Kassam drove the club into the ground

[Baboo]

Lets hope that in the fullness of time it doesn't end up being a Pyrrhic victory because splitting the stadium from the club can be a very dangerous business.

Which is why I don't understand the mentality of the Kassam Out brigade celebrating FK no longer owning the football club or Rosie's &quotFiroz Kassam has left the building&quot comment on the pitch before the first game of the new era.
The building is still owned by FK and he is in a position to do almost whatever he likes with it I would have thought.

[Snake]

Indeed, and that very public comment by Rosie probably put another couple of hundred thousand on the price of the stad.

Or maybe I can just imagine a conversation that goes something like this

NM : &quotWell, Firoz, it’s ten million or nothing. Take it or leave it, because that’s all we’ve got, mate.&quot

FK : &quotOk, but the deal is conditional on Peter Rhodes-Brown signing this 3 year contract to do the washing up at one of my hotels.&quot

[GodalmingYellow]

a demonstration from the Oxford fans that might have negatively impacted his other businesses and he was off, after all.

I think you'd have a job proving a causal link there. From what I understand from people much closer to the deal than me Kassam decided he wanted to do the deal when first approached by Merry and long before any Kassam Out protests.

Merry and Co couldn't find the money to buy the stadium and club together but did offer something other than money which wasn't acceptable to Kassam. Only after Bill &amp Bren were appointed and announced did Merry come back with the offer to buy the club without the stadium.

Perhaps the Ally Pally situation helped him decide to sell the club on its own where previously he had refused to do so but he was already looking for an exit long before that point. Lets hope that in the fullness of time it doesn't end up being a Pyrrhic victory because splitting the stadium from the club can be a very dangerous business.

That's a really interesting side I've not heard before.

I've heard from several people close to the deal, that the finance for the stadium was done and dusted a long time ago, and throughout the negotiations, that was understood to be the case. The version I've heard is that it was the risk to the Ally Pally deal as a result of direct input from intelligent Oxford fans, which persuaded Kassam to be less stubborn on the deal. It had nothing to do with the storming of the Bastille.

I think it is widely recognised that the appointment of B&ampB (and Patto) was a deliberate ploy by Kassam to focus the minds of Merry and Co.

[DLT]

I have heard the same story as Mally. But we were sat in the Pub together at the time.

I also had it independently supported elsewhere.

Still I have to say I appear to have been wrong on my London Irish gambit. Certainly no sign of movement there.

Back to Mr Lenaghan. Perhaps he didn't think that RL was going to be so successful at the Stoop. The times I have looked they have been getting 10,000 attending. He is hardly going to walk away from that.

Still it shows his potential if he ever did declare a financial interest in OUFC

[Snake]

Emails from disgruntled fans who’s sole objective was the success or not of a League II football club 100 miles up the road would hardly concern the people at Ally Pally, who had to make a proper decision on who took over there. I’m happy to be corrected (so long as you can provide evidence of that), but this sounds like one of Ross Clarke’s fantasies.

By the way, Terry, in reference to your previous post nothing is “widely accepted

[GodalmingYellow]

[quote=&quotSnake&quot]Emails from disgruntled fans who’s sole objective was the success or not of a League II football club 100 miles up the road would hardly concern the people at Ally Pally, who had to make a proper decision on who took over there. I’m happy to be corrected (so long as you can provide evidence of that), but this sounds like one of Ross Clarke’s fantasies.

By the way, Terry, in reference to your previous post nothing is “widely accepted

[GodalmingYellow]

I have heard the same story as Mally. But we were sat in the Pub together at the time.

I also had it independently supported elsewhere.

Still I have to say I appear to have been wrong on my London Irish gambit. Certainly no sign of movement there.

Back to Mr Lenaghan. Perhaps he didn't think that RL was going to be so successful at the Stoop. The times I have looked they have been getting 10,000 attending. He is hardly going to walk away from that.

Still it shows his potential if he ever did declare a financial interest in OUFC

You probably know more about egg chasing than me DLT. Isn't the RL lease at the Stoop fairly short (my memory says it was a 3 year lease, of which 1 has already gone).

[guest]

I find it amazing that a man who has been ultimately responsible for the club going down three divisions and out of the league can recieve any support whatsoever.

I'm struggling to think of other businesses where the owner would get exonerated for persistent failure, baffling mangerial decisions and child-like tantrums aimed at his customers and staff. Absolute chutzpah.

A 'man of conviction' - somebody who we should respect? Really?

[DLT]

I find it amazing that a man who has been ultimately responsible for the club going down three divisions and out of the league can recieve any support whatsoever.

I'm struggling to think of other businesses where the owner would get exonerated for persistent failure, baffling mangerial decisions and child-like tantrums aimed at his customers and staff. Absolute chutzpah.

A 'man of conviction' - somebody who we should respect? Really?

Another annony-mouse.

Didn't ask you to respect him!

Not sure I am exonerating him either.

But he did take a gamble and put his money where his mouth was when the rich and famous of Oxfordshire we all noticeably absent.

[Mooro]

I find it amazing that a man who has been ultimately responsible for the club going down three divisions and out of the league can recieve any support whatsoever.

I'm struggling to think of other businesses where the owner would get exonerated for persistent failure, baffling mangerial decisions and child-like tantrums aimed at his customers and staff. Absolute chutzpah.

A 'man of conviction' - somebody who we should respect? Really?

Kassam can only be blamed for a maximum of two of the three relegations, whichever way you look at it...he took over and he handed over in the latter part of seasons in which the club went down, so whichever way you assign blame, only one can be his fault.

Incidentally, I can actually forgive the middle relegation too, as it happened while he was overseeing more substantial issues (clearing the club debt/stadium move), although not necessarily the manner of it (for which the blame lies far more with Kemp &amp Kinnear than Kassam).

This doesnt make me pro-Kassam, I just like to have a little perspective about things. There are many things to criticise about his reign and his methods, but to not give credit for the things he did achieve and to exagerate the negatives as you have here for the sake of having someone easy to blame is unfair and in fact just plain lazy.

To assume that our current situation is purely down to one man, is to absolve many others from their responsibilities and part in the story and could even risk something similar happening again...

[Guest]

&quotbut to not give credit for the things he did achieve and to exagerate the negatives&quot

Not lazy, not lacking perspective. Kassam was primarily responsible for taking us out of the league. Trying to force the blame onto Kemp and Kinnear is fine, but the same mistakes were made again. I hardly think the negatives are in any need of exaggerating, unless you can supply some scenarios on how things could actually have turned out worse for the club once we were in the new ground.

Now, perhaps you'd like to draw up a list of the positives and negatives so we can consider the discussion from your 'perspective'.

[Isaac]

I wasn't asked but I'm going to plough in regardless - I think the positives for Kassam, to me, are quite straighforward

1) He kept the club solvent when no-one else would 7 years ago.
2) He enabled us to have a new stadium to play in.
3) We're not enormously in debt (although £2m is considerable).

I imagine some of the ex-foul gang would add in
4) He was our mate and a top bloke really - he told us he cared, so don't say nasty things about him.

The negatives are numerous and have been mentioned on here plenty of times, I might compile a list at some point.

[DLT]

Issac.

I can't see anyone saying 'don't say nasty things about him', perhaps you are imagining that or just caught up in other peoples hype.

I note Mr Guest doesn't want to add a handle to his posts.That is his choice, but I feel it slightly undermines his digs.

It is interesting that the folks I know who were sat around the room at the Supporters club the night the fans met to discuss how we might pull the club out of the poo now seem to have a different perspective to the vocal 'majority'.

Unless you really understood how deep the sh1te was at that time it is difficult to realise that were are today is still progress. The betting then had extinction odds on.

That is my view, you are perfectly entitled to a different one.

[Mooro]

I’ve said elsewhere that I think that the Kassam era falls into two clear parts.

The first involved the three main positives that Isaac so succinctly listed, all of which were the resolution of problems of other peoples making and came about despite some obstacles placed in his way by those with questionable motives. Failing on either of the first two would have meant instant expulsion from the league, the third could have led to points deductions if subsequent measures had to be taken. All of this came at the price of falling into Division 4, but that is a small price to pay and I would not hold Kassam primarily responsible for that decline.

Once in the new stadium, the picture changes and there is little doubt that the level of his responsibility for our plight increases, but my point is that he is not “entirely

[GodalmingYellow]

[quote=&quotMooro&quot]I’ve said elsewhere that I think that the Kassam era falls into two clear parts.

The first involved the three main positives that Isaac so succinctly listed, all of which were the resolution of problems of other peoples making and came about despite some obstacles placed in his way by those with questionable motives. Failing on either of the first two would have meant instant expulsion from the league, the third could have led to points deductions if subsequent measures had to be taken. All of this came at the price of falling into Division 4, but that is a small price to pay and I would not hold Kassam primarily responsible for that decline.

Once in the new stadium, the picture changes and there is little doubt that the level of his responsibility for our plight increases, but my point is that he is not “entirely