By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The forum is now on YouTube. Not watched it in full yet but it’s showing as 57mins long. The first 23 minutes are the opening comments from the panel. Before the questions start, in relation to the questions sent to the Trust, the MC mentions that “we need to make sure we allow time for those questions to be asked.”
There then follows approx 23 mins of questions from the floor, these are then followed by those sent into the Trust.
The MC then states just before the 54 minute mark on the video that they will take one further question from the floor as “we are over time”. Approx 3 mins later the forum ends.
[Post edited 11 Sep 13:46]
Those 23 minutes included time to discuss Ian being nice to someone's daughter and a detailed enquiry as to the availability of vegan options approximately 30 minutes before kick off.
The sweeping the room policy has never been successful, and to shorten the forum without any prior warning is not what this club has been about.
I had 3 requests to raise it at CAB. Hopefully the Trust statement will be followed up with a detailed response.
Didn’t understand the “disappointment” about more than one of McNulty’s coaching staff joining him. If anyone was expecting it just to be Taylor, did people really believe Done would turn down the offer to move to stay when his own role may be in doubt when a new manager came in?
Unless the idea was to offer him the managers job, it was an inevitable career move.
Done is best mates with Hendo and I don’t think for one minute that Hendo didn’t have some sway in bringing done in. Have to agree that a full departure of the core background staff was debilitating . The team took a huge turn when done and Taylor came in to support Jim.
That was not a good watch and a polar opposite from last years positivity, which given the current on field debacle is understandable. This documentary if picked up by a decent company ‘preying Netflix’ could be the saving grace.
Watson’s body language was that of a drowning man. I really hope he can change this around, but if you zoom in on the discussion around bringing in someone to oversee ie director or football and how nothing gets past the head coaches recruitment, he looks so uncomfortable.
Seems like a nice guy but not sure that was the rally call we all needed.
Disappointed at not being allowed further questions from the floor - I had one lined up about whether we are forced to play the Premiership loanees. It seemed like they had battened down the hatches, somehow expecting a more feisty crowd. I think the platitudes being spouted rather subdued the mood. The thing I took away was IW saying that we were on the next 3 year plan and that things would not happen overnight. Not convinced. The trouble is the get-out-of-jail card: the injuries.Until they return you can only go off your gut feeling.
[Post edited 12 Sep 9:20]
The worm of time turns not for the cuckoo of circumstance.
Didn’t understand the “disappointment” about more than one of McNulty’s coaching staff joining him. If anyone was expecting it just to be Taylor, did people really believe Done would turn down the offer to move to stay when his own role may be in doubt when a new manager came in?
Unless the idea was to offer him the managers job, it was an inevitable career move.
not for the first time SG's response had a defensiveness about it, almost echoing posters on here who feel McNulty 'betrayed' their trust by taking another job.
Equally we got clear confirmation that IW is not a continuity appointment (from his own lips) despite SG's contrary claim on his appointment.
not for the first time SG's response had a defensiveness about it, almost echoing posters on here who feel McNulty 'betrayed' their trust by taking another job.
Equally we got clear confirmation that IW is not a continuity appointment (from his own lips) despite SG's contrary claim on his appointment.
[Post edited 12 Sep 10:27]
In trying to elicit what he'd learnt in appointing managers, and whether he'd be looking to change anything going forward, i could perhaps have posed the question more forcefully, e.g. what have you learnt from mistakes made
He had the opportunity to answer with greater insight, but kept it fairly upbeat
In trying to elicit what he'd learnt in appointing managers, and whether he'd be looking to change anything going forward, i could perhaps have posed the question more forcefully, e.g. what have you learnt from mistakes made
He had the opportunity to answer with greater insight, but kept it fairly upbeat
Possibly though I suspect SG would have deflected that question too, DA.
Interestingly one of the questions I'd submitted via the Trust to IW was "If you again get appointed during a pre-season to a newly promoted side what lessons will you bring from your Rochdale experience?" - unfortunately that also wasn't asked.
Possibly though I suspect SG would have deflected that question too, DA.
Interestingly one of the questions I'd submitted via the Trust to IW was "If you again get appointed during a pre-season to a newly promoted side what lessons will you bring from your Rochdale experience?" - unfortunately that also wasn't asked.
That a question like that will have been seen by the Trust, passed on and then not asked is a quite damning reflection on whoever made the decision for it not to be asked on the night.
There needs to a clear explanation of the decision making process over the length of the forum.
That a question like that will have been seen by the Trust, passed on and then not asked is a quite damning reflection on whoever made the decision for it not to be asked on the night.
There needs to a clear explanation of the decision making process over the length of the forum.
Rochdale Supporters Trust would like to thank Laura Thomas for the following statement regarding our earlier post:
We are aware of the Dale Supporters Trust statement regarding last night’s Fans Forum.
Firstly, we would like to thank those fans who attended the Forum, as well as those who sent questions to the Trust in advance. Whilst there was a high volume of questions forwarded to the Club, there were some that raised a lot of similar points. In order to avoid repetition, these questions were grouped together.
In some cases, these were covered by the panel – Simon Gauge, Laura Thomas and Ryan Bradley – at the start of the evening. Other topics were then asked by the event’s MC, David Dockerty, towards the end of the night.
With regard to any questions submitted that were not fully answered, we are more than happy to provide a written response directly to the supporter who raised the question, upon request.
As a Club, we remain committed to working closely with the Dale Supporters Trust, supported by Vince Ashall, the Trust’s representative on the Club’s Board of Directors, who sat on Thursday night’s top table.
We also recognise that the Forum ended earlier than on previous occasions, and we will endeavour to ensure that all supporters in attendance have the chance to ask a question at future Forums.
Rochdale Supporters Trust would like to thank Laura Thomas for the following statement regarding our earlier post:
We are aware of the Dale Supporters Trust statement regarding last night’s Fans Forum.
Firstly, we would like to thank those fans who attended the Forum, as well as those who sent questions to the Trust in advance. Whilst there was a high volume of questions forwarded to the Club, there were some that raised a lot of similar points. In order to avoid repetition, these questions were grouped together.
In some cases, these were covered by the panel – Simon Gauge, Laura Thomas and Ryan Bradley – at the start of the evening. Other topics were then asked by the event’s MC, David Dockerty, towards the end of the night.
With regard to any questions submitted that were not fully answered, we are more than happy to provide a written response directly to the supporter who raised the question, upon request.
As a Club, we remain committed to working closely with the Dale Supporters Trust, supported by Vince Ashall, the Trust’s representative on the Club’s Board of Directors, who sat on Thursday night’s top table.
We also recognise that the Forum ended earlier than on previous occasions, and we will endeavour to ensure that all supporters in attendance have the chance to ask a question at future Forums.
Laura Thomas - CEO Rochdale AFC
But they weren't grouped together because the MC began with questions from the floor which by definition were unknown. The opening Panel statements were very welcome general Club policies and less welcome attempted mitigations for the disastrous start to the Season but Head Coach decisions weren't covered.
Better would be to use the previously submitted questions to group a series of topics, put them and request follow up questions from the floor - so that there is a dialogue instead of platitudes and deflection. The Message Board would also provide topic areas - all the key questions about the playing side had been covered in the recent podcast. New topics could also be taken from the floor but not in 30 minutes!
I will submit my 4 questions which were not put but the point is somewhat lost if the answers are not face to face in person to the assembled fans.
The comment about the Trust having a representative on the panel is well made - surely Vince would have known the submitted questions and could/should have raised them himself?
But they weren't grouped together because the MC began with questions from the floor which by definition were unknown. The opening Panel statements were very welcome general Club policies and less welcome attempted mitigations for the disastrous start to the Season but Head Coach decisions weren't covered.
Better would be to use the previously submitted questions to group a series of topics, put them and request follow up questions from the floor - so that there is a dialogue instead of platitudes and deflection. The Message Board would also provide topic areas - all the key questions about the playing side had been covered in the recent podcast. New topics could also be taken from the floor but not in 30 minutes!
I will submit my 4 questions which were not put but the point is somewhat lost if the answers are not face to face in person to the assembled fans.
The comment about the Trust having a representative on the panel is well made - surely Vince would have known the submitted questions and could/should have raised them himself?
[Post edited 12 Sep 15:27]
Regarding your last point: Vince Ashall wasn't even "at the table", but sat at the side and i doubt he'd be able to put forward the relevant questions in the manner their submitters would wish them to be asked
(Appreciate table lengths can vary, but an extension might've been added as a courtesy)
You're perfectly right though - it's the Trust Chair who should be championing questions from the Trust
Indeed. It now seems clear that parts of the "club establishment" did not want the forum, and obviously couldn't cancel it without controversy. (They may have expected vitriol, they got none. The pre-forum "message from the board" worked in that respect.) So, they manipulated it, ordering the MC to run it like he did to protect Watson from some of the deserved questions raised by his actions. Shut it down ASAP, impose a time limit but don't tell anyone. Even in much darker days, that has never happened before at a Fans Forum. That is NOT what a Dale Fans Forum is about. It is not a criticism of Ian Watson, who stayed on and spoke to supporters. It is not a criticism of the MC operating under orders, but a criticism of a very cynical manipulation of a bi-annual event, hosted by Dale Trust, by certain people at the club.
It was noted that none of the Ogden family or their appointed board members were there, but why should they travel and incur costs for a 53 minute meeting?
At a time when so many good things are happening off the pitch, we don't need divisive tricks like that. Hopefully, a lesson learned because those of us in attendance and Dale Trust will no doubt want visible timelines at least for the next event. We don't forget stunts like that.
At least none of the top table resorted to pretending to cry á la Roger.
Indeed. It now seems clear that parts of the "club establishment" did not want the forum, and obviously couldn't cancel it without controversy. (They may have expected vitriol, they got none. The pre-forum "message from the board" worked in that respect.) So, they manipulated it, ordering the MC to run it like he did to protect Watson from some of the deserved questions raised by his actions. Shut it down ASAP, impose a time limit but don't tell anyone. Even in much darker days, that has never happened before at a Fans Forum. That is NOT what a Dale Fans Forum is about. It is not a criticism of Ian Watson, who stayed on and spoke to supporters. It is not a criticism of the MC operating under orders, but a criticism of a very cynical manipulation of a bi-annual event, hosted by Dale Trust, by certain people at the club.
It was noted that none of the Ogden family or their appointed board members were there, but why should they travel and incur costs for a 53 minute meeting?
At a time when so many good things are happening off the pitch, we don't need divisive tricks like that. Hopefully, a lesson learned because those of us in attendance and Dale Trust will no doubt want visible timelines at least for the next event. We don't forget stunts like that.
At least none of the top table resorted to pretending to cry á la Roger.
[Post edited 13 Sep 2:55]
Fans forums are mandatory for EFL clubs, I guess enthusiasm for them is different from club to club... Under EFL Regulation 112.1, all member clubs across the Championship, League One, and League Two must hold at least two meetings or fans' forums per season. These forums must invite supporters or their representatives to discuss significant club matters and must feature senior club leadership—such as the majority owner, a board director, or a senior executive
Fans forums are mandatory for EFL clubs, I guess enthusiasm for them is different from club to club... Under EFL Regulation 112.1, all member clubs across the Championship, League One, and League Two must hold at least two meetings or fans' forums per season. These forums must invite supporters or their representatives to discuss significant club matters and must feature senior club leadership—such as the majority owner, a board director, or a senior executive
As it states “meetings” it could be argued this is met by meeting with Trust/CAB, something other clubs may do to ensure they meet this requirement.
Fact is, we’ve had fans forums forever at Dale, often in eras where the position was far worse than we are now. It’s even occurred in recent years before the Ogdens arrived with no time limits imposed.
What happened last week was a mistake and you can only imagine questions are also being asked behind closed doors at Spotland.
Whilst Simon Gauge has experienced the negativity that can happen amongst a fanbase when there's a perceived downward turn in club fortunes (both on and off the pitch) it's highly unlikely the Ogdens will have anything similar in their business backgrounds. Cut-throat competition, financial setbacks, yes - but the success of their companies is testament to acute business brains
I'm not sure they'll know how to negotiate in-match fan disenchantment, vociferously expressed, and i can understand why there was no family representative last Thursday, especially given the tremendous inputs of time, money and effort into not just the club but the wider community. In short, they don't need our (temporary) negativity, even whilst it's justified from one local angle
This isn't to say they'd shy away from confronting it, simply that it's probably in no-one's interests for that to be happening. The stage management of the forum, whilst unfortunate, has been recognised by the CEO. Moving on from there, we might expect a different forum in the expected six-month timeframe when there will have been much water under the bridge
Been posted elsewhere, but this is the sort of excellent information that could've been shared at a fans forum had it lasted long enough and questions been asked. Insightful from our reps, and some wise words from Huw Jenkins who is vastly experienced in the game.
But they weren't grouped together because the MC began with questions from the floor which by definition were unknown. The opening Panel statements were very welcome general Club policies and less welcome attempted mitigations for the disastrous start to the Season but Head Coach decisions weren't covered.
Better would be to use the previously submitted questions to group a series of topics, put them and request follow up questions from the floor - so that there is a dialogue instead of platitudes and deflection. The Message Board would also provide topic areas - all the key questions about the playing side had been covered in the recent podcast. New topics could also be taken from the floor but not in 30 minutes!
I will submit my 4 questions which were not put but the point is somewhat lost if the answers are not face to face in person to the assembled fans.
The comment about the Trust having a representative on the panel is well made - surely Vince would have known the submitted questions and could/should have raised them himself?
[Post edited 12 Sep 15:27]
Have you heard anything back regarding your questions?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.