here is a view words from harty.

[Publius Ovidius]

It's not outrageous, it's his RIGHT not to say anything.

QUOTE]


Then to be fair, you cannot blame supporters for making up conspiricy theories and pointing the finger.

personally I think Dean didnt look too well come the end of the season, he was missing some training sessions ( and games I recall) and I thing the pressure got too much for him. Dick saw it as an oppertunity as gates were falling even though we were doing well to relieve his suffering and bring in a former hero to get bums on seats and following up with the ST for U16 at £100 get as many people in ( unfortunately that is one huge f*** Up.....I may be a million miles off the truth, but Hey,...No-one knows do they?

 

[Knotty]

it seems DW was still sacked because he dared to question the chairman in private discussions.

Do you know that for a fact?[/B]

(And don't forget his prior years of successful service which were disregarded).

How do you know they were disregarded? Maybe he stayed in the job longer because of that?

This is nothing but ego from the chairman and it is very sad to see at a small club like ours.

On what basis have you formed that opinion? met him and discussed things with him?[/QUOTE]

I am not saying you are wrong in any of that, it's just that you don't know you are right. You are guessing to suit your agenda.

 

[Knotty]

So why was Knight talking about this with 'inner sanctum' supporters in January '08 then? Surely IF TRUE that would be very wrong indeed?

If true, I don't think he should have done that. It still doesn't mean that he should tell us everything.

 

[Lokki 7]

I am not saying you are wrong in any of that, it's just that you don't know you are right. You are guessing to suit your agenda.

Ah! But can we ever know that anything is in fact right? What is right? What is real? Can we be sure that anything exists at all? I can only guess to suit my agenda. I guess.

 

[Knotty]

It's not outrageous, it's his RIGHT not to say anything.

QUOTE]


Then to be fair, you cannot blame supporters for making up conspiricy theories and pointing the finger.

I suppose not, but it just seems so pointless to make up things to suit an agenda. We are performing badly on the pitch so people want to blame DK.

I agree with what you say about DW, though.

 

[Knotty]

Ah! But can we ever know that anything is in fact right? What is right? What is real? Can we be sure that anything exists at all? I can only guess to suit my agenda. I guess.

Guessing to suit your agenda is fine. Stating guesses as facts is not.

If I knew the reasons for DW's sacking, I might be appalled and consider DK to be totally wrong. But I don't, so I am not going to get ino gratuitous criticism.

 

[Lokki 7]

Guessing to suit your agenda is fine. Stating guesses as facts is not.

If I knew the reasons for DW's sacking, I might be appalled and consider DK to be totally wrong. But I don't, so I am not going to get ino gratuitous criticism.

Er? Right firstly, I don't have an agenda, I just think it's all a bit crap. Secondly, my whole discussion re DK and DW is exactly that we do not know the facts, that's my gripe. As Dave says it's not surprising there is speculation, that's what this whole thread is. I'm not stating anything as fact except it's all a bit crap.

 

[Dandyman]

OK.

1) The Chairman. Sacking a manager who had brought stability to the side, a healthy league position and brought through a crop of youngsters. He was clearing out the deadwood and setting us up for improvement. As a fan, I wanted to go to games, I was proud of my team, my club and positive for the future yet it seems DW was still sacked because he dared to question the chairman in private discussions. (And don't forget his prior years of successful service which were disregarded). This is nothing but ego from the chairman and it is very sad to see at a small club like ours.

2) The manager. Can't be arsed to trawl through for quotes but the disdain with which he has spoken about the fans of this club for expecting us to be top 6 in November, or being foolish enough to think we are in a relegation dogfight. Or not doing OUR bit to support the players. Without our support there would be no club, our support pays his wages so that HE can motivate the players. When I am paid to do that you can criticise me for failing you northern buffoon.

3) The players. Do I really need to explain this one? I have been watching football long enough to know that these players are capable of a hell of a lot more than that. We pay to watch them, they are letting us down.

These are just some examples, by no means the only ones. Why didn't the Chairman stick with a successful 'club' manager? Why won't he go public? Why won't the manager hold his hands up and say I should be doing better, sorry. Why don't the players say right sod this, lets go out and kick arse for the FANS? They did it against Man City so it is possible. It's the fans that are suffering, everyone else is looking out for themselves. I'm sure it didn't used to be like this, but maybe I'm just naive.

Nail on the head. My respect for what Dick Knight has done for the Albion does not extend to believing he is either infallible or without a rather large ego.

The board, chaired by Uncle Dick, sacked a decent manager and have staked their credibility on a "name" manager who was widely respected for his previous achievements with us.

The damage to the board's credibility in sacking Adams (plus the reputed cost of doing so) makes me think he won't be going anywhere other than by his own choice. Both the board and the manager, however, will face an increasingly alienated set of fans unless they pull their fingers out PDQ.

 

[Pavilionaire]

The lack of clarify over why Wilkins was sacked as manager has hung over this club like a black cloud, and Knight has misjudged the mood of the fans completely.

For all I know Knight may have been ENTIRELY justified in removing him, but based on the information we as fans have, and the subsequent demise of the performance of the team, Knight is coming out of this very badly.

I also get the feeling something's not right at the board level. The fact that Wilkins was allowed to stay in the manager's job for months after his spat with Knight suggests the board was split over his sacking, and the fact he was offered the coaches job I still find totally baffling unless it was done to appease some board clique.

We now have the situation of Knight's chosen son Adams going past the point at which any other manager would have been sacked. We now have the worst home record in the division and Knight sits idly by whilst managers in higher positions than us bite the dust.

I love Harty but his insistence that we won't go down is clearly a triumph of blind optimism over realism. Many of the points we gleaned were earlier in the season whilst the Wilkins team still had some coherence, but 6 months on the side has Adams fingerprints and we're in the shit.

I myself believe we won't go down, but wouldn't be surprised if we did.

 

[The Large One]

The lack of clarify over why Wilkins was sacked as manager has hung over this club like a black cloud, and Knight has misjudged the mood of the fans completely.

For all I know Knight may have been ENTIRELY justified in removing him, but based on the information we as fans have, and the subsequent demise of the performance of the team, Knight is coming out of this very badly.

I also get the feeling something's not right at the board level. The fact that Wilkins was allowed to stay in the manager's job for months after his spat with Knight suggests the board was split over his sacking, and the fact he was offered the coaches job I still find totally baffling unless it was done to appease some board clique.

We now have the situation of Knight's chosen son Adams going past the point at which any other manager would have been sacked. We now have the worst home record in the division and Knight sits idly by whilst managers in higher positions than us bite the dust.

I love Harty but his insistence that we won't go down is clearly a triumph of blind optimism over realism. Many of the points we gleaned were earlier in the season whilst the Wilkins team still had some coherence, but 6 months on the side has Adams fingerprints and we're in the shit.

I myself believe we won't go down, but wouldn't be surprised if we did.

For all the silence there has been on this matter, that is one of the few things we have been told by Dick Knight - that they were united in this decision.

Whether they're united over Adams now - who knows?

 

[Acker79]

For all the silence there has been on this matter, that is one of the few things we have been told by Dick Knight - that they were united in this decision.

So were the jury in 12 Angry Men, but at least two of them weren't sure they made the right decision. Maybe members of the board were just bored of fighting...

 

[The Large One]

So were the jury in 12 Angry Men, but at least two of them weren't sure they made the right decision. Maybe members of the board were just bored of fighting...

Fighting...?

One of the few things we are told - and as per Dick Knight's programme notes a few weeks ago - is that, generally it is a pretty united board. DK said something along the lines of the during his tenure as Chairman, he can count on one hand the number of times issues have had to go to a vote.

Just because things might be shite on the pitch, it does not necessarily follow that everything is falling apart at boardroom level and that everyone is in-fighting. (Nor for that matter would it necessarily follow that a really good season on the pitch results in boardroom harmony, but I digress).

I've met Dick several times, Derek Chapman and Martin Perry, and Darren Bloom a couple of times (that's not showing off or 'licker, look at him' stuff; because we have an accessible board and Chairman, a hell of a lot of people have done so, and they like to ask what's going on), and at no point does anyone present anything other than working together.

That in itself means very little, and sure they have disagreement, but by the same token, I have never seen or heard anything, nor heard it second-, third, or fourth hand whereby people on the board or in control are constantly falling out. Or 'fighting'.

Perhaps someone can enlighten us.

 

[Buzzer]

If you think I am "hinting" at that, you are - again - wrong.

I have no idea what is "really" going on.

I was thinking about your conversations with Harty today. Don't you think it strange that I have a conversation with one of the inner circle and am TOLD that DW was a goner back in Jan 08 and separately you tell Harty about a conversation you had with DK and Harty also interprets what you say as meaning DW was a goner. Has it occurred to you that DK was telling people that DW was a goner and you just didn't realise it? We know from Mr Burns that other people knew so the information was being disseminated.

I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't know what was going on but you sure as hell revelled in pretending to know. I really can't be arsed to go trawling through all your posts but there are plenty where you seem to take delicious delight in hinting that you know what's going on. Let's take this one:

I believe the decision was taken MONTHS ago. But it was deferred because the team was getting results and DK didn't want to rock that boat.

http://northstandchat.biz/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2400206

or this one:

Maybe because it WAS broken.

If you looked in the right place, under the bonnet.

http://northstandchat.biz/showpost.php?p=2400148&postcount=29

Did you describe them as guesses? No - you post them as someone who has inside information. The "if you look in the right place" comment is particularly snidey.

We lost a loyal servant and a damn good young manager who was Albion through and through in a really shitty way. It goes against everything I love about the Albion. It's the kind of thing Leeds would do, not us.

So at best you claim not to know what is going on but you're still prepared to make the above comments knowing full well that they would be taken seriously. I'm left with the conclusion that you're a snake in the grass and determined that Wilkins isn't accorded the respect he deserves by your smears. It's a bit late for you to hold up your hands and claim innocence. Shame on you.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I was thinking about your conversations with Harty today. Don't you think it strange that I have a conversation with one of the inner circle and am TOLD that DW was a goner back in Jan 08 and separately you tell Harty about a conversation you had with DK and Harty also interprets what you say as meaning DW was a goner. Has it occurred to you that DK was telling people that DW was a goner and you just didn't realise it?

No.

[And here's another snippet from the conversation with DK ...]

Because he was asked and made it clear that wasn't the intention.


As I've said before ... it's not my style to go blabbing about "what the Chairman said". But when inaccurate stories get circulated, I sometimes crack and try to put the record straight.

"Months ago" didn't mean in January.

 

[Buzzer]

You're the one posting the inaccurate stories though. How can you claim not to know what is going on and make all those posts hinting that you DO know?

You can't have it both ways and that comment about looking under the bonnet was well before people started getting wise to your smears. You didn't make that post under duress.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

You're the one posting the inaccurate stories though. How can you claim not to know what is going on and make all those posts hinting that you DO know?

You can't have it both ways and that comment about looking under the bonnet was well before people started getting wise to your smears. You didn't make that post under duress.

I'm baffled as to why you think a comment made in MAY is a comment about what I thought reflected the Chairman's opinion in JANUARY. A lot happened between January and May. I'm not claiming to know what, though.

And I have no particular wish to smear Dean Wilkins.

If it wasn't for the fact that I'm getting fed up with you trawling through my every post to find meanings that aren't there, I'd ask you to identify any "story" that I have posted that is "inaccurate".

 

[Buzzer]

Well excuse me for trying to back up my assertions with hard evidence.

You completely miss my point where I have quoted you and why I have quoted you. Time and time again you've claimed you don't know what went on, yet those posts are clear evidence that you at least pretended that you knew what was going on. It doesn't matter if it was May, January or whenever. You've given the impression that you're in the know. I can't see how you can claim otherwise.

We're not going to see eye to eye on this, that is clear. I'm just delighted that this part of the Wilkins saga is out in the open for other Brighton fans to see and draw their own conclusions.

That's me done.

 

[simonsimon]

From Lickergate to Liquorgate?

What next?

 

[Acker79]

Fighting...?

One of the few things we are told - and as per Dick Knight's programme notes a few weeks ago - is that, generally it is a pretty united board. DK said something along the lines of the during his tenure as Chairman, he can count on one hand the number of times issues have had to go to a vote.

Just because things might be shite on the pitch, it does not necessarily follow that everything is falling apart at boardroom level and that everyone is in-fighting.

'Fighting' was perhaps the wrong word. But if one member of the board wanted to keep Dean since he had shown progress in his second season and felt we'd been chopping and changing managers too much, and everyone else on the board wanted to bring in Adams (either because they honestly felt Dean was no good, or because they wanted faster improvement than DW was bringing, or because they wanted to bump the attendance up or whatever), and they had discussed it over and over and over and over with one person staying by DW while the others were trying to convince him to get behind MA and eventually, after one too many discussions just said 'fine, whatever, you all want it, fire Dean. I think you're wrong, but I'm fed up with it now'.

I don't mean to suggest warring factions within the board, I'm just trying to explain how "the board are united on this" can be misleading.



How many football boards are open about their fractious nature? Not many, because it's not good practice. Even if the board are warring (and again, I don't believe they are and don't mean to suggest they are) they aren't likely to exactly shout it from the rooftop.

 

[The Large One]

'Fighting' was perhaps the wrong word. But if one member of the board wanted to keep Dean since he had shown progress in his second season and felt we'd been chopping and changing managers too much, and everyone else on the board wanted to bring in Adams (either because they honestly felt Dean was no good, or because they wanted faster improvement than DW was bringing, or because they wanted to bump the attendance up or whatever), and they had discussed it over and over and over and over with one person staying by DW while the others were trying to convince him to get behind MA and eventually, after one too many discussions just said 'fine, whatever, you all want it, fire Dean. I think you're wrong, but I'm fed up with it now'.

I don't mean to suggest warring factions within the board, I'm just trying to explain how "the board are united on this" can be misleading.



How many football boards are open about their fractious nature? Not many, because it's not good practice. Even if the board are warring (and again, I don't believe they are and don't mean to suggest they are) they aren't likely to exactly shout it from the rooftop.

I've no idea how much arm-twisting it took for a unanimous decision to be reached to fire Wilkins - it could have been none, it could have been painful. Dick's notes imply the former.

However, regarding any 'warring' factions within the board, of course they won't shout it from the rooftops, but somewhere down the line, this sort of stuff leaks out. Mainly because it's impossible for it not to - that's just the way things are. My point is, I've not heard anything (not that I am in any more of a position to than anyone else), and I've not heard anyone who would or could know anything mention it either.

Not that that means anything either...