John pepper Mike rigg

[jojomk1]

He’s not head of recruitment. That’s Martin Hodge. And in any case, when the recruitment team recommend a signing and either Dyche says no or Garlick refuses to pay the fee how can it be their problem?

Hodge or Rigg - what does it really matter

If neither of them actually speak with the manager about the type of player he wants to work with (and then looks for suitable candidates), SD is pretty much going to veto any of their own proposals

By the same token, have they spoke with the then Chairman about monies available - I do not go along with this theory that nobody knew what sort of monies were in the kitty. Imagine Garlick asking them to scout players and then he will decide if the club can afford them

If Rigg has gone then I presume Hodge knows what will happen if he does not perform this summer

[superdimitri]

When somebody is head of recruitment for three years and we sign Dale Stephens and Crouch then I think the criticism is just.

Exactly. It would have been his responsibility to fish out initial targets and you only have to look at our current situation to see how dismal recruitment has been.
He may well have had to deal with both Dyche and Garlick but he was clearly looking at the wrong players if we weren't able to sign them.

I'm sure the new owners have spoken to Dyche and have a much bigger insight to the problem then anyone on here, but it's certainly a telling tale that he's been asked to leave when they will be trying to get Dyche to sign a new contract.

Hopefully any more issues with our recruitment are also dealt with. If we need to get better scouts in too, then so be it.

[ClaretTony]

I do not go along with this theory that nobody knew what sort of monies were in the kitty. Imagine Garlick asking them to scout players and then he will decide if the club can afford them

So you think you know better than Dyche, Rigg & Hodge.

[Sleeping Cat]

Recommend all the players you like, nothing you can really do if the transfer budget just isn't available.

But there was budget, the players rigg brought to the table just weren't fancied.

[KRBFC]

But there was budget, the players rigg brought to the table just weren't fancied.

Then who was the budget spent on? we signed 1 player in the summer for £1M.

[Grumps]

To be fair, I know the type of player dyche would like, and roughly if we could afford him
Someone working in that role would know far more than me, if they are scouting players outside that area, they deserve sacking.

[Top Claret]

No nowt out of Pepper, but what I know is that Rigg as been pishing in the wind with the little resources that Dyche has had his disposal with the Garlick.

Mons bin stealing a wage but no fault of his

[Vegas Claret]

Then who was the budget spent on? we signed 1 player in the summer for £1M.

that was the budget, and it was 750K

[Spike]

What happened to the Transparency that Pace promised and that it is a club for us all
More cloak and dagger stuff than Midsummer Murders
There’s also a rumour going round that Flyde have tempted the groundsman away for more dollars than we were paying

[ClaretTony]

Then who was the budget spent on? we signed 1 player in the summer for £1M.

We signed two, there was a fee for Norris too, and Dyche has insisted recently that he only spent £750,000.

[ClaretTony]

What happened to the Transparency that Pace promised and that it is a club for us all
More cloak and dagger stuff than Midsummer Murders
There’s also a rumour going round that Flyde have tempted the groundsman away for more dollars than we were paying

Sadly he’s jumped on the Hart ‘One club for all’ slogan that Hart introduced for the community.

I’m not sure there’s much transparency as yet but we will see how things develop over the next weeks and months.

[NewClaret]

What happened to the Transparency that Pace promised and that it is a club for us all
More cloak and dagger stuff than Midsummer Murders
There’s also a rumour going round that Flyde have tempted the groundsman away for more dollars than we were paying

That would be quite something, if true.

Hope we find a new one before the season starts or Arteta’s going to be fuming!!!

[Chester Perry]

We signed two, there was a fee for Norris too, and Dyche has insisted recently that he only spent £750,000.

He did several times, yet the accounts clearly state £1m being spent in the last season in the post event (account date) notes. We know which has to be legally correct. Why he would do something like that when public record so clearly undermines what he is saying I do not know, it makes you question other things he has said and is saying.

[ClaretTony]

He did several times, yet the accounts clearly state £1m being spent in the last season in the post event (account date) notes. We know which has to be legally correct. Why he would do something like that when public record so clearly undermines what he is saying I do not know, it makes you question other things he has said and is saying.

I think it might have been £750,000 for Stephens & £250,000 for Norris and I think he is potentially discussing the Stephens deal.

[ClaretTony]

What happened to the Transparency that Pace promised and that it is a club for us all
More cloak and dagger stuff than Midsummer Murders
There’s also a rumour going round that Flyde have tempted the groundsman away for more dollars than we were paying

Not heard anything about Paul Bradshaw (groundsman) leaving. I don’t know Paul, I think I’ve spoken to him once but his dad Bob was the club secretary in the 1980s. A nicer man you would struggle to find but he sadly passed away at the time he was at Burnley.

Paul is still listed on the club website but the staff list is anything but up to date.

[Chester Perry]

I think it might have been £750,000 for Stephens & £250,000 for Norris and I think he is potentially discussing the Stephens deal.

that was my thought, but he has said it very clearly as being I only spent £750k last summer, Norris had played in the cup by then and of course played the final two games, having been part of the matchday squad for a few more. Dyche was certainly making people question his "facts" (for want of a better word) as a result.

[ClaretTony]

that was my thought, but he has said it very clearly as being I only spent £750k last summer, Norris had played in the cup by then and of course played the final two games, having been part of the matchday squad for a few more. Dyche was certainly making people question his "facts" (for want of a better word) as a result.

I’m sure he meant Stephens

[Chester Perry]

I’m sure he meant Stephens

He may well have but it very clearly doesn't read like that, and that is my point

https://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/b ... 44624.html

Asked what his budget might be over the next few months, Dyche responded: "I'd be hopeful it's more than the £750,000 that we spent last summer, that would be a good start, but we'll have to wait and see."

this was quoted many times - including here

https://www.football365.com/news/sean-d ... ley-owners

[DCWat]

I’d want to forget spending £250,000 on Norris too.

[randomclaret2]

He may well have but it very clearly doesn't read like that, and that is my point

https://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/b ... 44624.html

Asked what his budget might be over the next few months, Dyche responded: "I'd be hopeful it's more than the £750,000 that we spent last summer, that would be a good start, but we'll have to wait and see."

this was quoted many times - including here

https://www.football365.com/news/sean-d ... ley-owners

Whether it was £750k, £1m, or somewhere in between, they are pitiful figures for a Premier League club.

[ClaretTony]

Whether it was £750k, £1m, or somewhere in between, they are pitiful figures for a Premier League club.

But helping the major shareholder to get a better deal on sale

[Chester Perry]

Whether it was £750k, £1m, or somewhere in between, they are pitiful figures for a Premier League club.

I am not questioning that in this discussion

[taio]

But helping the major shareholder to get a better deal on sale

And I believe influenced by the new owners because the takeover was contingent on very healthy cash balances preserved through a lack of transfer activity last summer.

[ClaretTony]

And I believe influenced by the new owners because the takeover was contingent on very healthy cash balances preserved through a lack of transfer activity last summer.

They couldn’t influence it really but it’s fair to say the Garlick bread knew where to be buttered.

[taio]

They couldn’t influence it really but it’s fair to say the Garlick bread knew where to be buttered.

They could influence it because the takeover was reliant on the club having significant cash resources.

[ClaretTony]

They could influence it because the takeover was reliant on the club having significant cash resources.

But they had no direct influence. That was Garlick.

[taio]

But they had no direct influence. That was Garlick.

Not sure about that. If a takeover deal is conditional on there being tens of millions in the bank as part of how the deal is structured then it is a direct influence in my eyes. The alternative in this case would have been further borrowing and putting the club into even more debt.

[ClaretTony]

Not sure about that. If a takeover deal is conditional on there being tens of millions in the bank as part of how the deal is structured then it is a direct influence in my eyes. The alternative in this case would have been further borrowing and putting the club into even more debt.

But until 31st December they could have no say. They could advise Garlick but only he and the other directors, who clearly had no influence, could control the spending. I’m not suggesting ALK didn’t influence Garlick, they obviously did, but they could not make decisions on behalf of the club.

[taio]

But until 31st December they could have no say. They could advise Garlick but only he and the other directors, who clearly had no influence, could control the spending. I’m not suggesting ALK didn’t influence Garlick, they obviously did, but they could not make decisions on behalf of the club.

I totally accept they couldn't make the decisions. All I'm saying is that the cash pile was clearly contigent on the takeover proceeding, therefore ALK influenced the lack of transfer activity last summer.

[duncandisorderly]

They can though - it's like agreeing to buy a house on the condition that all the kitchen appliances are included. That is a direct influence on whether or not the seller changes their oven before the sale completes.

if the condition of the sale of the club was that there be £X,000,000 in the bank then that is a direct influence on what Garlick can spend - not what Garlick spends it on, but what he can spend at all.

[ClaretTony]

I totally accept they couldn't make the decisions. All I'm saying is that the cash pile was clearly contigent on the takeover proceeding, therefore ALK influenced the lack of transfer activity last summer.

They probably influenced Garlick. I’ve never questioned that and Garlick was blatantly looking at the best deal for Garlick.

[taio]

They probably influenced Garlick. I’ve never questioned that and Garlick was blatantly looking at the best deal for Garlick.

You originally said they couldn't influence it really with reference to how much was spent last summer.

[ClaretTony]

You originally said they couldn't influence it really with reference to how much was spent last summer.

Which I’m continuing to say. The only people able to control the spending in the transfer window were our directors which in effect was Garlick. They were clearly influencing Garlick but they had no direct influence on the club until they bought it.

[taio]

Which I’m continuing to say. The only people able to control the spending in the transfer window were our directors which in effect was Garlick. They were clearly influencing Garlick but they had no direct influence on the club until they bought it.

You said originally they had no influence really. Now you are saying they were clearly influencing although not directly influencing. I believe the structure of the deal that was being put forward by ALK was such that it was clearly contigent on minimal transfer fees last summer. That in my book is a significant influencing factor and it appears I'm not on my own. However let's agree to disagree.

[ClaretTony]

You said originally they had no influence really. Now you are saying they were clearly influencing although not directly influencing. I believe the structure of the deal that was being put forward by ALK was such that it was clearly contigent on minimal transfer fees last summer. That in my book is a significant influencing factor and it appears I'm not on my own. However let's agree to disagree.

I give up. I’ve repeated a consistent view. I’ve made it clear but you don’t either seem to understand or want to understand.

[taio]

I was trying to draw a line under this. I was disputing your view that they had no influence really on spending last summer. They were your words not mine. Let's both give up.

[Chester Perry]

They probably influenced Garlick. I’ve never questioned that and Garlick was blatantly looking at the best deal for Garlick.

That is a questionable one, the best deal for Garlick was probably down the road with another year in the Premier League guaranteed and a return to normality and higher revenues.

The best deal for ALK was to takeover before the transfer window, with roadmaps (generated under Garlick's reign) in place, and the only known competitor being the subject of deep disquiet amongst fans

There is also the issue of Dyche, both Garlick and ALK appear to believe (like many) that he was essential to the prolonged stay in the Premier League. That appeared to require the exit of Garlick.

I have long maintained that pre-pandemic last summer would have seen a number of new squad additions as the ducks were aligning rapidly in terms of available cash and space in the squad budget, covid and the outlook for the season changed that outlook. No one has been willing to try and disprove that. With Garlick this summer would have still seen us in a positive position to acquire players, together with the work that is currently being done. The new owners will likely buy but financial position is totally different.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

That is a questionable one, the best deal for Garlick was probably down the road with another year in the Premier League guaranteed and a return to normality and higher revenues.

The best deal for ALK was to takeover before the transfer window, with roadmaps (generated under Garlick's reign) in place, and the only known competitor being the subject of deep disquiet amongst fans

There is also the issue of Dyche, both Garlick and ALK appear to believe (like many) that he was essential to the prolonged stay in the Premier League. That appeared to require the exit of Garlick.

I have long maintained that pre-pandemic last summer would have seen a number of new squad additions as the ducks were aligning rapidly in terms of available cash and space in the squad budget, covid and the outlook for the season changed that outlook. No one has been willing to try and disprove that. With Garlick this summer would have still seen us in a positive position to acquire players, together with the work that is currently being done. The new owners will likely buy but financial position is totally different.

As someone has posted above given the nature of the diabolical last few windows not sure what would have changed this summer has he remained in charge.

[ClaretTony]

As someone has posted above given the nature of the diabolical last few windows not sure what would have changed this summer has he remained in charge.

The manager would definitely have gone

[Chester Perry]

As someone has posted above given the nature of the diabolical last few windows not sure what would have changed this summer has he remained in charge.

not disputing that Sean may have left if the sale had not gone through, but I would still like someone to show me a detailed financial analysis of what could have been spent, with cost/revenue breakdowns and including the roadmap of all the other costs including a full list of assumptions and risks, bearing in mind each year your are planning budgets forward not looking back at results.

I keep asking and I keep getting no takers, which is a shame

People will keep saying I am defending Garlick, I am not, I have repeatedly said I have sought to understand his actions and decisions by looking at public record (mainly the accounts and interviews in which he and the board members have explained their approach) and then determine if they were reasonable by that criteria. I am asking for people to have a rational, non emotive discussion with clear points of reference in those records to what they could do differently (given the roadmap for all their non football plans).

[taio]

not disputing that Sean may have left if the sale had not gone through, but I would still like someone to show me a detailed financial analysis of what could have been spent, with cost/revenue breakdowns and including the roadmap of all the other costs including a full list of assumptions and risks, bearing in mind each year your are planning budgets forward not looking back at results.

I keep asking and I keep getting no takers, which is a shame

People will keep saying I am defending Garlick, I am not, I have repeatedly said I have sought to understand his actions and decisions by looking at public record (mainly the accounts and interviews in which he and the board members have explained their approach) and then determine if they were reasonable by that criteria. I am asking for people to have a rational, non emotive discussion with clear points of reference in those records to what they could do differently (given the roadmap for all their non football plans).

You should certainly continue trying to understand the various nuances and implications. I hope those who in my view have been overly critical of Garlick's time as chairman turn out to be right and that we will see improvement and investment under Pace. Personally I'm anxious about how the takeover was funded and what this will mean over the next few years.

[KRBFC]

not disputing that Sean may have left if the sale had not gone through, but I would still like someone to show me a detailed financial analysis of what could have been spent, with cost/revenue breakdowns and including the roadmap of all the other costs including a full list of assumptions and risks, bearing in mind each year your are planning budgets forward not looking back at results.

I keep asking and I keep getting no takers, which is a shame

People will keep saying I am defending Garlick, I am not, I have repeatedly said I have sought to understand his actions and decisions by looking at public record (mainly the accounts and interviews in which he and the board members have explained their approach) and then determine if they were reasonable by that criteria. I am asking for people to have a rational, non emotive discussion with clear points of reference in those records to what they could do differently (given the roadmap for all their non football plans).

I'm not sure how you can really defend Garlick for his actions last summer, piling cash reserves to sell the club while the squad was so badly neglected in key areas, we got incredibly fortunate there was 3 shocking teams below us. I've given him a pass for previous windows too. It's easy and understandable to say we are saving cash to build up to help stabilise if we are relegated but how true was all of that?

[Chester Perry]

I'm not sure how you can really defend Garlick for his actions last summer, piling cash reserves to sell the club while the squad was so badly neglected in key areas, we got incredibly fortunate there was 3 shocking teams below us. I've given him a pass for previous windows too. It's easy and understandable to say we are saving cash to build up to help stabilise if we are relegated but how true was all of that?

you appear to have ignored everything written in the post you quoted - which is not like you

[bfcjg]

As the thread is now nothing like the OP how about inserting a comma after John and finishing the sentence.
John,pepper Mike rigg; I want to hear him sneeze.

[Local cricketer]

They probably influenced Garlick. I’ve never questioned that and Garlick was blatantly looking at the best deal for Garlick.

Massive Burnley fan you know

[claretandy]

Boden's only just twigged on this, talk about breaking news...

[Stockbrokerbelt]

Does it Matter who did or who did not, who’s right & who is not, its not a xxxx swinging contest, what matters is what happens now & in the future, things will change & be different as the club is being run by business men who clearly understand world finance & how to raise it, put it to best use & also make it. It’s clear ALK have a vision & their own ideas on how they are going to run the club, that does not mean the structure of the deal & finance is wrong just how things happen in business. Kieran Mcguire who is an expert on football finance thinks its an ok deal.

[MACCA]

Massive Burnley fan you know

You spelt Business man wrong, damn auti correct these days eh...

[Andingle]

https://trainingground.guru/articles/ac ... five-years

[ClaretTony]

Boden's only just twigged on this, talk about breaking news...

What’s he supposed to do, announce speculation as fact? I’ve been aware of Rigg & Pepper for some time although I don’t believe the two are connected and I’m sure Chris has too.