Storer68
New member
But just remember "Football, without fams, is nothing" (Jock Stein - won the European Cup managing Celtic in 1967 for all you youngsters!)
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Dick Knight Interview
- Thread starter bhadeb
- Start date
My last relationship broke up like that actually, but then, we never had a contract guaranteeing it would last until the end of April 2011, and there was no financial implication of us breaking up.
I'm basing my view of events on what DK/MA are quoted as saying in the argus, and on SCR (though I missed the live interview, I heard it on the BBC website). The sound quality was not great and static kept interfering, but I don't recall him mentioning the details of his conversation.
Several people on here have put forward their own theories as to what happened (including the idea that DK told the MA where the board's loyalty lay) but as that is being posted anonymously, without source, and in some cases openly posted as "this is what I think might have happened...". As such I'm not putting stock in them as anything other than theories.
*I reread my last post, and wanted to clarify that I don't mean to come across as aggressive, or accusatory. I'm merely trying to explain the opposite view.
Last edited:
Storer68
New member
This appeared in the Daily Telegraph as early as October 2006
Disgruntled Brighton fans turn on Wilkins
By Alex Crook
Last Updated: 12:49AM BST 09 Oct 2006
Your View: Football fans' forum
Brighton & Hove Albion (0) 0 Blackpool (1) 3
The Brighton manager, Dean Wilkins, can count himself fortunate that he has already been promised the job of replacing Mark McGhee until the end of the season.
Judging by the boos that rung around the Withdean Stadium after Keith Southern's goal and two from substitute Scott Vernon had condemned the Seagulls to a fifth successive defeat, some of the club's supporters are already beginning to question the appointment.
Wilkins has won only two of eight games in charge, and hopes of a revival looked bleak when midfielder Southern rose highest to head Shaun Barker's intelligent right-wing cross past Michel Kuipers in the 16th minute.
Blackpool doubled their lead, 16 minutes into the second half, when Vernon – a first-half replacement for the injured Ben Burgess – poked the ball home at the back post after Barker had again provided the assist by flicking Simon Gillett's corner across the six-yard box.
Brighton's misery was compounded when substitute Alexandre Frutos became their fifth player to be sent off this season for catching the impressive Barker with a stray elbow.
Vernon ended any chance the 10 men had of staging a recovery when he doubled his tally three minutes from time. Keigan Parker headed Kerry Mayo's poor clearance into his path and the former Oldham striker rounded a grounded Kuipers to tap in his seventh goal of the campaign.
While Wilkins was left surveying the wreckage, opposite number Simon Grayson could not hide his elation. Grayson said: "We have set our standards with two good wins in and a row and there is no reason, if we play like that, we cannot compete at the right end of the table."
Match details
Brighton: (4-3-3): Kuipers; Whing, El Abd, Butters (Hart 77), Lynch (Frutos h-t); Hammond, Carpenter (Hinshelwood 62), Mayo; Cox, Revell, Williams.
Subs: Sullivan, Gatting.
Sent off: Frutos.
Blackpool: (4-4-2): Evans; Barker, Jackson, Evatt, Coid; Gillett (Jorgensen 80), Southern, Fox, Hoolahan; Burgess (Vernon 41), Morrell (Parker 84).
Subs: Jones, Joseph.
Booked: Barker.
Goals: Southern 17, Vernon 61, 87.
Referee: P Armstrong (Berkshire)
Disgruntled Brighton fans turn on Wilkins
By Alex Crook
Last Updated: 12:49AM BST 09 Oct 2006
Your View: Football fans' forum
Brighton & Hove Albion (0) 0 Blackpool (1) 3
The Brighton manager, Dean Wilkins, can count himself fortunate that he has already been promised the job of replacing Mark McGhee until the end of the season.
Judging by the boos that rung around the Withdean Stadium after Keith Southern's goal and two from substitute Scott Vernon had condemned the Seagulls to a fifth successive defeat, some of the club's supporters are already beginning to question the appointment.
Wilkins has won only two of eight games in charge, and hopes of a revival looked bleak when midfielder Southern rose highest to head Shaun Barker's intelligent right-wing cross past Michel Kuipers in the 16th minute.
Blackpool doubled their lead, 16 minutes into the second half, when Vernon – a first-half replacement for the injured Ben Burgess – poked the ball home at the back post after Barker had again provided the assist by flicking Simon Gillett's corner across the six-yard box.
Brighton's misery was compounded when substitute Alexandre Frutos became their fifth player to be sent off this season for catching the impressive Barker with a stray elbow.
Vernon ended any chance the 10 men had of staging a recovery when he doubled his tally three minutes from time. Keigan Parker headed Kerry Mayo's poor clearance into his path and the former Oldham striker rounded a grounded Kuipers to tap in his seventh goal of the campaign.
While Wilkins was left surveying the wreckage, opposite number Simon Grayson could not hide his elation. Grayson said: "We have set our standards with two good wins in and a row and there is no reason, if we play like that, we cannot compete at the right end of the table."
Match details
Brighton: (4-3-3): Kuipers; Whing, El Abd, Butters (Hart 77), Lynch (Frutos h-t); Hammond, Carpenter (Hinshelwood 62), Mayo; Cox, Revell, Williams.
Subs: Sullivan, Gatting.
Sent off: Frutos.
Blackpool: (4-4-2): Evans; Barker, Jackson, Evatt, Coid; Gillett (Jorgensen 80), Southern, Fox, Hoolahan; Burgess (Vernon 41), Morrell (Parker 84).
Subs: Jones, Joseph.
Booked: Barker.
Goals: Southern 17, Vernon 61, 87.
Referee: P Armstrong (Berkshire)
The Large One
Who's Next?
Fair enough, but taking that parallel view a bit further, it's a bit like a break-up where you have a joint commitment like in, say, a mortgage. But I guess we can only take that parallel view so far.
Anyhoo, at times like that, when both parties agree on a mutual consent, the contract is (or rather ought to be) a point to clarify, not a stick to beat each other with.
Last edited:
Lord Bracknell
On fire
If I can be forgiven for speculating ...
It is quite possible that the dynamics of the Club are changing quite dramatically at the moment. Most fans have got used to DK being the "man in charge" of all key decisions. And every time a key decision is made, we judge it against DK's previous performance.
Until now, the Blooms have been bit-players, biding their time until the REALLY important decisions need to be taken - about funding for Falmer and funding for serious squad strengthening.
What has happened in the last few weeks / days may be that the Blooms have now decided that the league position (and the failure at Luton) were so unacceptable that their moment has come. Hence the decision suddenly to change the manager.
DK's role is still to FRONT the decisions, but it's no longer to MAKE the decisions.
As fans ... we try to make some sense of this. So far, we're not doing very well at it.
It is quite possible that the dynamics of the Club are changing quite dramatically at the moment. Most fans have got used to DK being the "man in charge" of all key decisions. And every time a key decision is made, we judge it against DK's previous performance.
Until now, the Blooms have been bit-players, biding their time until the REALLY important decisions need to be taken - about funding for Falmer and funding for serious squad strengthening.
What has happened in the last few weeks / days may be that the Blooms have now decided that the league position (and the failure at Luton) were so unacceptable that their moment has come. Hence the decision suddenly to change the manager.
DK's role is still to FRONT the decisions, but it's no longer to MAKE the decisions.
As fans ... we try to make some sense of this. So far, we're not doing very well at it.
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
have we forgiven the Blooms for being Archers men then?
Lord Bracknell
On fire
I wouldn't assume that "the Blooms" are the same players as those who were in the game fifteen years ago.
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
Ray was
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Indeed, Ray was. But is he really an active player now?
Publius Ovidius
Well-known member
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,089
I said over a week ago that the other board members having staked so much money would not sit idly by and watch Adams take us down a division with Knight's tacit support.
Despite what has been said these faceless guys have staked a small fortune in the club, and now that planning permission has been granted and work is underway there is a chance their stake could net them a tidy sum IF a rich investor, such as has happened at MK Dons and QPR, comes in.
Knight's botched handling of the the management issues over the last year or so, coupled with his age, have weakened his position and now the money men are having their say. I'm not surprised.
From where I'm standing, and I'm genuinely sad to say this, Knight is beginning to appear more of a liability than an asset.
Despite what has been said these faceless guys have staked a small fortune in the club, and now that planning permission has been granted and work is underway there is a chance their stake could net them a tidy sum IF a rich investor, such as has happened at MK Dons and QPR, comes in.
Knight's botched handling of the the management issues over the last year or so, coupled with his age, have weakened his position and now the money men are having their say. I'm not surprised.
From where I'm standing, and I'm genuinely sad to say this, Knight is beginning to appear more of a liability than an asset.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
Sorry, Dave. I'm not biting. As I've made clear, this is SPECULATION, not fact.
I am no sage.
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
And clung onto Archer and Stanley till the bitter end and that should never be forgotten
D
Deleted member 2719
Guest
So as you are suggesting that this has been recent changes in decision making, so it would be fair to say Dick made the decision on Dean leaving back at the end of last season and the Blooms wanted Mickey out so i would say the blooms have made the best decisions then.
What do you think?
Don Tmatter
Well-known member
So why is DK still saying in that interview,"I" when talking about the search for a new manager, surely it would be a board decision?
Don Tmatter
Well-known member
Any idea why he clung on? and why he came back?
Lord Bracknell
On fire
What do I think? As I've said ... all we can do is speculate. My particular piece of speculation is that the Blooms have started to make some decisions. This doesn't necessarily mean that they are at odds with DK.So as you are suggesting that this has been recent changes in decision making, so it would be fair to say Dick made the decision on Dean leaving back at the end of last season and the Blooms wanted Mickey out so i would say the blooms have made the best decisions then.
What do you think?
So as you are suggesting that this has been recent changes in decision making, so it would be fair to say Dick made the decision on Dean leaving back at the end of last season and the Blooms wanted Mickey out so i would say the blooms have made the best decisions then.
What do you think?
I think we all haven't a f***ing clue, but the speculation is great fun.
The Blooms do seem to be the reason why Barry Lloyd was brought back last season. If they were involved in the decision making process then, presumably they would have also been involved in the decision to appoint Adams as manager, presumably having listened to what Bazza Lloyd said first.
ROSM
Well-known member
The Blooms (it was reported in the argus at the time) wanted McGhee out a full 4 months before it happened.
The only difference there may be between that situation and this was that when MM was aware the board was split on him, he thought he could stay on and fight. Whereas MA, perhaps, didn't.
As for Wilkins, it seems both Knight and Blooms agreed on that one.
The one thing Knight has been, historically, is loyal to managers (perhaps too loyal in the case of some).
The only difference there may be between that situation and this was that when MM was aware the board was split on him, he thought he could stay on and fight. Whereas MA, perhaps, didn't.
As for Wilkins, it seems both Knight and Blooms agreed on that one.
The one thing Knight has been, historically, is loyal to managers (perhaps too loyal in the case of some).