I'm not missing the point. When you formulate your desired plan for a team of non playing staff under normal circumstances you might be able to have all of those roles included. But because of the present economic conditions then you want you might have to make decisions on some of the roles because of the revised budget you have available. So if you still want 'n' number of coaches you might need to lose some of the other positions. The fact Harrold came in recently makes sense as two months ago when the other positions were made redundant the players were not back at training so why rush into it? Just because we had a budget for non playing staff it didn't mean we had to use it all up immediately.
This applies in the real world as well as football. For example, my company made loads of people redundant sadly two months ago, but since then we've also recruited people in other specialist positions because we've needed those people to take the business forward.
Anyway, I've posted this as a question for Danny Macklin as I'm interested in his view on it so guess we will know more soon.
You are. The statement wasn’t ‘we have to restructure our first team staff and coaching’. It was ‘we have to reduce the number of staff’.
This coaching set up failed last season and yet the club’s way of making it better is by making Matt Harrold (who played under this setup last season) another coach.
Why have you asked him? It’s Martin Ling who needs to answer this one. Jobs for the boys and a protective layer around the DOF. I can’t see Nigel and Kent being owners in 2 years and ML wants to make sure there are enough ‘Orient people’ around the first team and a structure that is difficult to break down, no matter how well or poor they perform. See Carl Fletcher.
Here is a point that is missed in all the above conversations .
JE's salary continued for a year paid to his widow .
That has been fulfilled & the salary is now back directly
within the clubs budget.
Senda Replaces Ross after Ross stepped into The Number 1 role.
Brill reverted back to his original role , Harold we can assume is affordable
As Senda may not have been on a massive wage at barnet & i doubt Ross
Is on the same wage as JE was .
If & it is an if those things are true , then we can probably say we stay within budget
but with the bonus of more staff.
All of that is fine but Martin Ling said we had to reduce staff due to the current economic climate. That clearly isn’t true.
BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Tue Aug 11, 2020 11:54 pm
You are. The statement wasn’t ‘we have to restructure our first team staff and coaching’. It was ‘we have to reduce the number of staff’.
This coaching set up failed last season and yet the club’s way of making it better is by making Matt Harrold (who played under this setup last season) another coach.
Why have you asked him? It’s Martin Ling who needs to answer this one. Jobs for the boys and a protective layer around the DOF. I can’t see Nigel and Kent being owners in 2 years and ML wants to make sure there are enough ‘Orient people’ around the first team and a structure that is difficult to break down, no matter how well or poor they perform. See Carl Fletcher.
Here is a point that is missed in all the above conversations .
JE's salary continued for a year paid to his widow .
That has been fulfilled & the salary is now back directly
within the clubs budget.
Senda Replaces Ross after Ross stepped into The Number 1 role.
Brill reverted back to his original role , Harold we can assume is affordable
As Senda may not have been on a massive wage at barnet & i doubt Ross
Is on the same wage as JE was .
If & it is an if those things are true , then we can probably say we stay within budget
but with the bonus of more staff.
All of that is fine but Martin Ling said we had to reduce staff due to the current economic climate. That clearly isn’t true.
Boris Johnson said he didnt lie to the Queen .
Courts said different
Here is a point that is missed in all the above conversations .
JE's salary continued for a year paid to his widow .
That has been fulfilled & the salary is now back directly
within the clubs budget.
Senda Replaces Ross after Ross stepped into The Number 1 role.
Brill reverted back to his original role , Harold we can assume is affordable
As Senda may not have been on a massive wage at barnet & i doubt Ross
Is on the same wage as JE was .
If & it is an if those things are true , then we can probably say we stay within budget
but with the bonus of more staff.
All of that is fine but Martin Ling said we had to reduce staff due to the current economic climate. That clearly isn’t true.
Boris Johnson said he didnt lie to the Queen .
Courts said different
Move on .
When the club is begging to keep my money and making me feel guilty about not doing so and claiming to be under so much pressure that they have to lay staff off but then employ more staff. They need to be held accountable for those decisions.
Re: FAO Gilso
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:08 pm
by HARVEY T DENTON
When you say the club, do you mean ML?
Re: FAO Gilso
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:10 pm
by NuneatonO's
HARVEY T DENTON wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:08 pm
When you say the club, do you mean ML?
BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 1:15 am
All of that is fine but Martin Ling said we had to reduce staff due to the current economic climate. That clearly isn’t true.
Boris Johnson said he didnt lie to the Queen .
Courts said different
Move on .
When the club is begging to keep my money and making me feel guilty about not doing so and claiming to be under so much pressure that they have to lay staff off but then employ more staff. They need to be held accountable for those decisions.
Begging for your Money ?
Feeling Guilty ?
Blimey you really have issues dont you .
Re: FAO Gilso
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:44 pm
by BiggsyMalone
HARVEY T DENTON wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:08 pm
When you say the club, do you mean ML?
Certainly on the staff side of things but the club are responsible for the other part
Boris Johnson said he didnt lie to the Queen .
Courts said different
Move on .
When the club is begging to keep my money and making me feel guilty about not doing so and claiming to be under so much pressure that they have to lay staff off but then employ more staff. They need to be held accountable for those decisions.
Begging for your Money ?
Feeling Guilty ?
Blimey you really have issues dont you .
Of course I have issues, I've given them £300 for a season ticket after last season's debacle. Everyone who renewed has issues, unlike you, who doesn't go to games.
BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:48 am
When the club is begging to keep my money and making me feel guilty about not doing so and claiming to be under so much pressure that they have to lay staff off but then employ more staff. They need to be held accountable for those decisions.
Begging for your Money ?
Feeling Guilty ?
Blimey you really have issues dont you .
Of course I have issues, I've given them £300 for a season ticket after last season's debacle. Everyone who renewed has issues, unlike you, who doesn't go to games.
Spot on mate. And dont let anyone tell you that you shouldn't want answers. It's a legitimate question. The club know the supporters will always stick by the club when the going gets tough, but there's a fine line between using that to keep us going and taking advantage of that and seeing it as a weakness.
I get why the club really wanted to keep the money. But then you need to consider the debt you are in to fans who aren't millionaires, and have effectively donated money to a business with no return. To then see that money being spent on new coaches when we've sacked 2 already, it's bordering on disgraceful
BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:48 am
When the club is begging to keep my money and making me feel guilty about not doing so and claiming to be under so much pressure that they have to lay staff off but then employ more staff. They need to be held accountable for those decisions.
Begging for your Money ?
Feeling Guilty ?
Blimey you really have issues dont you .
Of course I have issues, I've given them £300 for a season ticket after last season's debacle. Everyone who renewed has issues, unlike you, who doesn't go to games.
What makes you think i dont go to games ?
Had 3 years away 2015 -2018.
Of course I have issues, I've given them £300 for a season ticket after last season's debacle. Everyone who renewed has issues, unlike you, who doesn't go to games.
What makes you think i dont go to games ?
Had 3 years away 2015 -2018.
BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:45 pm
Of course I have issues, I've given them £300 for a season ticket after last season's debacle. Everyone who renewed has issues, unlike you, who doesn't go to games.
What makes you think i dont go to games ?
Had 3 years away 2015 -2018.
Seen plenty enough since
I won't ask what you were inside for
Because i wasnt outside of course
I like nature but im not about sleeping outdoors
BiggsyMalone wrote: ↑Sat Aug 08, 2020 8:10 pm
You're deliberately missing the point.
Brill for Ottley isn't an issue. Martin Ling chose to say 'due to the current economic climate, I've had to reduce the number of staff'. Getting Senda in is fine, they needed a number 2. If they think Matt Harrold will add coaching experience to Embleton, Senda, McAnuff and Brill, then God help us. Matt Harrold isn't needed, simple as that.
Clearly what Martin Ling said wasn't true or it was misleading. Saying 'we've reduced the number of staff so we could give ex-players a leg up' isn't going to wash. Either be honest or don't say anything.
I'm not missing the point. When you formulate your desired plan for a team of non playing staff under normal circumstances you might be able to have all of those roles included. But because of the present economic conditions then you want you might have to make decisions on some of the roles because of the revised budget you have available. So if you still want 'n' number of coaches you might need to lose some of the other positions. The fact Harrold came in recently makes sense as two months ago when the other positions were made redundant the players were not back at training so why rush into it? Just because we had a budget for non playing staff it didn't mean we had to use it all up immediately.
This applies in the real world as well as football. For example, my company made loads of people redundant sadly two months ago, but since then we've also recruited people in other specialist positions because we've needed those people to take the business forward.
Anyway, I've posted this as a question for Danny Macklin as I'm interested in his view on it so guess we will know more soon.
You are. The statement wasn’t ‘we have to restructure our first team staff and coaching’. It was ‘we have to reduce the number of staff’.
This coaching set up failed last season and yet the club’s way of making it better is by making Matt Harrold (who played under this setup last season) another coach.
Why have you asked him? It’s Martin Ling who needs to answer this one. Jobs for the boys and a protective layer around the DOF. I can’t see Nigel and Kent being owners in 2 years and ML wants to make sure there are enough ‘Orient people’ around the first team and a structure that is difficult to break down, no matter how well or poor they perform. See Carl Fletcher.
We're going round in circles here. Clearly we didn't need to reduce the number of coaching staff because we went on to appoint Senda and McAnuff shortly afterwards and then later Harrold to the coaching team. Had we needed to cut all staff roles then at least some of those offers would not have been made/accepted. You're too fixated on the exact words Ling said rather than looking at the bigger picture.
Reason for asking Macklin is that he is on the Orient Hour tonight, is representing the club and as Chief Executive will be able to offer insight into this, especially as he would have had some say in budgets. Just because he isn't Martin Ling that doesn't mean he cannot answer the question.
As before, can't help but feel this is just a fuss over nothing and the last two sentences of your post back that up.
Re: FAO Gilso
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:38 pm
by Long slender neck
Its called restructuring.
Re: FAO Gilso
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:53 pm
by Smendrick Feaselberg
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:38 pm
Its called restructuring.
I'm not missing the point. When you formulate your desired plan for a team of non playing staff under normal circumstances you might be able to have all of those roles included. But because of the present economic conditions then you want you might have to make decisions on some of the roles because of the revised budget you have available. So if you still want 'n' number of coaches you might need to lose some of the other positions. The fact Harrold came in recently makes sense as two months ago when the other positions were made redundant the players were not back at training so why rush into it? Just because we had a budget for non playing staff it didn't mean we had to use it all up immediately.
This applies in the real world as well as football. For example, my company made loads of people redundant sadly two months ago, but since then we've also recruited people in other specialist positions because we've needed those people to take the business forward.
Anyway, I've posted this as a question for Danny Macklin as I'm interested in his view on it so guess we will know more soon.
You are. The statement wasn’t ‘we have to restructure our first team staff and coaching’. It was ‘we have to reduce the number of staff’.
This coaching set up failed last season and yet the club’s way of making it better is by making Matt Harrold (who played under this setup last season) another coach.
Why have you asked him? It’s Martin Ling who needs to answer this one. Jobs for the boys and a protective layer around the DOF. I can’t see Nigel and Kent being owners in 2 years and ML wants to make sure there are enough ‘Orient people’ around the first team and a structure that is difficult to break down, no matter how well or poor they perform. See Carl Fletcher.
We're going round in circles here. Clearly we didn't need to reduce the number of coaching staff because we went on to appoint Senda and McAnuff shortly afterwards and then later Harrold to the coaching team. Had we needed to cut all staff roles then at least some of those offers would not have been made/accepted. You're too fixated on the exact words Ling said rather than looking at the bigger picture.
Reason for asking Macklin is that he is on the Orient Hour tonight, is representing the club and as Chief Executive will be able to offer insight into this, especially as he would have had some say in budgets. Just because he isn't Martin Ling that doesn't mean he cannot answer the question.
As before, can't help but feel this is just a fuss over nothing and the last two sentences of your post back that up.
Fair enough.
There certainly are other things at the club to worry about more but it's the statement ML made, alongside the club asking to keep our money and then appointing a bloke (that spent last season being coached by this lot) as first team coach. None of it sits right.
Re: FAO Gilso
Posted: Wed Aug 12, 2020 5:50 pm
by Top of the JES
I don't really see the logic of employing MH as a coach.
Neither Emma Baghurst or Reece Ottley were as far as I am aware "sacked" they were at the end of their contracts which were not renewed, it happens, that said Ling said he had let them go for financial reasons he should perhaps have been more honest and said they were restructuring the staff.
