Brave new world – or false dawn?

David Booth 05/09/2016  101 Comments  [Jump to last]
So Phase One of the Great Everton Revival has been reached: new owner, new manager, new signings and a new stadium apparently in the offing.

But being a justifiably cynical bunch and having witnessed a variety of false dawns since we fell from a position of eminence, I wonder how happy we Evertonians really are? Are we back on track, or just aimlessly puffing up and down in the sidings again?

The transfer window has certainly focused attention on our current status and divided opinion as to whether we are generating sufficient head of steam to begin to pose a threat to the Sky-favoured elite, or just blowing hot air.

As ever, opinion is wonderfully divided, with six-of-one happy with the progress being made, whilst half-a-dozen of the other are disappointed by what they see as the same old story. Me? I’m perched right on the top of the fence and freely admit I can see both sides… of both sides!

If you look at the hard facts in isolation, no-one could seriously argue that we are not better off. Could they?

Stekelenburg has already earned us at least four points with crucial saves in our three games so far and is a massive improvement on Howard (who had overstayed his welcome) and Robles (who will never be the foundation we are looking for).

Williams, although a bit old for my liking, will hopefully galvanise the team when their backs are against the wall and deliver the necessary leadership qualities to compensate for the fact he has a short shelf-life.

Gueye has been the epitome of a quiet revolution in midfield. The obsession with the Barry/McCarthy axis has at last been banished and we appear to have a craftsman in front of the back four.

In front of him, Bolasie represents something of an expensive surprise to many, if not all of us. However, the one thing I remember from our two home defeats and one draw with Palace in the last three years is how incapable we seemed to be to deal with him. Every time he got the ball, we looked vulnerable. So if that works in our favour now he has a blue shirt on his back, I am glad we have him.

Completing our signings is Valencia. Indisputably the biggest shock / surprise / disappointment [delete as appropriate] of deadline day and our transfer window as a whole. Whilst he will certainly not cause a log-jam in the shirt-printing department, he does offer the potential to provide a positive surprise. And let’s face it, he can’t be much worse than Kone or Niasse... can he? One hopes he will, er, prove he has something to prove.

All this and only one departure of note: the inevitable departure of John Stones to any club who were happy to treble his wages. Manchester City in this case. I was sad to see him go, as he, like every player under Martinez, looked a shadow of himself in the last two seasons. And let’s not stoop to be bitter and file him under the heading of 'good riddance'; he is a fine player and could/should have been a vital component of our much wished-for successful side for the next 10 years. But money talks and you cannot blame him for listening.

Elsewhere, the deadwood that was Osman, Hibbert and Pienaar have been told they are no longer allowed to draw their disability benefits. McGeady has been shifted sideways and the likes of Cleverley and Lennon appear to have been identified as squad players, which is all they are.

Bafflingly, Gibson has been retained, presumably to give the physios something to do now that some of the aforementioned have vacated the treatment tables. Which just leaves Niasse as the remaining superfluous link with the past. Lost for words on him!

The net result, three games in, is that we already look like a different team to the one Martinez left behind: tougher, fitter, more resilient and with round pegs fitting snuggly in round holes.

Those surplus to requirements have been moved sideways and the Koeman effect is readily apparent. The players have shape, discipline and a combined sense of purpose. This is a different team. But, for all the changes we can see on the pitch, have things really changed off it?

Because, for all the excitement generated by our seven unbeaten points, there are 35 games still to go and in order to sustain our good start, there needs to be a fundamental shift in the way we are perceived and do business.

This cannot be another ‘make do’ makeover. Putting a new overcoat on Goodison is fine for now, but the board cannot afford to be exposed for trying to get away with wearing the emperor’s new clothes. Again. Because, for all our dreams of a new dawn, have we really been presented with the official manifesto from Mr Moshiri yet?

The lack of communication from the board, at such a vital point in the club’s immediate and long-term future, is hard to fathom and does not auger well for the wave of enthusiasm that seems to be engulfing Evertonians right now.

That has left us to speculate wildly about transfer budgets running into hundreds of millions, instantly elbowing our way to a place on the top table alongside the likes of Sheik Mansour and Abramovich and that most holy of grails: a new ground in the next few years.

And it is here that I begin to have serious concerns.

We clearly did not have anywhere near that size of transfer budget. It was the usual media nonsense. Worryingly, most of us seemed to fall for it.

In the league table of (so-called) Premier League owners, Mr Moshiri might just about scrape into the top half, falling not only behind the usual suspects, but also the likes of those who control Leicester, Southampton, Stoke and Sunderland, all clubs we naturally assume superiority over in every aspect. Not so.

So, although we are significantly financially better off than we were under Kenwright and Woods, we are still way down the pecking order. This sense of perspective needs to be quickly grasped by we supporters. We are far from the biggest pigs at the trough and must still be content with what’s left after the fattest ones have gorged themselves.

For me, that raises questions about the latest transfer window and those that will follow. For, despite the balance sheet showing one out and five in, it was not really until the one departed that the arrivals lounge opened for business.

Yes, Stekelenburg and Gueye arrived in advance, but we didn’t spend £42 million on Bolasie and Williams until we had received that net amount (allowing for Barnsley’s sell-on clause), from Stones. And then with suspiciously indecent haste.

Taking this one stage further, who’s to say that the reason we failed to land any of the high-profile forwards we were allegedly courting, as the clock ticked down to the deadline, was because Lukaku was persuaded to stay?

Co-incidence, or déjà vu? You decide…

I think one would have to be blissfully naïve to believe we were just unlucky.

Arnautovic, Begovic, Bony, Brahimi, Carvalho, Gabbiadini, Hart, Indi, Kone, Koulibaly, Mata, Perez, Pelle, Sissoko, Slimani, Wijnaldum, Witsel, Ziyech and several others have all been touted as Goodison-bound.

Sounds like almost every other transfer window for the last 20 years or so to me. And don’t just blame media speculation, although that is not unwarranted. I am surely not the only one to smell some PR smoke behind all those raging fires.

Thankfully, Koeman has already proved at Southampton – and is already showing signs at Everton – that he can make a damn good silk purse out of a sow’s ear. Justified optimism on that front for now then.

Which brings me to the aspect that our whole future hinges on: a new ground.

Ten of our fellow clubs have new grounds. Tottenham will soon make it 11. And three others already have measurably bigger and better facilities. That means, at best, we can only cock a snook at Bournemouth, Burnley, Crystal Palace, Watford and West Brom. That is how far we have fallen behind.

It is something of a miracle that, even though we have slipped out of media consciousness, we are just about still regarded as fringe members of the elite. If we do not get a new ground, that will not last much longer.

If we fail to do so now, when will we? How much more ‘favourable’ do the circumstances have to be, before we do? Here lies the proof of the pudding.

My judgement is reserved until the latest rumblings prove to be the sound of excavators digging out foundations. Please do not let them just be the club’s media programme breaking wind again!

So that’s where my thinking lies I guess. Undecided, with a hint of oft-fed scepticism.

I would like the club to have been a lot more vociferous about the transfer window and to have issued some sort of post-deadline statement to affirm their intentions.

I would like something concrete (no pun intended), on the plans for a new ground. So far, all we have had is the mayor saying what a great guy Mr Moshiri is and the fact that another dockland site may be available.

And I would absolutely love to know Koeman’s thoughts now that he has been in the job for long enough to know how the land lies. Is he party to, and part of the real story – or has he been fed promises and expectations that the board cannot keep?

He seems a great guy for the job. Pragmatic, shrewd, savvy, wry-humoured and assured. I like him very much and think he is potentially the best manager by far since Howard Kendall Mk 1. A man with a plan.

My worry is whether or not the board have one to match? And with it, the wit, will and wherewithal to make this club great again.

Share this article

Reader Comments (101)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Patrick Murphy
1 Posted 05/09/2016 at 18:55:46
Entertaining and interesting article, David, I am certainly on the fence regarding the so-called Brave New World that Everton FC is supposedly now occupying. Whilst my heart says yes, this is our time to re-assert ourselves as a club, my head using the evidence provided so far says 'don't be a mug – you've seen all of this at least once before in the last 20 odd years".

Similarly to you, I will be quite happy for my head to be proved wrong and my heart to be correct, we'll have to wait and see what transpires in the coming months and years.

Good luck to Mr Koeman and his team as they are the true representatives of the supporters focus and passion, we can only hope that those in charge of club affairs can give the manager and his team their full support.

Jon Withey
2 Posted 05/09/2016 at 19:16:53
Pretty much spot on.

Moshiri isn't going to bank roll us – so is he going to build us or strip us?

The stadium is the decider really, isn't it?

Lee Mandaracas
3 Posted 05/09/2016 at 20:14:57
One thing you seem to have overlooked in your assessment of Mr Moshiri's overall wealth David is that he sold his 15% stake in Arsenal for £200m and then used £87m of that money to purchase 49.9% of Everton. This then leaves the assertion of £100m for transfers and the oft-overlooked retention of players above outgoing funds utterly plausible.

Admittedly, we may have only dipped circa £10m into that pot (excluding the £10m+ on management change and whatever unlisted agents' fees). I was disappointed with Deadline Day but not the window overall. There's further windows to come yet and too many changes at once could easily have had us where Spurs where after the departure of Bale or the RS after the Rat left the unfortunately still floating ship!

For now, I'm still being an optimist and I'm not booing anyone as long as the results keep going our way – except perhaps Lukaku every time he shoots his mouth off to the International press.

James Watts
4 Posted 05/09/2016 at 20:41:12
The communication from the board is farcical and well beyond a joke. Proving that BK is still very much in control or at the very least, a key player.

Why isn't someone talking to us about future plans? Why isn't someone telling us progress on the stadium? Why hasn't there been something to address the pigs ear of the TDD? I'm not expecting a 'We have £100mill to spend in January' type comment but just something to at least acknowledge us when they are no season tickets to sell? You know, something in the program, maybe once a month?? It's not too much to ask surely?!?

Is Moshiri just another shareholder, a la Green? The evidence I'm seeing so far points me in that direction.

Why can't BK just fuck off and retire so we have someone in charge who may actually care about the supporters in the 'Everton family' shite we hear but see no evidence off?!? No such luck by the looks of it.

Stan Schofield
5 Posted 05/09/2016 at 21:10:57
Answer: Too soon to say.
Paul Kossoff
6 Posted 06/09/2016 at 02:22:58
David, I've not bought into the 'new dawn' yet, especially after the farcical transfer deadline day. I'm sure that Koeman is as displeased with what happened as we are. For Moshiri to "apparently" voice his concern makes you wonder just how much power Kenwright is still wielding at Goodison.

I wouldn't be surprised if the 'toe the line' orders to the manager would eventually lead to Koeman to up sticks sooner rather than later. It seems to me that broken promises are not just made to supporters but managers and players.

I really hope that Moshiri isn't in cahoots with our chairman and that he genuinely wants to build something special here, something that he wasn't allowed to be involved with at Arsenal. When will I be convinced? Well, let's start with a new stadium announcement, and I don't mean Bill's hopes and prayers.

David Ellis
7 Posted 06/09/2016 at 03:38:01
I am less optimistic than I was... partly because we didn't get cover for Lukaku in the transfer window... but perhaps more importantly that weird post-Sissoko tweet from Moshiri. Please, please let him not be a nutter.
Alan J Thompson
8 Posted 06/09/2016 at 05:08:57
A new Manager, DoF, Academy Head, his own man on the Board and talks with the Council on available sites for a possible new ground.

Perhaps Iranians who made their fortune in Russia think softly, softly is the best way of doing business. Didn't do Harry Catterick any harm and I don't think we ever got told which players, if any, he missed out on... but then, he didn't have to deal with Agents.

Paul Ward
9 Posted 06/09/2016 at 05:38:17
I share the caution and fear and don't have confidence in the future. The start of a Brave New World may describe the the acquisition of at least a proven Manager and a highly reputed talent assessor as DoF.

I do concede the signing of Koeman is the first time since 1961 the club has pursued a manager of proven quality whatever the cost. I also accept Walsh needs a little time to thrive. Although I am angry at our efforts on the transfer deadline, I begrudgingly accept we can all make mistakes.

The biggest deterrent to our progress is Kenwright, he has failed us over the years and lied to us and could never be trusted.

I sincerely hope very soon, Moshiri buys the extra shares and sends Bill to some retirement village. Then I will have a little more confidence in our new dawn.

Rick Tarleton
10 Posted 06/09/2016 at 06:17:05
Jon Withey sums up my feelings exactly. The acid test for Moshiri is what he does about the stadium. This issue has been hanging over Everton for the last generation and we need a stadium that add to our assets, not one that has so many poor views and little corporate facilities.
Laurie Hartley
11 Posted 06/09/2016 at 06:42:27
I have no doubt Koeman and his back room staff will deliver on the pitch but to get back to the top of the pile, as David suggests, we also need a new stadium.

Moshiri made a major gaff with his message to Sky. It seems to me he has two ways of handling the fan fallout and restore his credibility after that blunder:

1). Keep quiet till it goes away or
2). Give us some good news

I know what I am hoping for. We will see.

Craig Walker
12 Posted 06/09/2016 at 09:04:34
Good article, David..

I'm somewhere midway between the eternal optimism of The Everton Show and the doom-and-gloom of some posters on ToffeeWeb. I'll be more persuaded that it's a Brave New World after a few more good results. The Merseyside derby is always a good barometer for me.

Martin Mason
13 Posted 06/09/2016 at 09:18:02
It wasn't clear that we didn't have a certain transfer budget;, the fact was that we had funds and were unable to buy the players. Anybody who believes that Moshiri is going to spend unlimited amounts on players and guarantee funding for a new ground is delusional and he is absolutely correct not to do this just to make a minority of Everton fans feel good.

He will have imposed budgets of course but the concept that we were not making funds available or were having to sell to buy is nonsense. Everton's development under Moshiri has to be sustainable for the era after he goes.

False dawn? After what the club has achieved in the last 30 years? At least there is a clear dawn now.

Dave Abrahams
14 Posted 06/09/2016 at 09:25:36
We will know more as the season progresses, most definitely after the next transfer window. For now, we have a very good manager with proper training back-up staff in place, the manager and his team can not do it without the management providing some more financial clout.

I am quietly confident at the moment, let's give this project some more time.

Clive Rogers
15 Posted 06/09/2016 at 11:08:12
I for one have every confidence in "the Mosh" to deliver. He has made an excellent start. A top, top manager after two Championship managers, a top DoF, and some quality squad signings. We have to accept it is difficult for us to attract some players and will remain so until we progress.

Koeman has said it will take him two years to get the squad in order. Quality signings will follow in the next few summer windows. January windows are difficult.

As others have stated, I will feel happier when Kenwright has gone. He's not to be trusted.

Gordon Crawford
16 Posted 06/09/2016 at 11:16:08
Brave new world for me. :)
Ciarán McGlone
17 Posted 06/09/2016 at 13:41:33
David,

You appear to be exactly where I am on this...

Koeman is an improvement, but the jury is still out on the boardroom antics.

I'm certainly not going to be sharpening my pitchfork, but there is no actual evidence that the boardroom shenanigans that we've become used to during the Kenwright tenure have changed at all.

Hopefully we're simply being over cautious (and rightly so) and we're not debating the same issues at the end of January. Watch this space.

Ciarán McGlone
18 Posted 06/09/2016 at 13:49:13
"the fact was that we had funds and were unable to buy the players"

No sorry, not a fact.

Half your posts are about telling people they have no idea about the internal workings of the club – the other half are wild and idle speculation on the inner workings of the club.

The only fact we can work on is the actual players who arrived.

Thomas Lennon
19 Posted 06/09/2016 at 14:36:37
And even there we do not know how much money comes in or goes out due to player transfers in any year until we get the accounts 6-18 months later.

If there weren't a need for us all to have something to chat about, barely a word written in these threads on the running of the club should be taken seriously.

Our new owner has stated in broad terms what his ambition is, he has roughly 100x more purchasing power than our last owner. He is here for the long haul. Chill.

Christopher Dover
20 Posted 06/09/2016 at 14:49:25
Perhaps for a change the target players they wanted were much better than Everton normally go for? The money was there but the players used it to their advantage to gain better deals at their own clubs or moved to a team in the Champions League. Also, some clubs just seemed to up the price as it moved along the negotiation.

Bony, as has been said, should have been a target but at no time has anyone in the club said he is. (If he was, why not make it part of the Stones move?) Of the players we were linked with, some would have been a target, some would not. Has Koeman and Co learnt from this window? I think and hope so.

The new ground, I don't think much will be said until a decision has been made as I cannot imagine what the negotiations are like with Peel, if it is to be the docks; if not, then, from the Mayor's comments, the other site can start quite quick.

The matches to date have shown a definite improvement over last season and I see no reason why it will not continue, it is four months to the next window so, if needed, I, like others, hope they are ready and quick to add as required to the team and then onward to keep improving and making Everton a more attractive club to players looking for a move.

Nick Page
21 Posted 06/09/2016 at 14:51:21
Agree with Ciaran. As I've said for the past God knows how long, until that charlatan, Kenwright is removed from all corporate responsibility, and his merry little band of Yes men & women are shown the door, things will not be changing for the better and the club will continue to be run like some tin-pot cheapskate amateur outfit that belongs in the last century.

Did people hear that the reason for the "facelift" taking so long is that the structure is so rotten, it needs reinforcing first? Another Bill Kenwright production. Brilliant.

Paul Mackie
22 Posted 06/09/2016 at 15:17:39
Can we all just agree that we hate international breaks?
Frank Crewe
23 Posted 06/09/2016 at 15:32:50
I certainly hate international breaks. Watching England doing their usual huffing and puffing as they try to scrape a win. Then listening to the apologist pundits (particularly Ian Wright droning on about "the boys") trying to convince us not to believe the evidence of our own eyes. Sooner we get back to league football the better I like it.

ps: Harry Kane... WTF? Makes Rom look like Dixie Dean. Couldn't score in a brothel.

Peter Laing
24 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:10:23
Is it mere coincidence but has anyone else noticed that Bill Kenwright has risen like Lazarus since Moshiri has come onboard. I won't be happy until Bill gets onto his Uncle Cyril's handlebars and takes that long ride out of Everton into the sunset of his retirement.
Martin Mason
25 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:15:20
Ciaran @18, if we made formal bids as reported in several sources, and which I believe is so, then we had the money available to make the buys. The null hypothesis is that we made formal bids as reported and we had the money available. Anything else is wild and idle speculation on the inner workings of the club. Totally up to you to prove that we made formal bids without having the money available.

The only fact regarding having money available is the players who actually arrived? Absolute drivel I'm sorry.

Btw, I don't comment on the inner workings of the club because like you I don't have a clue about the inner workings of the club. The difference between us is that you are deluded enough to think you do.

Martin Mason
26 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:21:06
Nick, I wondered how low some of our fans could go in irrational criticism of the club. I think you've moved the bar down significantly with your churlish, unsubstantiated rantings.

What is wrong in your head that you can find anything to criticise the club for, finding faults in something they were going to modify and then deciding to fix them before going ahead?

Barry Jones
27 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:24:05
A very well written article, David. Thank you for that. I chuckled at the suggested utility for retaining Gibson. I feel that the commitment to a new stadium is critical in judging the mid to long term intent of the new ownership.

As far as the transfer window went, I am reasonably happy. I don't feel that it was like previous years, where we hardly dipped a toe in the water. I think we were more aggressive this time around, but as Mick and the boys sang, "You can't always get what you want".

Joe Clitherow
28 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:26:20
"the fact was that we had funds and were unable to buy the players"

No sorry, not a fact.

Actually Ciaran that may well be a fact; it's just that you and the rest of us are not privy to information which may validate it.

Therefore speculative and comes down to the balance of probability. You pays your money figuratively and it's coloured by your existing prejudices or lack thereof (see thread above).

Who knows?

Martin Mason
29 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:33:58
Joe, do you feel that there is the slightest possibility that a club of Everton's stature could possibly make a formal bid for a player without having the money available to see the buy through at least at the bid price? What are your thoughts?

What reason could a buyer like Moshiri have in paying £80M for a controlling stake in a Club and then do nothing with it?

Ciarán McGlone
30 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:37:08
It's certainly not a fact as expressed by Martin Mason...
Ciarán McGlone
31 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:38:06
Null hypothesis... haha.

Give me strength..

Kevin Rowlands
32 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:46:41
Good balanced article, David. Personally I'm in the "glass half-full" side and the main reason for that is I honestly don't think Walsh and especially Koeman and Co would have come on board if they didn't believe something good is happening at the club.

I know some are disappointed at the transfer windo but Koeman is already on record saying it will be two years before he gets the team to where he wants them. I think we're going to have to be patient and hopefully good times are on the way.

Nick Page
33 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:53:32
Hi Martin (*waves*)

Sorry – which part of my extremely consistent and absolutely nailed on 100% correct so far hypothesis after years of bleating re Chairman Kenwright do you find churlish and unsubstantiated?

Go back and see what I was saying last year. Oh look, there goes Leicester and West Ham closely followed by Stoke and those darling Saints leaving us in their wake. Oh that's nice.

And look again, it's only Leicester winning the bloody league WITHOUT shit loads of money but with a strategy and board that doesn't dribble down the side of its fucking mouth when someone asks them a pertinent question. Brilliant that. For them. Not us.

I'll tell you what though. If Farhad Moshiri hadn't quite realised what an absolute and utter out-of-his depth amateur he was dealing with after that Chelsea QF quote he certainly does now. And I only hope Koeman can see past the Kenwrightitis and let things play out the way he was probably told/sold.

Joe Clitherow
34 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:58:30
Martin

I wasn't arguing one way or the other, just seeing both yours and Ciaran's points. On balance of probability I tend to agree with your conclusion.

For people like Nick above if there was the evidence of his own eyes that black was indeed black, then I'm sure he would believe this due to his existing conviction (and apologies for the exaggerated example). If Bill then subsequently repeated this fact I'm pretty sure he would revise his opinion purely due to the source, which seems a bit silly to me but there you go.

Ciaran's observation of null hypothesis is ultimately the clearest point. You believe whatever it is you want and it is ultimately pointless, though of passing interest.

I tend to agree with you in terms of my optimistic outlook, but the whole Moshiri - White iNotes fiasco has shaken my confidence to a degree I'll admit.

Martin Mason
35 Posted 06/09/2016 at 16:59:57
Nick, your diatribe was opinionated, fact free and the most childish load of rubbish that I've ever read. Apart from that, it was quite good. :-)
Nick Page
36 Posted 06/09/2016 at 17:03:32
Hahaha, thanks Martin ;-)

Hopefully (!) January will be more "productive".

Don Alexander
37 Posted 06/09/2016 at 17:10:10
In the sick world of players and their agents, there is next to nothing other than rampant greed at the fans' expense. Club owners hope to turn as much profit as possible too, from TV ...and the fans.

Mr Moshiri at least says way more that's believable than BPB ever said, in my opinion. I'm confident of a ground move to a way better stadium, a better squad already playing football in a recognisable way, and a manager and staff who seem to know why.

Here's hoping... as ever.

Brent Stephens
38 Posted 06/09/2016 at 17:29:26
Martin (#25) – "The null hypothesis is that we made formal bids as reported and we had the money available."

We've been here before, Martin. I stand to be corrected but I believe that in a null hypothesis you state that there is NO relationship between x and y and then test that hypothesis. If anything, you are stating what is called the (positive) alternative hypothesis.

Brent Stephens
39 Posted 06/09/2016 at 17:32:17
ps: Martin, in any case, a hypothesis remains to be tested / proven. Your "assertion" remains to be proven, perhaps?
Eddie Dunn
40 Posted 06/09/2016 at 17:39:35
Paul Mackie, I agree. I hate the international breaks, shit football, especially the friendlies, and no Everton things happening. It is like the close season, and it encourages in-fighting amongst our band of merry ToffeeWebbers.

Let's get on with the League and watch the big man bang in a couple of goals at Sunderland. Moyes sick as the proverbial and all will be well with the world.

Martin Mason
41 Posted 06/09/2016 at 18:17:58
Brent,

The Null Hypothesis (NH) is also called the conjecture and it is the case that has to be proven wrong by statistical analysis for the Alternative Hypothesis (AH) to be correct. The NH in my case is that EFC don't make formal offers for players without having the finance to do the deal and the AH, as claimed by some on here, is that they are making formal offers for players without any money being available.

The statistical basis from all available data is overwhelmingly that clubs do not make offers for players from other clubs unless they have the finance to do the deal although it may happen in rare cases. The NH in this case isn't disproven so the AH isn't correct, the club makes formal offers only because it is able to finance them if they go through.

I believe that it's OK to use the NH to show whether anything is likely to be toward the fact end of the truth spectrum as opposed to AH which are not.

I'm sure you accept is that the overwhelming data shows that clubs don't bid unless they have the money so the hypothesis is well tested.

Ciarán McGlone
42 Posted 06/09/2016 at 18:24:19
Stop, please stop.

I'm begging you.

Brent Stephens
43 Posted 06/09/2016 at 18:24:46
Martin, "The NH in my case is that EFC don't make formal offers for players without having the finance to do the deal and the AH."

That sounds more like a NH than your original statement ("The null hypothesis is that we made formal bids as reported and we had the money available").

"I believe that it's OK to use the NH to show whether anything is likely to be toward the fact end of the truth spectrum as opposed to AH which are not." I have no problems with using a NH – it's just that your original statement, as I say, doesn't set out the negative.

"I'm sure you accept is that the overwhelming data shows that clubs don't bid unless they have the money so the hypothesis is well tested." It might well do. I wasn't arguing with that. Although your point was about EFC not clubs generally?

Jay Wood
44 Posted 06/09/2016 at 18:44:48
Null hypothesis, eh Martin ... hmmm.

Do you comprehend that the more specific a statement is, the higher the possibility exists that it can be negated? Take your claim, propped up by you as an example of 'null hypothesis' (and ... I'm guessing here, but I have a sense you don't fully comprehend the application of the null hypothesis, either in its use with statistical data or from a philosophical viewpoint):

"The null hypothesis is that we made formal bids as reported and we had the money available. Anything else is wild and idle speculation on the inner workings of the club. Totally up to you to prove that we made formal bids without having the money available."

That's a pretty bold claim and hypothesis on your part, Martin. Thankfully for this world, some like to expose such throwaway claims and hypotheses to the severest criticism – trial by fire, if you like, so we can confirm its validity... or not, as the case may be.

For example, in this very transfer window we first flogged Stones before making the big money purchase of Bolasie. That is indisputable. Whether there was a direct correlation between one and the other is only known to a select few. All else is speculation.

Now you are attempting to state, authoritatively, with absolute veracity, that (a) we did lodge formal bids with any number of (rumoured) targets, and (b) we had the money available to pay for such bids.

Really? Let me play you at your own game: give me concrete, undeniable proof of either of those two claims. You can't. NO-ONE (I very much doubt) here on TW can say with any degree of certainty who of the many linked players we genuinely bid for.

Nor can any one claim with any degree of certainty (as you attempt to do) that money – cash in hand! – was available to pay for said purchases, least of all you given your acknowledgement that "I don't comment on the inner workings of the club (snigger!) because like you I don't have a clue about the inner workings of the club."

It is not an unreasonable claim, for example, given the gossip in the final days of the transfer window, to state that to land Sissoko we had to generate funds by first offloading McCarthy.

No bold claims by me one way or the other on the veracity or probability of the above, but just demonstrating it is lazy, flabby thinking on your part to make the claims you did and (erroneously) describing it as a 'null hypothesis'.

Daniel A Johnson
45 Posted 06/09/2016 at 18:45:51
Glass half-full for me.

This was the first transfer window that we have actually tried to sign players. It was just unfortunate most of our targets led down blind alleys for numerous reasons. The money is there, we just couldn't spend it unfortunately. The only real downer was the Sissoko fiasco which put a real bitter taste in everyone's mouths.

The only criticism I have is why leave it all so late? Man Utd did their business early and reaped the benefits.

We go with what we have and I believe Koeman will get them fit and organised and maybe make more moves in the next window.

Bill Gall
46 Posted 06/09/2016 at 18:45:58
Ronald Koeman was hired on 14th June and started on the 21st. This gave him about 9 weeks to bring in his own backroom staff, asses others he wanted to keep, before starting on the playing staff.

As he had players still on holiday and others getting extended holidays from the European competition, he was left with a few friendlies and advice from remaining coaches and videos, on who to keep and where he believed the team needed strengthening with players to suit the style he wanted to implement.

The four players brought in who will more than likely be regular first team players are good value for money while the player brought in on the last day is still open for debate.

Unlike a number of people, I believe that the transfer window is open from the end of the season till midnight on 31st August and not from midnight on 30th August till midnight on 31st August.

Did we do well in the transfer market? Yes. Could we have done better? According to some agents and the media, we did not try hard enough; according to the management, they did the best they could... so it now becomes a case of who do you trust.

Since Moshiri took over, Everton have fired their previous manager, hired a manager who appears more adapt to the Premier League and have put the club on a more stable financial position that (imo) should be judged over at least this season, and not as some people have said, because it was a poor transfer window in his first couple of months.

One of the things I learned, was when you are starting something new, whether it be business, a trade or learning music, you use the triangle or pyramid system where you form a solid learning of the basics to provide the platform before you try to climb higher. This is the position I see Moshiri taking over in the club and in time he will weed out the under performers at the club.

We cannot answer the article title question: Brave New World — Or False Dawn with just a few months passed but we have to wait and see what the future brings.

A good point made in the article that many supporters may have not been aware of, was the number of what we may see as lesser clubs, and how much financial muscle they have.

Martin Mason
47 Posted 06/09/2016 at 19:07:11
Jay W, I don't have to prove anything it is purely up to those who say that EFC didn't have money available to prove this was the case. Using the NH is a very good way of showing how ridiculous the alternative is.

The overwhelming evidence is that EFC made several formal bids for players and that to do so they had the money available.

You are definitely basing your comments on rumours and conspiracy theory without any supporting evidence. What you are doing is starting with a conclusion (we had to sell before buying) and then twisting logic on its head to match this such as we got more for Stones than we paid for Bolasie so we could only buy Bolasie by selling Stones, it is just ridiculous. The NH is pretty strong to me.

Jay Wood
48 Posted 06/09/2016 at 19:28:23
Now here's the thing, Martin, as I wrote:

"No bold claims by me one way or the other on the veracity or probablity of the above, but just demonstrating it is lazy, flabby thinking on your part to make the claims you did and (erroneously) describing it as a 'null hypothesis'."

None so blind as those who will not see ... you state:

"The overwhelming evidence is that EFC made several formal bids for players and that to do so they had the money available" and then you tell me "You are definitely basing your comments on rumours and conspiracy theory without any supporting evidence."

Whereas you're not, of course ...

RIGGGGHHHHTTTT! Got it!

Jay Woods
49 Posted 06/09/2016 at 20:20:29
For me, the cold realisation that Kenwright is still in a position of power at the club is the supreme red flag over the whole Moshiri shebang.

Would we have signed Bolasie had we not sold Stones? The fact that our net transfer spend was minus a million pounds or so should have set alarm bells ringing.

And Moshiri only twigged that things weren't going to plan late on transfer deadline day?

Then the absurd face-saving effort he made for the press...

Alarm bells, amigos. Alarm bells.

Michael Polley
50 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:05:12
The sound of silence from the Board is deafening. Maybe they can't discuss the new stadium due to legal issues – but feed us something, please.

My heart says we are on the verge of something great; my head is slightly pessimistic. Supporting the Toffees for nearly 40 years does that to a man.

Stan Schofield
51 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:06:55
Jay @49: You mention Moshiri's 'face-saving effort', meaning the reported White/Moshiri tweet? I've looked at various media reports about this, and all I can find is the tweet from White, which contains a statement apparently made by Moshiri.

I can't actually find a direct source of any such statement from Moshiri. In other words, I can see only a claim made by White that Moshiri made the statement, but I cannot see any convincing evidence that Moshiri actually did make the statement. Am I missing something?

Stan Schofield
52 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:17:25
Michael @50: I've supported them since 1961, so I know what you mean. This time, both my heart and my head tell me that we're on the verge of something great. I don't think it's just wishful thinking, this is different.
Michael Kenrick
53 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:26:15
Stan, you may not have followed the rather lengthy thread where we discussed the bizarre message from Moshiri to White.

Your need for 'convincing evidence' sets a very high bar for such things but I can say it is unprecedented to have not one but two Echo articles confirming that the message was genuine.

Still, even with that, it is just as hard to digest the motivation and logic for sharing such a message in the way that it was. But all indications are that it was genuine. However, only you can decide if you are convinced.

Stan Schofield
54 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:44:35
Michael @53: Thanks for the thread link. Don't know about a high bar, for me it's normal. Thus far, all I see is a claim, which is not convincing. We're talking about the media. The people who have great experience, not of handling evidence well, but of tapping people's phones, escalating innuendo, misrepresenting Hillsborough victims, making out scousers to be thieves, etc.
Brent Stephens
55 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:51:37
Stan, I'm sort of with you there. I wouldn't say I just don't believe all this about what Moshiri is supposed to have said but I find it hard to believe. So, an open but mistrusting mind. I emailed EFC on Thursday asking for comment but no reply apart from the standard acknowledgement of receipt of email. Make of that what you will.
Martin Mason
56 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:55:04
I have only one question regarding the Moshiri tweet assuming it's genuine. So what?
Jay Wood
57 Posted 06/09/2016 at 21:59:53
Stan, you've asked this question on a number of threads this evening. It is a worthy and legitimate one.

I'm of a similar ilk and wait for hard evidence to emerge before leaping all over any and every story reported in the meedjah.

Like many, first up I dismissed Moshiri's alleged text to Jim White as a total spoof, for the very reasons I mention in this thread and in the thread Michael references. It was so totally out of character from what we've seen and heard from the man (which is near nowt!) ... until now.

However, as Michael says, for the Echo to report not once, but twice, that it 100% came from Moshiri is unprecedented. This is the rag that is very mindful of its relationship with the club and not so much tip toes around any controversy related to Everton as totally ignores it, rather than risk rupturing the very cosy association they have with the makers and shakers at Everton.

The fact Moshiri's text is still being discussed here, 6 days after the event, is evidence enough for me it has raised eyebrows a smidgen and sown a wee seed of doubt about the man for some.

And because, 6 days on, there has been no rebuttal from him or the club that he was indeed the source of what has been a damaging quote rather affirms that the Echo is not telling porkies on this one, or they and others would have been corrected by now.

As Michael says, it remains for you and others to be convinced or not by the legitimacy of the claim they were indeed Moshiri's words.

I for one am and remain somewhat bewildered by them for the reasons I listed in earlier posts.

Stan Schofield
58 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:05:42
Brent @55: It'll be interesting to see what transpires. My general understanding is that someone in Moshiri's elevated position would not condescend to commenting (confirming nor denying) media reports. They have neither the inclination nor the time. There are just too many media reports for one thing, and media reports are too unreliable to be worthy of too much attention.

Martin @56: Well, it's possibly wasting a lot of Evertonians' time and effort in reacting to it, but I suppose that's up to the individuals. A lot of folk seem to have become more pessimistic about the 'new era', despite the questionable provenance of the alleged statement.

Ciarán McGlone
59 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:09:51
At least "so what?" is a little more honest than your null hypothesis gibberish.

It is not trivial (as you called it the other day).. it is the most utterly inane statement that could have come from our club at the time. It raises a number of questions..

1) who was he trying to convince with this garbage
2) who advised him it was the right thing to do

You might think the sun shines out of Bill Kenwright's arse, but a lot of fans have serious concerns about the way he has run this club. This whole saga reeks of Kenwright. If indeed he is pulling Moshiri's strings then we have a lot to be concerned about.

Stan Schofield
60 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:13:47
Jay @57: I understand your point about the Echo. However, this seems to be equivalent to saying that the Echo believes in the validity of the allegation. But just because the Echo believes in it, doesn't necessarily mean that it is true. The media make many mistakes, even when they try to be truthful.
Ciarán McGlone
61 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:16:43
Stan..

Show me one single other quote attributed to Moshiri which depicts him as a bit of a twit?

To state he would not lower himself to respond is nonsense.

This is not tittle tattle on the back of the Daily Sport. This was a quote repeatedly broadcast by a massive media organisation – which makes him look foolish.

Martin Mason
62 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:18:00
Ciaran, so what? What are you as a fan expecting to do about a supposed transgression from the owner of the club. Answer is nothing because it is nothing to do with you.
Ciarán McGlone
63 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:29:22
It's nothing to do with me?

Ok. I'll leave that one just hanging there.

Michael Kenrick
64 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:30:06
Stan, you are making a remarkable illustration of one undeniable truth, and that is the strength of a firmly held belief, versus evidence placed in front of you that runs contrary to that belief.

Your firmly held belief is: someone in Moshiri's elevated position would not condescend to commenting (confirming nor denying) media reports. They have neither the inclination nor the time. There are just too many media reports for one thing, and media reports are too unreliable to be worthy of too much attention.

Yet the very strong (but as yet unconvincing!) evidence is that he did indeed make the statement in question.

Others don't have a vested interest either way in accepting or rejecting its veracity. But you have strongly stated a predisposition not to accept it as true.

Perhaps what we need here is a Null Hypothesis...


Stan Schofield
65 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:44:43
Ciaran @61 and Michael @64: I understand your points. That said, I did say it was my understanding, rather than making an assertion about reality. I simply do not know, but can express my understanding.

The basic point is that I require suitable evidence to be convinced of an allegation in the media. Your requirements may well have a different level of rigour.

Paul Smith
66 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:46:01
Wow! I've come across some unique threads on TW in the past but this one takes the biscuit.

Weighing up the evidence and standing back for a few days after the event, I feel these texts were sanctioned at the highest level. I sent a tweet at the time dismissing the texts as rubbish, unwilling to believe the clubs saviour could sound so much like Kenwright, I mean shit, he's almost a clone. Gutted!

Michael Kenrick
67 Posted 06/09/2016 at 22:52:05
Martin, you keep raising the spectre of a lynch mob going after Moshiri to exact some bizarre revenge. You used the same logic as an apologist for Kenwright's many misdemeanours, so at least you are consistent.

The real concern is what such a bizarre statement signifies, and what it has clearly done to damage the persona (perhaps falsely attributed) of, as Stan says, someone in Moshiri's elevated position not condescending to commenting (confirming nor denying) media reports, with such bizarre references to protecting mediocre players in the 'Everton family'.

Clearly it hasn't penetrated your teflon coating but there are enough thoughtful Evertonians concerned about his utterances to want to know more about what might lay behind them. No lynching required just yet.

You say it's nothing to do with us, as fans. Yet we the fans are indeed the recipients of it. Your logic (as shown by your very wrong use of the Null Hypothesis) is once again sadly flawed.

Stan Schofield
68 Posted 06/09/2016 at 23:00:25
Paul @66: A debate about evidence. We can expect no less in the School of Science.
Eddie Dunn
69 Posted 06/09/2016 at 23:32:01
Surely the worry is that the common feeling prior to this strange Jim White thing, was that Moshiri was a man who liked to say very little, yet was assertive in the removal of Martinez. Now we have the spectre of Mr Moshiri possibly not being the wise and wealthy sage that is going to take us forward to greatness once more.

Perhaps we festooned him with qualities that he does not possess. The dialogue attributed to him was so weird, that at best we can hope that he had had a few drinks and failed to express himself properly. This happens on here regularly!

Laurie Hartley
70 Posted 06/09/2016 at 23:39:24
Martin - "so what?" (If he sent the message).

Well for me it's about leadership. I have ranted about this on another thread but I thought in Moshiri we had a man who had the financial clout, business acumen, and smarts to lead us back towards the top of the pile. Someone in the John Moores mould.

So to the brave new world – I would say that ,no matter how good a leader are, you have to have the confidence of the common folk if you are to succeed.

As one of those "common folk" I believe his message to White (which I do believe he sent) was schoolboy stuff and has therefore severely dented my confidence in him.

Also for those who are of the opinion that Kenwright is in someway to blame for Moshiri's message all I can say is:

It was the aliens that made me do it.

Stan Schofield
71 Posted 06/09/2016 at 00:04:01
Since my original question this evening, on a number of threads, as to whether there is direct evidence that Moshiri actually sent the message to White, there has been some debate about what might constitute evidence, and some folks have reiterated their belief that Moshiri did make the statement.

However, I have still seen no direct evidence that Moshiri sent the message to White. He might have sent it, or he might not have sent it. I still do not know.

Michael Kenrick
72 Posted 07/09/2016 at 00:15:39
Stan, the Echo tells you the weather...
The Echo tells you the score when Everton play...
The Echo describes what happens on he field...

These same journalists say, with 100% certainty (when have you ever seen that in a paper?), that Moshiri sent the message to White.

What do you do?
You call them liars.

Professional journalists whose business is Everton. Don't you think you should perhaps reconsider your position?

David Barks
73 Posted 07/09/2016 at 01:35:05
Stan,

The direct evidence is White saying he received the message and telling the world what it said. What you don't see is evidence that he did not send it, since absolutely nobody from the club or Moshiri himself has said he did not send it. This is just ridiculous at this point.

Instead, independent journalists have verified and reported that it was actually him. That's how it works. If something is reported, and nobody refutes it, and in fact other people verify the authenticity, then it is true.

John Daley
74 Posted 07/09/2016 at 02:29:02
Verification by independent journalists: "The Echo understands "?

Is that the same Echo who, back in mid February of this year, were claiming to "understand" that a £200m takeover deal by John J Moores and his mate was 'defo dead, dead close' and likely "to be completed by the end of the month", only for some other lid to come out of absolutely nowhere and leave them looking like they actually 'understood' fuck all about what was really going on?

Jay Wood
75 Posted 07/09/2016 at 02:48:58
With respect Stan, you are rather belabouring the point now.

I understand how and why journalists and the 'meejah' are reviled, particularly by footy fans. However, there cannot and should not be blanket condemnation of all journalists and media outlets. There are excellent journalists, publications and other channels of communication out there who merit respect and trust.

You have had it pointed out to you by more than one poster and more than once that it is unprecedented of the Echo to be so forthright in their reporting -100% certain! - on a matter related to a senior figure at Everton.

You are seemingly demanding nigh impossible degrees of proof. What would convince you? A photo of Moshiri's phone showing the offending text? Probably not, because of course that can be staged or Photoshopped. Nothing short of personally inspecting Moshiri's phone yourself would seemingly suffice.

I have to ask, do you apply the same standards of 'proof' to your reading of your morning newspaper or viewing of the tv news? Because, as in the very unambiguous clear statement on the subject by the Echo - 100% certain! - all news you read, view or listen to, you are never categorically in possession of the 'facts.'

Personally, I have moved from being totally dismissive that Moshiri could possibly have written such a crass statement via the media he did to accepting that he did. And the whole episode bewilders me and undermines ever so slightly - hopefully temporarily - my belief in his judgement and capabilities and capacity to return Everton to the lofty heights we all desire.

David Ellis
76 Posted 07/09/2016 at 03:13:05
Jay...sadly I concur with your last paragraph. I am much more bothered by this Moshiri "quote" than the deadline day disappointment. Like the Queen, he is popular only because his views are unknown. As soon as he speaks, he's in trouble. And this is just gibberish which has to be a MAJOR concern to any blue.

As for the evidence – well we can only go on the balance of probabilities and I would say on the balance of probabilities he did make that statement. I would also say that on the same basis we did not need to sell Stones to finance the players we bought in during the window.

Martin Nicholls
77 Posted 07/09/2016 at 06:19:18
The one thing that all posters seem to be agreed on is that if the text was sent, it was a serious error of judgement. What do you think BPB?
Michael Kenrick
78 Posted 07/09/2016 at 06:59:24
For anyone who has not seen this, one of the lads on Toffee TV was just as puzzled, bemused, confused by Moshiri's bizarre statement:


Michael Kenrick
79 Posted 07/09/2016 at 07:12:06
Seems all three lads on Toffee TV went into greater detail in this longer episode, released on Monday:


Denis Richardson
80 Posted 07/09/2016 at 07:38:30
Far too early to judge but the signs are good so far.

7 points from opening 3 games, even the most cynical of fans can't sniff at that.

Paul Tran
81 Posted 07/09/2016 at 07:55:20
The evidence points him saying it, and if so it was an error of judgement. I make them reasonably often, rectify them, apologise when necessary and move on.

An old boss of mine once told me to get the mistakes done early, learn from them and get better. I suggest the same to Moshiri.

Joe Clitherow
82 Posted 07/09/2016 at 08:20:19
There is a complete non sequitur of logic applied by some people on this site here, namely:

"Moshiri sent txt to White, therefore we had no money for transfers and had to sell to buy, therefore no '£100M war chest' (whatever that is)"

Of course this is total rubbish, and I am, even according to the high standards of proof required by some here convinced of this. Why? Because there actually are supporting facts.

Irrespective that Everton turned a profit on transfer dealings in the window (good business in my view) there are clearly huge sums of money available just from being in the Premier League. We had this money as did the other clubs who spent, to a greater or lesser degree. Even the sums for reported new deals for some players would make hardly a dent in the new deal money. Whether we have any additional "war chest" from Moshiri "investment" I have no idea, but it looks like a very strong position for the next window that we have generally kept our powder dry with big deals, and when compared to business other clubs did in the window with freshening up their squads I'd say we've done pretty well and sensibly addressed some areas with more to come.

Equating previous "sell to buy" positions from years gone by is a lazy and erroneous conclusion, as we were on our uppers then and we aren't now, because just being in the PL is a lottery win every August. Saying otherwise is just scaremongering gossip, trying to get attention or make some unconnected point about the suitability of BK, Robert Elstone, the board etc etc based on whatever axe you have to grind

And I've seen our accounts and the figures, like anyone else can; I get a very glossy booklet posted to me every year.

And that's a fact .

Thomas Surgenor
83 Posted 07/09/2016 at 08:29:08
Michael (#79), They do talk a lot of sense.

I subscribe to the theory we wanted to make a big impact on deadline day with 3 significant arrivals. We were playing to the football world. Three significant arrivals announced on Sky would make world wide news that would make other players sit up and take notice of our so called project.

However, I don't agree that the January window will be the significant one. I think January is a hard time to attract players. I think next summer's window is the litmus test for Walsh & Moshiri being the real deal.

Hopefully lessons have been learnt and that all those who needed the training on the job will be in a better position to complete their tasks next July. I expect/hope we get our main arrivals July 1st 2017 to give them a full pre-season so we are ready to hit our (European) campaign running.

Ciarán McGlone
84 Posted 07/09/2016 at 08:37:17
Interesting subtitles. I think our new shareholder should be known as 'fire machine' from now on.
Stan Schofield
85 Posted 07/09/2016 at 09:43:10
Regarding my post @71, I'm still at the same point. Subsequent posts show a fair bit of special pleading about the authenticity of media reports, but no direct evidence. Whether anyone thinks that I'm labouring a point, I'll take care of that. I've asked a question, I appreciate the debate about evidence, but as I say I cannot regard my question as being answered.
Brent Stephens
86 Posted 07/09/2016 at 10:05:49
As David #76 says, "on the balance of probabilities" Moshiri made the statement.

A higher standard of proof would be "beyond reasonable doubt".

My gut feel is that we have reached the "balance of probabilities" threshold but not the "beyond reasonable doubt" threshold. The reason I say this is that we are dealing with 1) Jim White and 2) the press.

1) Jim White is laughed at by pretty much every TWebber in terms of credibility. So reasonable doubt there.

2) The press is derided time after time for saying, for example, that "we understand" that Everton are interested in or have made a bid for x or y. TWebbers normally take "we understand" to be a load of tosh guesswork or even made-up nonsense. It's often just repeating a rumour that somebody else has started. And what's the language The Echo uses?... "we understand". I appreciate they are closer to EFC sources so somewhat more credibility than Jim White!

That's why I'm not quite at the "beyond reasonable doubt" stage yet. Not yet. But will be when Everton confirm it! Actually, reading my points 1) and 2) above I feel that even the "balance of probabilities" threshold might be dodgy! I'm wavering even as I write! Ahhh!

At the end of the day I'm not saying Moshiri didn't say those things. I just don't "know" (a sort of "phenomenal" link there).

Stan Schofield
87 Posted 07/09/2016 at 10:47:21
Brent @86: I suppose where I differ is, even on 'balance of probabilities' I don't feel I have enough information to 'feel' or 'make' a conclusion either way. I have seen similar situations in the past, and dealt with some in my job, so I understand the potential power of asking a simple question. It may lead to nothing, but it may lead to something bigger.

It's a bit like Columbo (the 70s detective series, for those younger than me). He'd say, "Stoopid of me, bud I fergat to ask, ", which always turned out to be the killer question. [Apologies for the lame attempt to translate his speech to text.]

Brent Stephens
88 Posted 07/09/2016 at 11:03:02
I know, Stan. I find myself swaying one way and then the other on this. That's why I said "Actually, reading my points 1) and 2) above I feel that even the "balance of probabilities" threshold might be dodgy!"

Damn you, Everton!

Stan Schofield
89 Posted 07/09/2016 at 11:28:47
Brent, just to further your point about balance of probabilities versus beyond reasonable doubt, because I realise some folks think I'm labouring a point by continuing to doubt the validity of 'Moshiri's statement'.

Consider beyond reasonable doubt. I agree with you. If, for the purposes of argument, we lived in a world where it was a criminal offence to make the 'Moshiri statement', based on the evidence before me I would not have confidence in pursuing a prosecution.

Consider balance of probabilities (the burden of proof in a civil case). If we lived in a world where the 'Moshiri statement' was potentially open to taking civil action against him, based on the evidence before me I would not have confidence in pursuing such civil action. Not confidence enough to risk legal costs, for example.

For me, the real test of confidence in a belief is whether you'd 'bet your shirt on it', manifested above by betting you'd win a criminal case or a civil case. Since I don't have that confidence, can't accept the validity of the Sky report. That doesn't mean I reject it as false, only that I don't accept it.

This is important, despite some folks possibly thinking the above is taking reasoning a bit too far or whatever, precisely because Evertonians are apparently getting fairly worked up about the 'Moshiri statement', in that it seems to be affecting their confidence in the 'new era'.

David Booth
90 Posted 07/09/2016 at 12:06:22
I feel we are straying from the original point of the topic here and getting bogged down in a 'did he or didn't he?' debate about whether or not that strange message to Jim White was genuine or not.

In truth we'll never know. Principally because football clubs thrive in a market full of wild speculation and misplaced assumption. They have absolutely no accountability or onus to explain this or any other matter that becomes part of the public domain.

We, as fans, ought to know how arrogantly insular they are and how they treat us like sheep (knowing we will just bleat away until the subject predictably goes away).

And for something as relatively trivial, why bother with any form of retraction or justification?

There's no such thing as bad publicity they say (one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard: see G Ratner...), but if I were advising Mr Moshiri, I would tell him to make no further comment and let it become tomorrow's chip papers.

This pointless debate about it is derailing the purpose of my post: which was intended to sample opinion on whether or not we are financially any better off now with Moshiri allegedly at the helm.

Koeman and the results so far have been a massive improvement. But is it business as usual behind the scenes? Are we still a buy-to-sell club, or are we finally witnessing the beginning of our long-overdue return to being one of the 'top' clubs on and off the field?

If we have decided to 'save' the Sky money and balance the books in the transfer market – in a bid to finally get our new ground plans up and running – then that would be fantastic.

If, however, Mr Moshiri is no more than another Green or Grantchester, we need to wake up and re-adjust our expectations accordingly.

Despite Martinez being dispensed with and Koeman (and Walsh) arriving, this last transfer window rang alarm bells for me. It was a perfect opportunity for us to make a statement and we just ended-up treading water.

I was wondering why?

Whether or not some innocuous text got sent in the aftermath is irrelevant – and has been discussed in minute detail already on several other threads.

Brent Stephens
91 Posted 07/09/2016 at 13:11:20
David #90, sorry, you're right. Yours was a very good initial "Fan Comment". And, yes, the thread has tracked into other issues (as always!). I don't know what the answer is to your questions in the original piece but it sure makes for an interesting future.

If I can just say, finally, Stan #89, 2nd, 3rd and 4th paras. Well put, I'd say.

Kevin Tully
92 Posted 07/09/2016 at 13:17:21
Getting back to the OP - I think we do do have to temper expectations after the last few weeks. There are undisputed facts in the public domain which nobody can argue with. We only went into the transfer market after the Stones deal was complete. We have renewed an off-shore facility that was charging the club around 10% last time around, plus a hefty arrangement fee. Somebody's pockets are still being lined who had or has links to the club. (I don't have a photo of any bank statements.)

Also, rather than bringing more of his own people in, we have seen the CEO of EitC promoted to a place on the board along with Elstone. She may well have proved to be successful in her previous role, but the good lady in question has no experience of delivering a new stadium, handling transfers or improving our commercial deals – all areas which require attention.

I drove past Goodison Park yesterday, and the cladding project seems to have come to a grinding halt since the Stoke game. 'So what?' would be the response of many, but these types of delays point to the same culture of recent times still present at the club – a serious lack of leadership.

Will we go into the next window with Elstone & Kenwright trying to get transfers over the line? I hope not. They have had their chance and seem to have blown it this summer, if in fact the money was available all along?

Then there was 'that statement,' which was accompanied by a picture of Mr Moshiri all over the national media. I'm sorry, but that was something even worse than any of the sentimental bollocks that Tiny Tears would ever spout in public. And why communicate through Jim fucking White of all people? He has absolutely no connection to the club, and in case you hadn't noticed, Mr Moshiri, 32,000 loyal Evertonians purchased season tickets this summer. Wouldn't it be better to speak to us directly through our media department? (Another area where vast improvement is required.)

There are positives, I think our overall business was good and we certainly have a top manager in Koeman. For me, Moshiri has another 12-18 months to at last address the stadium problem. If he manages to build a waterfront stadium, he will have proved to be a man worthy of guiding the club into a new era.

Brent Stephens
93 Posted 07/09/2016 at 13:44:44
Kevin, I thought Moshiri did put one of his own guys on the board.
Kevin Tully
94 Posted 07/09/2016 at 14:10:14
Yes he did, Brent. Ryazantsev looks like he's there as eyes and ears for Moshiri, rather than being brought on board because of any previous success in the football world. I think this is his first experience at a football cub, which probably means Kenwright & Elstone are sill dictating transfer policy etc..
Jay Wood
95 Posted 07/09/2016 at 14:46:52
David @ 90

Your opening post was a good one, but with respect you can never determine the direction responses will take. It is an oft made complaint about threads on TW - that they have been somehow hijacked, or gone off on a tangent. For me, it is just the nature of the beast. Place an opinion in a public forum like this and people will interpret and respond according to their own perceptions and, yes - prejudices.

I don't agree with your final paragraph that an "innocuous text got sent in the aftermath is irrelevant." It is totally relevant to the points you made in your OP.

As you yourself add, the fact it has been discussed in minute detail – and is still being discussed one week on – demonstrates for many Blues the wording, timing, implications and platform used to publish this message is far, far from innocuous and irrelevant.

Jay Wood
96 Posted 07/09/2016 at 15:18:11
Joe @ 82

With regard to your claim that "There is a complete non sequitur of logic applied by some people on this site here, namely: "Moshiri sent txt to White, therefore we had no money for transfers and had to sell to buy, therefore no '£100M war chest' (whatever that is)."

I agree. There are some offering that flawed logic, as evidenced in Jonathon Tasker's 'Moshiri - nothing has changed' thread.

But there are many others - such as David, the author of the OP in this thread - and indeed myself, who are expressing a mild disquiet in the wake of events following TDD.

Your own post makes many claims and presumptions about the financial health of the club and the direction it is heading, when in truth there is little or no evidence to form the basis of such claims.

I don't regard myself as a cynic or pessimist with regard to Everton. If anything, I'm a hopeless romantic, constantly believing we are on the cusp of greatness.

However, there is a more pragmatic side to me that whispers ... caution.

Colin Fitzpatrick has posted an interesting post on Jonathon's thread. It is, as usual from Colin, a revealing and informative read. I recommend it. He closes his post by saying:

"Blind faith is irresponsible, I'd encourage cautious optimism, keeping an open mind but a watchful eye."

Pretty sound advice when it comes to Everton, doncha think?

David Booth
97 Posted 07/09/2016 at 15:31:22
It strikes me that – momentarily contradicting my request to get back on topic and with reference to the alleged text– if we were so keen to remain loyal to McCarthy, why did we arrange a private plane to whisk Sissoko to Merseyside for talks, or even get involved in the first place?

The whole last-minute, inflated fee, 'desperately' missing out again, 'tried our best everyone' scenario stinks rotten of past transfer windows to me.

Indeed, I wonder if other chairmen tip each other a knowing wink when they meet. Can't you just imagine the conversation: "I see Everton have been making things up to keep the fans quiet, again."

Apart from Koeman, I have so far seen absolutely nothing to make me believe our circumstances, outlook and prospects are any different to what we have been for the last 20 or more years.

Phil Walling
98 Posted 07/09/2016 at 15:49:10
When is the next AGM due and are there any hopes Moshiri will attend to answer 'Questions from the floor'?
Ian Cowhig
99 Posted 07/09/2016 at 17:19:00
Good article... But regarding similarity to the previous regime. Under the previous regime, we weren't even in the ball park of being linked with higher standard, well known players. Never mind getting into a position were we had offers accepted, with terms agreed for the player.
Unfortunately the higher level players come with diifferent baggage to the crap ones.

1. They are good enough to be considered by teams in the Champions League, so want to make that step if it becomes an option.
2. They are good enough that their current clubs are reluctant to let them go.
3. They are good enough to be represented by the snake-like super agents that all clubs find it difficult to deal with.

So initially we will be relying on finding hidden gems. And on Koeman developing and improving players, and formation, of our current squad to move us up the table and become more of an attraction in transfer windows to come.

We could have probably picked up a number of other players during the transfer window. But if they are not rated by Koeman/ Walsh, then what is the point?

The addition of Valencia on loan may seem surprising. But if a manager cannot get who he wants, then why not get an available stop-gap (that he rates) till he can?

Darryl Ritchie
100 Posted 08/09/2016 at 07:08:25
Phil, I doubt he would show at an AGM, but a one on one interview with someone, anyone, is long past due. An embarrassing tweet, an interview with BK, where BK did all the talking, and showing his face at home games, is all the first hand knowledge of Moshiri we have.

It's time to end all the speculation! It's high time we heard about what Moshiri has planned for the club from Moshiri himself.

Michael! Lyndon! Set it up, OK? (Just kidding...sort of.)

Mike Berry
101 Posted 14/09/2016 at 20:26:57
It's EVERTON remember, lads. They will always contrive to let us down. I've had 53 years of it...

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

© ToffeeWeb