex-manager with even more experience on a full-time salary probably sitting in the same office as the manager.
If Bassett is a good friend of the manager's, as the club suggested in last weeks' paper, why does he feel the need to charge the club such a large sum for his wisdom? The club are trying to make us believe this was an ad-hoc arrangement with Bassett merely asked for a bit of advice. As they have made no attempt to deny the fact he was being paid, that would suggest to an outsider that this was more than some informal arrangement.
Putting personalities aside, as a fan, are you not a little concerned that we might have paid as much as £70,000 for advice from an out of work manager - and the club wanted to keep it a secret?
What else are they paying for and not telling us about?
The Watford Observer has merely brought to the surface something that many fans will have a strong opinion on.
Perhaps the club are doing themselves more harm than good by not talking to the paper.
If they were more forthcoming the WO wouldn't need to unearth such stories - and we fans might also have a better idea of what is going on at OUR club.
The reason Watord FC are reluctant to speak to the Watford Observer is surely because of the recent sniping, factually incorrect reporting and third-rate tabloid-style journalism from Kevin Affleck. It is hardly surprising Aidy is not massively keen to share his thoughts with a man who seems to have a personal vendetta against him. There is only one winner in this battle and it's certainly not a very average journalist who should probably go back to reporting on sunday league football.
The reason Watord FC are reluctant to speak to the Watford Observer is surely because of the recent sniping, factually incorrect reporting and third-rate tabloid-style journalism from Kevin Affleck. It is hardly surprising Aidy is not massively keen to share his thoughts with a man who seems to have a personal vendetta against him. There is only one winner in this battle and it's certainly not a very average journalist who should probably go back to reporting on sunday league football.
Posted by: gordon kelly, RELEVANT EXPERIENCE on 9:19am Tue 3 Jul 07
I think that DW puts it well-Herbie & I would probably not agree on how many days there are in a week! ( he thinks that the devils behind WFC have a hidden,secret agenda that they spend all day,every day building on)
I have made my points on the difference between Line Management & consultants in detail under other topic headings on this site,and as a consultant I can confirm that ALL organisations use such people particularly to give an independent view.the points re £70k,etc appear not to based on fact-a running rate cannot be trated as annually or hourly unless it is effectively full time-Herbie & the rest of us have every right to disagree but why the constant cynicism-if you cannot see that these are the good times when you take an overall view of our history then I despair.
i generally support the management of the club but have expressed reservations about some issues & would accept that the "mood & tone" of things could be improved but people such as Herbie appear only to see the downside of every issue-which you will always find if you look hard enough!
Affleck does worry me-he does not seem to have as good sources as you would expect and some of his aqrticles are too silly for words.He certainly does not see the matches that I do ( i had no problem with match reports from Olly or Matthews)
I think that DW puts it well-Herbie & I would probably not agree on how many days there are in a week! ( he thinks that the devils behind WFC have a hidden,secret agenda that they spend all day,every day building on)
I have made my points on the difference between Line Management & consultants in detail under other topic headings on this site,and as a consultant I can confirm that ALL organisations use such people particularly to give an independent view.the points re £70k,etc appear not to based on fact-a running rate cannot be trated as annually or hourly unless it is effectively full time-Herbie & the rest of us have every right to disagree but why the constant cynicism-if you cannot see that these are the good times when you take an overall view of our history then I despair.
i generally support the management of the club but have expressed reservations about some issues & would accept that the "mood & tone" of things could be improved but people such as Herbie appear only to see the downside of every issue-which you will always find if you look hard enough!
Affleck does worry me-he does not seem to have as good sources as you would expect and some of his aqrticles are too silly for words.He certainly does not see the matches that I do ( i had no problem with match reports from Olly or Matthews)
You couldn't make this up!
Employing someone whose recent record is abject, to stop us from being relegated.
Apart from his dreadful record with us, why would Aidy look to him for advice?
I think this seriously brings to mind that whether Aidy is capable of doing the job. Surely his judgement has to be questioned?
We were always told that Aidy "was his own man".
Obviously, Aidy does not believe he has the methods or management skills to motivate the team he has assembled.And we payed for this "advice". Bassett could not have believed that he was to be payed for his input. We are being made to look like mugs.
SACK AIDY!.
You couldn't make this up!
Employing someone whose recent record is abject, to stop us from being relegated.
Apart from his dreadful record with us, why would Aidy look to him for advice?
I think this seriously brings to mind that whether Aidy is capable of doing the job. Surely his judgement has to be questioned?
We were always told that Aidy "was his own man".
Obviously, Aidy does not believe he has the methods or management skills to motivate the team he has assembled.And we payed for this "advice". Bassett could not have believed that he was to be payed for his input. We are being made to look like mugs.
SACK AIDY!.
Posted by: Jonathan, Borehamwood on 11:33am Tue 3 Jul 07
Herbie, like you considerably more of my money goes into the coffers of the football club than those of the paper, frankly that is irrelevant.
I expect basic journalisitic integrity from any newspaper I read regardless of how much I may pay for it, or even if it's free.
The fact that the football club may no longer be spoon-feeding the paper stories is irrelevant.
It doesn't excuse the fact that the match reports no longer tell you what happened on the pitch and are just weekly instalments in Kevin Affleck thesis on why Aidy was doing a bad job.
When reporting the level of season ticket renewals this summer, the paper seemed to devote most of the story to an irrelevant comparison with renewals at Charlton Athletic and Sheffield United, which were unsurprisingly higher as they're bigger clubs.
Herbie, like you considerably more of my money goes into the coffers of the football club than those of the paper, frankly that is irrelevant.
I expect basic journalisitic integrity from any newspaper I read regardless of how much I may pay for it, or even if it's free.
The fact that the football club may no longer be spoon-feeding the paper stories is irrelevant.
It doesn't excuse the fact that the match reports no longer tell you what happened on the pitch and are just weekly instalments in Kevin Affleck thesis on why Aidy was doing a bad job.
When reporting the level of season ticket renewals this summer, the paper seemed to devote most of the story to an irrelevant comparison with renewals at Charlton Athletic and Sheffield United, which were unsurprisingly higher as they're bigger clubs.
Posted by: gordon kelly, STUNNED DISBELIEF! on 1:02pm Tue 3 Jul 07
CHRIS-are you on medication? sack a mngr who has just signed an improved 3 yr deal? Clearly you struggle with concepts re consultants/mngmnmt/
contracts/business,e
tc.
Taking advice is normal biz mngmnt practice-you are suggesting that it implies a lack of skill/knowlegde/conf
idence,etc-so why does any tiop company (such as banks) who have in house legal teams still use expensive law firms/ or Financial directors in companies still use external ACCOUNTANCY practices? You are clearly either not very experienced or you have some other issue because you make no sense at all.
CHRIS-are you on medication? sack a mngr who has just signed an improved 3 yr deal? Clearly you struggle with concepts re consultants/mngmnmt/
contracts/business,e
tc.
Taking advice is normal biz mngmnt practice-you are suggesting that it implies a lack of skill/knowlegde/conf
idence,etc-so why does any tiop company (such as banks) who have in house legal teams still use expensive law firms/ or Financial directors in companies still use external ACCOUNTANCY practices? You are clearly either not very experienced or you have some other issue because you make no sense at all.
Jonathan
It seems to me what you are saying is that the paper should run positive stories or reports that reflect Watford in a good light.
That's fine - if the stories are there.
I think a comparison of season ticket renewals at the three relegated clubs is very relevant. After all, if Charlton have sold 20,000 season tickets in a stadium that holds 27,000, we know they have sold 75% of the available seats. That percentage means we can draw a fair comparison with Watford, who might have fewer fans, but also have fewer seats.
I have been to Charlton's website, and the fact they have such good numbers is probably due to the offer they have made (buy a ST for 07/08, and if they go up, you get a free ST for 08/09). Again, that shows what can be done with creative thinking and allows us to consider and compare what a similarly relegated club has done to maintain ST sales.
As for match reports, I really don't rely on the WO for minute-by-minute, blow-by-blow reports of games. I can get those from the internet, TV or daily papers.
Therefore, I am looking for more analysis, which is what the WO and Kevin Affleck have aimed for.
Analysing last season's games can't have been easy - there weren't too many positives to be taken from lots of defeats and some very neanderthal football.
It all comes back to my original point - you can only write about positive things if they are there to be written about.
The club may be doing lots of positive things right now - but if they choose not to tell the WO, whose fault is that?
And in my opinion, giving news stories to the local paper is not spoon-feeding: I would call it honest and important communication with the target audience in their heartland.
Jonathan
It seems to me what you are saying is that the paper should run positive stories or reports that reflect Watford in a good light.
That's fine - if the stories are there.
I think a comparison of season ticket renewals at the three relegated clubs is very relevant. After all, if Charlton have sold 20,000 season tickets in a stadium that holds 27,000, we know they have sold 75% of the available seats. That percentage means we can draw a fair comparison with Watford, who might have fewer fans, but also have fewer seats.
I have been to Charlton's website, and the fact they have such good numbers is probably due to the offer they have made (buy a ST for 07/08, and if they go up, you get a free ST for 08/09). Again, that shows what can be done with creative thinking and allows us to consider and compare what a similarly relegated club has done to maintain ST sales.
As for match reports, I really don't rely on the WO for minute-by-minute, blow-by-blow reports of games. I can get those from the internet, TV or daily papers.
Therefore, I am looking for more analysis, which is what the WO and Kevin Affleck have aimed for.
Analysing last season's games can't have been easy - there weren't too many positives to be taken from lots of defeats and some very neanderthal football.
It all comes back to my original point - you can only write about positive things if they are there to be written about.
The club may be doing lots of positive things right now - but if they choose not to tell the WO, whose fault is that?
And in my opinion, giving news stories to the local paper is not spoon-feeding: I would call it honest and important communication with the target audience in their heartland.
Pete
If you're going to start hurling personal abuse at Kevin Affleck, how about citing some examples?
Was the Bassett story made up? Was the Russos story made up? Was the Chris Cummins story made up?
Perhaps the WO adjusted the league table to make it look worse than it really was?!
And did Kevin Affleck pick the team each week, or fail to sign anyone of anyone substance in January? Was it Kevin Affleck who said we were looking at establishing ourselves in the top half with one eye on Europe? Was it Kevin Affleck who kept telling us we wouldn't go down?
A personal vendetta? Ridiculous.
What we have is manager, and other senior figures at the club, who don't aceept criticism, who won't hear a counter argument, who won't consider a second opinion and who think they can do and say exactly as they please.
Unless things change on the pitch, it could be the manager who is going back to working at a lower level.
Pete
If you're going to start hurling personal abuse at Kevin Affleck, how about citing some examples?
Was the Bassett story made up? Was the Russos story made up? Was the Chris Cummins story made up?
Perhaps the WO adjusted the league table to make it look worse than it really was?!
And did Kevin Affleck pick the team each week, or fail to sign anyone of anyone substance in January? Was it Kevin Affleck who said we were looking at establishing ourselves in the top half with one eye on Europe? Was it Kevin Affleck who kept telling us we wouldn't go down?
A personal vendetta? Ridiculous.
What we have is manager, and other senior figures at the club, who don't aceept criticism, who won't hear a counter argument, who won't consider a second opinion and who think they can do and say exactly as they please.
Unless things change on the pitch, it could be the manager who is going back to working at a lower level.
Posted by: gordon kelly, SACK EM ALL! on 1:39pm Tue 3 Jul 07
AIDY & DAVIES FIRED!
Billy Davies signed a new contract @ Derby yesterday & has apptntd CRAIG BROWN ( 1 club in England-fired from it (PNE)) as FOOTBALL CONSULTANT -Herbie ,Chris ,etc -you are quite right this proves that Davies like AB has no self-belief & must go!
I understand in the light of your brilliant analysis the CEO`s of all FTSE100 companies are resigning as they all use consultants & all other c`hip teams are giving away free tickets!
Charl;ton HAVE to repay their fans ( who in many cases deserve what has happened0 they have lots of people like you-They increasingly moaned at Curbs for not getting theim into Europe ( every `phone in on saturdays) until he got fed up-the board offered Davies the job & then gave it to Dowie-a totally self -inflicted wound! Charlton have had yrs of TV money + sales of Bent-the board Must get fans back on side as relegation was caused by Weak chmn listenuing to malcontent fans & then panicking.
AIDY & DAVIES FIRED!
Billy Davies signed a new contract @ Derby yesterday & has apptntd CRAIG BROWN ( 1 club in England-fired from it (PNE)) as FOOTBALL CONSULTANT -Herbie ,Chris ,etc -you are quite right this proves that Davies like AB has no self-belief & must go!
I understand in the light of your brilliant analysis the CEO`s of all FTSE100 companies are resigning as they all use consultants & all other c`hip teams are giving away free tickets!
Charl;ton HAVE to repay their fans ( who in many cases deserve what has happened0 they have lots of people like you-They increasingly moaned at Curbs for not getting theim into Europe ( every `phone in on saturdays) until he got fed up-the board offered Davies the job & then gave it to Dowie-a totally self -inflicted wound! Charlton have had yrs of TV money + sales of Bent-the board Must get fans back on side as relegation was caused by Weak chmn listenuing to malcontent fans & then panicking.
Posted by: Jonathan, Borehamwood on 2:22pm Tue 3 Jul 07
Herbie, I'm not saying that "the paper should run positive stories or reports that reflect Watford in a good light."
They should accurately report the news without putting any slant on it, negative or positive.
The story itself may cast the club in a particular light, not the manner in which it is reported.
The success or otherwise of season ticket sales should be judged against the size of the fan-base, not of the stadium.
The catchment area for Charlton is big enough that their programme for our game their reported their plans to increase their capacity to 40,000. Maybe their season ticket sales should be compared to that figure.
One could interpret from their offer to their fans that they were so concerned about their fickleness that they had to offer the incentive of free Premiership season tickets for the next season.
And despite all those fans renewing their season tickets and the benefit of considerably more years of Premiership TV money than we've had, they still had to axe their ladies team to save money.
"Analysing last season's games can't have been easy" - Is that their excuse for what they produced?
I don't remember the coverage being so poor in the previous Premiership season, when we played a poorer standard of football overall than we did last season.
"And in my opinion, giving news stories to the local paper is not spoon-feeding: I would call it honest and important communication with the target audience in their heartland." If the club want to communicate with its target audience, all it needs to do is put the information on their web-site and they will more effectively reach a greater proportion of their fans than the paper ever can.
Tommy, you ask if the Russos story was made up.
If it had been accurately reported, would the paper have needed to issue an apology and pay damages?
Herbie, I'm not saying that "the paper should run positive stories or reports that reflect Watford in a good light."
They should accurately report the news without putting any slant on it, negative or positive.
The story itself may cast the club in a particular light, not the manner in which it is reported.
The success or otherwise of season ticket sales should be judged against the size of the fan-base, not of the stadium.
The catchment area for Charlton is big enough that their programme for our game their reported their plans to increase their capacity to 40,000. Maybe their season ticket sales should be compared to that figure.
One could interpret from their offer to their fans that they were so concerned about their fickleness that they had to offer the incentive of free Premiership season tickets for the next season.
And despite all those fans renewing their season tickets and the benefit of considerably more years of Premiership TV money than we've had, they still had to axe their ladies team to save money.
"Analysing last season's games can't have been easy" - Is that their excuse for what they produced?
I don't remember the coverage being so poor in the previous Premiership season, when we played a poorer standard of football overall than we did last season.
"And in my opinion, giving news stories to the local paper is not spoon-feeding: I would call it honest and important communication with the target audience in their heartland." If the club want to communicate with its target audience, all it needs to do is put the information on their web-site and they will more effectively reach a greater proportion of their fans than the paper ever can.
Tommy, you ask if the Russos story was made up.
If it had been accurately reported, would the paper have needed to issue an apology and pay damages?
Gordon, I do not struggle re consultants.
But what I cannot understand is why we had employ "Harry" Bassett.
Of all the people to help us why we do pick a man who is so hated by ALL the supporters.
Why do we have KB on our books, then?
I have been saying for months that AB should have been sacked.
I think that is why the Russo's have been ousted. These were the people who bailed the club out.
Gordon, I do not struggle re consultants.
But what I cannot understand is why we had employ "Harry" Bassett.
Of all the people to help us why we do pick a man who is so hated by ALL the supporters.
Why do we have KB on our books, then?
I have been saying for months that AB should have been sacked.
I think that is why the Russo's have been ousted. These were the people who bailed the club out.
Posted by: gordonkelly, BAFFLED on 4:34pm Tue 3 Jul 07
Chris
you contradict yourself in virtually every paragraph-i don`t HATE Bassett-i hate child molesters,terrorists
-get some perspective-i am at LEAST as much aupporter as you,so don`t speak for me!
You cannot seperate issues such as assistant MNGR ( with consultants -you claim to u`std but show that you don`plc`s have Financial directors so why do they use external Accountancy firms/consultants etc? I cannot put this stuff any simpler!
Chris
you contradict yourself in virtually every paragraph-i don`t HATE Bassett-i hate child molesters,terrorists
-get some perspective-i am at LEAST as much aupporter as you,so don`t speak for me!
You cannot seperate issues such as assistant MNGR ( with consultants -you claim to u`std but show that you don`plc`s have Financial directors so why do they use external Accountancy firms/consultants etc? I cannot put this stuff any simpler!
The anti-WO reporter sentiments among these comments are laughable. Granted Affleck can be a bit harsh in his match reports – for example his Doyley-bashing probably didn't help the player's confidence much.
But as far as I can tell he has always tried to maintain an impartial view on matters, rather than toadying to the club. I'm sure he could make his own job much easier by just writing what the manager, etc want to read.
But I personally don't always want to hear the latest Aidy spin. The stories he has come up with are obviously worth reporting or they wouldn't attract so much debate in these pages
The anti-WO reporter sentiments among these comments are laughable. Granted Affleck can be a bit harsh in his match reports – for example his Doyley-bashing probably didn't help the player's confidence much.
But as far as I can tell he has always tried to maintain an impartial view on matters, rather than toadying to the club. I'm sure he could make his own job much easier by just writing what the manager, etc want to read.
But I personally don't always want to hear the latest Aidy spin. The stories he has come up with are obviously worth reporting or they wouldn't attract so much debate in these pages
Posted by: gordon kelly, TYPO HELL on 4:42pm Tue 3 Jul 07
APOLOGIES FOR ERRORS ON MY LAST BLAST!
Chris the Russos did NOT bail us out-this has been accepted as part of WO climbdown as FACT,so don`t peddle such rubbish.
Muzzy-if you believe what you write then why is this comment column titled BASSETT BOMBSHELL? it is a very minor point presented stupidly to get people who cannot think to react adversely.
APOLOGIES FOR ERRORS ON MY LAST BLAST!
Chris the Russos did NOT bail us out-this has been accepted as part of WO climbdown as FACT,so don`t peddle such rubbish.
Muzzy-if you believe what you write then why is this comment column titled BASSETT BOMBSHELL? it is a very minor point presented stupidly to get people who cannot think to react adversely.
Gordon, haven't the Russo's got approx £9m of shares?
I presume all this will have to repaid to them?
Perhaps Bassett was not hated by fans, but he has been much maligned by all the Watford fans that I know.
A total disaster. But I think you concur with his appointment, and would gladly see him back there next season.
Gordon, haven't the Russo's got approx £9m of shares?
I presume all this will have to repaid to them?
Perhaps Bassett was not hated by fans, but he has been much maligned by all the Watford fans that I know.
A total disaster. But I think you concur with his appointment, and would gladly see him back there next season.
Posted by: Jonathan, Borehamwood on 5:47pm Tue 3 Jul 07
Chris - The fact that the Russos own a significant chunk of shares gives them a certain say in the running of the club, for example being able to call an EGM, but having £9m of shares doesn't mean the club has to repay them £9m, although I think they may still have a loan outstanding to the club.
If anything, having such a large amount of money invested in the club means that if they want to see a return on their investment it would be against their interests to do anything to imperil the club's financial stability.
Chris - The fact that the Russos own a significant chunk of shares gives them a certain say in the running of the club, for example being able to call an EGM, but having £9m of shares doesn't mean the club has to repay them £9m, although I think they may still have a loan outstanding to the club.
If anything, having such a large amount of money invested in the club means that if they want to see a return on their investment it would be against their interests to do anything to imperil the club's financial stability.
Posted by: gordon kelly, HAVING A BRAIN on 6:11pm Tue 3 Jul 07
Chris
how dumb are you?
shareholding & loans were AFTER GS saved club (part of WO apology for getting it as wrong as you) Who says I want him back-GROW UP! This is childish when you lose the key points you make comments about rubbish-I already said to keep AB so how can you be so ridiculous?
However at the time I knew "harry" quite well & he thought he was going to Villa or Man city-only when GT went for the villa job ( and i know ALL the detail as GT,Harry,Bertie Mee & Eddie Plumley ALL individually told me the story)did Elton go for "harry" so by the time I knew on Monday he was appointed I never had time to think about it as GT only left same day.Incidentally if like "harry" you came home from connentating on Cup Final to Find Elton & Eddie plumley sitting in your house wouldn`t you have taken the Wfd job? They were all watching the Final @john reid`s house (round corner from Bassett`s) & listening to harry commentate they decided he was the guy!
Although Eddie & I quickly thought it was wrong guy we ALL thought he was a good choice at first-INCLUDING MAJORITY OF FANS. I actually use it on M<NGMNT course I run to show diff between getting promoted in a biz to going in at a senior level without taking time ti undstnd it. Harry knows he screwed up but AFFLECK is wroing again-he was NOT SACKED1 he actuually resigned fairly early because he knew he could not turn it around at that point but thought someone new may be able to-quite decent really-even OLLY thought that keeping him would bring us back up!
Chris
how dumb are you?
shareholding & loans were AFTER GS saved club (part of WO apology for getting it as wrong as you) Who says I want him back-GROW UP! This is childish when you lose the key points you make comments about rubbish-I already said to keep AB so how can you be so ridiculous?
However at the time I knew "harry" quite well & he thought he was going to Villa or Man city-only when GT went for the villa job ( and i know ALL the detail as GT,Harry,Bertie Mee & Eddie Plumley ALL individually told me the story)did Elton go for "harry" so by the time I knew on Monday he was appointed I never had time to think about it as GT only left same day.Incidentally if like "harry" you came home from connentating on Cup Final to Find Elton & Eddie plumley sitting in your house wouldn`t you have taken the Wfd job? They were all watching the Final @john reid`s house (round corner from Bassett`s) & listening to harry commentate they decided he was the guy!
Although Eddie & I quickly thought it was wrong guy we ALL thought he was a good choice at first-INCLUDING MAJORITY OF FANS. I actually use it on M<NGMNT course I run to show diff between getting promoted in a biz to going in at a senior level without taking time ti undstnd it. Harry knows he screwed up but AFFLECK is wroing again-he was NOT SACKED1 he actuually resigned fairly early because he knew he could not turn it around at that point but thought someone new may be able to-quite decent really-even OLLY thought that keeping him would bring us back up!
Jonathan - I can see what you want the WO t do, but I just don't see how it's possible! As you and I are demonstrating, people are very different in their views and beliefs.
If the WO tried to run a totally neutral story, some would find it sycophantic towards the club and others would say it was too harsh.
You interpret the Charlton ST offer as possibly sucking up to fickle fans. I see it as a very positive way of getting a full stadium - and if they go up, the cost of the free ST will be more than covered by the increased TV income etc.
I can't agree with you that we played better football last season than in 99/00. I went home and away in 99/00 and we actually had a go in games. We tried to win games. last season, all too often our main aim was to stop the other team and strangle the life out of the game. Bearable if it leads to a victory, but pretty sturgid stuff when it doesn't.
As for the club website, it's virtually Pravda! The sun is always shining on watfordfc.com, and everyone loves everyone else. They can certainly reach a wider audience but in reality, it is extremely rose-tinted stuff. It's like a restaurant - if I wanted a real review I'd buy a paper, because they're hardly going to criticse their own food!
You cannot rely on the club to report everything, warts and all. Nor should we expect them to - but stopping anyone else doing it either isn't right.
ncidentally, the story that led to the legal proceedings was the one involving Steve Simmons. The initial stories about the Russos and their removal from the board did not lead to any action.
And when the club made that announcement on their website, were you really and honestly happy with the lame, one paragraph explanation?
Jonathan - I can see what you want the WO t do, but I just don't see how it's possible! As you and I are demonstrating, people are very different in their views and beliefs.
If the WO tried to run a totally neutral story, some would find it sycophantic towards the club and others would say it was too harsh.
You interpret the Charlton ST offer as possibly sucking up to fickle fans. I see it as a very positive way of getting a full stadium - and if they go up, the cost of the free ST will be more than covered by the increased TV income etc.
I can't agree with you that we played better football last season than in 99/00. I went home and away in 99/00 and we actually had a go in games. We tried to win games. last season, all too often our main aim was to stop the other team and strangle the life out of the game. Bearable if it leads to a victory, but pretty sturgid stuff when it doesn't.
As for the club website, it's virtually Pravda! The sun is always shining on watfordfc.com, and everyone loves everyone else. They can certainly reach a wider audience but in reality, it is extremely rose-tinted stuff. It's like a restaurant - if I wanted a real review I'd buy a paper, because they're hardly going to criticse their own food!
You cannot rely on the club to report everything, warts and all. Nor should we expect them to - but stopping anyone else doing it either isn't right.
ncidentally, the story that led to the legal proceedings was the one involving Steve Simmons. The initial stories about the Russos and their removal from the board did not lead to any action.
And when the club made that announcement on their website, were you really and honestly happy with the lame, one paragraph explanation?
Posted by: gordon kelly, SOVIET UNION? on 6:43pm Tue 3 Jul 07
COMRADE Herbie
PRAVDA means TRUTH! unusual for you to compliment club!
Legal action was finally triggered by Simmons article but WO did print retraction of "russo rescue " story as part of whole situation as they had got it WRONG
Last season we did NOT set out to stop opposition enough-our downfall was attacking too much otherwise last minute defeats re arsenal/bolton/chels
ea/s utd/newcastle,etc would have been draws-if yo actually SAW those gamers you did not understand what you were watching-I actually think that a defensive approach from the start may have saved us ( just about)
OFF TO THE SALT MINES WITH YOU!
COMRADE Herbie
PRAVDA means TRUTH! unusual for you to compliment club!
Legal action was finally triggered by Simmons article but WO did print retraction of "russo rescue " story as part of whole situation as they had got it WRONG
Last season we did NOT set out to stop opposition enough-our downfall was attacking too much otherwise last minute defeats re arsenal/bolton/chels
ea/s utd/newcastle,etc would have been draws-if yo actually SAW those gamers you did not understand what you were watching-I actually think that a defensive approach from the start may have saved us ( just about)
i find it shocking that Aidy Boothroyd has been using D Bassett as a consultant. I find it shocking that Chris Cummins was sacked apparently over monies due to him. I find it shocking the WO has now run this ridiculous article about a trialist who wasnt happy.
Whats going on - whats happening to the family club !
The football was largely rubbish last season but at least I thought it was solely down to the internal management team.
I wonder if Mr Bassett was a consultant in our promotion year ?
Why was the man not paid on a results basis?
i find it shocking that Aidy Boothroyd has been using D Bassett as a consultant. I find it shocking that Chris Cummins was sacked apparently over monies due to him. I find it shocking the WO has now run this ridiculous article about a trialist who wasnt happy.
Whats going on - whats happening to the family club !
The football was largely rubbish last season but at least I thought it was solely down to the internal management team.
I wonder if Mr Bassett was a consultant in our promotion year ?
Gordon
Are you ever WRONG? (I hate using caps, but it seems you like to do a bit of textual shouting).
You seem to accuse everyone else of being wrong, being stupid, being negative etc
Who made you judge and jury, sir?
Yes, I saw the games Gordon. Just as I saw them for 30-odd seasons before that.
In my opinion, we simply did not try to win games. At times, it was hard to decipher what exactly the game plan was.
One thing that was easy to spot was that Foster was asked to thump the ball as far down field as he could at every opportunity, and the defenders' stock pass was a 60-yard punt.
Now we know where the guidance for those tactics came from.
Like just about every other organisation, the WO has made mistakes.
But it seems to me that Watford FC, and you Gordon, are never wrong. It's just everyone else.
Spot on - Pravda means Truth. Well done.
It was the official mouthpiece of the Communist Party - another organisation which had some forceful tactics for dissentors and doubters.
My use of Pravda was ironic. Maybe it was lost on you.
I don't generally go in for the constant references to management courses, success in business or name-dropping you regularly pepper your posts with.
However, as you seem to know GT so well, perhaps you'd like to let me know how that is so? As I am meeting him for lunch next week, I can check your story.
And please, don't doubt me. That's not name dropping - that's fact.
Gordon
Are you ever WRONG? (I hate using caps, but it seems you like to do a bit of textual shouting).
You seem to accuse everyone else of being wrong, being stupid, being negative etc
Who made you judge and jury, sir?
Yes, I saw the games Gordon. Just as I saw them for 30-odd seasons before that.
In my opinion, we simply did not try to win games. At times, it was hard to decipher what exactly the game plan was.
One thing that was easy to spot was that Foster was asked to thump the ball as far down field as he could at every opportunity, and the defenders' stock pass was a 60-yard punt.
Now we know where the guidance for those tactics came from.
Like just about every other organisation, the WO has made mistakes.
But it seems to me that Watford FC, and you Gordon, are never wrong. It's just everyone else.
Spot on - Pravda means Truth. Well done.
It was the official mouthpiece of the Communist Party - another organisation which had some forceful tactics for dissentors and doubters.
My use of Pravda was ironic. Maybe it was lost on you.
I don't generally go in for the constant references to management courses, success in business or name-dropping you regularly pepper your posts with.
However, as you seem to know GT so well, perhaps you'd like to let me know how that is so? As I am meeting him for lunch next week, I can check your story.
And please, don't doubt me. That's not name dropping - that's fact.
Posted by: gordon kelly, KREMLIN on 9:30pm Tue 3 Jul 07
GREETINGS COMRADE
yes i am sometimes wrong but compared to you very rarely!
You twist what people say (jack ) and make leaps of logic that fail any test of fact.
I dont give a FLYING F*** if you believe me but GT will tell you that when Elton Offered Harry the job GT had noyt even resigned at that point!
GT told me this & more when he was back in 97/98 as GENERAL MNGR & I was dealing with him & Mark Devlin about a potential joint enterprise with my company backing WFC branded training courses.(petchey wouldn`t fund it so it died)
I doubt your motives & intelligence but you feel it`s ok to doubt my integrity-so get lost!
GREETINGS COMRADE
yes i am sometimes wrong but compared to you very rarely!
You twist what people say (jack ) and make leaps of logic that fail any test of fact.
I dont give a FLYING F*** if you believe me but GT will tell you that when Elton Offered Harry the job GT had noyt even resigned at that point!
GT told me this & more when he was back in 97/98 as GENERAL MNGR & I was dealing with him & Mark Devlin about a potential joint enterprise with my company backing WFC branded training courses.(petchey wouldn`t fund it so it died)
I doubt your motives & intelligence but you feel it`s ok to doubt my integrity-so get lost!
Oh Gordon
Why do you have to resort to such anger and unpleasantness at the first sign of someone quizzing you or disagreeing with you?
Please, look back through my posts: I may stand by my views but I have not resorted to the sort of aggressiveness, name-calling or foul language of your last message.
I think also, if you look to the exchange between myself and Jack, we both maintained a level of maturity and merely enjoyed a healthy debate.
You know, Gordon, people are entitled to have an opposing view to yours. And, may I add, those who do are not 'dumb' or 'on medication'.
As someone who has obviously operated at the highest level in the business world, do you not think launching such tirades and using such puerile language is the sort of unnecessary sensationalist provocation you accuse the WO of?
As for telling me to get lost - you don't really mean that Gordon, do you?
You love the banter, you love playing to an audience.
I will ask Graham whether he remembers what you have said here next week. I could also give Mark a call - you see, I was involved at Vicarage Road in professional capacity from 1989 until about three years ago.
One thing I don't understand is why Petchey would have been the person funding your joint venture - when GT returned in 1997 it was as part of the move to oust Petchey and put the club back in the hands of Sir Elton.
That's not you being wrong is it Gordon?
No, thought not . . .
Oh Gordon
Why do you have to resort to such anger and unpleasantness at the first sign of someone quizzing you or disagreeing with you?
Please, look back through my posts: I may stand by my views but I have not resorted to the sort of aggressiveness, name-calling or foul language of your last message.
I think also, if you look to the exchange between myself and Jack, we both maintained a level of maturity and merely enjoyed a healthy debate.
You know, Gordon, people are entitled to have an opposing view to yours. And, may I add, those who do are not 'dumb' or 'on medication'.
As someone who has obviously operated at the highest level in the business world, do you not think launching such tirades and using such puerile language is the sort of unnecessary sensationalist provocation you accuse the WO of?
As for telling me to get lost - you don't really mean that Gordon, do you?
You love the banter, you love playing to an audience.
I will ask Graham whether he remembers what you have said here next week. I could also give Mark a call - you see, I was involved at Vicarage Road in professional capacity from 1989 until about three years ago.
One thing I don't understand is why Petchey would have been the person funding your joint venture - when GT returned in 1997 it was as part of the move to oust Petchey and put the club back in the hands of Sir Elton.
Posted by: gordon kelly, ACCURACY on 10:16pm Tue 3 Jul 07
I think your motives & approach are patronising & offensive -WRONG AGAIN!-GT got ELTON back involved @ end of Jackett`s season "elton is coming home" GT on pitch at end of season-how can you keep on being so very WRONG? please apologise when GT confirms all this (he told elton he was leaving again unless EJ bought JP out)-confusing if you are not very bright is it?
didn`t know you worked there-did you sell me a programme ?
I think your motives & approach are patronising & offensive -WRONG AGAIN!-GT got ELTON back involved @ end of Jackett`s season "elton is coming home" GT on pitch at end of season-how can you keep on being so very WRONG? please apologise when GT confirms all this (he told elton he was leaving again unless EJ bought JP out)-confusing if you are not very bright is it?
didn`t know you worked there-did you sell me a programme ?
Gordon
Why are you being so aggressive and unpleasant?
Surely flying off the handle in the way you appear to be is a sign of weakness?
I can't beleiev the way you are behaving on here is what you pass on to those attending your management courses?
GT returned to the club in February 1996 but failed to stop the team being relegated. KJ was appointed manager for the 96/97 season. At the end of that season, GT became manager again with KJ as coach.
Therefore, GT was manager (not general manager) during the 1997/98 season - and Petchey was certainly not chairman.
Of course, you'll tell me you're still right.
I have to say, I find your consult insult-throwing a tad tiresome.
I have tried to remaint polite but firm throughout - what a shame you have had to continue with the name-calling.
I didn't say I worked for the club - once again, how sad that you felt the need to suggest I was a programme seller. Never mind.
As I said, I didn't claim to work there. I said I was involved in professional capacity with the club that allowed me to get to know GT, Luther, Kenny, Gibbsy, as well as many others behind the scenes.
I also had a similar working relationship with two other Premiership football clubs.
I have, over the last 18 months, pulled away from football.
I am most certainly not a muppet, dumb, not very bright - or any of the other frankly silly names you choose to hurl at me (and at anyone else who who dares to disagree with you on the various areas around this site).
Please Gordon, keep airing your views. Debate is healthy. Conversation is stimulating. Exchanging viewpoints is refreshing and often educational.
Name-calling and ranting is not any of the above.
Gordon
Why are you being so aggressive and unpleasant?
Surely flying off the handle in the way you appear to be is a sign of weakness?
I can't beleiev the way you are behaving on here is what you pass on to those attending your management courses?
GT returned to the club in February 1996 but failed to stop the team being relegated. KJ was appointed manager for the 96/97 season. At the end of that season, GT became manager again with KJ as coach.
Therefore, GT was manager (not general manager) during the 1997/98 season - and Petchey was certainly not chairman.
Of course, you'll tell me you're still right.
I have to say, I find your consult insult-throwing a tad tiresome.
I have tried to remaint polite but firm throughout - what a shame you have had to continue with the name-calling.
I didn't say I worked for the club - once again, how sad that you felt the need to suggest I was a programme seller. Never mind.
As I said, I didn't claim to work there. I said I was involved in professional capacity with the club that allowed me to get to know GT, Luther, Kenny, Gibbsy, as well as many others behind the scenes.
I also had a similar working relationship with two other Premiership football clubs.
I have, over the last 18 months, pulled away from football.
I am most certainly not a muppet, dumb, not very bright - or any of the other frankly silly names you choose to hurl at me (and at anyone else who who dares to disagree with you on the various areas around this site).
Please Gordon, keep airing your views. Debate is healthy. Conversation is stimulating. Exchanging viewpoints is refreshing and often educational.
Posted by: gordon kelly, BEING TALKED DOWN TO on 8:05am Wed 4 Jul 07
it may have been 96/7 rather than 97/8-i didn`t look it up but your original WRONG claim was TOTALLY inaccurate -that GT came back as part of EJ buy out & JP would not have been involved-your correction just makes YOUR original statement even wider of the mark,but I may have got the year a season too late rather than too early-hardly affects my story does it? what does your claim about other clubs have to do with anything? I bought my current house from the Chief Exec of Leics City-does that make me an authority on them? (he`s the guy castigated in Martin o`neills autobiography but still a great guy to buy a house from-)where was I? -oh yes my annoyance is based on your totally destructive views that you try to dress up as considered-you correct contributors other than me on opinion ( i accept i did re your ridiculous "defensive football" claim) but don`t respond to challenges re FACTS-I.E my point re Davies of Derby using consultants,etc.Ever
y challenge sees you shifting direction-it is this intellectual dishonesty that exasperates-I can accept getting a year wrong but you cannot apologise for telling me that I could not have dealt with GT backed by Petchey-when you know that is the case by your own point above.interesting that that you appear NOT to have been involved for the last3 years-is this the cause of your continual destructive moaning?
it may have been 96/7 rather than 97/8-i didn`t look it up but your original WRONG claim was TOTALLY inaccurate -that GT came back as part of EJ buy out & JP would not have been involved-your correction just makes YOUR original statement even wider of the mark,but I may have got the year a season too late rather than too early-hardly affects my story does it? what does your claim about other clubs have to do with anything? I bought my current house from the
Print
Email this
Comment