Derek Chapman has a swipe at DK

[Not Andy Naylor]

Derek Chapman is clarifying certain things, putting across his version, not so much of events, but more how the boardroom operated. However, when doing so in the context of - according to the Argus - the fact that Dick's book has just come out, it's not unreasonable to think he is replying to Dick's book. In fact, the first paragraph of the Argus piece states just that.

And there's the rub, Dick doesn't make any accusation against Derek in print, so what accusation is Derek justifying himself against, unless he has been told something in error - either accidentally or mischievously - by a third party?

Exactly. The Argus front page claims that DC "gives his views on DK's book" and the headline on p2 is "my view on DK's new book." Not 'my observations on what happened in the boardroom,' although that is what he actually gives. Since the headlines are written by the paper's sub-editors not by DC, it's the Argus being mischievous. What a surprise.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Derek Chapman is clarifying certain things, putting across his version, not so much of events, but more how the boardroom operated. However, when doing so in the context of - according to the Argus - the fact that Dick's book has just come out, it's not unreasonable to think he is replying to Dick's book. In fact, the first paragraph of the Argus piece states just that.

And there's the rub, Dick doesn't make any accusation against Derek in print, so what accusation is Derek justifying himself against, unless he has been told something in error - either accidentally or mischievously - by a third party?

Just maybe, DC is making it known that DK wasnt the only savior of the club, as some people on here seem to believe.
Yes Dick led the fight, and was the figurehead, but others, including DC were equally contributing, without getting the recognition as DK did.
Its also the perfect platform for him to dispel the postings previously on this board regarding his construction company.

 

[B.W.]

Tony Bloom didn't want to take over until the planning permission had been settled. Once that was sorted, he stepped up.

Over-simplistic. Tony was forced to step-in with the money when it became clear the banks were not going to play ball. He was entitled to control in return for his investment. Dick wanted to lord it until the Amex was opened. Sadly for him, he (Dick) had no right to do so.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Just maybe, DC is making it known that DK wasnt the only savior of the club, as some people on here seem to believe.
Yes Dick led the fight, and was the figurehead, but others, including DC were equally contributing, without getting the recognition as DK did.
Its also the perfect platform for him to dispel the postings previously on this board regarding his construction company.

I don't think there is a single Brighton fan who believes Dick Knight was alone in helping to save the club.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

I agree, of course he has a brilliant position from which to comment on the goings on at the time. But Chapman does himself refer to making observations on the book's content.

Perhaps I didn't word it quite right. I meant it would perhaps be more useful and interesting for supporters if he had commented having read the book because I am sure he would have some interesting take on it. But as there is nothing in the book attacking him, I don't see why Chapman needs to comment on it as if there was.

In general I do think supporters should hold back a bit until having read the book because it isn't nearly as vitriolic as the headline-grabbing extracts suggest.

I think much of the polarisation being argued on here is probably unnecessary given the book's overall content.

Although it's obviously a great help to book sales if potential purchasers think it's more vitriolic and controversial than it is. So I'm sure the publishers, Amazon, City Books etc are delighted with the Argus sensationalising it and the club deciding not to stock it. Yet.

 

[The Large One]

Just maybe, DC is making it known that DK wasnt the only savior of the club, as some people on here seem to believe.
Yes Dick led the fight, and was the figurehead, but others, including DC were equally contributing, without getting the recognition as DK did.
Its also the perfect platform for him to dispel the postings previously on this board regarding his construction company.

I've always said that many elements came into play when it came to saving the Albion. And by that I mean...

Dick, Tony, Martin, Derek, Richard, the FFA team, the council, the supporters, away supporters, Prescott and so on.

- and that, if you took away just one of those elements, the whole campaign and project would have failed. This is a stadium and a club for everyone.

 

[symyjym]

Just maybe, DC is making it known that DK wasnt the only savior of the club, as some people on here seem to believe.
Yes Dick led the fight, and was the figurehead, but others, including DC were equally contributing, without getting the recognition as DK did.
Its also the perfect platform for him to dispel the postings previously on this board regarding his construction company.

Do you really believe he did not make a penny from the construction? He may have not earned as much as another construction company would have done, but from a £100m project I cannot see anyone not benefitting in some shape or form no matter how kind hearted they are.


I mentioned earlier on here that DC will surely earn from the hotel and student accommodation constructions so there is plenty for him to gain in the future.

 

[BUTTERBALL]

Dick was saying at the book signing on Saturday (City Books) that he couldn't believe the club had banned his banner in the North Stand as people "couldn't see". He intimated that the club had become petty, too corporate and lost touch with it's roots.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

and the club deciding not to stock it. Yet.

DC says they have not been asked!

 

[B.W.]

Derek Chapman is clarifying certain things, putting across his version, not so much of events, but more how the boardroom operated. However, when doing so in the context of - according to the Argus - the fact that Dick's book has just come out, it's not unreasonable to think he is replying to Dick's book. In fact, the first paragraph of the Argus piece states just that.

And there's the rub, Dick doesn't make any accusation against Derek in print, so what accusation is Derek justifying himself against, unless he has been told something in error - either accidentally or mischievously - by a third party?

As I said before, DC is putting the record straight in responding to the Argus EXTRACTS of DK's book, and clearing up a separate accusation of him profiteering from Albion building projects. Not that hard to understand, is it?

 

[B.W.]

Neither DK nor the publishers sanctioned the extracts used on Friday. And the club knows that.

Naughty by the Argus then.

 

[BUTTERBALL]

This is a stadium and a club for everyone.

Exactly this. History can never be re-written and this was always the objective of all the fighting we did. FALMER FOR ALL.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I mentioned earlier on here that DC will surely earn from the hotel and student accommodation constructions so there is plenty for him to gain in the future.

Will he? Is he even still involved in the industry? He doesn't own Adenstar anymore.

 

[The Large One]

As I said before, DC is putting the record straight in responding to the Argus EXTRACTS of DK's book, and clearing up a separate accusation of him profiteering from Albion building projects. Not that hard to understand, is it?

Which accusation was this? From whom?

 

[B.W.]

I agree, of course he has a brilliant position from which to comment on the goings on at the time. But Chapman does himself refer to making observations on the book's content.

Perhaps I didn't word it quite right. I meant it would perhaps be more useful and interesting for supporters if he had commented having read the book because I am sure he would have some interesting take on it. But as there is nothing in the book attacking him, I don't see why Chapman needs to comment on it as if there was.

In general I do think supporters should hold back a bit until having read the book because it isn't nearly as vitriolic as the headline-grabbing extracts suggest.

I think much of the polarisation being argued on here is probably unnecessary given the book's overall content.

And you don't think Dick has written to sell the book, or that he would be happy that the local rag has picked some juicy extracts to publish from the book? Really!?

 

[symyjym]

Will he? Is he even still involved in the industry? He doesn't own Adenstar anymore.

I thought he was building the academy?

 

[Monkey Man]

Naughty by the Argus then.

Not naughty. Fair dealing in legal terms. And also likely to boost book sales rather than harm them, as I'm sure Dick knows very well.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Which accusation was this? From whom?

zzzzzzzz

Your seemingly compulsive need to back up DK, whatever, is quite tiresome. The suggestion (not accusation - I don't think anything illegal has been suggested) that Derek Chapman profited nicely from his involvement with the club, has been floated on here plenty of times.

 

[Monkey Man]

I don't think there is a single Brighton fan who believes Dick Knight was alone in helping to save the club.

You're right, but does Dick agree? "The ad man who saved Brighton" is a fairly bold cover line!

 

[Guinness Boy]

I don't think there is a single Brighton fan who was around at the time and doesn't have an axe to grind who believes Dick Knight was alone in helping to save the club.

Slightly edited!