Paul Reid lays into Wilkins

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

Don't know if anyone has already posted this but here is Reid's own view.... a bit less ranting here:

Paul Reid's weekly column - May 8 edition - Littlehampton Today

 

[ROSM]

The only times we hear about in house arguements is after the disciplinary - i.e. Cox and why he was left out of the team.

or when wilkins tells Big Gully or BHADEB how unhappy he is after a contract negotiation doesnt go the way he wants or when Dick Knight refuses to make Bas Savage the highest paid player at the club?

 

[Mendoza]

Don't know if anyone has already posted this but here is Reid's own view.... a bit less ranting here:

Paul Reid's weekly column - May 8 edition - Littlehampton Today

maybe this is what he actually thought instead of being prompted by a journalist who had to use bullet points to make his own points of view and not that of the person he was interviewing

 

[BigGully]

or when wilkins tells Big Gully or BHADEB how unhappy he is after a contract negotiation doesnt go the way he wants or when Dick Knight refuses to make Bas Savage the highest paid player at the club?

Every now and then you poke your head above the parapet and then slink off again !!

I would love for you to give any kind of insight into your views, then if you hung around long enough we could debate, argue then sit down and agree that I was right !!

 

[ROSM]

Every now and then you poke your head above the parapet and then slink off again !!

I would love for you to give any kind of insight into your views, then if you hung around long enough we could debate, argue then sit down and agree that I was right !!

It's called having a job and a life. As for slinking off - been around a bit longer than you I would suggest. I spent almost 20 posts trying to debate with you previously but you fundamentally fail to grasp even the basic understanding of paying a reasonable price based on value. You in my mind (based on my belief that most of your assumptions about what might or might not have happened may have initially started with comments from wilkins or his friends) have done more to reduce my view of Mr Wilkins than Uncle Spielberg ever could

 

[BigGully]

maybe this is what he actually thought instead of being prompted by a journalist who had to use bullet points to make his own points of view and not that of the person he was interviewing

It doesnt tell us much, but a more tempered view.

I am not willing to blame Naylor on this one, it seems Reid has been brooding long and hard on this one and he has tried to inflict a wound into Wilkins and management style.

It has rebounded and most would agree that Wilkins comes out of this maybe with an even enhance reputation.

I am still trying to work out what Reids miff is with the 'timing' of his release, he seems to make it clear that he was under no illusion that he was not going to be retained, so whats with his gripe of the date he was told .... he already knew !!

 

[BigGully]

It's called having a job and a life. As for slinking off - been around a bit longer than you I would suggest. I spent almost 20 posts trying to debate with you previously but you fundamentally fail to grasp even the basic understanding of paying a reasonable price based on value. You in my mind (based on my belief that most of your assumptions about what might or might not have happened may have initially started with comments from wilkins or his friends) have done more to reduce my view of Mr Wilkins than Uncle Spielberg ever could

Thats good your view on Wilkins is based on either Uncle Spielberg or Big Gully .... your kiddin' me

I have never debated with you, you make a statement, I am likely to disagree and your gone .... whoooosh

 

[ROSM]

Thats good your view on Wilkins is based on either Uncle Spielberg or Big Gully .... your kiddin' me

I have never debated with you, you make a statement, I am likely to disagree and your gone .... whoooosh

correct - you've never debated. You've ignored, sidestepped, bypassed and now blatantly misinform.

You even speak of yourself in the third person - how pretentious.

My view of wilkins is that he is a little naive as a manager (not coach). But as i've said before, with only a limited number of people with FIRST hand knowledge of player negotiations, any comments that may refer to those must eminate from those attendees. Where you've commented in the past that Wilkins has not had the players he wants and that he feels the board (chairman) have not made sufficient efforts to keep players he wants then it leads me to believe that he is the source of that information either directly or indirectly to you.

The almost, toys out of pram, behaviour that you paint he should be feeling (unhappy that we paid money for murray rather than savage, weren't willing to wait for hammond to make his mind up and risk him leaving for a free, chairman didn't want him etc etc etc) leads me to believe that he is not supporting the decisions of his company. That leads me to believe that he may well be making these comments to the players and their agents and therefore hampering the clubs position on contract deals.

Just an opinion like

 

[Icy Gull]

Makes me laugh, so many on here are like a dog with a bone when it comes to slagging off Naylor. The guy has got a job to do and is a massive improvement on the sycophant he replaced. Sometimes he refects the negativity of half of NSC, but as a journalist he's apparently not allowed to do that. So many posters get really precious about his questioning of the board and management.

Yeah I agree he's sometimes over the top but I don't want a local reporter who licks the board's arse and on balance I'm quite happy with his reporting. In the minority I know but some of the venom towards him is in true NSC over reaction

 

[BigGully]

correct - you've never debated. You've ignored, sidestepped, bypassed and now blatantly misinform.

You even speak of yourself in the third person - how pretentious.

My view of wilkins is that he is a little naive as a manager (not coach). But as i've said before, with only a limited number of people with FIRST hand knowledge of player negotiations, any comments that may refer to those must eminate from those attendees. Where you've commented in the past that Wilkins has not had the players he wants and that he feels the board (chairman) have not made sufficient efforts to keep players he wants then it leads me to believe that he is the source of that information either directly or indirectly to you.

The almost, toys out of pram, behaviour that you paint he should be feeling (unhappy that we paid money for murray rather than savage, weren't willing to wait for hammond to make his mind up and risk him leaving for a free, chairman didn't want him etc etc etc) leads me to believe that he is not supporting the decisions of his company. That leads me to believe that he may well be making these comments to the players and their agents and therefore hampering the clubs position on contract deals.

Just an opinion like

Not the thread to start a whole new debate and I got kinda weary the more I read.

But where the hell did you get unhappy that we paid money for Murray rather Savage ?

I have always said that Wilkins should decide where to appropriate any 'playing budget'.

 

[ROSM]

Not the thread to start a whole new debate and I got kinda weary the more I read.

But where the hell did you get unhappy that we paid money for Murray rather Savage ?

I have always said that Wilkins should decide where to appropriate any 'playing budget'.

first line of your answer sums up what happens every time I try and debate with you

You have implied that wilkins feels that as we spent money on Murray we could have spent it on Savage.

Your final point - if that is also the opinion of wilkins - just illustrates the naivety. A playing budget at 99% of football clubs is set and administered by the board. Managers and coaches can identify who they feel the club should go for but they should not have the spending authority. As I understand it, that is the norm at almost every lower football leage club and at the majority of championship clubs. Not sure about premiership as the management capability level is significantly higherr but also many of them are plc status.

 

[Mendoza]

Every now and then you poke your head above the parapet and then slink off again !!

I would love for you to give any kind of insight into your views, then if you hung around long enough we could debate, argue then sit down and agree that I was right !!

i didnt write what you quoted me on, so i'll ignore that

 

[ROSM]

i didnt write what you quoted me on, so i'll ignore that

the quote function has gone a bit haywire today. You've just quoted big gully but it shows as me. I've just quoted you to see what we can blame on big gully.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Reid has been a good servant to the club, but I agree with Wilkins decision.

What I don't agree with are players that speak for other players. He has no business implying that Mayo, Hart, Butters, Rents or anybody else might be dissatisfied with the manager. Tell Naylor off the record by all means, but don't go public with it.

One spin-off from this cull is that it should send out the signal to those that are left that they are Wilkins chosen men, his team. There is always a risk with axing the likes of Reid because they have something to offer, but it should make it easier to attract other players because of the reduction in competition for places at this time.

 

[Mendoza]

the quote function has gone a bit haywire today. You've just quoted big gully but it shows as me. I've just quoted you to see what we can blame on big gully.

it is MENTAL, quite funny if it gets heated and people get angry with the wrong people

and now its made me quote myself

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I have always said that Wilkins should decide where to appropriate any 'playing budget'.

Not if it breaks the agreed wage structure. What would happen if a whole lot of players reached the end of their contracts and demanded wages to be brought in line with say Savage, if we had bowed to his demands?

 

[sten_super]

Not if it breaks the agreed wage structure. What would happen if a whole lot of players reached the end of their contracts and demanded wages to be brought in line with say Savage, if we had bowed to his demands?

But BoF, you forget, we don't need a wage budget. We're running at a loss anyway (we're in fact insolvent) so there's no need to stick to limits for wages or fees or anything, we should just pay everyone what they want

 

[ROSM]

But BoF, you forget, we don't need a wage budget. We're running at a loss anyway (we're in fact insolvent) so there's no need to stick to limits for wages or fees or anything, we should just pay everyone what they want

anyway Big Gully appears to have slunk off after putting his head above the parapet

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

anyway Big Gully appears to have slunk off after putting his head above the parapet

Council meeting?

 

[BigGully]

But BoF, you forget, we don't need a wage budget. We're running at a loss anyway (we're in fact insolvent) so there's no need to stick to limits for wages or fees or anything, we should just pay everyone what they want

Misrepresentation, never said that we shouldnt have limits, I am amazed we pay what we do now , it is restricted however by individual peoples views rather than the constraints of some fantasy budgets !

I am surprised you havent mentioned DK quote in The Argus, where he points out 'Judicious Housekeeping' today.

I had to laugh and I did think of you lot !!

Now if you can post nealry £3 million pound of losses and somehow congratulate yourself for being judicious, it shows what I am up against !!

Of course with Falmer thankfully on the horizon, there is a real need for judicious planning and budgeting, I fully accept.

But to try and tell me we have been nothing but a financial basket case for past 10 years or so is deluded.

It is obvious we cannot budget for anything with any great credibility, because we have continued to lose revenue and many of our costs have increased and we simply run out of money.

So how do we pay competitive salaries and in so many respects punch above out weight ?

We go to Mr Bloom and friends cap in hand and ask for contributions and our so called budgets will consist of how much Mr Bloom feels he can afford at any given time.

So you guys can talk about budgets and wage structures till the cows come home but there arent any budgets, not in the true sense of the word anyway.

No doubt in depth business plans have been given to our lenders since we left the Goldstone and originally we probably raised some cash on the strength of these.

But banks quickly lose patience, when time after time the projected income and projected profits just do not appear, they nearly become an irrelevance.

How exactly do you budget when your losing millions a year and your bank overdraft is overdrawn.

If you have the answer you should be at Nos. 11 Downing Street and not posting on here !!

This aint the right thread by the way !