Town's programme needs improving...soon.

Ever since I started going to watch football, many years ago, I have bought a programme, natural as breathing for me. But the current Town programme is, in my view, a real disgrace for a club that otherwise does so much right. I love the new name, but apart from that everything else is dire. The amount of reading material is virtually non-existent, 1/2 page from Simon, a bit about Trinity (presumably supplied by them), the usual Gary Plant wittering on about our wonderful sponsors, ditto community stuff, a page on the youth, a rather silly A-Z with a player, and Paul Thirwell Best XI (actually quite intereresting). And a page supplied by the Non League Paper. The Stats page is laughable, spread over 2 non consecutive pages, it does not even tell us who came on as a sub for the Brackley game and who was subbed. And apparently Matt Bloomer is a goalkeeper. 40 pages, almost half ads.

I happen to have a copy of the Fylde programme for last season against us: This is what it contains (printed on clear white paper, in a simple, elegant modern design) and 48 pages, larger size than ours:

1) full page Club news
2) Full page the Manager
3) One and a half page tribute
4) full page the President
5) Full page on the media coverage
6) Full page from the Secretary
7) Two full pages about the visitors (us!)
Two full page profiles of our lads
9_ Full page interview with Michael Potts (now burning it up for BPA!)
10) Two full pages Community
11) Two excellent stats pages
12) Full page January round up
13) Full page This week in History
14) Full page Comment piece
15) Full page on Business matters
16) Full page season stats
17) Full page Conference North review
18) Full page NLP piece
19) Full page Youth matters
20) Full page Ground Hopping
21) Full page Player Quiz.


15 pages of ads, 23 of editorial, and it looks wonderful.

It has to be said that even Peter Arnett's programmes, whilst being colourful and lively, very often resorted to printing photographs in place of text. In my view Bob Head's programmes (presumably produced on a much smaller budget) were far superior to either.

So come on, we can do better than this. We don't all have a reading age of 9 1/2, give us some intelligent material to read. For God's sake, we have a 100 year history and an excellent club historian, make use of that.

Rant over. Maybe nobody else cares about this, but we do so much else right, can't we get the programme right to?

I agree, having bought one on entering the ground, I was looking to offload within about five minutes. It really is poor and gives a bad impression.

I guess rome wasn't built in a day. We have Pete walk out who was a great all rounder, he took pics, wrote match reports and put the programmes together. I think the pictures are great these days, the match reports are getting there (still need some work) and the programmes will get there. There are always teething problems when in transition so I would say just be patient.

BTW there is an update on the website regarding the programmes encouraging people to contact Mike Bligh as he is managing the programmes I believe.

I agree it's work in progress (and don't want to be too critical) but to spread the results section over two pages as in yesterday's issue is not a good idea. Also, Town's score should be given first (as it was last year) rather than the opposition's - if you see what I mean (look at the Brackley result). Early days and best wishes to those developing the matchday programme.

Has anybody else realized that the Tamworth squad in today's programme is actually the Hednesford squad?

Not good if that is the case

I think its called programme a work in progress! Ever heard of proof reading? To be fair it is better than week one, but it reflects badly on the club.

Everything is going so well on the field, I feel a bit mean complaining about anything, but just a few words more about the programme. Yes it HAS improved since the first issue, but there are still issues. Still not enough reading material in my view (the 'groundhopping' feature in the last programme was excellent, by the way). But the proof reading etc. needs a lot of attention in my view. The Opposition feature on page 6 is barely literate. Now this may well be BPA's fault, but some proof reading could have been done surely. I quote from one paragraph:

'In the 2010 season Simon Collins Became the eight manager change in two years. Simon Collins was replaced by John Deacey in the 2010 season. Making it nine manager changes in two years and John Deacey third stint as manager'

This could easily be re-written as follows:

'In the 2010/11 season Simon Collins became the eighth manager in the space of two years. He, in turn, was replaced during the season by John Deacey, who became BPA's manager for the third time.'


I hope this does not make me sound too pedantic, but I just don't think it looks good, especially when the club is going forward in so many directions.

Would it not be possible for the club to actually appoint a specialist programme editor? Bob Head and Peter Arnett are hard acts to follow, and I'm afraid the current effort looks a pale shadow of what went before.

Oh, and nearly forgot. The results pages are completely confused as to which score to put first. For example the Brackley result is given as 0-1 and the Curzon result as 1-2. This, presumably, means that we either lost them both or won them both! Simple solution: always put Town's score first. Also no attendance figures given, I mean please! No indication of who replaced who as subs Not much use to Phil Harrison or any other future club historian. Still, at least, Matt Bloomer is no longer down as a goalkeeper!

You charge £2.50 for this, the same (or nearly) as some league clubs. Sorry to whinge but I don't think its good enough.

paulstreet wrote:Everything is going so well on the field, I feel a bit mean complaining about anything, but just a few words more about the programme. Yes it HAS improved since the first issue, but there are still issues. Still not enough reading material in my view (the 'groundhopping' feature in the last programme was excellent, by the way).  But the proof reading etc. needs a lot of attention in my view.  The Opposition feature on page 6 is barely literate. Now this may well be BPA's fault, but some proof reading could have been done surely.  I quote from one paragraph:

'In the 2010 season Simon Collins Became the eight manager change in two years.  Simon Collins was   replaced by John Deacey in the 2010 season. Making it nine manager changes in two years and John Deacey third stint as manager'

This could easily be re-written as follows:

'In the 2010/11 season Simon Collins became the eighth manager in the space of two years. He, in turn, was replaced during the season by John Deacey, who became BPA's manager for the third time.'


I hope this does not make me sound too pedantic, but I just don't think it looks good, especially when the club is going forward in so many directions.

Would it not be possible for the club to actually appoint a specialist programme editor?  Bob Head and Peter Arnett are hard acts to follow, and I'm afraid the current  effort looks a pale shadow of what went before.

Oh, and nearly forgot. The results pages are completely confused as to which score to put first. For example the Brackley result is given as 0-1  and the Curzon result as 1-2.  This, presumably, means that we either lost them both or won them both!  Simple solution: always put Town's score first.  Also no attendance figures given, I mean please!  No indication of who replaced who as subs   Not much use to Phil Harrison or any other future club historian.  Still, at least, Matt Bloomer is no longer down as a goalkeeper!  

You charge £2.50 for this, the same (or nearly) as some league clubs.  Sorry to whinge but I don't think its good enough.

Points duly noted - action this day! - no issues with constructive criticism - thanks for taking the time to feedback.

My gripe about the programme is not so much the content as the difficulty in buying one. Arriving yesterday, as I normally do about 15 minutes before kick off, there were no programmes on sale at the gate nor were any team sheets available. This was not a one off as it has happened regularly since I started supporting Town 2 years ago. I have visited many grounds in the past and only rarely encountered similar problems - usually when the gate has been much higher than expected. This is not really good enough for an ambitious club operating at step 2. Please print more programmes and never mind if there are a few left over at the end.

Mike of Wetherby wrote:My gripe about the programme is not so much the content as the difficulty in buying one. Arriving yesterday, as I normally do about 15 minutes before kick off, there were no programmes on sale at the gate nor were any team sheets available. This was not a one off as it has happened regularly since I started supporting Town 2 years ago. I have visited many grounds in the past and only rarely encountered similar problems - usually when the gate has been much higher than expected. This is not really good enough for an ambitious club operating at step 2. Please print more programmes and never mind if there are a few left over at the end.

Mike
As per my comment to Paul I will follow this up and provide you with feedback but can confirm that we now have a dedicated programme seller and it may be that with a big crowd and someone incentivised to sell programmes, they went quicker than expected. If you could leave it with me I will report back later in the week.

Did anyone pick up a programme on Saturday?

It was absolutely appauling. To name a few things

- No information on their manage, just a black space where writing should have been.
- Sammys competion - blank and no question
- Information on leading the team out - All it says is 'Lead out your hero's on a match day and'. AND WHAT??
- Ged's column about our upcoming game against STOCKPORT?

What an appauling mess. I thought it was meant to be improving. We are meant to be running a semi proffesional football club. My kids could do better.

I have tried to avoid getting back on this topic for a while, everything otherwise going so well etc. But now that someone else has raised the issue it might be worth saying a few things. Neil30 is right, it really does look as though nobody ever actually proof reads the bloody thing before sending it to the printers! Where to start:
Page 3 Next Home u21's game BLANK Top left, for some bizarre reason, the words 'Who's Who' appear for no good reason
On the Fc United pages There are player profiles but no name of the player!! Karl Marginson apparently has nothing worth saying about him. Nice black rectangle tho': bit of modern art perhaps.
Ged's page: 'And now we welcome Lowestoft Town', I mean, for God's Sake.
Match Day re-wind: Full account, just no mention of who the f..k we were playing! The phote at the top has the caption: Place's a shot, low into the bottom corner as keeper watches on' I mean WHO, are we meant to guess? Never mind the command of English. I still hate the way scores are tabulated, and there are lovely blue, yellow and red dots all over the place, with no indication what they mean. Life is too short to check the Stat Attack pages, Neil has mentioned the comical 'Lead out your hero's on a match day and' And what precisely, give us a clue at least. Sammy's competion: another lovely black rectangle devoid of writing. Another match day rewind with no indication as to who we were playing. I think that might be it.

If anyone reads this from the club: this is an absolute disgrace. We could be in the National Premier next season, such a truly dreadful programme might be grounds for compulsory relegation!

Please, please, please, appoint a proper programme editor. The club does everything so well otherwise, why have you allowed this shambles to carry on all season?

Rant over.

In cidentally, whilst I am on the topic, why has the programme this season almost completely stopped giving info about our various junior teams. Do we still have them? Under 21's, Academy etc. Peter's programme (please come back!!), always had full details of their games, fixtures etc. I can barely recall a single mention in this season's 'programme'. why not?

I've heard there was a problem with the printers for the FCUM game hence the mistakes..Mike Bligh produces the programme so any issues can you raise with him?

I haven't seen it, but from the description it does sound poor...Surely if we knew how poor it is, should we be selling the thing? If they are printing errors, I am pretty sure Irving wouldn't sign off payment, I mean who would?

I think we need to bring in someone with editorial experience to solely focus on the programme. I know for some it is part of the match day experience and I would be fuming if I spent £2.50 on it.

Chips97 wrote:I've heard there was a problem with the printers for the FCUM game hence the mistakes..Mike Bligh produces the programme so any issues can you raise with him?

So the club knew the programme was wrong and continued to sell it for FULL PRICE? That is just wrong!

It isn't only us who are realising it, if you check on other non league forums, people are laughing at us.

I thought it was meant to improve....

I believe we ran out of programmes also. I heard some complaints from various people during the game .

I'm just the messenger don't blame me

GARAGE wrote:I believe we ran out of programmes also. I heard some complaints from various people during the game .

Probably just as well!

Chips97 wrote:I'm just the messenger don't blame me

Could you please message back that it's bullshit.

Agree with neil30. If they knew it was substandard and STILL sold it full price. <<that is a bit of a disgrace in itself. I am sure Mike is a great guy and everything but we really do not a committed programme editor. It can't be shortage of money!

Meant to type we DO need a professional editor

I like to take a programme home from every match I attend even if it is not very good. However. no programmes available at 2.20 when I arrived.