Cod Almighty | Article

by Andy Atkins

25 February 2004

Suspended. Injured. It started as the former and on Tuesday night Aidan Davison picked up an injury that is likely to extend his absence from the Mariners team beyond the original three games.

Whichever way you look at it, Town are going to be without their first-choice goalie for the next few games. Barnsley - a team with stuttering away form over their last six away games - visit Blundell Park on Saturday and with it a ripe chance for Town to pick off three points. There is added spice given that the game marks the possible returns to Blundell Park of Tony Gallimore, Peter Handyside and, in particular, Michael Boulding so soon after his departure.

The following game is away at Notts County, a team who have been unexceptional in the league bar twatting fellow-relegation candidates Stockport County last weekend. A draw would be nice, while a win would help put more distance between ourselves and the pack meekly slapping other teams for the odd point here and there. With the win against Luton seeing Town chalk up at least two unexpected (and undeserved?) points, the next week marks an important point in Town's season. And with Aidan Davison's absence, they enter it with a huge Riddler-like question mark over who will tend the nets.

After Davison, the Town keeper list is lacking in experience. Could it be contestant number one, Andrew Pettinger, who has just returned to training after a broken finger? With a lack of match practice and therefore probably full fitness (not goalies ever need to be svelte), are these matches a week too early for the lad signed with such enthusiastic words from Paul Wilkinson? What about contestant number two, Bradley Hughes, who Town picked up a couple of summers ago for Watford and was felt to be one for the future? He's looked slight in reserve and friendly matches but at least he's fit. Or how about contestant number three, youngster Paul Fraser? Fraser is still recovering from a nasty accident during a youth game at Bradford City which left him with a broken arm.

In an interview, Graham Rodger has hinted that the board may compel him to make do with the current playing resources. Will Town give Pettinger or Hughes their breakthough? Sure, Rodger could throw one of these youngsters into the upcoming games but would they prefer someone more experienced? And if they don't go for Pettinger or Hughes, what is the point in having them on the playing staff?

The last young keeper to be given a chance by Town was Steve Croudson, thrown into the fray in similar circumstances against Wolves in 2000. Despite fans believing him to have promise, a lack of first-team chances saw him move on to Boston where he has resumed his duties as a bench warmer. The current tendency, Mansaram's fleeting appearances aside, has been to have as experienced a first XI as possible. Unless of course Graham Rodger was suitably impressed by Des Hamilton during his short stint as Aidan Davison's replacement at the end of the Brighton game, what other options do the current playing resources offer? None.

If they seek a replacement from outside, I've been given the impression (have you?) that there's no money in the club's coffers. There's no doubting that the board are supporting the club, as they constantly remind us they are dipping into their own pockets to keep GTFC afloat. Those pockets, as Peter Furneaux has said recently, aren't bottomless, and the board members are currently running the tips of their fingers along the pocket stitching, tracing it along downwards.

This seems to be the reasoning behind the Grimsby Town Supporters Trust establishing a 'Grab-a-Goalie' campaign on Monday. You could see this one coming. When the trust was first discussed on a Radio Humberside phone-in with Peter Furneaux, the wispy chairman stated that he wanted to see the trust put something into the club. His one example? The trust should pay the wages of a player. After a meeting between the board and the club last week, this campaign seems to be the net result. Meanwhile, the club expects the trust to fund a loan signing but won't give the trust a place on the board until the trust matches the investment put in by a board member. And is all this going against, as listed on its website, the trust's seventh objective: "To invest in the future of GTFC in order to safeguard the future of the club. This may be through direct investment in the youth set up, or encouragement of younger supporters." Surely the mentioning of youth in this statement means the accent should be put on the club's own young players.

As for the scheme itself, given that Town need a keeper by Saturday, it all seems a bit slapdash and half-hearted. Looking at the trust's website, how the collection works seems less than transparent. You can donate online; there were buckets at the Luton game (competing with buckets for that other, more important flag-waving cause), but how much is there so far? If it takes a big Blue Peter-style cash-o-meter then let's have it. How do we know what we are raising? Where it is going? Are we looking at raising a one-off figure to cover the whole proposed loan or are there going to have to be continual weekly collections to ensure any fees and wages are met? How much does the trust need to raise to actually get a goalie to the club? A tenner? A hundred quid? A thousand quid? If the fans, or rather the supporters of the trust, were given a figure to aim for then that would set them a goal.

And why is it that the trust is organising this? Surely the trust is just doing the board's 'dirty work'. The trust always comes across as 'nice', whether it's arranging the engaging fans' day or helping replace a young Town fan's bike. Is GTST being abused by the board? Has it been set a task to prove its worth? Or has the trust had a chat with the club, seen a chance to get all chummy with the board and is taking it?

As for the money, once collected, how do we know that it will actually be used for a loan goalie? What if, somehow, say two grand is raised by Friday and then Graham Rodger decides to go with Pettinger as he feels the young lad is up to the challenge or there just aren't any loan keepers out there? What happens to the money then? Which also begs the question: do we even know if Rodger wants to get another keeper in? The whole process needs transparency.

And you'd have thought the Grimsby Telegraph, so often wanting to claim the glory in any scheme that 'saves' the Mariners, would have been given the scheme a push far greater than the passing mention it got in yesterday's edition (look, if you can find it). Grab-a-Goalie is taken with such seriousness by the club itself - the beneficiary of this scheme - that it's not even given a mention on Town's official website, the only campaign touted there being the one to raise £500 for a giant flag, which I am sure we'll all agree is the biggest priority at the moment.

Some may argue that is it right that the fans of a football club should be asked to pay what is essentially the workforce for their service. Someone suggested to me that this is akin to a Hollywood studio asking you to pay for an actor to appear in the studio's latest blockbuster. Or is it more like the smaller (and skinter) independent film industry where playing for a pittance, to show you have the ability, doing it because you love it rather than for the money, begging to get a film made that will win plaudits? Similarly, what is the advantage - the purpose, even - of becoming a member of the trust? Where does the money go that the trust's members contribute? To buy shares which put money into the club, and...? If there were that many people interested in the trust - and the survival of the club, as again the trust sets out in its objectives - then its membership would exceed the 150 it has totted up over the first 12 months of its existence.

Despite these harsh questions, I cannot help but admire the spontaneity and sincerity of the trust's actions. But remember when we, the fans, whipped round to buy out Bonetti's contract with that sport publicity company? Back then a genuine feeling of community abounded. There was no trust to direct us, just a drive to do what most fans wanted at that time. Given the declining attendances at Blundell Park over the past three seasons, maybe the town has given up on the GTFC, and it is no longer a 'community club'. With the Bonetti case the fans knew what they were aiming for; there was a defined goal. Until this goal is set, I, as supporter, will struggle to be convinced that dropping my money into those collection buckets is what is required.

Meanwhile... tick tock, tick tock, tick tock, tick tock... don't we need a goalie well before 3pm on Saturday?