Issue I am the walrus

As told by Ron Beaumont

The time has come, the Walrus said, to talk of many things… – Lewis Carroll

Is it me or are we losing sight of some of the real issues affecting our club?

Whilst Pete Moss’s interesting article prompts debate and reasoned comment about the future use of Valley Parade by the Bulls (or “Odsal Sports Village” by the Bantams) and other sites swap as many insults as arguments, am I the only one who thinks we are adding to something that obscures real concerns.

Of course the future of both clubs is important and needs to be addressed sooner rather than later but right now I feel there are more pressing concerns. Call it paranoia or conspiracy theory but has all this hypothetical discussion – generated in no small way by Mark Lawn – obscured the fact that other items on Mr. Lawn’s desk are dragging on without comment?

Whatever happens in the V.P. v. O.S.V. debate, City (barring extreme financial disasters) will still have a ground on which to play next season but will we still have the manager? Why is there still no resolution to the protracted contractual discussions despite all the right noises being made by both parties?

Almost a year ago I contributed my first posting on this site. Much of what I said in “Anger, Management and Rotherham” concerned the future of a certain Stuart McCall and the need for those running the club to make a clear statement on the manager’s future prior to the end of the season. Now I find that the “will he/wont he doubts that were so divisive at the end of last season are with us once again. The confusion over the future of S.M. is now being repeated with confusion over P.T. – and we are debating hypothetical venues!

How can players commit to a future with a club that has uncertainties with their manager for next season? How can undecided supporters commit to next season’s ticket with so much uncertainty regarding manager and players?

If the board are hoping to generate much-needed extra revenue through further season ticket sales to those fans as yet undecided then they seem to be going about it in the wrong way.

If the number of extra season ticket sales is a factor in Peter Taylor’s decision on his future then the problem is even further compounded by a ground sharing debate that, whilst relevant, is not of immediate concern. It creates doubt rather than commitment.

Surely the priority is to get the manager’s contract sorted out first? Then he can begin negotiations to keep valued players. THEN maybe we can sort out something on the ground sharing. It seems simple, it seems logical, so why isn’t it happening?

If there is another agenda for Peter Taylor, and/or another agenda for Mark Lawn then we are conveniently obscuring it by the ground sharing debates… or is it just me?

If it is me then I’ll put it down to another “senior moment” but if others share my concerns it would be interesting to know. Either way the time has come not to talk of many things, but to clarify a few and, in doing so, bring about commitment – on all sides – and, with it, the much needed extra revenue that commitment – on all sides – would surely create.