Update from the club tonight

[Boston Red Sox]

Good update chaps, thanks for that. Clearly we are Dunfermline, the kingdom is ours.

[Digs]

OK, so a few things.

The club I couldn't remember wasn't Midtjylland. I can't remember who it was as I was writing and listening at the same time, but it definitely wasn't them. Also, in regards to FGR, and St Pauli. We aren't looking to copy them, emulate them or be them. They were merely given as examples of clubs who had an identity who had managed to commercialise that and therefore monetize it. That's it.

1 hour ago, parsforlife said:

If there’s a blatant dive to win us a penalty that gets given and we score to win the league do you honestly think anyone is going to be saying bad things against the diver? Are they ****, he’s going to be right amongst the celebrations. Fans of other clubs can moan as much as they want, we can wave our medals in their face and laugh. 

After I said this is all well and good but might be a hard sell to some, McPake asked me what I would do if we were in a cup semi final and we were awarded a pen in those circumstances? I told him I, and everyone else would probably celebrate, and he then asked what would happen if McCann say, then deliberately missed the pen (they'd shown an example of this from Galatasaray with this scenario - he's not planning on telling players to miss stuff) in the context of a situation where it was blindingly obvious it was an injustice. That's what we're talking about here, think Bielsa for Leeds against West Ham. Both he and David Cook made the point that they were talking about one in every ten-twenty years type scenarios to give an example of what they meant by sportsmanship, they aren't proposing on rolling over and being everyone's door mat. He also mentioned the Falkirk game last year and Breen's goal. He said that for him, it was a clear goal, McCann behind the goal's reaction and subsequent clarification at HT that it was absolutely in was enough for him along with the reaction of all of our players but it wasn't clear, at all, if it was a goal or not. He's not talking about us having went to the ref and say 'look ref, that probably wasn't in, just chalk it off'.

 

9 hours ago, SanguinePar said:

Not sure about the notion of the Norrie as a family stand - I really wish football would get over this idea of everything having to be "family friendly", I just don't see it as realistic.

That's not what they are saying. They are talking about a small section at the corner next to the player pitch entrance where the kids all congregate to meet their heroes. Get autographs, pictures, Sammy the Tammy in there, that sort of stuff. McPake said that players were always stopping to sign stuff for the kids and previously, earlier in his career, he might have been telling them to ignore that and get in and get their mind on the game, but having thought about it from this mindset, he can see what does it matter if they spend an extra 20-30 secs there getting the kids onside and treating them well, rather than 'listen to him ramble on' (he seems self aware of talking a lot and going off on tangents in general, he says it all the time) and actually, the same thing with the lads in the NW. He loves the fact that his players always go over there and it is helping strengthen the bond, which in turn helps the players when they step on the pitch.

 

9 hours ago, Grant said:

"Our top three targets we'd identified at the end of the season in April, were signed by Oremier League teams." 

.....All of those players would've been great signings. Maybe they should have been our top targets? 

 

That's the point, why should we adjust our own expectations? As I said, they acknowledge their recruitment strategy isn't without risk but as I said, the Manager said he is happy with the group of players he has at the moment, and Meggle added they still want to add 2-3 quality players. Hopefully one today, and then probably a few more loan signings, who in turn will hopefully be this/next seasons KRH/Otoo/Fisher. 

I'd rather we set our sights a bit higher, when we do go up, it's far less upheaval overhauling a whole squad if you already have players capable of competing at that level, and we might even sell the odd one to make us some money on the way.

9 hours ago, Grant said:

"Thomas Meggle said it was clear there was disconnect with the fans after relegation..." 

This whole paragraph is just utter, utter pish. Hughes played and gave new contracts to McCann, Todd and Allan. There was still a disconnect, you know why? Because we were absolutely stinking the place out getting bloody relegated. Because our board were appointing belters like Grant and Hughes. We didn't get a great connection because Chris Hamilton grew up in Crossgates, the fans loved the players last season because we were winning games and beating Falkirk. KRH is English, who we got from a team in Glasgow, and despite these insurmountable differences he was one of, if not the most popular fans favourite. Maybe because he's really good at football?! 

If we can get a few more KRHs by paying them 50 quid a week more I'd be absolutely fine with them commuting from Glasgow/Dundee. It sounds like we're needlessly limiting out pool of available transfers with idealistic nonsense you'd expect from a teenager, this is a job at the end of the day for the players, let's not insult them eh? 

 

You've completely misinterpreted the point here. He never said any of that. 

He was making the point that they wanted players who live in the community who are visible to the fans, guys from here who hopefully might be Pars fans too, ie 'one of our own' Matty Todd literally has songs sung about him saying just that. He's not saying that they signed those players for that reason, he gave them as an example of the sort of players he meant. He also didn't say we were only going to sign players if they are local. He was making the point that these guys (most of them) came through the ranks and they want to do more of that, but they won't make up the entire squad, they just want some local representation in the squad, if possible, as it has benefits. Not only from a fans point of view, but from attracting the top youth players to sign for us as they will see they will get their chance. 

You've also conflated two separate points about the extra £50 a week and the reason why we signed KRH. He was part of the strategy to get good hungry young players in on loan and if they are good enough convince them this is the place to play their football next season because they'll get a chance. 

The £50 a week comment was directed at those players from the 'dundee/glasgow' cars who only come here for that reason but don't buy into any other part of what the manager is trying to do. It was in the context of everyone at the club from the Manager to the tea lady all pulling in the same direction. A player can be good enough, but if he's not interested in that and only interested in an £50pw and that's it, they don't want him and I agree 100% with that. One person not pulling in the same direction of the others can see your whole plan for the season unravelling pretty quickly.

 

So, as I said at the beginning of my summary, please don't take what I've said so literally, as it is very high level and I even pointed out to David Cook that this might happen so they have to get the message right from the start and engage people with it. Lengthy, verbose presentations are only going to get shot down by people lasering in on tiny points to pick holes in it, so the overall message has to be prevalent and the benefits to the club and fans have to be clear. He appeared to agree so hopefully the other groups who were invited to the various presentations will say similar things so that it can be tweaked accordingly when it is presented in full.

 

[parsforlife]

1 hour ago, Digs said:

 

After I said this is all well and good but might be a hard sell to some, McPake asked me what I would do if we were in a cup semi final and we were awarded a pen in those circumstances? I told him I, and everyone else would probably celebrate, and he then asked what would happen if McCann say, then deliberately missed the pen (they'd shown an example of this from Galatasaray with this scenario - he's not planning on telling players to miss stuff) in the context of a situation where it was blindingly obvious it was an injustice. That's what we're talking about here, think Bielsa for Leeds against West Ham. Both he and David Cook made the point that they were talking about one in every ten-twenty years type scenarios to give an example of what they meant by sportsmanship, they aren't proposing on rolling over and being everyone's door mat.

I recognize this,  but in the example given,  if McCann is running into the box, falls over the ball and is wrongly given a penalty,  a penalty he know he doesn't deserve.  Then his focus on taking the penalty should be to score it. If he deliberately misses in a game of that size that we didn't go on to win I would be absolutely raging at him.   I wouldn't be bothered if we were 5-0 up or its last game of the season when our position is already known, but in important moments you take everything you can get,  you can apologize to the opposition afterwards.

[DA-go Par Adonis]

I don't think they're talking about turning us into Corinthian Casuals...  

In your example, in the heat of the battle, McCann probably thinks he's fouled and we try and score the penalty.  If we're in the league that we want to get in, VAR probably over-rules it anyway.

[Digs]

33 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

I recognize this,  but in the example given,  if McCann is running into the box, falls over the ball and is wrongly given a penalty,  a penalty he know he doesn't deserve.  Then his focus on taking the penalty should be to score it. If he deliberately misses in a game of that size that we didn't go on to win I would be absolutely raging at him.   I wouldn't be bothered if we were 5-0 up or its last game of the season when our position is already known, but in important moments you take everything you can get,  you can apologize to the opposition afterwards.

I see where you're coming from, having played, coached and managed the game pretty much my whole life, I'm as competitive as it gets, but to be clear, they were talking about clear injustices. Not ambiguous claims. McPake also made the point that VAR coming in would rule out most of the ambiguity so players are unlikely to be in this position very often, which is also a fair point. 

Also, in the scenario you give, I think they'd be expecting the player to be honest and say, 'look ref, it wasn't a foul, I fell over the ball'. That's not a wild take, I've seen it done.

I don't think I'd be raging at all. Maybe bemused in the moment, as I'm not one that claims for every single challenge and I find myself sitting in my seat quite a lot whilst others are going daft at perceived injustices but I think most people are generally sensible away from the heat of the moment where, let's face it, we all go a bit more mental than we would once we've had a chance to calm down and aren't under the influence of a couple of pre match liveners.

As I said, try not to laser in on specific hypothetical scenarios, it's not about that.

[parsforlife]

9 minutes ago, Digs said:

 Not ambiguous claims. McPake also made the point that VAR coming in would rule out most of the ambiguity so players are unlikely to be in this position very often, which is also a fair point. 

 

VAR was my first thought when you said cup semi-final,  as its used at that stage.  I understood not talking ambiguous claims, maybe i wasn't clear in the how I described the McCann penalty situation you talked about,  I my mind the opponent wasn't attempting a tackle, wasn't touching mccann at all, he has just fallen over and only the refereeing team have not noticed it.

I'm slightly confused now about what it is about TBH,  if it not about what we do in the extreme examples that may occur once in a players career,  and its not about the week to week stuff where its been repeatedly agreed that they are not wanting the players to lose any of that edge where they fight like **** for everything,  then what is it about?

 

Edited August 4, 2023 by parsforlife

[Stanza]

18 minutes ago, parsforlife said:

I recognize this,  but in the example given,  if McCann is running into the box, falls over the ball and is wrongly given a penalty,  a penalty he know he doesn't deserve.  Then his focus on taking the penalty should be to score it. If he deliberately misses in a game of that size that we didn't go on to win I would be absolutely raging at him.   I wouldn't be bothered if we were 5-0 up or its last game of the season when our position is already known, but in important moments you take everything you can get,  you can apologize to the opposition afterwards.

Sorry, but this is an example of focussing on one small aspect of the overall philosophy. Nobody in the room was suggesting that this situation would be commonplace or would apply except in the most blatant and obvious situation, and JMcP accepted that it might be down to the captain or manager to make the decision.

Once again, think of the plaudits Bielsa received for his decision not to defend a goal, and compare it with the criticism levelled at Thierry Henry for his World Cup handball. You're right of course, many Leeds fans would have been raging, and many French fans would have been delighted - but that's not an attractive part of football culture, IMO.

There is no absolutely right way of getting the message out and the Board chose to continue the policy of initially notifying representatives of the various supporters groups. Fair enough, but perhaps they might have been better just publicising the headline points of the vision quite widely, and gradually over time filling in the detail as the debate among stakeholders developed

 

[Digs]

Just now, parsforlife said:

I'm slightly confused now about what it is about TBH,  if it not about what we do in the extreme examples that may occur once in a players career,  and its not about the week to week stuff where its been repeatedly agreed that their not wanting the players to lose any of that edge where they fight like **** for everything,  then what is it about?

 

You can still do all of those things and be honest and have integrity. As I said, there's a lot more to it than I am able to convey properly. It's essentially about playing with proper sportsmanship towards your team mates, your opponents, and yourself, rather than 'win at any cost'. It's also important to remember, there is more detail aligned to this regarding off the field activities rather than just how the players individually conduct themselves.

 

[parsforlife]

18 minutes ago, Stanza said:

Once again, think of the plaudits Bielsa received for his decision not to defend a goal, and compare it with the criticism levelled at Thierry Henry for his World Cup handball. You're right of course, many Leeds fans would have been raging, and many French fans would have been delighted - but that's not an attractive part of football culture, IMO.

 

 

We shouldn't be chasing plaudits. I couldn't give the slightest **** if somebody nothing to do with the club is talking about us in a 'oh that Scottish team Dunfermline, that was nice of them, I like clubs who play nice'    Also couldn't care if someone wants to moan at us because we win a game in a controversial manner,  actually I'd prefer that, because they are talking about us winning. 

Edited August 4, 2023 by parsforlife

[DA-go Par Adonis]

I guess you're an existing fan though, so as long as this philosophy isn't diametrically opposed to your outlook on life, you're going to continue to support the club. 

It might be something that appeals to other people in the community though e.g. non-Pars supporting parents whose kids are mad on football.  

Given his background, Meggle (and the others) will know that the most important thing for getting people through the door consistently is a successful team - and they seem to have been keen to re-iterate that they are not looking to compromise that primary aim.

[SanguinePar]

3 hours ago, Digs said:

That's not what they are saying. They are talking about a small section at the corner next to the player pitch entrance where the kids all congregate to meet their heroes.

Fair enough - I maybe misread @Piracy when he said:

Quote

• Club are creating a family zone with the Norrie McCathie stand

I'm guessing that should say within the Norrie. I read it as the whole stand! :-)

That said, isn't section A of the Norrie already meant to be a family area anyway? Either way, happy enough for them to give it renewed focus. I was just worried about them taking it too far.

 

3 hours ago, Digs said:

Both he and David Cook made the point that they were talking about one in every ten-twenty years type scenarios to give an example of what they meant by sportsmanship

That's fair enough - but I would hope we'd be doing that anyway. It doesn't seem like something we should need to make a big deal of.

In fact the whole Fairness, Accountability, Determination philosophy just seems like an odd thing to make such a central part of a meeting, when it's only two days before the new season and we have a paper thin squad and a bit of an injury crisis.

As you say, it's very long term project - but right now 'long term' isn't what's on most fans' minds IMO, they want to know who'll be in goals on Saturday and whether we'll have an attacking midfielder worthy of the name to try and pull us back into the game after Todorov scores in the 3rd minute.

It all sounds fine and everything, but at best it seems to me like giving much too much focus to a fairly secondary/tertiary priority; at worst (and I don't actually think it's this) it could be construed as an attempt to distract from our (soon-to-be) onfield situation.

Just to be clear, I'm 100% not dismissing this outright, but I do feel that the timing, and also the approach of inviting a few people to hear about it in detail, and then just letting the info be disseminated via forums, etc, is maybe not the best way they could have gone about it.

It's inevitable that there'd be misinterpretation, apparent inconsistencies, even potentially factual mistakes in how it's reported. I would have preferred that the club put all this together into a complete (if not yet final) consultation document and made it available (in early summer, when there's less immediate pressure) for all to read at once, and from a primary source.

Then we would all be clear (or at least equally unclear!) on exactly what they mean, instead this apparent confusion.

EDIT to add - I should also say, that I feel for @Piracy, @Digs and @Stanza here, because you've been left doing the job of trying to:

1. Explain the whole thing to everyone
2. Counter all the speculation/dissent/suspicion/etc

...neither of which should really be your job.

It's definitely appreciated, and I'm definitely more inclined to give the idea more credence because of who is reporting it, just as I was inclined to give the new owners the benefit of the doubt because of Ross McArthur's initial endorsement. I just don't think you (or any fans) should have been landed with the responsibility of sharing/defending it.

 

 

Off topic...

58 minutes ago, Stanza said:

the criticism levelled at Thierry Henry for his World Cup handball

Always thought that criticism was over the top, the ball flew straight at him - yes it hit his hand, but I'm still not convinced there was clear intent (which at the time would mean it wasn't technically handball). I think the fact that it was France (who the English media traditionally hate) and that it was against Ireland (who the English media traditionally adopt in a fairly patronising way) meant it got the people here totally riled up and turned into much more of an issue than it would have been otherwise.

[Grant]

5 hours ago, Piracy said:

I'd rather we stayed away from '****ehouses' and worked with a team of bonded players working their socks off for each other if it means we get promotion. 

You can gain 3 points being hard but fair, resilient and organised. Like we were last season, which got us promoted. 

Porteus for example is a ****ehouse, however is loved by his teammates, you wouldn't take him? 

3 hours ago, Rossmcno1 said:

FGR who nobody had heard of until the last couple of years and St Pauli who plenty of people have heard of maybe are correct examples of clubs either punching above their weight on the park, or reputation in a global sense.  Also think it’s a stretch to try and compare the Bundesliga to the Scottish top flight.  
 

What I’ve interpreted it as is a philosophy that isn’t winning at all costs, it’s long term winning the right way with the right behaviours that makes it more of a club with positive ethos that grows as such.  Not just short termism which can be easily replicated.

There owner bought them years ago, invested a good amount of money which got them better players so they got promoted. That was a far bigger reason for them getting to league two than them stopping selling pies in the ground. 

For all the global success of St Pauli, it hasn't transpired to much on the pitch has it? 

3 hours ago, Digs said:

OK, so a few things.

The club I couldn't remember wasn't Midtjylland. I can't remember who it was as I was writing and listening at the same time, but it definitely wasn't them. Also, in regards to FGR, and St Pauli. We aren't looking to copy them, emulate them or be them. They were merely given as examples of clubs who had an identity who had managed to commercialise that and therefore monetize it. That's it.

After I said this is all well and good but might be a hard sell to some, McPake asked me what I would do if we were in a cup semi final and we were awarded a pen in those circumstances? I told him I, and everyone else would probably celebrate, and he then asked what would happen if McCann say, then deliberately missed the pen (they'd shown an example of this from Galatasaray with this scenario - he's not planning on telling players to miss stuff) in the context of a situation where it was blindingly obvious it was an injustice. That's what we're talking about here, think Bielsa for Leeds against West Ham. Both he and David Cook made the point that they were talking about one in every ten-twenty years type scenarios to give an example of what they meant by sportsmanship, they aren't proposing on rolling over and being everyone's door mat. He also mentioned the Falkirk game last year and Breen's goal. He said that for him, it was a clear goal, McCann behind the goal's reaction and subsequent clarification at HT that it was absolutely in was enough for him along with the reaction of all of our players but it wasn't clear, at all, if it was a goal or not. He's not talking about us having went to the ref and say 'look ref, that probably wasn't in, just chalk it off'.

That's the point, why should we adjust our own expectations? As I said, they acknowledge their recruitment strategy isn't without risk but as I said, the Manager said he is happy with the group of players he has at the moment, and Meggle added they still want to add 2-3 quality players. Hopefully one today, and then probably a few more loan signings, who in turn will hopefully be this/next seasons KRH/Otoo/Fisher. 

I'd rather we set our sights a bit higher, when we do go up, it's far less upheaval overhauling a whole squad if you already have players capable of competing at that level, and we might even sell the odd one to make us some money on the way.

You've completely misinterpreted the point here. He never said any of that. 

He was making the point that they wanted players who live in the community who are visible to the fans, guys from here who hopefully might be Pars fans too, ie 'one of our own' Matty Todd literally has songs sung about him saying just that. He's not saying that they signed those players for that reason, he gave them as an example of the sort of players he meant. He also didn't say we were only going to sign players if they are local. He was making the point that these guys (most of them) came through the ranks and they want to do more of that, but they won't make up the entire squad, they just want some local representation in the squad, if possible, as it has benefits. Not only from a fans point of view, but from attracting the top youth players to sign for us as they will see they will get their chance. 

You've also conflated two separate points about the extra £50 a week and the reason why we signed KRH. He was part of the strategy to get good hungry young players in on loan and if they are good enough convince them this is the place to play their football next season because they'll get a chance. 

The £50 a week comment was directed at those players from the 'dundee/glasgow' cars who only come here for that reason but don't buy into any other part of what the manager is trying to do. It was in the context of everyone at the club from the Manager to the tea lady all pulling in the same direction. A player can be good enough, but if he's not interested in that and only interested in an £50pw and that's it, they don't want him and I agree 100% with that. One person not pulling in the same direction of the others can see your whole plan for the season unravelling pretty quickly.

 

So, as I said at the beginning of my summary, please don't take what I've said so literally, as it is very high level and I even pointed out to David Cook that this might happen so they have to get the message right from the start and engage people with it. Lengthy, verbose presentations are only going to get shot down by people lasering in on tiny points to pick holes in it, so the overall message has to be prevalent and the benefits to the club and fans have to be clear. He appeared to agree so hopefully the other groups who were invited to the various presentations will say similar things so that it can be tweaked accordingly when it is presented in full.

 

"That's the point, why should we adjust our own expectations?" 

 

Because we're about to enter the season with a wafer thin squad while our rivals have made decent signings? I'm 

"The £50 a week comment was directed at those players from the 'dundee/glasgow' cars who only come here for that reason but don't buy into any other part of what the manager is trying to do" 

Just absolutely nonsense, are we reckoning that the employee who's going to the highest bidder (because imagine doing that in a job eh?!) is then incapable of being as effective? Why on earth is any footballer coming in and then not doing there best to get the club moving forward? If we get promoted, they also get more money. That's simple economics. 

1 hour ago, Stanza said:

Sorry, but this is an example of focussing on one small aspect of the overall philosophy. Nobody in the room was suggesting that this situation would be commonplace or would apply except in the most blatant and obvious situation, and JMcP accepted that it might be down to the captain or manager to make the decision.

Once again, think of the plaudits Bielsa received for his decision not to defend a goal, and compare it with the criticism levelled at Thierry Henry for his World Cup handball. You're right of course, many Leeds fans would have been raging, and many French fans would have been delighted - but that's not an attractive part of football culture, IMO.

There is no absolutely right way of getting the message out and the Board chose to continue the policy of initially notifying representatives of the various supporters groups. Fair enough, but perhaps they might have been better just publicising the headline points of the vision quite widely, and gradually over time filling in the detail as the debate among stakeholders developed

 

Would you say that Leeds are known for there positive football culture? 

 

 

I just think this is all a load of absolute nonsense. A referee makes a mistake but don't worry lads, what's next? Defenders on the opposite team slipping up but us giving them the ball back? What tosh.

 

What on earth is happening with the training ground? It was announced with some amount of fanfare and now plans have changed? But hey, we're going to be more sporting. 

[DA-go Par Adonis]

"Defenders on the opposite team slipping up but us giving them the ball back? What tosh."

I guess it's fine to be sceptical but there's little point in inventing scenarios to get yourself more annoyed.  To date, the present management team have not signed a bunch of shrinking violets, so there is little point in assuming that this will change.  If it does, then we can question the policy.

It sounds like they are going, or will continue, to be more diligent about the type of characters that we sign.  Maybe if we had more of that 5 years ago, we wouldn't have ended up with a squad with Robbie Muirhead, Louis Longridge, Myles Hippolyte, James Vincent, Mark Durnan etc.

Edited August 4, 2023 by DA-go Par Adonis

[Digs]

17 minutes ago, Grant said:

"That's the point, why should we adjust our own expectations?" 

 

Because we're about to enter the season with a wafer thin squad while our rivals have made decent signings? I'm 

"The £50 a week comment was directed at those players from the 'dundee/glasgow' cars who only come here for that reason but don't buy into any other part of what the manager is trying to do" 

Just absolutely nonsense, are we reckoning that the employee who's going to the highest bidder (because imagine doing that in a job eh?!) is then incapable of being as effective? Why on earth is any footballer coming in and then not doing there best to get the club moving forward? If we get promoted, they also get more money. That's simple economics. 

 

It's not nonsense, I never said that! 🤣 If these players don't pull in the same direction as the rest of the squad, it doesn't matter how good your team is, you'll win heehaw. A bad apple, is a bad apple.

It's not saying they wouldn't pay the right money for the right player but there has to be value for money and if he's not buying into what the rest of the squad and manager are trying to achieve then he's not worth any amount of money more. Being happy to pick up a wage packet and not do what you're asked is not acceptable in any job. Just because someone is a good player it doesn't mean he's going to be effective in your squad so people only interested in the money aren't the type of player they are after, they need to fully commit to what the manager wants to achieve. It's not rocket science.

 

[Al k]

The training ground was held up because of drainage issues. I believe there was an update somewhere on it last week.

Now that's been sorted who is dealing with what there will now have to be a recosting for certain aspects due to change in material costs. 

Have you tried contacting the club for a definite answer?

Think your getting a bit upset over the sporting thing. I'm reading it as if something out of the ordinary happening and its such a bad thing we would try and apply some form of sporting integrity.

Why don't we just worry about when and if it happens?

We aren't going start scoring own goals because an opposing players slipped and we got a yard advantage.