Second relegation from the Prem - the common denominator

[ZacNaloen]

I'm not really into conspiracy theories, everytime fans have decided the go into accounts it's always been pretty clear where the money has gone. Player Wages.

[glenroyal]

SJM saw the club primarily as a means of moving money around his business empire.

eh?

x2

SJM saw it as an opportunity to invest in Reading (the community) - he just never had bottomless pockets or a penchant for unservicable debts. Cannot understand how a "supporter" can make such cynical accusations about "our" team.

[Waylenstreet]

I cant see how a supporter ( no ad homs from me, no inverted commas ) cant see the obvious.
To return to the OP , the common denominator is clear......SJM.
Lets hope things are going to change.

[ZacNaloen]

The obvious that players and agents are sucking football clubs dry, I can see that clearly, up and down the football pyramid.

[peterroyal76]

It's Nicky Hammond.

We got relegated for under-investing in quality players first time around, ditto this season.

If he had been doing his job properly, he would have been urging AZ/Brian McD to invest in quality or suffer the consequences, based on his own experience.

The fact that it hasn't happened, suggests either:

(a) He's absolutely stupid, so shouldn't be in the job.
(b) He gives advice based on his experiences, but gets completly ignored, so shouldn't be in the job.
(c) He's a evil Teflon man who never accepts responsibility for his mistakes, so shouldn't be in the job.

It's also the fella selling the golden gamble tickets! He was there last time and he's still there now! Golden gamble man out!

[MouldyRoyal]

I cant see how a supporter ( no ad homs from me, no inverted commas ) cant see the obvious.

Please provide some evidence of whatever is obvious. At the moment this is just baseless accusation. Why should we take you seriously?

[glenroyal]

I cant see how a supporter ( no ad homs from me, no inverted commas ) cant see the obvious.
To return to the OP , the common denominator is clear......SJM.
Lets hope things are going to change.

So "ad homs" against Hammond and SJM don't count then ?

The new "team" SJM, Hammond, BMcD and Anton didn't get it right when they had the opportunity to spend - they clearly put too much store on getting Gylfi and Sunzu and paid the price when they were disappointed. Don't see any one of them restricting the spend, just collectively they were were maybe a bit too cautious (with that hindsight). All indications are that all the purchasing decisions were consultative. Maybe should have bid for more than they could afford - on the basis that not all bids would succeed, would be my take.

And anyway SJM's position is part of the change, not a common factor. I think we're just seeing the learning process for Anton. No need to look for scapegoats or conspiracies.

[Waylenstreet]

The obvious that players and agents are sucking football clubs dry, I can see that clearly, up and down the football pyramid.

In general terms you are right. But other teams manage to stay in the premier..a committed owner is more than half the battle.
Not one who who has been quite open for several years about his desire to scrape the club off his shoe.
It brings to mind the old parable about the guy who wanders through the streets shouting " who will buy my stinking fish ? "

[Waylenstreet]

I cant see how a supporter ( no ad homs from me, no inverted commas ) cant see the obvious.

Please provide some evidence of whatever is obvious. At the moment this is just baseless accusation. Why should we take you seriously?

You shouldn't.
You should take a long cold look at the last few years in the history of the club and its financial position.
Its not as though the elephant in the room has only just appeared.

[glenroyal]

The obvious that players and agents are sucking football clubs dry, I can see that clearly, up and down the football pyramid.

In general terms you are right. But other teams manage to stay in the premier..a committed owner is more than half the battle.
Not one who who has been quite open for several years about his desire to scrape the club off his shoe.
It brings to mind the old parable about the guy who wanders through the streets shouting " who will buy my stinking fish ? "

But that is a lousy characterisation of SJM's sale. He was selling a community club built on careful prudent foundations, that he could see he could never afford to fund at these levels himself - would be a more charitable take.

[Waylenstreet]

More charitable ? Certainly.

[MouldyRoyal]

I cant see how a supporter ( no ad homs from me, no inverted commas ) cant see the obvious.

Please provide some evidence of whatever is obvious. At the moment this is just baseless accusation. Why should we take you seriously?

You shouldn't.
You should take a long cold look at the last few years in the history of the club and its financial position.
Its not as though the elephant in the room has only just appeared.

You're still not being specific though are you, merely alluding to vague wrong-doings.

I do look at the accounts each year to be honest. Which sections do you have problems with? Feel free to get technical, I will keep up.

[glenroyal]

So back to the OP, which was about Hammond (not about slandering SJM)

Maybe some truth that Hammond's skills and competence weren't (aren't) up to driving the management team into more opportunities. I suspect as a team (I've already said they were too cautious maybe) - maybe needs more differences of character within the team. I get the feeling (pre Anton sacking Brian) the team was a bit too cosy - a group of similar-minded people, who seemed to genuinely get on. Needed a maverick, a pusher, a risk-taker - like Di Canio or Warnock

And what have we added to that team .... oh right, I see.

I think the biggest accusation you can make against Reading's management is they're a bit boring and risk-averse.

PS
Though continuing this management consulting line - when it was a 3 man team SJM, NH & the Team-Manager, SJM probably appointed NH as a "steady eddy" to counteract an over ambitious manager focussed on the short-term. Having added Anton to the team, with more power and money than himself, he probably expected the ambition and risk-taking to come from Anton. When Anton turned out to be another thoroughly nice and reasonable bloke, we found ourselves with a management team full of thoroughly nice reasonable business-like professional blokes.

The real common factor ?- they're all blokes

[melonhead]

no collars

[ZacNaloen]

So back to the OP, which was about Hammond (not about slandering SJM)

Maybe some truth that Hammond's skills and competence weren't (aren't) up to driving the management team into more opportunities. I suspect as a team (I've already said they were too cautious maybe) - maybe needs more differences of character within the team. I get the feeling (pre Anton sacking Brian) the team was a bit too cosy - a group of similar-minded people, who seemed to genuinely get on. Needed a maverick, a pusher, a risk-taker - like Di Canio or Warnock

And what have we added to that team .... oh right, I see.

I think the biggest accusation you can make against Reading's management is they're a bit boring and risk-averse.

Too many conservatives I'd say.

[glenroyal]

So back to the OP, which was about Hammond (not about slandering SJM)

Maybe some truth that Hammond's skills and competence weren't (aren't) up to driving the management team into more opportunities. I suspect as a team (I've already said they were too cautious maybe) - maybe needs more differences of character within the team. I get the feeling (pre Anton sacking Brian) the team was a bit too cosy - a group of similar-minded people, who seemed to genuinely get on. Needed a maverick, a pusher, a risk-taker - like Di Canio or Warnock

And what have we added to that team .... oh right, I see.

I think the biggest accusation you can make against Reading's management is they're a bit boring and risk-averse.

Too many conservatives I'd say.

Precisely. (See the PS I added to my previous post)

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Isn't Hammond also a common denominator of us getting promoted *TO* the Premier League?

Or is this just another numptie who doesn't understand anything about what Hammond actually does?

[glenroyal]

no collars

Metaphorically speaking yes - but even Mavericks wear collar and tie (and nice suits - DiCanio style, with muddy kneecaps.)

[glenroyal]

Isn't Hammond also a common denominator of us getting promoted *TO* the Premier League?

Or is this just another numptie who doesn't understand anything about what Hammond actually does?

I think the problem is attributing all blame (or credit) to one individual. The problem is the balance of management team skills needed, is maybe different between prudently building from the Championship up, to that needed for a sustained push on maintaining a Premiership place.

[Clyde1998]

Shorey? He's been at the club both times we've gone down