39 replies to this topic

[eclecticsheep]

http://www.rugbyoldham.org/

Cryptic maybe...
But I happen to appreciate the views,aims and motives of RUGBY OLDHAM and particularly Mr Geoff Cooke who is an ORLFC supporter thro and thro!

2012 AGM says it all really...

and says it in genuine desire to help support nurture and re-establish this once great club.



*that is BIGGER than one persons meglomania, or should be....

*My opinion ok.

[sheddings69]

http://www.rugbyoldham.org/

Cryptic maybe...
But I happen to appreciate the views,aims and motives of RUGBY OLDHAM and particularly Mr Geoff Cooke who is an ORLFC supporter thro and thro!

2012 AGM says it all really...

and says it in genuine desire to help support nurture and re-establish this once great club.



*that is BIGGER than one persons meglomania, or should be....

*My opinion ok.

I think the newsletter says it all. Perhaps the Trust will now change it's position from supporting the club (i.e. sponsoring the academy, offering to help fundraise for the ground) and actively look to put together a group of interested parties to make an offer to CH? Was this discussed at the AGM?

Edited by sheddings69, 22 May 2012 - 01:12 PM.

[geoffcooke]

On another thread 'Oldhamer' criticised BQ for laxity in not checking the club's financial affairs: IF (a really big if that) anyone could discover the true position of the current club's finances there could be possibilities. Speaking only for myself and not the Board of Rugby Oldham there is no reason why constructive talks could not take place but, as the Newsletter states, we never get a response to our approaches. That being so it would be foolish to commit to any financial input. Apart from which Rugby Oldham would need its members approval as it is a democratic organisation and its money belongs to the members.
Other clubs have a healthy relationship with their Supporters Trusts and consequently derive financial benefit, examples of this being Warrington, Wakefield, Swinton, Halifax and Doncaster.
Although Rugby Oldham was NOT founded with the aim of running a professional club and has NEVER made any bid to do so, whether in full or in part, the organisation is there as a fallback in the event of a total collapse of ORLFC (1997) Ltd.

[sheddings69]

Thanks for coming on here and giving an explanation Geoff - certainly more than we ever get from the club. Quite frankly I think the club should be ashamed. The Trust has over 400 potential paying customers and this is the way it treats them! . How can CH turn down the offer of help......it's a disgrace in my opinion. Unless of course the club can offer a valid reason...... I won't hold my breath!

[Shaw Lad]

On another thread 'Oldhamer' criticised BQ for laxity in not checking the club's financial affairs: IF (a really big if that) anyone could discover the true position of the current club's finances there could be possibilities. Speaking only for myself and not the Board of Rugby Oldham there is no reason why constructive talks could not take place but, as the Newsletter states, we never get a response to our approaches. That being so it would be foolish to commit to any financial input. Apart from which Rugby Oldham would need its members approval as it is a democratic organisation and its money belongs to the members.
Other clubs have a healthy relationship with their Supporters Trusts and consequently derive financial benefit, examples of this being Warrington, Wakefield, Swinton, Halifax and Doncaster.
Although Rugby Oldham was NOT founded with the aim of running a professional club and has NEVER made any bid to do so, whether in full or in part, the organisation is there as a fallback in the event of a total collapse of ORLFC (1997) Ltd.

Lets hope theres a total collapse of ORLFC(1997) Ltd.Very soon. Has Hamilton could'nt run a p*ss up in a brewery.

[champ]

On another thread 'Oldhamer' criticised BQ for laxity in not checking the club's financial affairs: IF (a really big if that) anyone could discover the true position of the current club's finances there could be possibilities. Speaking only for myself and not the Board of Rugby Oldham there is no reason why constructive talks could not take place but, as the Newsletter states, we never get a response to our approaches. That being so it would be foolish to commit to any financial input. Apart from which Rugby Oldham would need its members approval as it is a democratic organisation and its money belongs to the members.
Other clubs have a healthy relationship with their Supporters Trusts and consequently derive financial benefit, examples of this being Warrington, Wakefield, Swinton, Halifax and Doncaster.
Although Rugby Oldham was NOT founded with the aim of running a professional club and has NEVER made any bid to do so, whether in full or in part, the organisation is there as a fallback in the event of a total collapse of ORLFC (1997) Ltd.

Thankyou for coming on and updating the fans Geoff.Very very sad reflection on CH that the club never responds to approaches.(but not at all suprising its HIS baby)
Im afraid i agree with shawlad below,the bloke has got to pack his bags and go,the sooner the better in my book.

[sheddings69]

Care to comment allroughyed, saintscoach, oldhamer, rugbyman1, logic et al?

Don't think even the most vehement CH supporters would question Geoff Cooke's love for the club would they?

Edited by sheddings69, 23 May 2012 - 06:35 AM.

[oldhamer]

For the record I did not critise BQ for not checking the books. I merely pointed out that if he did invest without seeing the books then it was poor judgement, after someone posted that CH hadn't let him or anyone access the clubs accounts.

What RO does is good in theory, but does contradict itself when it says it wasn't set up to run the club in full or part, yet on a previous newsletter states that it wanted some input in return for an investment. Which in my opinion is fair, who would invest in something and not have a say in how things were run? People are very critical of CH and the way he runs things, who would say RO would be a better option?

[saints10coach]

In my opinion there have been some people who joined Rugby Oldham with an agenda of overthrowing the current regime at the club, from the get go. It is understandable the group do not get responses when it would not be known if it was that section of the group making the requests or not. If I was the Chairman, I would be very suspicious of any group which started on the emotion of the club being close to going under, and started alternative fund raising on the same emotion when the club was asking for funds from the same source. I am also a big believer in the saying "The tail should not wag the dog"
I am sure there is a lot happening behind the scenes that only the directors will know about, and they would also refrain from communicating details to any outside agency until all things were in place.

[allroughyed]

Care to comment allroughyed, saintscoach, oldhamer, rugbyman1, logic et al?

Don't think even the most vehement CH supporters would question Geoff Cooke's love for the club would they?

I'm not a "vehement" supporter of CH, though at the moment, I do support TB and the team fully through this difficult time of the season. I was there at the meeting when Geoff made the generous offer of financial support to the club.
I have never questioned Geoffs love for the club, I know Geoff, and I know he is a true supporter, and like me, wants the best for ORLFC.I also know some of the other members, such as Brian Walker and Tim Hughes, both long standing and loyal supporters.
For the record, I was one of the many people who actually went to the forming of Rugby Oldham at Tim's offices.
I have asked CH many times whats happening with the ground imporvements , and just get told " things are happening and there will be another meeting in a month". That was in February. I must admit, I am puzzled as to why he is not responding to RO letters.
I don't know what Rugby Oldhams policy and intent is now , but at the outset, buying the club was not why it was formed. It was formed to help locate, and build a ground.
It was dissapointing that Bill Quinn rejected their help, and decided to go it alone.
I would like to hear why CH is not responding to Rugby Oldham, and if I get the chance on saturday, i will once again ask him what the current state of play is with the ground.

Edited by allroughyed, 23 May 2012 - 09:00 AM.

[oldhamer]

In addition.
In 1997, Oldham RLFC was reborn from the Bears, with no assets whatsoever, not even a set of waterbottles.
In 2001, Oldham RLFC were 55 minutes away from a return to SL only to lose to Widnes.

Fast forward to today.
We now have a ground, a base to which to operate. And a foundation to build upon. With that, the business can finally start generating money for the club, and not throw it away renting a ground where we were treated like lepers.
We have a social club that is a great source of income to the club, and a meeting place for supporters to get together.
We operate a succesful Under 23s side, that other club higher up in the food chain are envious of, and players wanting to be a part of it.
We operate an Extended Scholarship that is in its early stages, and yet another fantastic cornerstone for the club.

We have a better rapour with the amateur clubs/service/schools than ever before. We do more than what the defunct Bears did, and they got funding for it!

We have come a long long way in 15 years. And compare that to other teams in our divsion and even in the Championship, and it fairs quite well.

The whole game is biased to the SL and clubs outside the SL will always struggle, even more so with the franchise route. Investers are few and far between, as the Championship is the limit for 99% of clubs, and to invest in a club that could only generate crowds of 3k maximum in the Championship, is very hard. And that is every club outside SL. Crowds are low outside SL, and that needs tackling by all clubs and the powers that be, and the scrapping of P&R has helped kill off the sport outside the top flight. Clubs like Oldham have a small turnover, and have to do everything to try and maximise that, and at Whitebank, I can imagine on even crowds of 500, the turnover is more than when we had 1500 at BP once rent was taken out.

If a big backer came into the club with very deep pockets, I guess until the planning applications and permissions have be submitted and sought, no amount of money would change the current status of the ground. I guess there are complications and hiccups with submitting anything to the council, but the club has history of only processing things that would have a near 100% success rate.

With that money, yes you could attract 'better' players, but would only be here for the money and not for the club. Is that what people want? A team of mercenaries that do not have a connection to the club or the town. It's been proved before that route ends up only one way - in disaster.
We are only seeing the fruits of the 23s, and with every first team game they are playing, they are still learning. Time is the key, and something that should never be rushed in developing players.

For me, I do not wear rose tinted spectacles, I see only what is there. And from where I am stood, yes it's far from perfect, nothing is, but the club seems in a quite healthy position. Yes, we should be worried about next season if we remain in this division, but it wasn't Oldham RLFC who decieded on next years league setups. Should the club throw every penny to the cause and risk going under, as some clubs seem to be going that way? Or should we carry on, get everyone back fit, and challenge every step of the way - and SURVIVE?

And as a footnote, if CH was hell bent on it being his club. Didn't he step aside being chairman a couple of years back????

Edited by oldhamer, 23 May 2012 - 10:03 AM.

[sheddings69]

In my opinion there have been some people who joined Rugby Oldham with an agenda of overthrowing the current regime at the club, from the get go. It is understandable the group do not get responses when it would not be known if it was that section of the group making the requests or not. If I was the Chairman, I would be very suspicious of any group which started on the emotion of the club being close to going under, and started alternative fund raising on the same emotion when the club was asking for funds from the same source. I am also a big believer in the saying "The tail should not wag the dog"
I am sure there is a lot happening behind the scenes that only the directors will know about, and they would also refrain from communicating details to any outside agency until all things were in place.

Thanks for the comments everyone - for the record I think allroughyed and oldhamer have offered a balanced view and ask some interesting questions.

SC - would love to know what your opinion of a 'agenda of overthrowing the current regime from the get go' is based upon? Given the published constitution of the Trust, I'm not sure that would be even possible!!

What on earth does this mean?.....'it is understandable the group do not get responses when it would not be known if it was that section of the group making the requests or not'.

In reference to, 'If I was the Chairman, I would be very suspicious of any group which started on the emotion of the club being close to going under', I think you'll find that almost every supporters Trust was set up in these circumstances. Indeed, the vast majority have a very good working relationship with the clubs they support (emotionally and financially!). At the public meeting the option of trying to buy the club was debated and the rep from supporters direct advised the vote to go down that route. However, that option was discounted in favour of trying to support the club by helping it find a home.

Anyway, nice to know that CH has all the funding in place and doesn't need the money offered by the Trust to help develop the ground.

[saints10coach]

Anyway, nice to know that CH has all the funding in place and doesn't need the money offered by the Trust to help develop the ground.

Where has this been said?

Also you have drawn me into this conversation. Which could only serve to create a train of thought that could only be potentially damaging to the Trust knowing my stance on things. If you wish to question me on my views on the matter I will be at the game on Saturday. But it would take someone very convincing to change them.

[Logic]

I agree 'saints10coach' - I had reason to form a similar opinion to yourself at the time Rugby Oldham was formed and as we know constitutions are not formed on the basis of hidden agenda.

[sheddings69]

Where has this been said?

Also you have drawn me into this conversation. Which could only serve to create a train of thought that could only be potentially damaging to the Trust knowing my stance on things. If you wish to question me on my views on the matter I will be at the game on Saturday. But it would take someone very convincing to change them.

The Trust have offered a sum of money to the club for the ground. Why else would CH turn it down? We are all entitled to our opinions SC, just thought you might want to substantiate them as its very easy to throw out accusations without anything to back it up! I'd take the anti CH at all costs brigade to task in exactly the same way.

[saints10coach]

The Trust have offered a sum of money to the club for the ground. Why else would CH turn it down? We are all entitled to our opinions SC, just thought you might want to substantiate them as its very easy to throw out accusations without anything to back it up! I'd take the anti CH at all costs brigade to task in exactly the same way.

I thought that GC said he had not had a reply, not that the money had been refused. Maybe it is just a case of the club is not ready for the money yet.

[oldhamer]

Ask CH on match days when you see him. Simples!

[sheddings69]

I thought that GC said he had not had a reply, not that the money had been refused. Maybe it is just a case of the club is not ready for the money yet.

Genius SC - that's that one sorted!!

As for asking CH directly, I don't know him do you? Perhaps a statement from the club would be a slightly more professional approach.

[HARRYRUBY]

Rugby Oldham do a lot of good work for rugby in the town hence its name Rugby Oldham. Its not just there for the towns professional club but rugby in general which I am sure would include Oldham Rugby if dialouge was established.

As far as some of the posts are concerned lets look at facts.

The club is not in a healthy position. You can see this off the latest accounts which can be obtained from companies house.

The club is bigger than any one man yet is being run by one man.

As for CH giving up the chairmanship when BQ came on board but that did not last for long and he is now chairman again.

As for the books how many of the previous directors have ever seen them apart from CH. Its easy to get hold of the final accounts but its the day to day entries in the books which tell the full story.

Professional sport in any categories cannot prosper without solid investment from others and with all the best will in the world it it needs more than one person running the club.

There needs to be more openess and information from the club about future plans.







Whitebank needs a lot of money spending on it and I would be surprised if CH as that kind of money to bring it up to standard. I appreciate that therecmay be grants that could be obtained but no information is forthcoming about the situation or any plans that are in the pipeline.

In my opinion Whitebank is not the answer and the town needs a new joint stadium but I dont now think that is obtainable in the present economic climate.

The clubs immediate future depends upon getting promoted this season.

CH said that it would not be the end of the world ( or words to that effect if we did not get promoted ) that may be true, but not many people would rejoice about playing in a new structured division one step up from the conference.

Rugby league is now structured to the so called big clubs in Super League which is now virtually a closed shop.

To run the championship on the same lines without promotion is not a good idea.

Why not increase the Super League by two clubs. Increase the Championship to include the long established clubs eg Barrow,Whitehaven,Workington,Doncaster,Rochdale and Oldham and give them a three year plan to be stable and viable.

Make championship one a league with the remainder of the present division and the new teams from Northampton,Coventry, Hemel Hemstead and Gloucester plus anothers from the midlands,the north east,anglia and even Scotland.

It would create a base for the future of the sport where over a three year period they could get stability to challenge for a place in the championship.

Once it is all established annual promotin and relegation could be reintroduced throughout all the divisions.

[oldhamer]

How can any investors realistically look to part with money in any of the Championship or Championship 1 clubs at a level that would make a huge difference, when the set up from the Championship and SL is totally flawed and totally unfair? Throwing money into any of these clubs, you would have to be a staunch fan of that club, as to get any return from a top club in the championship that can only get less than 2k fans for a home game, isn't going to get you a return on your cash or more importantly, any exposure. Re-introduce P&R, and that 2k fans would probable increase to 3-4k, and have a shot at the big time, and then you would get exposure for your investment and have a return through the turnstyles and sponsorhips.

The powers that be at the RFL need to look why people are staying away from the Championship and Championship 1 clubs, and address that problem. But they wont, and probably blame CH