Dick Knight Interview

[Seagull73]

Agreed. He does say that.



How do you draw this conclusion?

I can't believe you're asking - it suits her agenda - just nicely thank you.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

I don't have too question my own beliefs from last season because I know what happened - Dick just contradicted himself and when Harty questioned it he got very agitated which he gets with fans sometimes when they don't say what he wants to hear

... and as I said in another thread I think you're being set up.

Knight is no longer the power in this club and I suspect hasn't been since McGhee went. He wasn't the voice that got DW sacked, he may have pulled the trigger but it wasn't his decision. The individuals that got rid of mcGhee and got DW appointed were the same individuals that got DW binned. You need to be aiming you vitriol at other members of the board

 

[Dorset Seagull]

I seems fairly straightforward to me. The only way DK was able to agree a termination at that meeting would be if he knew that he was the only one in favour of MA staying.

My guess is that board wanted MA out but agreed for DK to let MA stay a bit longer to turn it around. DK tells MA that he is fighting his corner to save him. MA realises that he can't survive and so he is better off taking the money now than staying to fight a lost cause.

DK accepts this and doesn't need to consult board as they have all stated they want MA out anyway

 

[The Large One]

I seems fairly straightforward to me. The only way DK was able to agree a termination at that meeting would be if he knew that he was the only one in favour of MA staying.

My guess is that board wanted MA out but agreed for DK to let MA stay a bit longer to turn it around. DK tells MA that he is fighting his corner to save him. MA realises that he can't survive and so he is better off taking the money now than staying to fight a lost cause.

DK accepts this and doesn't need to consult board as they have all stated they want MA out anyway

I'll buy that.

 

[Knotty]

I have listened to that interview now several times and i don't know what everyone else thinks but it dosen't all add up.

In that interview Dick said that he had spoken to the board and that going to the meeting he had no intention of sacking Micky. So from that statement we would all agree that Board and Dick have discussed situation and no sacking will take place.

Then Dick has meeting and as it progresses it becomes apparant that in the best interest of the club that Micky should go.

Now i thought at this club the whole board made decisions not just Dick Knight.

I can see two senarios that go on at this club

Either the board and Dick had a meeting and it was decided that Micky was too go (Which i would hope that the board as a whole discuss everything before decisions are made) so what Dick said in the interview was untrue about not sacking him

or

Dick just makes all decisions and then says the board agrees


My personal opinion is Dick went to the meeting having been told to sack Micky which he didn't want to do and when Harty questioned him he cleary got agitated

Neither you nor any of us knows exactly what went on and when. Everything we read on NSC chat at the moment is based on supposition, guesswork and biased agendas, one way or the other. And with little or no knowledge of the facts.

DK and the board are entitled to conduct their business as they wish. We have no part in that. We might all have an opinion on how things should be done and some will agree with DK and some won't.

So what? Like it or not, we are simply customers of a business that is entitled to conduct its private, internal affairs how it wishes. It is entitled to tell us about things happening at the club when it wishes, and as much or as little as it wishes.

I am only interested in what happens on the pitch. I don't pay my money to know exactly what happens in board meetings and who says what, and why an announcement is made an when, and why DK says "I", and who is putting most money into the club at the moment, and what Mr Bloom had for breakfast.

Some people need to get a grip on reality. It's a game of football, not World War III.

 

[Smythe]

I seems fairly straightforward to me. The only way DK was able to agree a termination at that meeting would be if he knew that he was the only one in favour of MA staying.

My guess is that board wanted MA out but agreed for DK to let MA stay a bit longer to turn it around. DK tells MA that he is fighting his corner to save him. MA realises that he can't survive and so he is better off taking the money now than staying to fight a lost cause.

DK accepts this and doesn't need to consult board as they have all stated they want MA out anyway

seems the most reasonable one so far

 

[theonesmith]

I have listened to that interview now several times and i don't know what everyone else thinks but it dosen't all add up.

In that interview Dick said that he had spoken to the board and that going to the meeting he had no intention of sacking Micky. So from that statement we would all agree that Board and Dick have discussed situation and no sacking will take place.

Then Dick has meeting and as it progresses it becomes apparant that in the best interest of the club that Micky should go.

Now i thought at this club the whole board made decisions not just Dick Knight.

I can see two senarios that go on at this club

Either the board and Dick had a meeting and it was decided that Micky was too go (Which i would hope that the board as a whole discuss everything before decisions are made) so what Dick said in the interview was untrue about not sacking him

or

Dick just makes all decisions and then says the board agrees


My personal opinion is Dick went to the meeting having been told to sack Micky which he didn't want to do and when Harty questioned him he cleary got agitated

Or it really was a mutual agreement (which I believe). We all know you're biased, but you have to remember Micky Adams does love this club and I don't think he wanted to take us down. I think they genuinely had a discussion and it's just ended how it has. I don't think that any of the other options would have turned out like this.

 

[EastbourneGull]

Neither you nor any of us knows exactly what went on and when. Everything we read on NSC chat at the moment is based on supposition, guesswork and biased agendas, one way or the other. And with little or no knowledge of the facts.

DK and the board are entitled to conduct their business as they wish. We have no part in that. We might all have an opinion on how things should be done and some will agree with DK and some won't.

So what? Like it or not, we are simply customers of a business that is entitled to conduct its private, internal affairs how it wishes. It is entitled to tell us about things happening at the club when it wishes, and as much or as little as it wishes.

I am only interested in what happens on the pitch. I don't pay my money to know exactly what happens in board meetings and who says what, and why an announcement is made an when, and why DK says "I", and who is putting most money into the club at the moment, and what Mr Bloom had for breakfast.

Some people need to get a grip on reality. It's a game of football, not World War III.

Top class posting Knotty. And to those wishing to direct their vitriol at the board generally, I say don't bite the hand that feeds you. We have seen what is essentially an unsustainable business supported by board members and major shareholders. There has been more investment in the team than any other club in League 1 during January. And finally we have a stadium being built in the midst of the most horrendous financial crisis any of us can remember. Given some of the comments posted on this and other related threads, I sometimes wonder why those who invest time and money in the club even bother.

 

[Bwian]

Top class posting Knotty. And to those wishing to direct their vitriol at the board generally, I say don't bite the hand that feeds you. We have seen what is essentially an unsustainable business supported by board members and major shareholders. There has been more investment in the team than any other club in League 1 during January. And finally we have a stadium being built in the midst of the most horrendous financial crisis any of us can remember. Given some of the comments posted on this and other related threads, I sometimes wonder why those who invest time and money in the club even bother.

I bet Micky Adams doesn't use somebody to continually post on here for him in an attempt to discredit Dick Knight at every opportunity as a previous manager appears to be doing.

 

[clapham_gull]

Or the more likely occurance, Adams decided that it was impossible for him to stay due to fan pressure and wanted to leave because he felt it was better the club. (so fans would reunite and cheer the team on, rather than because he didnt think he was up to it.)

Nope, I suspect the other reasons are the real ones.

The power base shifts sometimes, it's plain to see..

 

[Jim D]

Then Dick has meeting and as it progresses it becomes apparant that in the best interest of the club that Micky should go.

If MA spoke at the meeting the same way that he speaks on SCR after the match then it would be obvious to anyone that he's a beaten man. DK's no fool when it comes to 'reading' people and it would have told him loud and clear that there was nowhere further that MA could take us.

 

[Seagull73]

I bet Micky Adams doesn't use somebody to continually post on here for him in an attempt to discredit Dick Knight at every opportunity as a previous manager appears to be doing.

Absolutely.

 

[Easy 10]

Sounds like Dick was was in Adams's corner, wanting him to stay, and Adams was also of that mind (hence all the tubthumping "I'm not quitting" headlines on Thursday/Friday). But during that meeting on Friday, once MA realised the board was split over this, it was apparent he was a dead man walking and decided to jack it in.

The timing did seem very strange when the news broke, but that pretty much explains it for me.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

and what Mr Bloom had for breakfast.

He has Croissants with Robertson jam and a black coffee.

 

[skinbok]

Why the little chef?

What seems really stange is the choice of the venue for this meeting assumably selected by Knight. The little chef! Bit public for a sacking or even a heated debate.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Micky is a Yorkie , he would have known he was in a catch 22 situation. He would know that DK is no longer the puppeteer and is now the puppet. Micky knows another appointment will come his way and its better to leave before things become acrimonious.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

What seems really stange is the choice of the venue for this meeting assumably selected by Knight. The little chef! Bit public for a sacking or even a heated debate.

Because it was leaked on NSC that DK had reserved a table at Topolinos.

 

[BigGully]

I bet Micky Adams doesn't use somebody to continually post on here for him in an attempt to discredit Dick Knight at every opportunity as a previous manager appears to be doing.

Why would MA have any inclination to have any anti-Knight feelings, anyway ?

He got employed by maybe the only club that thought he was employable, has been given lots of money to spend on his players, had Naylor and DK in his back pocket and failed miserably.

There will be no whispering campaign about him losing the dressing room, Naylor will not trawl up past and current players to try to discredit him, because DK, Naylor, Harty, LB and others that were so keen on MA's appointment, irrespective of logic, have no wish to find them.

No need for a shameful character assasination on MA as was with Wilkins, it would be further proof that they got it all wrong and thats makes them feel a wee bit embarrassed at present.

 

[pasty]

Neither you nor any of us knows exactly what went on and when. Everything we read on NSC chat at the moment is based on supposition, guesswork and biased agendas, one way or the other. And with little or no knowledge of the facts.

DK and the board are entitled to conduct their business as they wish. We have no part in that. We might all have an opinion on how things should be done and some will agree with DK and some won't.

So what? Like it or not, we are simply customers of a business that is entitled to conduct its private, internal affairs how it wishes. It is entitled to tell us about things happening at the club when it wishes, and as much or as little as it wishes.

I am only interested in what happens on the pitch. I don't pay my money to know exactly what happens in board meetings and who says what, and why an announcement is made an when, and why DK says "I", and who is putting most money into the club at the moment, and what Mr Bloom had for breakfast.

Some people need to get a grip on reality. It's a game of football, not World War III.

Top post. No one here knows for sure what occured, and I would think it highly unlikely any of us ever will.

 

[Knotty]

Why would MA have any inclination to have any anti-Knight feelings, anyway ?

He got employed by maybe the only club that thought he was employable, has been given lots of money to spend on his players, had Naylor and DK in his back pocket and failed miserably.

There will be no whispering campaign about him losing the dressing room, Naylor will not trawl up past and current players to try to discredit him, because DK, Naylor, Harty, LB and others that were so keen on MA's appointment, irrespective of logic, have no wish to find them.

No need for a shameful character assasination on MA as was with Wilkins, it would be further proof that they got it all wrong and thats makes them feel a wee bit embarrassed at present.

As usual. I agree with very little that you say but that's normal.

The only comment I would make is that I don't see why the board should be embarrassed by what happened with MA. They are not the first board to appoint a manager who hasn't delivered as they expected - it's happened at every club in the land. It will also happen to us again on numerous occasions in the future, regardless of who is the chairman or on the board.

That's football. It's an employment mistake that every employer has made at some time. If every club changed its chairman/board every time they got a managerial appointment wrong, football would run out of people wanting to be board members/shareholders.