Good Try Mr. McKenzie


ARTESIANFEBRUARY 4, 2017 at 02:23  CORRUPT OFFICIALFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 23:54Very …

Comment on Good Try Mr. McKenzie by Corrupt official.

ARTESIANFEBRUARY 4, 2017 at 02:23 
CORRUPT OFFICIALFEBRUARY 3, 2017 at 23:54Very True -although every industry I have worked in has relied on a steady stream of raw talent of sufficient quality being available to enable it to flourish and grow .
   Thanks for the reply ARTESIAN. 
        I agree a method needs to implemented whereby a conveyor belt of raw talent has to be improved upon. I touched upon it as a KPI, with more funding going to clubs who direct players upwards in the system.  As well as the transfer fee, they would receive a bigger slice of any “communal fund”. 
    Over-all, I am attempting to find ways to “encourage” smaller clubs with ambition, to do more to help themselves. Those who do, receive additional assistance. In the main, that is what the larger clubs have done, and through similar methods, i.e. transfer improved players. increase gates, and receive rewards for success.  
    I would also try to get an “adopt a club” scheme in place, whereby larger clubs with better facilities could perhaps allow an ambitious local club use of them during down times. Maybe the occasional session with the better, “specialist” positional coaches, offer tactical awareness classes, to aspiring coaches of lower clubs, etc. It would be practically a free improvement, other than an hour or two of peoples time, and a bit of electricity. This could be done conveyor belt stylee, with every club assisting a club from the division below. 
    Perhaps more importantly, some business advice, on raising, negotiating, and securing sponsors, and attracting “customers”, maximising and increasing current revenues, and creating new ones.
    All relatively cheaply implemented, and a win win for all. There are many ways to expand such a system, and encourage it to grow.

Corrupt official Also Commented

Good Try Mr. McKenzie
Why “redistribution” of wealth at all? 
    Who can say, that spreading income from the top clubs onto lower clubs will produce increased competition,and not some new tables and chairs for the social club?… The off-set being the top clubs are weakened, ergo Euro coefficients and solidarity payments reduced, with subsequent knock-ons
   Wealth creation is the way forward. It is what the top clubs have done, and are doing, with Aberdeen and Hearts both implementing massive stadium improvement plans for example. 
   This was not done by popping down the road to see their mate with a haulage company, and filching some scaffolding poles to hang his board on. It is being done by professional clubs being professional. Showing ambition, drive, and optimistic enthusiasm.
   It is hard to say this without appearing to be mocking of some lower clubs, but the bottom line is some of them like the way their club already is. I cant, and won’t knock them for that. It is their club, they run it, and that is what they want. 
   They don’t want hundreds turning up, where there are tens, They don’t want thousands turning up, where there are hundreds.   They wouldn’t all fit in for the dinner dance. 
   The “social” aspect of their club, is different from the “social” aspect of higher clubs. 
   That is not to say all smaller clubs do not want to grow. Any wealth distribution that does take place, should be split with this differential in mind. A block of butter can only spread so many bread slices before it becomes both a waste of butter, and bread. The distribution pool first needs narrowed. 
   Then the funds should be used in an encouraging fashion. Perhaps based on average attendance increases, showing the club is doing their bit, or maybe on turn-over, with performance indicators to include increased sponsorship and fund-raising the club does for itself, or maybe players transferred to a higher division, showing the club has an eye for a player. 
      I absolutely do not mean or wish any harm on smaller clubs who do not wish to partake of such a way, but lets be honest.
    We are talking about providing increased competition for top clubs, and a move away from monopolies or duopolies. but either way you look at it, it is a move intended to improve on the current “business” model. That is the nuts and bolts of it. Business.
      There can be no sentimentality about it, no matter how long your club has been a member. KPI’s are all that matter.
   That is what income redistribution boils down to. Some clubs will be worthwhile investing Scottish fitba’ money in, but sadly, some won’t. Financial assistance to some clubs will simply be a waste of a valuable and very limited resource. Cash .

Good Try Mr. McKenzie
Warbs made a peculiar comment regarding hooking off the loan Ranger boy. (I forget his name), stating that he had a duty of care to his parent club. I am in no doubt that they have, as they should have to any employee, employed directly or otherwise.
 However, injuries and fatigue, are part and parcel of the game. I’m sure that any parent club would understand this.
   That is primarily what insurance is for.
   However the level of insurance comes in many shapes and forms, with premiums gauged pro-rata with the level of cover, and value of player.
   We have all seen the photos of Garner in A&E. Have the boys parent club said, “If you break him, You fix him”, and minimal limited cover is the cause of his concern?.
     It of course could very well be, that he was managing the boys fitness, and he doesn’t want to lose the boy for the short time he has him, but it did make me wonder how, and who, would be responsible for his insurance cover in a loan situation?
   I imagine it would be raised in the contract negotiations, and an agreed situation reached should any mishaps occur. 
   To my thinking, it would fall on the receiving club, to provide the appropriate insurances, but that a parent club could possibly be perceived as being negligent, should the boy be farmed out on lesser cover than they themselves provided. 
   Warbs has already put it out there that player contracts were above his pay-grade, which a questioning SMSM would not have missed or skated over. 
   Could it be that TRFC only have minimum cover for the boy, but are contractually obliged to underwrite to the level he currently enjoys? ….As I said in opening. It’s a peculiar statement to make, that perhaps a more questioning SMSM might have quizzed further. 

Good Try Mr. McKenzie
Euro campaign pay-outs 

Farsley Celtic done well eh….Other clubs, not quite so well. 

Recent Comments by Corrupt official

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
JIMBODECEMBER 29, 2017 at 12:55
I hope the pathways in the approaches to CP are well salted tomorrow.  I read a few weeks ago that the pavements were very icy and dangerous on the way to the ground
    I think it is covered in the criteria by which a match can take place Jimbo, but I imagine restricted to the actual property boundaries.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
JIMBODECEMBER 28, 2017 at 18:17
So the SPFL have come out and said we can’t afford goal line technology.
    How much would a phone selotaped to the goalposts really cost?….OK the pinhole camera securely sited in the post or bar, but it shouldn’t run to mega bucks. 
    Interesting reading this past wee while. I wish you all a very happy and healthy new year. 

Who Is Conning Whom?
    Would it have been less embarrassing for the Sevco statement to merely have iterated. “Sorry, but we’re skint!”

Who Is Conning Whom?
DBD….Don’t you want to discover who killed your club and how?. (Because the simple fact you dismiss, is that Yes!..It did die !) Don’t you want to know who assisted them, have them exposed, and removed from office, or prosecuted if warranted?. Don’t you want rules, and governance to prevent it happening again?
   No need for a glass door to see some folk coming.

Who Is Conning Whom?
   I hear Sevco will be sending out a strong message at the AGM

About the author