Time for an objective assessment of how the club us being run

[Ernie Eskilsson]

We’re in season six of the five year plan and I think it’s time the FOH produced a considered review of the situation.

 

We started off with Budgement Day which was quite a ruthless cull of players presumably at Levein’s instructions. We then had a fantastic promotion season followed by a one good then one not so good consolidation season in the SPL. During this period Budge was the darling of the fans, our saviour, our Queen of Hearts. She communicated openly, constructively, honestly and regularly with the fans. The FOH was established and set out on an unparalleled journey that has seen us contribute nearly £10m to the cause so far. All was good, we were the envy of many clubs.

 

Since then though things have changed significantly for the worse and not just on the pitch. 

 

We have built a new stand which looks magnificent but has suffered from Design flaws and huge cost overruns. You can’t see the goals from the Gorgie end. The toilets were inappropriately configured causing huge queues.  After all this time the inside is still incomplete. The cost has doubled with the latest estimate at completion around £22m. That Budge’s hibs supporting brother has made any money at all out of this suggests a lack of professional tendering. If he’s made a lot then so much the worse.

 

We’ve apparently spent c£1m on a new state-of-the-art hybrid pitch. Right now it’s a mess and looks no better than the old one which was a disgrace.

 

Our best players have had injury after injury where an initial predicted short term out has turned into a much longer term with several failed attempts to return. This suggests the medical dept hasn’t been good enough. Who do we get to fix it - well the same man that oversaw the setup of the last, crap one of course.

 

Our communications with the fans have become less regular. They carp unnecessarily at our own fans behaviour - we’re not saints but we’re football fans not churchgoers for Christ’s sake. I suspect they’ve also become dishonest. We’ve been told that despite performing poorly we were on the cusp of great things! We’ve been told that Levein would see out this season working with the kids but now he’s on transfers and setting up a new medical team. We’ve been told Budge decided to give Levein the first round of fixtures before making a decision - a fabricated retrospective justification I’m sure. I believe even now she’s angling to keep Levein on in whatever capacity she can. For whatever reason.

 

The playing side is well documented. We’re 5 points adrift. We’ve endured 3 years of countless transfers bringing poor and injured players into the club with few exceptions. We’ve wasted a great crop of youngsters, letting less skilled journeymen populate the 1st team at their expense. We’ve sent them to lower league clubs to ‘better’ their development. We’ve suddenly picked the odd one for the 1st team out of nowhere and then, just as suddenly discarded him. We’ve endured a 2019 that saw the lowest points won and the poorest quality football I can remember.

 

Finally we have a new manager in place and it’s right that we must support him. It’s a worry though as it’s a gamble. We’ve started on a new player cull, Budgement Day 2 if you like. But the way in which some players have (rightly) been let go is disappointing. The fact that some others haven’t been culled yet is even more worrying as is the nature of the rumoured recruitment.

 

i hope that we manage to avoid relegation - that’s the extent of our ambition at the end of the season. Until then we give all our support to the team and keep our fingers crossed.
 

Either way, once the season is over, I think we need a major, objective review of how the club is being run. It just reeks of desperation and a management team that is out of its depth.

[Ethan Hunt]

When is the objective assessment going to take place? 

 

 

[John Gentleman]

25 minutes ago, Ernie Eskilsson said:

Either way, once the season is over, I think we need a major, objective review of how the club is being run. It just reeks of desperation and a management team that is out of its depth.

 

15 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

When is the objective assessment going to take place? 

 

I think, more pertinently, who is going to undertake the suggested review?

[Ethan Hunt]

Just now, John Gentleman said:

 

 

I think, more pertinently, who is going to undertake the suggested review?

It’ll certainly not be the OP. Not a lot of objectivity shown in that post.

[John Gentleman]

2 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

It’ll certainly not be the OP. Not a lot of objectivity shown in that post.

Perhaps, but from a factual perspective I can't see much wrong in the OP's summation of where we're at.

[Ernie Eskilsson]

Not me no. I try to take an objective view but the fact that I think the review is necessary makes it clear that I’m concerned. If you check my posts you’ll see that I’ve been a Budge supporter. I just think that we’ve reached a point where we’re not doing anything very well. Four years ago the press was unanimously favourable about the way the club was being run. Now the only positive is FOH which is why I think they should oversee the review and decide who conducts it.

[Finlay James]

The FOH are fully involved with the club so would not be objective.  It would need to be someone entirely external such as an auditor.

 

You wouldn't like the outcome though, we may have had a few setbacks but as a business, we're very well run.

[Sherbet]

The obvious man to do.the assessment is already in the building

[sam?]

9 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

It’ll certainly not be the OP. Not a lot of objectivity shown in that post.

What part isn’t objective? Most of the points made are factually correct other than the communications with the fans paragraph which Is subjective at worst .

 

The stand, pitch, transfers, injuries, new manager gamble are all factually correct and  ongoing concerns for our club. 
 

I think an independent review is what  would be required to confirm what has went wrong with the points made by the OP, but that isn’t going to happen with a private company that hasn’t done anything other than poor management decisions that would merit an inquiry.

[John Gentleman]

2 minutes ago, Finlay James said:

The FOH are fully involved with the club so would not be objective.  It would need to be someone entirely external such as an auditor.

 

You wouldn't like the outcome though, we may have had a few setbacks but as a business, we're very well run.

The outcome would very much depend on what the terms of reference are. 

[Ernie Eskilsson]

As a business? Some might take the view that the club is currently alienating the fans who, don’t forget, contribute a huge amount of money  to the ‘business’. By the time of the review we might also have been relegated which would definitely not be good for the ‘business’. Our business is football, nothing else. The fact that the current financial position is where it is is down to benefactors and the FOH as much if not more than the clubs management team.

[DH1986]

3 minutes ago, Sherbet said:

The obvious man to do.the assessment is already in the building

[Forza Cuore]

Stendel should not have had to remove Daly. The old guard should have been removed before he was here. 

 

Farce.

[Nookie Bear]

“Shambolically”

[Coco]

Levein's football department is already being dismantled.  The structure, manager, coaches, players, backroom staff like the sports scientist going or gone.  Hopefully all of these changes will be for the better.

 

So far it seems like the untouched area is the underperforming £4m youth setup.  Would think the personnel and structure there will change in time too.

[DH1986]

7 minutes ago, Forza Cuore said:

Stendel should not have had to remove Daly. The old guard should have been removed before he was here. 

 

Farce.

If every coach was removed from their positions prior to Stendel joining.....who was going to take training and pick the team etc for 6 weeks  ?

Edited January 12, 2020 by DH1986

[Finlay James]

16 minutes ago, John Gentleman said:

The outcome would very much depend on what the terms of reference are. 

 

True

[Ethan Hunt]

21 minutes ago, sam? said:

What part isn’t objective? Most of the points made are factually correct other than the communications with the fans paragraph which Is subjective at worst .

 

The stand, pitch, transfers, injuries, new manager gamble are all factually correct and  ongoing concerns for our club. 
 

I think an independent review is what  would be required to confirm what has went wrong with the points made by the OP, but that isn’t going to happen with a private company that hasn’t done anything other than poor management decisions that would merit an inquiry.

To be totally objective you have to have balance. OP concentrated mainly on the negatives, with little acknowledgement of positive aspects.  

 

Too much personal feelings. To be objective you have to put personal feelings to the side and look at things, well objectively, taking all things into consideration, good and bad.

 

While the OP may well be factually correct on a number of things, merely stating facts isn’t necessarily being objective.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Ethan Hunt

[sam?]

5 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

To be totally objective you have to have balance. OP concentrated mainly on the negatives, with little acknowledgement of positive aspects.  

 

Too much personal feelings. To be objective you have to put personal feelings to the side and look at things, well objectively, taking all things into consideration, good and bad.

 

While the OP may well be factually correct on a number of things, merely stating facts isn’t necessarily being objective.

As I said it would require an independent review and that ain’t going to happen.

[John Gentleman]

1 minute ago, sam? said:

As I said it would require an independent review and that ain’t going to happen.

Why not?

[Ethan Hunt]

Just now, sam? said:

As I said it would require an independent review and that ain’t going to happen.

It requires someone to be objective. That person (or people) doesn’t necessarily have to be independent.

 

 

[sam?]

We’ve not done anything wrong to merit an independent inquiry? 
 

4 minutes ago, John Gentleman said:

Why not?

 

[Prof]

3 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

To be totally objective you have to have balance. OP concentrated mainly on the negatives, with little acknowledgement of positive aspects.  

 

Too much personal feelings. To be objective you have to put personal feelings to the side and look at things, well objectively, taking all things into consideration, good and bad.

 

While the OP may well be factually correct on a number of things but stating facts isn’t necessarily being objective.

The OP was a rant which to be fair was probably fuelled by by our league position. Some minor mistakes have been made with the new stand but it’s a credit to the club and any faults should be laid firmly at the designers door. 
I agree about the pitch and I am surprised we aren’t taking further action. The concert didn’t help. So that’s a negative.

levein should have been sacked. He shouldn’t be at the club. That’s also a negative.

Far to many players were given lucrative contracts. Another negative.

on the positive side the club is financially sound. Something we haven’t been for since WM’s time.

going forward the club needs to separate the job of business CEO and football CEO. So basically, and I hate to say this, we need a Ms Dumpster type for the business and a football manager who is in charge of all football related matters.

[kimosavi]

Until Levein is completely removed from this club we will be laughed at, the club will remain a shambles. The guy is now involved in a new medical department FFS. Come the summer Ann will be hoping the dust has settled and she can keep Levein here in some capacity. Meanwhile we are told how bad and amateurish the club is by ex players whilst Levein was in charge 

[John Gentleman]

1 minute ago, sam? said:

We’ve not done anything wrong to merit an independent inquiry? 
 

 

 

Perhaps there's a whole raft of things we could be doing a whole lot better? 

[Ethan Hunt]

4 minutes ago, sam? said:

We’ve not done anything wrong to merit an independent inquiry? 
 

 

No-one is asking for an inquiry. The OP wanted a review. Two different things.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

55 minutes ago, Finlay James said:

The FOH are fully involved with the club so would not be objective.  It would need to be someone entirely external such as an auditor.

 

You wouldn't like the outcome though, we may have had a few setbacks but as a business, we're very well run.

FOH also just bow their heads to Budge

[davemclaren]

2 hours ago, Forza Cuore said:

Stendel should not have had to remove Daly. The old guard should have been removed before he was here. 

 

Farce.

Should they have removed Kirk before he arrived as well?

[Debut 4]

12 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Should they have removed Kirk before he arrived as well?

No, Kirk and Park could’ve taken the first team and all who were directly involved with the first team removed. 

 

Clubs handle it all the time. There could’ve been a temporary shuffle of roles to cope until we appointed a new manager.  

[Forza Cuore]

1 minute ago, Debut 4 said:

No, Kirk and Park could’ve taken the first team and all who were directly involved with the first team removed. 

 

Clubs handle it all the time. There could’ve been a temporary shuffle of roles to cope until we appointed a new manager.  

Thanks for clarifying my early morning moan 👍

[jambogemz]

1 hour ago, kimosavi said:

Until Levein is completely removed from this club we will be laughed at, the club will remain a shambles. The guy is now involved in a new medical department FFS. Come the summer Ann will be hoping the dust has settled and she can keep Levein here in some capacity. Meanwhile we are told how bad and amateurish the club is by ex players whilst Levein was in charge 

Which players called the club amateurish while Levein was in charge?

The only player I recall saying the club was amateurish was Whealen and that was obviously aimed at the nature of his departure....by Daniel. 

[davemclaren]

10 minutes ago, Debut 4 said:

No, Kirk and Park could’ve taken the first team and all who were directly involved with the first team removed. 

 

Clubs handle it all the time. There could’ve been a temporary shuffle of roles to cope until we appointed a new manager.  

Sorry, my point was that Stendel can decide who he wants to keep from the coaching team. Most clubs don't usually sack the whole coaching team when changing manager. Stendel quite quickly removed Daly and  Fox from frontline duties after arriving and, presumably, assessing them. 

[1971fozzy]

The fact ‘he’ is still at the club is a shambles and makes us a joke.

The club was doing great things pre Cathro , since then it’s been nothing short of embarrassing and shambolic. 
the sooner Budge and Levein go (I can only imagine it would have to be together as they are inseparable) then we can move on

[Mikey1874]

Objectively clubs are judged on results. 

 

Results on the park mostly.

 

 

[JohnB]

Bryan Jackson.

[kingantti1874]

Of the park good with some question marks.. On the park massive failure at all levels 

[kingantti1874]

1 minute ago, JohnB said:

Bryan Jackson.

agree

[Thomaso]

2 hours ago, kimosavi said:

Until Levein is completely removed from this club we will be laughed at, the club will remain a shambles. The guy is now involved in a new medical department FFS. Come the summer Ann will be hoping the dust has settled and she can keep Levein here in some capacity. Meanwhile we are told how bad and amateurish the club is by ex players whilst Levein was in charge 

Sadly you are absolutely correct 

[Ernie Eskilsson]

4 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

To be totally objective you have to have balance. OP concentrated mainly on the negatives, with little acknowledgement of positive aspects.  

 

Too much personal feelings. To be objective you have to put personal feelings to the side and look at things, well objectively, taking all things into consideration, good and bad.

 

While the OP may well be factually correct on a number of things, merely stating facts isn’t necessarily being objective.

I did focus on the negatives as they’re why I feel we need a review. I’m well aware of the positives and plenty of credit has already been given for those elsewhere.

[Getintaethem]

There seems to be some restructuring at the club happening now.  The worry is the people involved in organising that restructuring are the same ones who have been involved over the last five years.  There will be major changes at the club this summer, once the fan buyout is completed.  Although I think Ann Budge will still be involved in some capacity in the short term, I suspect Craig Levein will have little or no involvement with the club.

 

  Fresh eyes in the boardroom should be a benefit.  We may find the current structure being implemented may be ripped up again.

 

  Doubt much will happen at board room level until the summer.  Everyone’s focus for the next few months should be on ensuring our premiership survival.

[Cruyff]

3/10 

[Pagey]

Not sure this is the right place for objectivity 🤔

[davemclaren]

1 minute ago, Pagey said:

Not sure this is the right place for objectivity 🤔

🤨

[jumpship]

we’re not saints but we’re football fans not churchgoers for Christ’s sake.

 

Had a wee sinful laugh at that...

[kimosavi]

4 hours ago, jambogemz said:

Which players called the club amateurish while Levein was in charge?

The only player I recall saying the club was amateurish was Whealen and that was obviously aimed at the nature of his departure....by Daniel. 

Read it again slowly

[Captain Canada]

1 hour ago, Getintaethem said:

There seems to be some restructuring at the club happening now.  The worry is the people involved in organising that restructuring are the same ones who have been involved over the last five years.  There will be major changes at the club this summer, once the fan buyout is completed.  Although I think Ann Budge will still be involved in some capacity in the short term, I suspect Craig Levein will have little or no involvement with the club.

 

  Fresh eyes in the boardroom should be a benefit.  We may find the current structure being implemented may be ripped up again.

 

  Doubt much will happen at board room level until the summer.  Everyone’s focus for the next few months should be on ensuring our premiership survival.

 

Good post. One of my frustrations is that we're making all these changes mid-season in year six when we've had five years to put things in place properly. 

 

It seems our medical dept, scouting network and coaching structure have been put under review, like you say, by the very people who implemented them in the first place. 

 

Come the summer, we may need another manager and have a new CEO in place. Do we then review everything again and make more changes? 

 

Things seem very unstable at the moment on and off the pitch. Financially things are ok, but we've relied heavily on benefactors, crowds are down and have a £400k hole in our revenue this year. 

Edited January 12, 2020 by Captain Canada

[Phage]

Craig Levein will be selected to give a comprehensive objective 3 year review

[Phil Dunphy]

1 hour ago, Cruyff said:

3/10 

 

For what? Laying out a well worded personal view of how things are at the football club?

 

No surprise this is your reaction to this thread, since you were one of the chief culprits in defending Levein and Budge, talking down to anyone who showed any concern for the direction we were headed.

[Cruyff]

40 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

For what? Laying out a well worded personal view of how things are at the football club?

 

No surprise this is your reaction to this thread, since you were one of the chief culprits in defending Levein and Budge, talking down to anyone who showed any concern for the direction we were headed.

3/10 for the boards performance, you plonker. 

[luckydug]

8 hours ago, Ernie Eskilsson said:

We’re in season six of the five year plan and I think it’s time the FOH produced a considered review of the situation.

 

We started off with Budgement Day which was quite a ruthless cull of players presumably at Levein’s instructions. We then had a fantastic promotion season followed by a one good then one not so good consolidation season in the SPL. During this period Budge was the darling of the fans, our saviour, our Queen of Hearts. She communicated openly, constructively, honestly and regularly with the fans. The FOH was established and set out on an unparalleled journey that has seen us contribute nearly £10m to the cause so far. All was good, we were the envy of many clubs.

 

Since then though things have changed significantly for the worse and not just on the pitch. 

 

We have built a new stand which looks magnificent but has suffered from Design flaws and huge cost overruns. You can’t see the goals from the Gorgie end. The toilets were inappropriately configured causing huge queues.  After all this time the inside is still incomplete. The cost has doubled with the latest estimate at completion around £22m. That Budge’s hibs supporting brother has made any money at all out of this suggests a lack of professional tendering. If he’s made a lot then so much the worse.

 

We’ve apparently spent c£1m on a new state-of-the-art hybrid pitch. Right now it’s a mess and looks no better than the old one which was a disgrace.

 

Our best players have had injury after injury where an initial predicted short term out has turned into a much longer term with several failed attempts to return. This suggests the medical dept hasn’t been good enough. Who do we get to fix it - well the same man that oversaw the setup of the last, crap one of course.

 

Our communications with the fans have become less regular. They carp unnecessarily at our own fans behaviour - we’re not saints but we’re football fans not churchgoers for Christ’s sake. I suspect they’ve also become dishonest. We’ve been told that despite performing poorly we were on the cusp of great things! We’ve been told that Levein would see out this season working with the kids but now he’s on transfers and setting up a new medical team. We’ve been told Budge decided to give Levein the first round of fixtures before making a decision - a fabricated retrospective justification I’m sure. I believe even now she’s angling to keep Levein on in whatever capacity she can. For whatever reason.

 

The playing side is well documented. We’re 5 points adrift. We’ve endured 3 years of countless transfers bringing poor and injured players into the club with few exceptions. We’ve wasted a great crop of youngsters, letting less skilled journeymen populate the 1st team at their expense. We’ve sent them to lower league clubs to ‘better’ their development. We’ve suddenly picked the odd one for the 1st team out of nowhere and then, just as suddenly discarded him. We’ve endured a 2019 that saw the lowest points won and the poorest quality football I can remember.

 

Finally we have a new manager in place and it’s right that we must support him. It’s a worry though as it’s a gamble. We’ve started on a new player cull, Budgement Day 2 if you like. But the way in which some players have (rightly) been let go is disappointing. The fact that some others haven’t been culled yet is even more worrying as is the nature of the rumoured recruitment.

 

i hope that we manage to avoid relegation - that’s the extent of our ambition at the end of the season. Until then we give all our support to the team and keep our fingers crossed.
 

Either way, once the season is over, I think we need a major, objective review of how the club is being run. It just reeks of desperation and a management team that is out of its depth.

In the meantime how about supporting the manager while he clears out the dross in the playing staff. 

First you are saying the way he got rid of Whelan, Daly and has put others up for sale was wrong and then you say the cull is not happening quickly enough. 

As for Stendels appointment being a gamble, all new management appointments are a gamble. 

Would you prefer that we hadn't bothered and continued with the set up you rightly criticise.