Hammond clearly moved to a MASSIVE club

[British Bulldog]

their to busy bullying

It all gets quite sad at times.

 

[BigGully]

But you are also insinuating that Dick Knight will not back his manager with players he wants and the club can afford. Can you back that up?

Cant back this up, but yep, thats about it.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

I don't understand this. Are you saying there is no wage structure or are you saying that there is one and that sometimes it is (secretly) broken?

 

[BensGrandad]

The problem with NSC is that everybody is put into little boxes and you are classed as either pro or anti Dk nobody seems to condider that a person can generally agree with what he is doing but not agree with everything 100% they are then classed as being anti.

The same goes with the team if you criticise a player or a team selection you are then accused of not being a 'proper' supporter, or not even a supporter.

I agree with a lot that DK has done and disagree with a lot that he does , as has been shown on this message board, but on the question of Dean Hammond from the information that I have DK did the right thing in getting the best price that he could for him. If anybody wants to give me other information that may change my opinion I would be only too pleased to receive a pm with details and then perhaps my view may change. The same goes with most of MA team selections but I do not agree with all of them.

 

[Knotty]

Cant back this up, but yep, thats about it.

How do you know 'that's about it', if you can't back it up?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I was in total shock when it transpired that DK had spoken to some supporters back in January 2008 that Wilkins tenure was fragile, when the Manager had absolutely no idea.

I spoke with DK in January. AT NO TIME DID HE SAY THAT WILKINS' TENURE WAS FRAGILE. Quite the opposite, in fact.

When the push finally came, I was surprised at the timing.

 

[Waterhall Wizard]

I spoke with DK in January. AT NO TIME DID HE SAY THAT WILKINS' TENURE WAS FRAGILE. Quite the opposite, in fact.

When the push finally came, I was surprised at the timing.

I have to say LB that that really surprises me.

I don't post on here very often, but a post you made a few months ago left me with a distinct feeling that DK had spoken to you about his uncertainty of Wilkins, in January. That was an easy deduction to make for me and I'm sure anybody reading that post.

 

[Muhammed - I’m hard - Bruce Lee]

i actually think we'd be a better team with hammond in it

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I have to say LB that that really surprises me.

I don't post on here very often, but a post you made a few months ago left me with a distinct feeling that DK had spoken to you about his uncertainty of Wilkins, in January. That was an easy deduction to make for me and I'm sure anybody reading that post.

DK did speak to a small number of people about the way that Wilkins had contributed to the discussions of Hammond's contract, and he obviously wasn't happy about it. But he certainly didn't indicate to me that that Wilkins' tenure was fragile (which is what BigGully claimed). As I say, quite the opposite.

 

[cjd]

I have to say LB that that really surprises me.

I don't post on here very often, but a post you made a few months ago left me with a distinct feeling that DK had spoken to you about his uncertainty of Wilkins, in January. That was an easy deduction to make for me and I'm sure anybody reading that post.

I agree with you...........can,t be bothered to go back on old ground, but I got the distinct impression that lord Bracknell, who is surely the most respected poster on here, following his huge efforts and expertise with the Planning applications, almost single-handedly, completed a character assassination of Dean Wilkins and his management skills.

 

[Waterhall Wizard]

DK did speak to a small number of people about the way that Wilkins had contributed to the discussions of Hammond's contract, and he obviously wasn't happy about it. But he certainly didn't indicate to me that that Wilkins' tenure was fragile (which is what BigGully claimed). As I say, quite the opposite.

I have to say LB that at the time I was disappointed to read that post. It wasn't that DK had chosen to take some fans in to his confidence and had discussed the manager, but that you had chosen to divulge the incident on a public forum.

 

[clarkey]

i actually think we'd be a better team with hammond in it

Didnt think that when we sold him, but do now. Think our midfield, despite the additions of Thomson and Livermore, has detioriated, McLeod aside. Virgo and Thomson are more ineffective than El Abd and Hammond were, and Cox seems to have gone backwards as well. In midfield the only decent player we seem to currently have, or who is at least in some sort of form (Virgos heading aside) is McLeod, and that is very worrying.

 

[BigGully]

DK did speak to a small number of people about the way that Wilkins had contributed to the discussions of Hammond's contract, and he obviously wasn't happy about it. But he certainly didn't indicate to me that that Wilkins' tenure was fragile (which is what BigGully claimed). As I say, quite the opposite.

You can go all second class barrister on me if you want, but thats was what was intimated by one of your posts.

You can re-post and then wrap it up with an interpretation that might back up your claim, but it would surprise me if that wasnt your line.

 

[British Bulldog]

i actually think we'd be a better team with hammond in it

I'd love to see Hammond back in our midfield.

 

[Lord Large]

A better centre midfield player than any we have at the club so yes, would love him back.

Don't really understand some Brighton fans' obsession with revelling in the apparant failure of ex players.

Get over it.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I have to say LB that at the time I was disappointed to read that post. It wasn't that DK had chosen to take some fans in to his confidence and had discussed the manager, but that you had chosen to divulge the incident on a public forum.

The only reason to "divulge the incident" is that it has been misrepresented. I don't know when the Club took the decision to replace Dean Wilkins as manager. It's been insinuated that this was sometime last January, but DK didn't tell DW, although he hinted to some fans that this would be the outcome.

Because that is a misrepresentation of what happened in January, I'm saying NOW that I heard no suggestion then that DW was going to be sacked.

I'm no more comfortable about posting this stuff on NSC than Waterhall Wizard is about reading it. I just don't want to see an incorrect account of what happened gain any currency as "the truth".

 

[mona]

Shit player, shit club, no fans. Good move, Dean

The Oracle has spoken!

Our midfield have been so impressive since Hammond has gone, hasn't it!

And Tranmere have dropped O'Pissedaghan. Shit player etc etc etc etc

 

[BensGrandad]

Cant be bothered to look up the posts but I said all of last season that Hammond was overated as he couldnt tackle without giving away a freekick, usually just outside of the box and most of the goals he scored were penalties so no we do not need him. The money received from Colchester has gone to buy a much more valuable player to us in Glen Murray who given time and encouragement rather than slating on here will turn out to be a diamond buy.

 

[mona]

What's our midfield now got to do with Hammond? Read the Colchester boards - they're NOT impressed with him.

As you think they are "a shit club", why should I take any notice of what is posted on their Board?
If you went to Orient last year or watched the game on tv, you might have noticed that Hammond and O'Callaghan played well. Not just my opinion but also the Sky tv commentary.
Hammond had faults as a player but the sustained negative comments he got from you did nobody any favours.
Our midfield now has got everything to do with it as we struggled yesterday.
l