Fan Groups Meeting Tonight

[Al k]

Great stuff thanks Digs. What a difference in two weeks with better communication from the club.

After the negative comments from us (the fans) good to see Meggle involved and not shying away from those questions and points made.

I get the clubs stance but I think we need another keeper and midfielder in. Then we can spend a bit more time with the loans market.

[DA-go Par Adonis]

I think there are currently 18 in the first team squad.  We obviously need another keeper - and by Saturday - and then possibly another 3 in total.  However, I am not wedded to the idea that they all need to be in before the first league game of the season.  Realistically, I would hope for one of them at the beginning of August and the other two prior to the end of the loan window.

If 10 players are injured by the end of the year, there would be again be a massive problem, but I don't think you can run a massive squad in the Championship just because you might have a injury crisis.

[El Patrón]

 

 

12 hours ago, Digs said:

TM likes longer term deals rather than changing the entire squad every year as it puts too much pressure on us to get players in as we need more of them. He said it is diffuclt for us as if we are offered the same player by an agent as say Airdrie, they will be offered him for £200 a week less then us. It is expected that we will pay more.  They are trying to change this and won't be forced to cave on this. On the flip side, they don;t want players who are only coming for an extra £200 a week. Of course money should drive them but it shouldn't be their only motivation, they have to want to come here so if that extra £200 is important to them, good luck to them. We won't break our wage structure to accomodate.

So in this example, say the agent for player X is offering him to Airdrie for £500pw and to us for £700pw...... we say we will only pay the £500pw that he's being offered up for elsewhere, so he turns us down and goes to Airdrie for £500pw anyway?
 

[DA-go Par Adonis]

Or he signs for us for £500pw and the club save over £10k over the course of the year.

[Digs]

34 minutes ago, El Patrón said:

 

 

So in this example, say the agent for player X is offering him to Airdrie for £500pw and to us for £700pw...... we say we will only pay the £500pw that he's being offered up for elsewhere, so he turns us down and goes to Airdrie for £500pw anyway?
 

No, we pay what is within our salary bandings. If that £700 takes him out of our salary bandings, we won’t pay it. He was making the point that there appears to be a perception with some agents that we will pay more than other clubs. We’re not going to do that if we don’t think he’s worth that extra £200 a week and that’s the right approach IMO.

[Stanza]

That's an excellent synopsis of the meeting, Digs. Thank you - my pen gave up halfway through the meeting, so your post has saved me relying on my failing memory!

A couple of extra things I do remember 

- On the "squad size" question I got the impression TM thought it would be good to have one more defender on the books. So if it doesn't happen on a permanent basis I would expect that to be a target in the loan market.

- Drew asked about the value of a larger, freely available meeting- the view last night was positive, so he will set one up.in the Purvis Suite with the Chairman, Manager etc.

Edited July 9 by Stanza

[SRBpar]

4 hours ago, Digs said:

I will add, it was quite a conversational answer so it may not have been conclusive, ie, it’s goalkeepers and loans and that’s it. It won’t be much more than that though I don’t think.

I was there too for p&b and understood it as looking to add GK and Defender then look to loan market towards end of window but again just my interpretation 

[Digs]

12 minutes ago, SRBpar said:

I was there too for p&b and understood it as looking to add GK and Defender then look to loan market towards end of window but again just my interpretation 

Possibly my terrible writing tbh. I was having to rely on my memory for parts of it 😂

[Digs]

53 minutes ago, DA-go Par Adonis said:

If 10 players are injured by the end of the year, there would be again be a massive problem, but I don't think you can run a massive squad in the Championship just because you might have a injury crisis.

And that question was asked an answered to that effect.

[El Patrón]

23 minutes ago, Digs said:

No, we pay what is within our salary bandings. If that £700 takes him out of our salary bandings, we won’t pay it. He was making the point that there appears to be a perception with some agents that we will pay more than other clubs. We’re not going to do that if we don’t think he’s worth that extra £200 a week and that’s the right approach IMO.

I understand that, I just read it as we and another club offer the same, but they choose the other club on the same money as we are offering because them/the agent felt we should pay more because we are "bigger", which didn't make sense.

[kelty_par]

58 minutes ago, SRBpar said:

I was there too for p&b and understood it as looking to add GK and Defender then look to loan market towards end of window but again just my interpretation 

Courier article now saying decisions to be made after the game tomorrow on the LB and GK. can see both getting signed 

[Raymie]

I've not seen them play but appears that they will provide the cover needed, are young and won't cost an arm and a leg, so fits our strategy

[the saline hill puma]

the left back(im not totally convinced his natural position is LB) has looked ok going forward putting in a couple of good crosses, but didn't look all that great defensively from what I have seen. I don't think he will play anyway as Otoo would probably be first choice at cover full back. Guess he will be taking Fenton's place and will just be used in the reserves and keeping a seat warm on the bench.

Edited July 9 by the saline hill puma

[SanguinePar]

4 hours ago, DA-go Par Adonis said:

I don't think you can run a massive squad in the Championship just because you might have a injury crisis.

On the flipside though, if you run a squad that's too small, you make an injury crisis more likely. I appreciate that budget is always a factor, so I'm not calling for a 30-man squad or anything like that, but IMO anything under 22 players is just too risky. I'd be happier with 23 or 24 tbh, not including kids.

We saw what happened last year, where one problem (a small starting squad) was heightened by an injury crisis, while also contributing to worsening that crisis. The result was that we struggled badly and had to patch the team up with whoever we could get in January. Whereas, if we'd addressed the thin squad in the summer we would have had that cover all along and also might have seen fewer players getting reinjured when they were rushed back for lack of any other options. It's just foolhardy IMO, cutting things to the bone and hoping we don't get injuries. Yes there's a short term saving in wages, but is it enough to justify a mediocre season and the very real risk of relegation?

I also don't really buy the argument about it being difficult to keep a larger squad happy - firstly, it's unlikely that we'll ever/often have a situation where everyone is fit at once and so it's unlikely that more than, say, a player or two is going to be left out of the matchday squad on a given day. And secondly, other teams, with much higher-profile players than ours manage to cope with larger squads. To me that 'disharmony' argument is just an excuse, albeit one that's difficult for fans to disprove.

 

Anyway - thanks to Digs for the extensive coverage of the meeting. Didn't even realise it was happening, or I might have put in a question or two to ask.

 

 

[Salvo Montalbano]

17 hours ago, Digs said:

There were a couple of questions from Pie and Bovril, one about would Stephens still be the caterer, Drew put that one to me as my Mrs runs it, and the answer is yes. Drew wasn't sure of the nature of the agreement in terms of time, and neither do i, but I would say that if there any specific issues please contact them direct and they will follow it up.

I didn't know your missus was involved, but I think the same things have come up time and again about Stephens' offering. I'm also sure folk have asked Stephens directly. So if you're able to get a word in edgewise with the better half, then firstly you'd be doing better than I do, but secondly do you think the following can be passed on?

1. A lot of clubs now do things like different pies, especially a pie of the month... We've had bridies, sausage rolls, macaroni pies and I think that's it for several seasons now (do we even sell a scotch pie?), so given Stephens also do a steak pie, a steak and haggis pie, a donner meat pie, a venetian pie etc, will anything different be offered at EEP?

2. On Pie and Bovril and elsewhere, people have been suggesting that tap water should be offered for free. I'm sure in the past it was stated that the reason we don't offer postmix soft drinks was that the catering outlets were not connected to the water mains (I think that's also why the hot water urns are topped up with water from elsewhere) so is this accurate and if so, what alternatives cab be offered to free tap water?

3. Have Stephens or the club looked into some kind of collaborative effort (like the Sammy the Tammy biscuits) celebrating the links to Germany such as Bratwursts in rolls or even Bratwurst or Currywurst sausage rolls etc?

4. We seem to be one of the few clubs whose catering outlets close before or just after half time, whereas a lot of other clubs have offerings that are still open into the second half (especially for midweek games and/or cup games where extra time night come into play). We also seem to run out of hot food very early (soup and stovies almost always sell out during the first half; it's not uncommon for pastry products to be gone before the middle of half time) so is there scope for a slightly longer opening times and slightly more food?

Cheers