Ask The Club - Is this a fair question?

[clapham_gull]

If they can't answer why Wilkins went, they can surely answer why that farce was allowed to happen.

.. if Wilkins was going to be sacked even if we had promotion.

Why not sack him at the end of the season then.

 

[bigc]

.. if Wilkins was going to be sacked even if we had promotion.

Why not sack him at the end of the season then.

Exactly, just like Lewes did with King.

Why the wait for another 6 days?

 

[Mr Burns]

SOmeones asked the question, and its still there.

Now lets wait for the spin

 

[rongully]

Since some people get banned for using "Ask the Club" I thought I would ask here if you think this is a fair question before posting it.............

So is this a fair question to ask, and should it be asked?

Dear Mr Insider

As you probably know from reading this forum, many fans are far from happy with our performance this season, the performance of the manager, and the performance of the team.

Things seemed to be moving forward well under Dean Wilkins and obviously comparisons are being made, and the fact that we have brought in a more experienced manager in Micky Adams and appear to be heading backwards, and it would appear sliding uncontrollably towards relegation, can you once and for all end all the speculation amongst fans, and explain why the club sacked Dean Wilkins in May?

The club have always claimed to be open and honest with the fans, so why have we not been given the definitive reason for Dean Wilkins' sacking yet?



I think its a fair question, and to be honest if they won't answer this, or if it gets removed and I get another one week ban (that ends tomorrow), then is there any point in having "ask the club"?

Good Work ! why dont we all post it ?

 

[e77]

It wouldn't be fair for the club to answer the question (although it is a free country so feel free to ask it) as Dean Wilkins personnel dealings should remain confidential.

How would anyone like it on here if their dealings with their employer was made public?

 

[Seagull73]

I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES IN THE PAST " I CANNOT NAME THE SOURCE"

To be honest i don't care whether people believe me or not - what i say IS true but if people don't beleive me that is fine but peole that constantly slag me off for no reason is not fair

What a contradiction in terms that really is. If you don't give a shit whether people believe you, why would you care whether people slag you off as well.

If things were really that bad, you would name the source and get things out in the open. The reason why you won't is because you yourself cannot be totally sure that you are on solid ground, so you sprout your lies on a messageboard and try to whip things up that way.

Either put up or shut up frankly.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

SOmeones asked the question, and its still there.

Now lets wait for the spin

There won't be any spin. They will say they can't answer that question (and hopefully ban you for abusing ask the club) as you know full well but still felt you had to put an attention seeking thread online.

 

[Finchley Seagull]

What a contradiction in terms that really is. If you don't give a shit whether people believe you, why would you care whether people slag you off as well.

If things were really that bad, you would name the source and get things out in the open. The reason why you won't is because you yourself cannot be totally sure that you are on solid ground, so you sprout your lies on a messageboard and try to whip things up that way.

Either put up or shut up frankly.

Exactly. I could make up some crap about the club which was believable and then say I couldn't name my source. The sad thing is that some people on here are so against the club that they will accept any old rubbish as gospel and assume the worst.

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

These calls for DK to tell us why Wilkins was sacked are never going to work.

Clearly DK and the Board offered a settlement to DW that he found acceptable, otherwise he would have taken the club to Court.

And I'll bet you all the money I have spent on following the Albion for 50 years that part of that settlement was a confidentiality clause stopping either party from going public with the reasons. That is standard business practice.

So unless the Board or DW decides to break that confidentiality agreement we will never know the truth.

What's done is done, rightly or wrongly. It was a decision by the Club which Wilkins accepted.

Time to move on.

 

[Acker79]

Or when they legally can. It is often agreed when a manager is paid off that the club or manager cannot speak publically about it (same with any business).

They paid him off? So why do people keep saying we can't sack MA because we can't afford to pay three managers? Either he's been paid off and is not a factor in the club's finances anymore, or he hasn't been paid off and therefore no pay off agreement made. Or am I missing something?

 

[The Large One]

If - IF - there is a confidentiality agreement, and the club were to speak out and inform us of what happened, it would require Dean Wilkins' permission to do so - in effect, for them to mutually waive the agreement. Likewise, if Wilkins ever wanted to go public, it would need the club to agree.

There is a further issue, that if both sides agree to be allowed to speak out, we should hear both sides - and that's where it could get even messier, with the possibility of neither side agreeing on what really happened, and dirty laundry effectively being washed in public.

But in answer to the original question - perfectly fair.

 

[The Large One]

They paid him off? So why do people keep saying we can't sack MA because we can't afford to pay three managers? Either he's been paid off and is not a factor in the club's finances anymore, or he hasn't been paid off and therefore no pay off agreement made. Or am I missing something?

Again, assuming there is a confidentiality clause, any settlement would also be confidential.

Point is - we just don't know, and does Dean Wilkins want his financial situation discussed in public?

 

[Finchley Seagull]

Again, assuming there is a confidentiality clause, any settlement would also be confidential.

Point is - we just don't know, and does Dean Wilkins want his financial situation discussed in public?

That seems to be what people are missing here. It may be as much in Dean Wilkins interest to keep it private as the club's.

 

[Ernest]

To be fair maybe it is Dean Wilkins who is insisting on the reasons remaining confidential

 

[Ernest]

That seems to be what people are missing here. It may be as much in Dean Wilkins interest to keep it private as the club's.

Wow that is spooky, both posting the same thing at the same time

 

[Acker79]

Again, assuming there is a confidentiality clause, any settlement would also be confidential.

Point is - we just don't know, and does Dean Wilkins want his financial situation discussed in public?

So when people talk about not being able to afford three managers... they're just assuming Dean hasn't been paid off even though others are assuming he has?

 

[Buzzer]

There won't be any spin. They will say they can't answer that question (and hopefully ban you for abusing ask the club) as you know full well but still felt you had to put an attention seeking thread online.

ABUSING ask the club? Dunno if you've noticed but there's a lot of us fans that are currently bewildered, nay completely disillusioned with things at the moment and would like an explanation as to why DK changed a winning formula. Go on then, report my post to the mods if it offends you so much. I dare you. I double dare you.

 

[Knotty]

The question isn't asking for the reason, it's asking why we haven't been told which is a completely different question entirely.

If the answer to that question is "we can't tell you legal reasons, then I'd be quite happy with that..."

Or "We can't tell you because employment matters are confidential."

I don't have a problem with that.

 

[The Large One]

So when people talk about not being able to afford three managers... they're just assuming Dean hasn't been paid off even though others are assuming he has?

Seems like it.

Some clarification from the club would help, but I suspect this is less likely to be forthcoming than any explanation on Wilkins' sacking because it could hint at Wilkins' financial situation, which is more sensitive, and less of our business.

 

[Knotty]

These calls for DK to tell us why Wilkins was sacked are never going to work.

Clearly DK and the Board offered a settlement to DW that he found acceptable, otherwise he would have taken the club to Court.

And I'll bet you all the money I have spent on following the Albion for 50 years that part of that settlement was a confidentiality clause stopping either party from going public with the reasons. That is standard business practice.

So unless the Board or DW decides to break that confidentiality agreement we will never know the truth.

What's done is done, rightly or wrongly. It was a decision by the Club which Wilkins accepted.

Time to move on.

Spot on.