The Head Coach Thread.

[RiseAgainst 3,793]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

Problem is Pulis didn't get us there, the excuses and lies havent worked - he calls us honest, friendly, hard working people then lies, spins and tries to pull the wool over our eyes - I think that has been as hard to bear as the football for some.

Chris Houghton is rumoured to be leaving Brighton, I'd love him here, Nigel Clough fills the "local" candidate too.

Just saw a poll on "The72" and Pulis voted 18th best manager in the EFL, I guess they don't take into account the "work he does behind the scenes"

Genuine question - how do people think the forum will fair if we have another season of Pulis?

 

Much as I like this board (far less confrontational and spiteful than the Boro board I used to frequent), I'd probably stop visiting if Pulis remains in charge next season. I certainly won't be travelling down from Scotland to attend any games. I know we've had less successful seasons, but the lack of entertainment has been so chronic I'd honestly rather go shopping with the wife than watch us. There's simply no joy in watching five defenders and three CDMs crabbing around and hoofing it up to a lonely striker. And what else is there to expect if Pulis remains in charge?

[DanFromDownSouth 1,706]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

 

Looking at the accounts and reading between the lines. Almost £100 Million is an internal debt. Could be owed to various businesses that Gibson owns. I'm also pretty sure this whole brexit effect isn't really a thing as of yet. As Bulkhaul I believe turned a big profit last accounting period. It also looks like we have paid none of the debt off to Gibson, regardless of what people say or believe.

[Blanco 4,917]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

 

Looking at the accounts and reading between the lines. Almost £100 Million is an internal debt. Could be owed to various businesses that Gibson owns. I'm also pretty sure this whole brexit effect isn't really a thing as of yet. As Baukhaul I believe turned a big profit last accounting period. It also looks like we have paid none of the debt off to Gibson, regardless of what people say or believe.

 

This debt could have a lot to do with Gibson trying to get FFP sanctions against Villa/Derby etc. He might be happier to now write off the debt from Bulkhaul and Boro start with a clean slate without the worry of points deductions for breaching FFP as the EFL took no action against the others?

[thatoldchestnut 583]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

Problem is Pulis didn't get us there, the excuses and lies havent worked - he calls us honest, friendly, hard working people then lies, spins and tries to pull the wool over our eyes - I think that has been as hard to bear as the football for some.

Chris Houghton is rumoured to be leaving Brighton, I'd love him here, Nigel Clough fills the "local" candidate too.

Just saw a poll on "The72" and Pulis voted 18th best manager in the EFL, I guess they don't take into account the "work he does behind the scenes"

Genuine question - how do people think the forum will fair if we have another season of Pulis?

The forum will initially be up in arms about his continued employment, if that is what happens. I don't know how Steve Gibson can bear to sit and watch the turgid dross for another season to be fair, never mind us fans. If he does extend Pulis for another year, i can guarantee he will be sat after 12 games thinking that we need rid of this man, and then it will cost far more than if he lets him go now!

[Randy Sandwich 209]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

Problem is Pulis didn't get us there, the excuses and lies havent worked - he calls us honest, friendly, hard working people then lies, spins and tries to pull the wool over our eyes - I think that has been as hard to bear as the football for some.

Chris Houghton is rumoured to be leaving Brighton, I'd love him here, Nigel Clough fills the "local" candidate too.

Just saw a poll on "The72" and Pulis voted 18th best manager in the EFL, I guess they don't take into account the "work he does behind the scenes"

Genuine question - how do people think the forum will fair if we have another season of Pulis?

 

Much as I like this board (far less confrontational and spiteful than the Boro board I used to frequent), I'd probably stop visiting if Pulis remains in charge next season. I certainly won't be travelling down from Scotland to attend any games. I know we've had less successful seasons, but the lack of entertainment has been so chronic I'd honestly rather go shopping with the wife than watch us. There's simply no joy in watching five defenders and three CDMs crabbing around and hoofing it up to a lonely striker. And what else is there to expect if Pulis remains in charge?

There was a point the forum seemed practically dead, it was a unification against Pulis which seemed to reignite the Forum, but another season like this is going to lose fans - how many is yet to be seen, I fear it could have a similar effect on here.

[Borodane 6,301]

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/challenging-tony-puliss-middlesbrough-mitigation-16231697

 

I actually enjoyed this article by the Gazette yesterday. Finally opens up some of the subjects we have discussed here about how Pulis tries to make himself look good in the press and the fact that he has been a failure in the transfer market despite being backed by significant funds. And the ridiculous statement from Pulis that he is in the same situation that Mogga found himself in. An absurd claim by a dilusional man. The club hierachy and Pulis himself need to realise that he is disliked by too many fans to turn it around.

[Randy Sandwich 209]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

 

Looking at the accounts and reading between the lines. Almost £100 Million is an internal debt. Could be owed to various businesses that Gibson owns. I'm also pretty sure this whole brexit effect isn't really a thing as of yet. As Baukhaul I believe turned a big profit last accounting period. It also looks like we have paid none of the debt off to Gibson, regardless of what people say or believe.

 

This debt could have a lot to do with Gibson trying to get FFP sanctions against Villa/Derby etc. He might be happier to now write off the debt from Bulkhaul and Boro start with a clean slate without the worry of points deductions for breaching FFP as the EFL took no action against the others?

Can he do that?

Wouldn't writing off 100mil debt affect fair play? Other teams could say the debt was never intended to be paid back and was therefore an investment - I don't know enough about it to be honest.

[Dan_Boro_Till_I_Die 1,181]

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/challenging-tony-puliss-middlesbrough-mitigation-16231697

 

I actually enjoyed this article by the Gazette yesterday. Finally opens up some of the subjects we have discussed here about how Pulis tries to make himself look good in the press and the fact that he has been a failure in the transfer market despite being backed by significant funds. And the ridiculous statement from Pulis that he is in the same situation that Mogga found himself in. An absurd claim by a dilusional man. The club hierachy and Pulis himself need to realise that he is disliked by too many fans to turn it around.

 

Maybe they know he is going hence the articles going for Pulis.

[Borodane 6,301]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

 

Looking at the accounts and reading between the lines. Almost £100 Million is an internal debt. Could be owed to various businesses that Gibson owns. I'm also pretty sure this whole brexit effect isn't really a thing as of yet. As Baukhaul I believe turned a big profit last accounting period. It also looks like we have paid none of the debt off to Gibson, regardless of what people say or believe.

 

This debt could have a lot to do with Gibson trying to get FFP sanctions against Villa/Derby etc. He might be happier to now write off the debt from Bulkhaul and Boro start with a clean slate without the worry of points deductions for breaching FFP as the EFL took no action against the others?

Can he do that?

Wouldn't writing off 100mil debt affect fair play? Other teams could say the debt was never intended to be paid back and was therefore an investment - I don't know enough about it to be honest.

 

Considering there are rules about how much an owner can put into the club on a yearly basis I don't think you can just write off the debt, but on the other hand I don't think it would matter either because I don't think there are rules about paying back debts if the creditor doesn't demand it. That's the big advantage of having just one owner with a large company to back it up. Debt isn't a problem as long as you can manage it and uphold the rules about how much debt you can rack up according to FFP. Our debt could be 500 million and it wouldn't matter as long as Gibson doesn't demand it back or charge interest.

[Blanco 4,917]

Gibson is no mug, in another thread about debt it was pointed out that although the club owed around £110 mil out it was all to Bulkhaul - can anyone confirm that?

If so and the rumours that Brexit could seriously affect Bulkhaul, has Steve took desperate measures to get us into the prem and then use the prem money to pay Bulkhaul? Do Bulkhaul need to call the debt in?

I can see the logic in wanting someone like Pulis to keep is in the prem on the cheap then once Bulkhaul are paid the next seasons money can be invested in the club, we would also then be attractive to possible buyers, it would be difficult to sell the club with that amount owed out.

 

Looking at the accounts and reading between the lines. Almost £100 Million is an internal debt. Could be owed to various businesses that Gibson owns. I'm also pretty sure this whole brexit effect isn't really a thing as of yet. As Baukhaul I believe turned a big profit last accounting period. It also looks like we have paid none of the debt off to Gibson, regardless of what people say or believe.

 

This debt could have a lot to do with Gibson trying to get FFP sanctions against Villa/Derby etc. He might be happier to now write off the debt from Bulkhaul and Boro start with a clean slate without the worry of points deductions for breaching FFP as the EFL took no action against the others?

Can he do that?

Wouldn't writing off 100mil debt affect fair play? Other teams could say the debt was never intended to be paid back and was therefore an investment - I don't know enough about it to be honest.

 

Considering there are rules about how much an owner can put into the club on a yearly basis I don't think you can just write off the debt, but on the other hand I don't think it would matter either because I don't think there are rules about paying back debts if the creditor doesn't demand it. That's the big advantage of having just one owner with a large company to back it up. Debt isn't a problem as long as you can manage it and uphold the rules about how much debt you can rack up according to FFP. Our debt could be 500 million and it wouldn't matter as long as Gibson doesn't demand it back or charge interest.

 

I don't know enough about it to be sure but you are allowed post losses of 39m over 3 years. I think Villa had exceeded this but got around it when the new owners took over as they claimed it had nothing to do with them. Birmingham was different as they paid more for a player than they admitted to while they were under an embargo. Could the takeover rumours be true and Gibson is looking to ensure that Boro will have a clean slate going forward?

[ABH 470]

 

Looking at the accounts and reading between the lines. Almost £100 Million is an internal debt. Could be owed to various businesses that Gibson owns. I'm also pretty sure this whole brexit effect isn't really a thing as of yet. As Baukhaul I believe turned a big profit last accounting period. It also looks like we have paid none of the debt off to Gibson, regardless of what people say or believe.

 

This debt could have a lot to do with Gibson trying to get FFP sanctions against Villa/Derby etc. He might be happier to now write off the debt from Bulkhaul and Boro start with a clean slate without the worry of points deductions for breaching FFP as the EFL took no action against the others?

Can he do that?

Wouldn't writing off 100mil debt affect fair play? Other teams could say the debt was never intended to be paid back and was therefore an investment - I don't know enough about it to be honest.

 

Considering there are rules about how much an owner can put into the club on a yearly basis I don't think you can just write off the debt, but on the other hand I don't think it would matter either because I don't think there are rules about paying back debts if the creditor doesn't demand it. That's the big advantage of having just one owner with a large company to back it up. Debt isn't a problem as long as you can manage it and uphold the rules about how much debt you can rack up according to FFP. Our debt could be 500 million and it wouldn't matter as long as Gibson doesn't demand it back or charge interest.

 

I don't know enough about it to be sure but you are allowed post losses of 39m over 3 years. I think Villa had exceeded this but got around it when the new owners took over as they claimed it had nothing to do with them. Birmingham was different as they paid more for a player than they admitted to while they were under an embargo. Could the takeover rumours be true and Gibson is looking to ensure that Boro will have a clean slate going forward?

 

He could give the stadium to Bulkhaul in return for clearing the clubs debts to them. The FA have already said it was ok for derby to sell its stadium to its owner.

 

If Gibson where to sell the club how much would he get for a club losing money and £100m in debt?

[Blanco 4,917]

 

This debt could have a lot to do with Gibson trying to get FFP sanctions against Villa/Derby etc. He might be happier to now write off the debt from Bulkhaul and Boro start with a clean slate without the worry of points deductions for breaching FFP as the EFL took no action against the others?

Can he do that?

Wouldn't writing off 100mil debt affect fair play? Other teams could say the debt was never intended to be paid back and was therefore an investment - I don't know enough about it to be honest.

 

Considering there are rules about how much an owner can put into the club on a yearly basis I don't think you can just write off the debt, but on the other hand I don't think it would matter either because I don't think there are rules about paying back debts if the creditor doesn't demand it. That's the big advantage of having just one owner with a large company to back it up. Debt isn't a problem as long as you can manage it and uphold the rules about how much debt you can rack up according to FFP. Our debt could be 500 million and it wouldn't matter as long as Gibson doesn't demand it back or charge interest.

 

I don't know enough about it to be sure but you are allowed post losses of 39m over 3 years. I think Villa had exceeded this but got around it when the new owners took over as they claimed it had nothing to do with them. Birmingham was different as they paid more for a player than they admitted to while they were under an embargo. Could the takeover rumours be true and Gibson is looking to ensure that Boro will have a clean slate going forward?

 

He could give the stadium to Bulkhaul in return for clearing the clubs debts to them. The FA have already said it was ok for derby to sell its stadium to its owner.

 

If Gibson where to sell the club how much would he get for a club losing money and £100m in debt?

 

Good point and good question. I really don't know

[Smogzilla 7,484]

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/middlesbrough-news-transfers-live-boro-16236077

 

Tallantire answering questions. Asked about Pulis. Doesn't seem to think hes likely to stay.

[mendieta420 1,008]

He also said it's impossible to know what will happen "the chairman likes and respects Pulis"

[Dan_Boro_Till_I_Die 1,181]

Yeh I asked him this.

 

14:30PHILIP TALLENTIRE

Your questions answered No5

The season’s over and we can now assess what’s gone wrong (and right).

 

Danny Beardmore asks: What is your honest opinion on Pulis future? Do you think he should go and will go?

 

Philip says:

 

Putting my money where my mouth is, I think the best option all round is to bring in a new man. It’s clear the majority of fans haven’t bought into Tony Pulis’s methods and if you play that style of football and don’t succeed then there’s really only one outcome.

 

Missing out on promotion means this season’s one and only on-field target hasn’t been achieved.

 

Pulis will be out of contract this summer so it’s not a case of sacking him, just not offering him a new deal.

 

Who knows, maybe Pulis has already decided he doesn’t want to stay.

 

Will he go? Impossible to second guess the chairman on this. He likes and respects Pulis but he’s also a pragmatist who knows the season hasn’t gone as planned.