Are we in a mimi crisis...

[JamieM]

I completely agree with Alan defending his right to an opinion, everyone is entitled to one, but it implies that he agrees with him and i was simply just wondering on what grounds? If he'd have disagreed with him then instead of defending his right to an opinion (which i never disagreed with) then he would have offered a counter-argument surely?

Or maybe i'm wrong and you don't agree with him Alan! What is your stance on the whole 'crisis' situation?

 

It seems that there is a consensus of opinion that we're not in a \"crisis,\" which I think is quite correct, but a forum would be pretty boring without an opening post from which to spark a discussion wouldn't it?

Your right, it would be boring if everyone agreed with each other and the whole point of any forum is to encourage debate. I am simply just disagreeing with Rovin's original point and his subsequent, somewhat ineligible one!

For my part, I think \"crisis\" is the wrong word, but we are at something of a crossroads which from what I've heard is a point that is recognised by the board. The summer has only just started so it's no time to be pressing any panic button, but can anyone honestly say they are not looking forward to a bit of good news on retaining more of the key out of contract players, Oster in particular?

I, like i presume the rest of us, are anxious for contract renewals. However, even if, for example, Oster was offered more money elsewhere, SOD would replace him as he did with Wellens. I dont think it would even be a potentially mini-crisis situation. SOD has proved that he can replace quality players, he's been quoted many times as to having Plan A/B and C should situation A/B/C occur.

By letting contracts run out in the way that we do, we are exposed to the potential for a mini-crisis, if that's what you'd prefer to call it. The modern game is increasingly reliant on a strong squad of players and right now we would struggle to get a first eleven from our contracted players, let alone a full squad. Compare it to where we've come from in the last decade and we're in dreamland obviously, but looking at the current position we have reached something of a crossroads. Our management and our better players will understandably attract interest from other clubs and ideally we'd surely like to tie people down to some longer term contracts (including several players that are entering their last year) and then build on that, otherwise you have to almost start again which is not ideal.

I have to agree the contract system that SOD/ROK employ is risky, but they know what they're doing and as much as we complain about it they're not going to change their ways.

Who knows why they let contracts run (even with key players)? Maybe it's a cost issue, or an incentive to perform for the players, i really have no idea.

But unfortunately that'll never change so we just have to trust the management, i'm sure they have their reasons.

[WSBBA_Ben]

Crisis? I'd say Cardiff are in a crisis, maybe Pompey, Hull City are in a money crisis.

Doncaster Rovers were a small, well run club who have refused to be held to ransome by players last time I looked?! Has Richardson taken the club back? Are we having to pick players up at Watford gap before matches next season? I think people are getting a bit unrealistic.

[Jonathan]

WSBBA_Ben wrote:

Crisis? I'd say Cardiff are in a crisis, maybe Pompey, Hull City are in a money crisis.

Doncaster Rovers were a small, well run club who have refused to be held to ransome by players last time I looked?! Has Richardson taken the club back? Are we having to pick players up at Watford gap before matches next season? I think people are getting a bit unrealistic.

So if we had ignored the precarious position we're in where contracts are concerned, we could have just flooded the message board with posts celebrating the fact that we don't have a benefactor trying to burn the ground, all joined hands and walked off into the sunset chanting Hare Krishna?

This is a football forum that is used for debate and discussion. Yes, the opening post only looks at it from one perspective, but there is such a thing as devils advocate you know. It poses a question that most people have answered resoundingly and I agree wholeheartedly that we are not in a \"crisis,\" but it represents a viewpoint that would be folly to ignore and dismiss completely.

There is an elitist attitude that has been earned in some cases but not in others. If everyone that claims so had been there through the Richardson years then it's strange that we struggled to scrape four figure crowds and you could stand in most parts of Belle Vue, stretch your arms out and spin round in a circle without so much as brushing past anyone, such was the sparsity of attendees. Like them or not, the club needs newer fans that have come on board with success and in some respects, they have a voice that needs listening to even more than the band of die-hards that would still be there if we were playing in the Screwfix Premier or whatever they call it nowadays.

It's brilliant to list the roll-call and be reminded of the 400% rise in attendances, but that would not have happened without the investment in playing staff and the backing of managers, old and new, that has got us where we are today. Naturally, when we reach a higher level, that backing needs to be greater to facilitate sustained improvement. The opposition is bigger and better, the costs are larger, and the income and rewards of Championship football are also greater.

We are not in a crisis but we are at a crossroads. Much of our success last season centred around effective use of the loan market which is great for papering cracks but we are now in a position wherby a lot of players are at or nearing the end of their contracts. It is a situation that ideally needs to be sorted out for the club to be able to retain the manager, and to continue progression. If we don't, then you might stand by the club, as would I and as would many on this relatively small forum, but don't kid yourself that everyone would - no matter what they say! The crowds that we have worked hard to develop are a result of wise investment and development of players over a number of years, right now the need for more of that is greater than ever, depending which route we wish to take.

As a final point, it's worth adding that JR has publicly stated that we have the biggest transfer budget in the clubs history which is a very encouraging sign and as always, we have plenty to be positive about. But until we see the results of the budget increase, you cannot blame some people for asking questions, albeit poorly worded or balanced in some cases.

[Donnybob]

Look, it's all fine and dandy to have debates on a football forum but some folk would rather have intelligent debates. Posting drivel like 'were in a me-me crisis' deserved the very short shrift it got. Put your brain in gear first next time.

Posting should be a bit like driving - mirror, signal, manoevre. Put another way: determine problem, come up with a constructive opinion, then post. Read post preview. If in doubt, press cancel.

Players' contracts tend to run for three years on average, often less. That means that a third of the players at EVERY club will expire each season. Folk who whine about Greeny leaving for nothing conveniently forget that he wasn't worthy of a contract renewal for the first half of his final season because he played well below par.

Should we have kept Roberts in a job till he was 50? Sometimes you have to let them go and if the offer from Derby was that good we couldn't have kept him anyway. Do you think that his agent hasn't been speaking with other clubs for the whole of the past year?

Players agents decide when it's time for a player to move on and frequently encourage them to let their contracts run down. It gives them huge bargaining power and although we lose players to the system, we also gain them. Did we not raid Bournemouth and Rotherham?

You're a fool if you think that the Rovers don't have discussions with players' agents about contract renewals well in advance. Club's don't dictate to agents you know!

Shackell's agent did a brilliant job for his man. Sharpe's agent will do the best deal he possibly can for his man, too.

And while you're posting endless, 'worth a punt' threads, doesn't it ever cross your mind that you're happy with the current contract situation, or do you want to be the one club in the league that's allowed to play by a different set of rules.

Anyway, I think we should be scouring the Universe for talent, ideally creatures that are at least 8 feet tall and have three or more legs. In fact I hear we're in for an octopus. How stupid is that?

Or would you like me to post a stupid thread like that every hour until I grow bored - which won't be until August?

[Savvy]

Donnybob wrote:

Look, it's all fine and dandy to have debates on a football forum but some folk would rather have intelligent debates. Posting drivel like 'were in a me-me crisis' deserved the very short shrift it got. Put your brain in gear first next time.

Posting should be a bit like driving - mirror, signal, manoevre. Put another way: determine problem, come up with a constructive opinion, then post. Read post preview. If in doubt, press cancel.

Players' contracts tend to run for three years on average, often less. That means that a third of the players at EVERY club will expire each season. Folk who whine about Greeny leaving for nothing conveniently forget that he wasn't worthy of a contract renewal for the first half of his final season because he played well below par.

Should we have kept Roberts in a job till he was 50? Sometimes you have to let them go and if the offer from Derby was that good we couldn't have kept him anyway. Do you think that his agent hasn't been speaking with other clubs for the whole of the past year?

Players agents decide when it's time for a player to move on and frequently encourage them to let their contracts run down. It gives them huge bargaining power and although we lose players to the system, we also gain them. Did we not raid Bournemouth and Rotherham?

You're a fool if you think that the Rovers don't have discussions with players' agents about contract renewals well in advance. Club's don't dictate to agents you know!

Shackell's agent did a brilliant job for his man. Sharpe's agent will do the best deal he possibly can for his man, too.

And while you're posting endless, 'worth a punt' threads, doesn't it ever cross your mind that you're happy with the current contract situation, or do you want to be the one club in the league that's allowed to play by a different set of rules.

Anyway, I think we should be scouring the Universe for talent, ideally creatures that are at least 8 feet tall and have three or more legs. In fact I hear we're in for an octopus. How stupid is that?

Or would you like me to post a stupid thread like that every hour until I grow bored - which won't be until August?

If they are going to be as stupid as that one give it a rest?

\"Players' contracts tend to run for three years on average, often less. \"

Sounds like a contradiction in terms to me, but mirror, signal, eh?

[Alan Southstand]

We're not in a crisis - but for a lot of people who havn't yet purchased a season ticket (that did last season, apparently) there may seem to be one. Yes, I'm aware of the fact that the financial climate is just a tad rough at the moment (it's affected my choice, so far) but there's more to it than that, I'm sure. We had nearly 8,000 STH's at roughly this time last year, who to a man or woman were all waiting with baited breath for the signings news to unfurl. If you remember the only thing that got unfurled was statement after statement that we had no money for new signings.

Now, as the season progressed, things changed slightly and we did get players of substantial quality in through the door. Fair enough, it may well have been papering the cracks, as Jon describes it, but they bloody well worked and we so nearly reached the ultimate of prmised lands. At no time during the summer, though, did we ever look like getting the 'mouthwatering' signings that were implied. It's all history now, but I've thought all along that last summers events would come back to bite the Club in some way and I would argue that that is part and parcel of the 'mimi' crisis that the original poster spoke of (or, at least, was hidden in there, somewhere).

The situation we now find ourselves in is a tricky one, especially with events unfolding the way they did in the play-off final. JR was right to point out about crazy spending of Clubs like Portsmouth and Derby and maybe even Leeds, but what he fails to mention is it doesn't take crazy spending to get in the Premiership (where the real money is) and Blackpool have proved it. But even their level of spending eclipsed ours last summer and £500k they spent on Charlie Adams raised a few eyebrows here, but it turned out to be a magnificent piece of footballing business and it showed me (and probably the rest of our Board) that we are SO close. Talking about it and doing something about, though, are 2 completely different things.

I hope that clears up where I stand?

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I agree it was bad enough losing approx 800 ST holders last season. Did the club do anything to find out why they weren't renewing ?

I suggest if they had followed it up and got some feedback, we may have not lost a much larger number this time.

I don't think a large number of fans were party to the 'mouthwatering' signings nonsense, I think a lot of folk weighed it up just purely on economic grounds and uncertainty about their financial future.

Lets face it Rovers didn't really do much off the field to 'entice' the punters. 'Loyal season ticket holder?'

I don't see how the club carried that message forward when announcing ST renewals/Sales. The same has carried forward this time.

Folk need to feel their loyalty is being rewarded and it does matter to the club whether you renew or not. A loyalty discount should have been and should always be built in to the pricing structure. NOT paying the same price before we put it up.

The club have failed miserably in understanding what a loyal ST holder looks like and what makes a difference when it comes to a financial decision in hard times.

[Donnybob]

\"Players' contracts tend to run for three years on average, often less. \"

Sounds like a contradiction in terms to me, but mirror, signal, eh?

Err, which part of the word 'average' do you not understand? Hence 'three years on average' invariably means some contracts are for more than 3 years, others less, hence my use of the term 'often'.

The only contradiction to me appears in the use of a pseudonym like 'savvy'.

Distinct lack of savvy more like it...

Re: Alan's suggestion that it doesn't take crazy spending to make the Premiership, no it didn't in this one-off case. As it's such an easy thing to do can we expect a dozen or so teams to actually cut back on their outlay so that they can get promoted next year?

What I don't understand is why a tin pot club doesn't get promoted to the Premiership EVERY season.

Mind you, if we did make it I would expect to see complaints about us not competing in the market for the world's best players, that we should be taking a gamble on reaching the Champions League and that we should sack both the manager and the board because we happened to be facing relegation.

Any theory that player purchases would expand the fan base should be considered against the quality of the squad we have today. It's probably better than at any point in my lifetime although crowds do not remotely compare with the 25,000 against Burnley, 22,000 against Darlington, 17,000 against Notts County or the five in a row in excess of 15,000 back in 1965.

We have 10,000 fans. Face facts. The best average in the 1960's was 10,500. It's never been bigger than that until the past two seasons and then only just. A drop in season ticket sales does not necessarily indicate a forthcoming drop in attendances. It might just be that folk are skint, struggling, worried, finding things hard and that the arrival of Fabrigas and Kaka might make little difference.

However, it goes without saying that this is the best crisis I can ever remember and I can't wait for it to deepen at this rate!

[Savvy]

Donnybob wrote:

\"Players' contracts tend to run for three years on average, often less. \"

Sounds like a contradiction in terms to me, but mirror, signal, eh?

Err, which part of the word 'average' do you not understand? Hence 'three years on average' invariably means some contracts are for more than 3 years, others less, hence my use of the term 'often'.

The only contradiction to me appears in the use of a pseudonym like 'savvy'.

Distinct lack of savvy more like it...

Re: Alan's suggestion that it doesn't take crazy spending to make the Premiership, no it didn't in this one-off case. As it's such an easy thing to do can we expect a dozen or so teams to actually cut back on their outlay so that they can get promoted next year?

What I don't understand is why a tin pot club doesn't get promoted to the Premiership EVERY season.

Mind you, if we did make it I would expect to see complaints about us not competing in the market for the world's best players, that we should be taking a gamble on reaching the Champions League and that we should sack both the manager and the board because we happened to be facing relegation.

Any theory that player purchases would expand the fan base should be considered against the quality of the squad we have today. It's probably better than at any point in my lifetime although crowds do not remotely compare with the 25,000 against Burnley, 22,000 against Darlington, 17,000 against Notts County or the five in a row in excess of 15,000 back in 1965.

We have 10,000 fans. Face facts. The best average in the 1960's was 10,500. It's never been bigger than that until the past two seasons and then only just. A drop in season ticket sales does not necessarily indicate a forthcoming drop in attendances. It might just be that folk are skint, struggling, worried, finding things hard and that the arrival of Fabrigas and Kaka might make little difference.

However, it goes without saying that this is the best crisis I can ever remember and I can't wait for it to deepen at this rate!

Why am I not surprised you can't see the contradiction, try taking the blinkers off!

While we're taking pseudonyms Shouldn't yours be Neilandbob or is that what you do?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Donnybob wrote:

Players' contracts tend to run for three years on average, often less. That means that a third of the players at EVERY club will expire each season. Folk who whine about Greeny leaving for nothing conveniently forget that he wasn't worthy of a contract renewal for the first half of his final season because he played well below par.

Fully agree with your points in general, but on the specifics of Green's case, you're being a tad unfair. Green was on the bench for every single one of the first 20 league matches of that season, so it's a bit harsh to call his performances \"below-par\".

[Barmby Rover]

Same as some other players we have had, \"not up to this standard\" generally means, \"I haven't seen him kick a football for two weeks so I have forgotten what he can do.\"

[RobTheRover]

Rovin Reporter wrote:

RobTheRover wrote:

Rovin Reporter.... you are so wide of the mark its untrue.

1) Name the 10 out of contract players.

2) Yes, Roberts has gone, and with the club's blessing.  We will get a younger, better player to replace Gareth.

3) We met Wolves valuation of Shackell and offered him a good wage package, but Barnsley came in with an UTTERLY RIDICULOUS wage package.  The lad couldnt possibly say no to what they are paying him.

4) Was Oster not a significant signing? I think he has eclipsed Wellens' achievements, so we actually improved after Wellens went.  And when that happened loads on here (myself included) felt it was the end of the world....

5) We nearly lost our manager because he is doing the right things?  Jesus wept, would you rather he did the wrong things?  Of course he is going to be on other club's radars, just as the best performing players are monitored.  As Sean says, thats football.  Cant get worked up about it.

6) Not sure what your final point is.  I dont think too many clubs will be thrilled at getting relegated, even with the new parachute payments in place.  The rest is just random words.

 YOU are the administrator .of what? try engaging in the question, i said 8 9.or 10 players if YOU know then just say so , it was mentioned on the radio that we had 10 . John Oster was 6 months signing then another 6....Why ? MONEY? what players where we have spent money have we still got ?( if you know how many  say so!)as for \" SO'D AND the right things \" it is for that reason i was stating it!!  do you actually understand any of the points made ? ( i very mush doubt)i am a supporter and  your reply comments make me feel in no doubt that i should have my bumps felt for daring  voicing anything like an opinion  on this site site . YOU SHOULD KEEP YOUR THOUGHTs TO YOUR SELF or JUSTIFY , LIKE ME FOR GOING IT ,IF ALL YOU CAN DO IS  TALK IS DRIVEL  because this reprents that IGNORANCE  I S NOT JUST JUST A LACK OF FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, HIGHLIGHTING AN  INADEQUACEY YOU HAVE, IT IS ALSO YOUR  RUDENESS AND BEING UNCIVIL TO OTHERS .. prick!!!!!!!!!

ROFLMAO!!!!  Superb.

In (belated) retort....

1) \"try engaging in the question\" - erm, I did.

2) \"i said 8 9.or 10 players if YOU know then just say so\" - Erm, you said that. Why should I try to straighten your inaccuracies?

3) \"do you actually understand any of the points made ?\" - yes, you are having a panic attack.  Take a paper bag and breathe deeply into it.

4) \")i am a supporter and  your reply comments make me feel in no doubt that i should have my bumps felt for daring  voicing anything like an opinion  on this site site\" - Your opinion is welcome, Brian, but dont be surprised when others disagree.

5) \"YOU SHOULD KEEP YOUR THOUGHTs TO YOUR SELF or JUSTIFY , LIKE ME FOR GOING IT ,IF ALL YOU CAN DO IS  TALK IS DRIVEL  because this reprents that IGNORANCE  I S NOT JUST JUST A LACK OF FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, HIGHLIGHTING AN  INADEQUACEY YOU HAVE\" - Hmmm, not sure how to respond to this without being labelled a prick, so I dont think I'll bother.  

6) IT IS ALSO YOUR  RUDENESS AND BEING UNCIVIL TO OTHERS .. prick!!!!!!!!! - a touch of dual-standards creeping in here, Brian.  Kind of undermines what I think you are trying to say, really (but I'm still not 100% sure what that is).

Anyway, keep pressing and guessing, kid.

[Donnybob]

Fully agree with your points in general, but on the specifics of Green's case, you're being a tad unfair. Green was on the bench for every single one of the first 20 league matches of that season, so it's a bit harsh to call his performances \"below-par\".

Billy, at the risk of you using Heffs to support your case ('Save us from that old chestnut' cries Waldorf!), not making the first team for 20 consecutive games kind of proves my point, doesn't it?

Without wishing to detract from his 'legend' status, Green gave fantastic service to this club through the lower divisions. Would he have walked into the team last year? Has he made an amazing impact at Derby and furthered his career?

Had he not been out of contract and therfore commanded a transfer fee, would Derby have splashed out so much on his wages? Probably not.

Would we pay half a million to have him back next season...?

Would we take him on a free and offer £6K per week over 3 years (ie: best part of a million quid)?

It boils down to agents again. It was clearly in the players' best interest to run down his contract and move on to the highest bidder.

The 'get rid of Guy' crowd were all for ripping up contracts and the hell with honour, yet they demand it in return.

How many of the team that won promotion at Wembley will turn out next season in August? How many that came up through League Two? Or the Conference?

Football is contantly in a state of flux and change. Players come, players go. Everyone loses the odd 'star' player, their heroes, but if you're lucky, like us, the strength of the overall squad continues to improve. No-one complained when we used the same system to tempt players like Wellens and Woods on free transfers.

There's something called 'the emotional cycle of change'. It affects all things in life but seldom does it fluctuate quite so quickly as it does for football fans between seasons.

What we have here isn't a mimi crisis, or even a me-me crisis, it's an emotional crisis, fuelled by impatience, jealousy and greed.

Oh, and a distinct lack of intelligence and maturity...

;-)

[Alan Southstand]

Back to Donnybob's:

Re: Alan's suggestion that it doesn't take crazy spending to make the Premiership, no it didn't in this one-off case. As it's such an easy thing to do can we expect a dozen or so teams to actually cut back on their outlay so that they can get promoted next year?

What I don't understand is why a tin pot club doesn't get promoted to the Premiership EVERY season.

I get your drift and, of course, its worth pointing out that, most of the time, it really is the big spenders that make it, but, I've also heard the argument that 'money doesn't buy you success'. Especially when aimed at supporters, on here, who demand that the Board get this, that or the other player, costing umteen millions, or whatever!

I can't agree that Blackpool was a one-off - what the hell was Burnley last season, then? They hardly spent mega-bucks did they? Patterson was their biggest single layout (£1m?) and again, proved to be an inspired piece of business.

The point I was stumbling to make is that, when you consider how close we got to Blackpool last season, it wouldn't have taken much to have swapped places with them. The difference, in the end, was the clever purchase of Adams (or is it Adam?). Hindsight is always a wonderful thing, and we've all got a PhD in it, but its so obvious to me that our manager has the tactical awareness and footballing brain to take us to the very highest level. What is missing is the extra backing from the Board ( a la Blackpool). I tend to agree with other supporters who claim that, at some point in the future, Mr O'Driscoll just might start to believe it himself and head off somewhere else. After all, he must have ambition as well.

I get the feeling (maybe wrongly) that a big part of the Board's strategy is to rely on SOD/ROK to keep 'pulling rabbits out of the hat' and that might be OK some of the time, but after a while it'll get a bit tiresome for SOD, surely.

[DonnyNoel]

Alan Southstand wrote:

I can't agree that Blackpool was a one-off - what the hell was Burnley last season, then? They hardly spent mega-bucks did they? Patterson was their biggest single layout (£1m?) and again, proved to be an inspired piece of business.

Burnley is an interesting one. They built the promotion team over 2/3 seasons and steadily spent a bit of money towards it:
McDonald £500k
Paterson £1m
Blake £250k
Carlisle £200k
Caldwell £200k
Gudjonsson £150k

Plus Eagles was \"undisclosed\" but thought to be around £1.4m

Plus another 2/3 players around £100k.

That said, nothing like the money spent by other clubs to go nowhere in this division and your point about us being a top drawer player off \"doing a Blackpool\" is one I agree with. Sadly now though with the \"loss\" of Shackell and the Billy situation being up in the air its asking a lot to sign 3/4 \"Charlie Adams\" in one summer. Then again, given how our top players turn heads its probably just as hard to sign one top signing every summer for 4 consecutive sumemrs and still have the first one by the time we sign the 4th one!

[Savvy]

Donnybob wrote:

Fully agree with your points in general, but on the specifics of Green's case, you're being a tad unfair. Green was on the bench for every single one of the first 20 league matches of that season, so it's a bit harsh to call his performances \"below-par\".

Billy, at the risk of you using Heffs to support your case ('Save us from that old chestnut' cries Waldorf!), not making the first team for 20 consecutive games kind of proves my point, doesn't it?

Without wishing to detract from his 'legend' status, Green gave fantastic service to this club through the lower divisions. Would he have walked into the team last year? Has he made an amazing impact at Derby and furthered his career?

Had he not been out of contract and therfore commanded a transfer fee, would Derby have splashed out so much on his wages? Probably not.

Would we pay half a million to have him back next season...?

Would we take him on a free and offer £6K per week over 3 years (ie: best part of a million quid)?

It boils down to agents again. It was clearly in the players' best interest to run down his contract and move on to the highest bidder.

The 'get rid of Guy' crowd were all for ripping up contracts and the hell with honour, yet they demand it in return.

How many of the team that won promotion at Wembley will turn out next season in August? How many that came up through League Two? Or the Conference?

Football is contantly in a state of flux and change. Players come, players go. Everyone loses the odd 'star' player, their heroes, but if you're lucky, like us, the strength of the overall squad continues to improve. No-one complained when we used the same system to tempt players like Wellens and Woods on free transfers.

There's something called 'the emotional cycle of change'. It affects all things in life but seldom does it fluctuate quite so quickly as it does for football fans between seasons.

What we have here isn't a mimi crisis, or even a me-me crisis, it's an emotional crisis, fuelled by impatience, jealousy and greed.

Oh, and a distinct lack of intelligence and maturity...


Yeah mostly yours! You always know when someones lost the arguement when they resort to personal insult so don't be surprised when you get one back.

As for the rest of your diatribe, its nothing more than conjecture really is it?

;-)

[Donnybob]

Wouldn't it be nice if you understood the difference between a debate and a statement with a question mark at the end...

[BobG]

Mr DB - please, please, please, do not forsake this board. Ever. The understanding of the difference between the concepts you have highlighted is spread verra, verra thin. Indeed, knowledge of the concepts themselves is sometimes entirely absent - as is abundantly clear from a current thread in the OT section which has left me with little option but to shake my head in bemused wonderment.

Shouldn't be so surprised really though I suppose. Was chatting to an older generation teacher this afternoon - who told me, unequivocally, that maths students when taking a GCSE are not expected to answer any questions at all on integral calculus, quadratic equations or Euclidean geometry. I ask you! Apparently even the existance of the separate subjects of pure maths, applied maths and mechanics is dubious at best these days. Dumbing down? We see it in action every single day.

Cheers

BobG