ARTICLE: John Bond at Burnley

[ClaretTony]

This week's article from davet / rodleydave

See link
https://www.uptheclarets.com/john-bond-at-burnley

[Ashingtonclaret46]

Thanks for that Dave, it is a good read and it shows that a bit of luck here and there is always needed to achieve success.
An outsider coming in to the Club at that time was always going to find it difficult to be accepted, particularly coming in to replace Frank who had done so well.
All water under the bridge now in a period which has seen us sink to the depths and then go on to achieve the impossible. All part of life's rich tapestry when you have supported the Clarets for so long!

[Woodleyclaret]

Probably the biggest mistake ever made by the board

[Steve1956]

Probably the biggest mistake ever made by the board

Thats an understatement!

[groove]

This should be interesting. Very divisive opinions regarding Bond among supporters. The Thatcher of ex-Clarets bosses.

[Wokingclaret]

Probably the biggest mistake ever made by the board

Sadly a failed mistake, but the biggest mistake was still to come with the next appointment.

[groove]

Would love to see the TV programme where he faces the fans.

[dsr]

I remember that TV interview, especially the bit about not thinking Burnley had a youth policy. At the club when he arrived, or sold just before he arrived, were:

Trevor Steven
Lee Dixon
Brian Laws
Andy Peyton
Mike Phelan

To look back, with hindsight, and say we didn't have a youth policy - clearly nonsense.

[ewanrob]

Remember going to Hull for first game expecting so much, 5 minutes in seeing Joe Gallagher half run half hobble.

[ClaretTony]

I remember that TV interview, especially the bit about not thinking Burnley had a youth policy. At the club when he arrived, or sold just before he arrived, were:

Trevor Steven
Lee Dixon
Brian Laws
Andy Peyton
Mike Phelan

To look back, with hindsight, and say we didn't have a youth policy - clearly nonsense.

Andy Payton was not at the club. We had Phelan, Laws and Dixon in the first team squad. The Steven deal to Everton had already been sorted.

Could you please tell me who are what was in the youth system at the time? I’ll tell you, no one of any value. So where on earth you get your nonsense from I don’t know.

[ClaretTony]

Probably the biggest mistake ever made by the board

Make no mistake - it was far from it.

[mdd2]

He always told me the time was not right for him or indeed probably anyone from outside coming to the club
Always watched the results more so after we became friends
Rang me immediately after that final whistle in 2010 to offer congrats at our promotion and had a wealth of info about the goings on at BFC when he was here
A nice man was John

[fidelcastro]

He always told me the time was not right for him or indeed probably anyone from outside coming to the club
Always watched the results more so after we became friends
Rang me immediately after that final whistle in 2010 to offer congrats at our promotion and had a wealth of info about the goings on at BFC when he was here
A nice man was John

Which final whistle in 2010?

The one that confirmed we were relegated?

[CleggHall]

A fair defence by Bond on TV and since though Gallagher, Tueart and Gow were disaster signings. Unlucky with the injury to Reeves but his "Flash Harry, London Spiv" image didn't help either. The analogy with Bob Lord is difficult to understand, Lord had many achievements and successes before his eventual downfall.

[mdd2]

Oops meant 2009
The 2010 final whistle was against his son and Harry

[Wokingclaret]

He always told me the time was not right for him or indeed probably anyone from outside coming to the club
Always watched the results more so after we became friends
Rang me immediately after that final whistle in 2010 to offer congrats at our promotion and had a wealth of info about the goings on at BFC when he was here
A nice man was John

Nice story that Mdd2, have to say Tommy Hutch was always fantastic with me and my Dad and Kevin Reeves was great too.

[Herts Clarets]

Probably the biggest mistake ever made by the board

Maybe the biggest they had made at that time. The next couple of appointments made the Bond decision pale into insignificance.....

[Gordaleman]

Bond had one bit of bad luck, and that was the hip injury to Kevin Reeves. Reeves was class, whereas the other Man City players he brought in were garbage.

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

A team of kids with a spine of veterans had got promoted, got relegated but proved in the cup runs that there was talent in the side. He landed, wrote them off, brought in his City fun bunch and we know the story. Not my favourite guy.

[Rodleydave]

Cleggy only that both are much maligned

[JimmyRobbo]

I remember at the time being happy that he was appointed.
I remember ups and downs during the season.
I despised him for years afterwards.

Now I've grown up, I think he was unlucky and it certainly wasn't all his fault. Might not be the most likeable bloke to manage us but he takes a lot of criticism for some things that he had nothing to do with.

I was talking to Steve Daley a few years ago about his deal. There was serious mismanagement there, too, but not entirely Bond's fault.

It didn't work out despite everyone wanting it to happen. If anything, it should teach us to continue investing with prudence. We can't afford to make many mistakes.

[dsr]

Andy Payton was not at the club. We had Phelan, Laws and Dixon in the first team squad. The Steven deal to Everton had already been sorted.

Could you please tell me who are what was in the youth system at the time? I’ll tell you, no one of any value. So where on earth you get your nonsense from I don’t know.

Sorry, I will try and make it a bit clearer. Bond, so far as I am aware, said that we didn't have a youth policy at the time - not that we didn't have any young players worth developing. But the youth policy, not long before he arrived, had had those five players in it. Which suggests to me that we had a youth policy up that that time, even if its results of three England players and two other top division players had tailed off.

I've always been lead to believe that the youth policy which had produced those five players was dismantled by Bond. Is that not right?

And for the record, I know that Steven had already left the club. My point was that just because Steven had left the club does not mean that we didn't have a youth policy any more. It may have meant that it was in a downturn, but it didn't mean it didn't exist. Those five players came from a youth policy - maybe it had ceased to exist before Bond arrived; perhaps you could clarify. But to say it had never existed would be plain wrong.

[ClaretTony]

I've always been lead to believe that the youth policy which had produced those five players was dismantled by Bond. Is that not right?

100% not right. We were fortunate with Phelan (local), Steven (a contact in Berwick) and Dixon (a trial through his dad). But if you want to look at the dismantling then the Gordon Clayton period as scout is a good place to start and he left the club before Bond arrived.

I don’t think Bond probably got involved in the youth system at all during his time at the club.

[Wokingclaret]

The reserves were still going, even John Benson promoted Steve Kennedy the next season!

Andy Kilner awaiting in the wings

[dsr]

100% not right. We were fortunate with Phelan (local), Steven (a contact in Berwick) and Dixon (a trial through his dad). But if you want to look at the dismantling then the Gordon Clayton period as scout is a good place to start and he left the club before Bond arrived.

I don’t think Bond probably got involved in the youth system at all during his time at the club.

OK. But he still spent a fortune and failed. IMO.

[Wokingclaret]

OK. But he still spent a fortune and failed. IMO.

The board got rid, but we still failed after him (with a great squad of players).

[BenWickes]

Grew up disliking the fella at first. Mainly because my Dad was a friend of Brian Miller. He was old school and wanted Burnley to appoint in house (my Dad not Miller) so he had a bee in his bonnet with Bond from day one.
It was indeed Miller who corrected my Dad some time later that Bond wasn't such a bad appointment but bad luck and a few decisions which didn't sit well with everyone. As mentioned above. He met Bond a few years later and said he was a very likeable chap who only wished us well and was clearly unhappy things hadn't turned out as he wished. He genuinely thought he could take us back up the leagues but it didn't work out.

[ashtonlongsider]

John Bond's appointment was an 'eyebrow raiser' no doubt. It was a divisive appointment and some supporters never gave him a chance. However IMO, at that time I felt we were ready for an external appointment. Someone who could bring new ideas into the club and move forward from the Bob Lord era.I think JB can count himself unlucky. He was beginning to turn opinion around and we were playing some very attractive football. However Kevin Reeves injury changed all that and I suppose it was the catalyst to his eventual downfall. Yes hindsight is a wonderful thing and the guy was honest enough to say he made mistakes but I personally felt our problems really started once he left.

[Dark Cloud]

IMO, the time had become right to look externally to appoint, as constantly looking inside the club had started to fail and we were in a mess. BUT that mess wasn't just connected with the management of the team or the recruitment, it was critically financial and was going to make reviving us very, very difficult for whoever took over. In that respect Bond was absolutely the wrong choice. It was the modern day equivalent of appointing Harry Redknap (or similar) He was flash, opinionated had probably read too many of his own press cuttings and gave off the air of a real big time charlie who'd come to save little old Burnley. He'd had success at some clubs (City?) and less at others, but he was a household name and I believe Jackson was thinking that his appointment would signal intent, help attract bigger name players and galvanise the fans. It failed and almost terminally broke the club. As as has been said, Bond eventually looked back on his time with a degree of humility and admitted (genuine) mistakes and I can't help drawing parallels with the Waddle appointment whereby there was a belief that appointing a "big name" would somehow bring a guarantee of success. Bond signed a bunch of ageing, last big pay day guys (who weren't on peanuts, at a pretty skint club) who he knew from his more successful days and believed that playing alongside a few youngsters in a poor lower division they would simply bring success. Waddle did the same and both times it failed, because it's a lot, lot harder than that.

[Woodleyclaret]

We had a board and chairman at the time who had lost there way
Only with the advent of Barry Kilbys tenure did things start moving on up.
Making a hash of manager appointments can become a habit.Weve got the best now and must do everything to keep him.

[dsr]

We had a board and chairman at the time who had lost there way
Only with the advent of Barry Kilbys tenure did things start moving on up.
Making a hash of manager appointments can become a habit.Weve got the best now and must do everything to keep him.

Things started moving on up with Frank Teasdale as chairman. We were in a much better position when Teasdale left than when he arrived.

[mdd2]

Things started moving on up with Frank Teasdale as chairman. We were in a much better position when Teasdale left than when he arrived.

Sorry to correct your spelling DSR for whilst agreeing with your post I thought his name was Teasdaleout as that is all I ever heard from those supporters who chanted his name in what I assumed was adulation of him.

[dsr]

Sorry to correct your spelling DSR for whilst agreeing with your post I thought his name was Teasdaleout as that is all I ever heard from those supporters who chanted his name in what I assumed was adulation of him.

After the York game in 1992, Jimmy Mullen and the players managed to get the fans to start a (brief) chant of "Teasdale! Teasdale!" and after every mention of his name, Teasdale mouthed the word "Out". He was smiling, though.

[ClaretTony]

OK. But he still spent a fortune and failed. IMO.

So you post something that is totally untrue, and then that is your response.

Yes, he failed. He took over a relegated side that was nowhere near good enough, he improved it, but ultimately it wasn't able to go up. He spent money that we probably didn't have but any manager will spend what they are given. He left a squad that was close to being good enough that the next manager managed to take down.

Was he a success at Burnley? No. Do I get really brassed off with him being accused of things he wasn't? Very much so.

[Hipper]

I would love it if Dave could write a warts and all review of the Bond era.

I think it was my most intense period of watching Burnley, including going to a couple of reserve games (I was a London Claret so that wasn't so easy). It was probably also the most exciting and strangest season, with an outsider and big name manager attracting more then usual publicity, all the transfers (some big names and including the extended Steve Daley saga), the sometimes superb home performances couple with the mostly miserable away ones (Wimbledon most obviously excepted), a season of two halves, the second being on the whole awful and with no sense of purpose (even Bond didn't attend some of those games, apparently going in search of new players). It would include the preparation for the following season with a clearly less ambitious set of transfers and finally, on the eve of the kick-off, Bond's departure.

[ClaretTony]

Things started moving on up with Frank Teasdale as chairman. We were in a much better position when Teasdale left than when he arrived.

And that is the biggest load of nonsense possible. I'm assuming you mean the Frank Teasdale who lied to shareholders when he told them there had been no offers for the club, found out when one of the potential investors just happened to be sat in the room. Being chairman became more important to him than the club did and in the end he had to be stitched up by other directors to get rid of him. He presided over the worst period in the club's history and he was very much a part of that.

Things started moving on up with Frank Teasdale as chairman? Don't make me laugh.

[BenWickes]

Things started moving on up with Frank Teasdale as chairman. We were in a much better position when Teasdale left than when he arrived.

Quite the contrary.

[mdd2]

Come on Tony it maybe that we were moving forward despite him but we had from memory gone from Division 3 to 4 before he became chairman and went as high as Div 2 with him and although we may have been heading to Division 3 (4) again when BK took over he had returned us to appointing managers in house or ex players apart from Waddle and maybe Buchan but he did get us Stan. So I think the club was somewhat better when he stepped down although he was somewhat recalcitrant apparently in stepping down. We may not like the new stands but at least we built them to make us all seater and I think we still owned our facilities at that time and he didn't stay on to watch us maybe end back in the lowest FL Division.
All was not bad with Teasdaleout.

[dsr]

And that is the biggest load of nonsense possible. I'm assuming you mean the Frank Teasdale who lied to shareholders when he told them there had been no offers for the club, found out when one of the potential investors just happened to be sat in the room. Being chairman became more important to him than the club did and in the end he had to be stitched up by other directors to get rid of him. He presided over the worst period in the club's history and he was very much a part of that.

Things started moving on up with Frank Teasdale as chairman? Don't make me laugh.

I suppose it's arguable that Burnley FC in October 1998 when Kilby took over was in a worse state than it was in May 1985 when Teasdale took over. It would be a hard argument, though.

Teasdale took over a side that had just been relegated to division 4 and had no manager. When he left we were in division 3 and fairly stable. Financially we were better off, and the two new stands had been built. Why do you think the club that Kilby took over was in no better state than the one Teasdale took over?

[ClaretTony]

I suppose it's arguable that Burnley FC in October 1998 when Kilby took over was in a worse state than it was in May 1985 when Teasdale took over. It would be a hard argument, though.

Teasdale took over a side that had just been relegated to division 4 and had no manager. When he left we were in division 3 and fairly stable. Financially we were better off, and the two new stands had been built. Why do you think the club that Kilby took over was in no better state than the one Teasdale took over?

Kilby came in during October, he became chairman at the end of the year, finally getting rid of Teasdale a short time later. Financially, we were in a shocking mess when Kilby came in, seriously shocking, and as for being stable in division 3, I think you need to look how things were going that season. Without Kilby's finance, we would have gone down, simple as. And you tell me, how on earth can you have any respect for a chairman who blatantly lies to shareholders at the AGM. The Teasdale era was, in the main, a total disaster.

At least you have given me a laugh today to suggest we were stable and financially better off when Teasdale handed over to Kilby.

[mdd2]

Even with BK's finances we nearly went down. Wasn't it the return of Steve Davis and permanent or loan deals initially for Paul Cook, Graham Branch, Tom Cowan, Micky Mellon, Lenny Johnrose and maybe some others that eventually saw us safe that season. I know we had a relatively long unbeaten run towards the end of the season after 11 goals conceded at home against City (nothing unusual there) and Gillingham where didn't Taylor bag all 5 goals?

[ClaretTony]

Even with BK's finances we nearly went down. Wasn't it the return of Steve Davis and permanent or loan deals initially for Paul Cook, Graham Branch, Tom Cowan, Micky Mellon, Lenny Johnrose and maybe some others that eventually saw us safe that season. I know we had a relatively long unbeaten run towards the end of the season after 11 goals conceded at home against City (nothing unusual there) and Gillingham where didn't Taylor bag all 5 goals?

Crichton, Pickering, Davis, Branch, Mellon & Johnrose all signed and there was no improvement. Following the two big defeats we signed Cowan and, significantly in my view, Cook on loan from Stockport. We lost the next game 1-0 v Preston but then went 11 without defeat.

[Wokingclaret]

Cowan and Cook were the game changers and maybe a happier manager to boot

[mdd2]

Crichton, Pickering, Davis, Branch, Mellon & Johnrose all signed and there was no improvement. Following the two big defeats we signed Cowan and, significantly in my view, Cook on loan from Stockport. We lost the next game 1-0 v Preston but then went 11 without defeat.

And then IMO one of the best signings in that summer-Mitchell Thomas to partner Steve Davis. Agree or not CT?

[Mala591]

Tommy Hutchison was a quality player and a pleasure to watch. I think he played for a couple of seasons on the left side of midfield. A great dribbler and crosser of the ball.

[mdd2]

Indeed Mala but that was until summer of 1985

[ClaretTony]

And then IMO one of the best signings in that summer-Mitchell Thomas to partner Steve Davis. Agree or not CT?

I'd seen Mitchell play against us for Luton in the previous season and wondered what on earth Stan was doing he was so bad. Proved to be a terrific signing, but Cook will always be the key signing for me.

[mdd2]

Didn't Cook and Stan have a fall out and wasn;'t he loaned out to Wigan?