It is a forum, a FANS' forum. It's your choice of course but I cant help thinking you're inviting trouble. Good luck with everything nevertheless.

I'm only basing my opinion on what I see as an outsider looking in Al.......I see the amount of his own money he put in and the intentions he had to make the club successful.

If I see and hear from the right people and have it as fact, things he has done so badly wrong then I may change my opinion.....

You are entitled to your opinion, as everyone is......You obviously know things I don't, or think you do? Would probably make people like me easier to understand, and maybe have the same opinion as you if you actually posted what you know......is there any reason why you don't, out of interest?

I’d have to agree with some of the Glover defenders on here. I don’t think the argument is as simple as has been polarised by some and feel that Glover can be defended to an extent without being accused of rose tinted glasses or naivety. He saved the club albeit temporarily when nobody else was coming in to our rescue. He’d thrown the club a few quid before through sponsorship of match days etc and I think came with the best intentions only to receive poor advice and get in way over his head.

Their seems an attitude in some circles that Ted’s era was a Halcion period ruined by the evil double glazing salesman and his henchmen. I recall the Richardson years ending in administration, a desperate plea for fans to donate thousands, a firesale of talent and ‘complications’ involving an Irish owned bank, the stadium ownership and an off-shore account none of which were ever explained to me. Déjà vu anyone ?

So essentially, we have had two complete meltdowns – neither one seems to have covered the club in glory. Both are as ‘bad’ as one another – But just as continuing in the Glover vein would be foolish, just as ridiculous would be a return to the management style that came before.

There are far more who claim to be ‘in the know’ than I would ever profess. I can only judge the club on my interaction with them. For me, my experiences have improved in the last two years ‘on my level’ ; I can buy things online with a certainty they’ll arrive, I can contact the club and speak to a person rather than a post-it and I now stand in the dry under a covering with a fantastic atmosphere. Thus, for me, as a common or garden fan who goes to the games ,buys the shirts, programmes, raffle ticket etc,( but isn’t a businessman, doesn’t know how to run a business and frankly, leaves that to better people ) the Glover years have been an improvement.
If this is all sheen and underneath we have paid a heavy price for the above, I will bow to those with greater knowledge than myself.

Richardson clearly loved the club enough to put his money in but never seemed to do anything with it. I always felt we lacked initiative, drifting from one season to the next. Glover has ended up with the same result as his predecessor – ie failure, through biting off more than he can chew. Ultimately, it seems a very British negativity to judge the second failure as worse than the first, because ‘ he got our hopes up’ rather than getting hopes up at all. The net result of both is that we are in the mire. Does it really matter the style in which we got there ?

The bottom line is they were both unable to maintain the club - but could either of them done so anyway ?

I have no axe to grind with the either regime and don’t consider myself on either ‘side’– I feel for both Richardson and Glover who made mistakes but not because they were corrupt or looking to profit at our expense. They are both hampered by a city that aside from a core of 5000 ( ? ) die hards, has a casual fan base who never get round to attending a game, or businesses that haven’t invested in what should be a historic institution that puts Wakefield on the map.

I don’t think Richardson is worth ‘3 Andrew Glovers’ or vice versa. Holding up either man as a messiah or saviour solves no problems. But both men deserve more credit than they’ve been given from their critics for actually stumping up in the first place.

Mr Carter has apparently put his house on saving the club. If he fails, will his personal sacrifice by ignored by those looking to rubbish another Wakefield collapse ? Or will fans actually remember that he tried to help in the first place ?

Excellent post that!!

Just for the record, I have absolutely nothing against the Richardson's either........maybe a little touch of nepotism going on.....bit like 'jobs for the boys' recently....it happens in companies up and down the land though....always has done, always will do.....9 times out of 10 in a negative way too......

I know mate, hopefully we can move forward after mondays meeting.

One step forward and Two steps back!

A very good post indeed.

I was accused of being a Ted man and I hope that people appreciate that I am Wakefield Trinity man and will try and work with whoever is in the hot seat if it helps the club.

As for comparisons - all I would say is that if you combine Andrews marketing skills with Teds rugby knowledge we could have a fab club.

As it is, we have had tow failures in quick succession and there is no guarantee that Michael's tenure will be any different - albeit I have every confidence in his abilities - so far so good as they say. So what can we do to help ensure that we don't make the same mistakes again? This is where the Supporters Trust comes in. Our aim is to involve ourselves within the club to help provide the supporters the security of knowledge that the club is being run in a sustainable manner - it is in the rules under which we operate - by virtue of having hands on knowledge of the dealings of the club.

We are a safeguard / a fall-back. That doesn't mean we will come running to supporters every 2 minutes with gossip from behind the scenes - it has to be much more business like than that, and yes, it will mean that some people will be privilege to a bit more information without being able to post it on here.

We, the committee, have kept the Trust running for the past 3 years not quite knowing whether there would be a role for us. In that time we have tried to involve ourselves in supporter issues, but we have had little influence. We now feel that we have an opportunity to come to the fore and play an active part in both supporting and encouraging the clubs fight to survive and thrive but also to try and prevent our club ending up being run in a manner that it just can't afford to.

In the end it will be your choice to decide whether you will back us or not. We don't anticipate that we will be loved by all, but I can assure you that none of us have anything to gain but the feeling of playing our part in protecting what is, for most, the second greatest love in our lives after our families.

Tomorrow promises to be an interesting day!

You used to be good at it but you've lost you're edge 4/10

I'll third that - great post Rumour13. Sums up pretty much how I feel about our recent chairmen and their predicaments. Unfortunately, if you don't have a wallet as deep as that of Ken Davy or Marwan Koukash, cash-flow problems will drag you down in the end.

It's a long road to becoming a self-sustaining club that can compete at the very highest level, and without the benefits that Newmarket promises, we haven't got a hope. It means pumping in cash to cover the shortfall until that time comes, or accepting the inevitable, and trying to re-build. If we do the latter, Newmarket may be a few years further down the line, and may end up becoming something that we didn't really envisage at the outset, and that requires further investment if we're to progress.

It's a leap of faith whichever way you look at it. The first thing to ensure is whether it makes sense to take that initial step in the run-up. Monday night should make that clearer.

I hope we go into this with our eyes wide open, and not giddy on some dream. If it's the former, I'm in, and I have a lot less to gain from it that most.

As part of Supporters Direct, and as being bound to all the rules and regulations that go with that, there will be no giddy dreams I'm afraid. There will be both legal and financial expertise, that we will have to pay for, but if that price ensures that we gain security then so be it.

Sandal Cat can be an obnoxious grumpy old so and so, but he is also thorough, worldly wise and knowledgeable. He is the right man to be our Chairman and ensures that us giddy beggars don't get carried away. (Have I got away with that?

)

Get through this and getting to Newmarket ASAP is what in hoping for, hope M Carter or whoever ends up owning us has a direct line to Sir R Walker.

Then a whole shed load of new problems to face

A lot less problems than we currently have at Belle Vue open alot more revenue.

Are you sure of that?

Go on then. Treat us to your expertise on this subject too.

To automatically think that a move to a stadium that you dont own will provide more income would be wrong , if you are so sure it will, tell us why?

We're already at one we don't own where the rent is much higher than it will be at newmarket

I was thinking the same. I would think the Stadium trust, local council etc who are involved in Newmarket would take their cut of extra revenue wouldn't they? (excuse me if I am wrong).

So you pay a rent for BV, but do you run it and keep its income?

We don't own the stadium we're in, so unless the rent for the new stadium is considerably higher than what we're already paying (and we're led to believe by the trust that will be running it on a not-for-profit basis that this will not be the case), then that's one problem out of the way. The modern facilities that the new stadium will bring open up many more revenue steams that Belle Vue could open too.

You'll have to ask those responsible for managing the project what the net gain will be for us, but it will be considerably more than trying to pay rent on and patch up a stadium whose sell-by date was 30 years ago at best.

Yes we also incur maintenance costs which aren't insignificant at such an old stadium. We get a fixed payment from outside caterers for food and drink sales I think

Community Trust nothing to do with the council

So many things change, the whole culture of the club changes, the whole matchday that people have been used to for decades changes, its one thing visiting somebody elses concrete souless cantilever canopied ground once a year, making yours ' Feel ' like home is something else

Most if not all council ( because ultimatly it is them that will be running it ) stadiums are run ' not fir profit ' , but they will still cost a fortune compared to BV, they cant take any shortcuts, and that will need to be paid for

These new revenue streams? , they are what exactly?

Sub letting out parts of the stadium to our clients would bring in additional revenue and making it work seven days a week instead of 13 days a year will earn us money.
Having heard some of the multiple use plans I'm quite impressed.