Clarification from Paul Barber on Dick Knight Selling his shares

[London Irish]

Rubbish without DK as a platform there wouldn't have been a coherent voice or direction. He proactively led by example and did a fantastic job.

Good from you to defend DK even though it appears your views on the Poyet sacking don't quite accord

 

[Tooting Gull]

Being a club legend doesn't automatically give DK (or anybody else) a free pass on all other actions.

I have issues with this share scheme/stunt and the publicity that has surrounded it.

Does that cloud everything DK has done?
Of course it doesn't.

Exactly right. We have been hailing DK's role for 16 years. I'll say that again, 16 years. That doesn't mean you can't judge each individual development on its merits, in this case comments in the book and the manner of its promotion.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Dick always was an egomaniac, one of the more unpleasant people connected with the club I've met over the years. We can now add bitter to that. He achieved great things for us, there's no denying that, which makes it more the pity that he's chosen to throw the muck now. But alas, those blinded by their cozy relationship to the 'great man' during the Withdean Years will always deny his faults and try and have him as some kind of Saint.

I don't think anyone who knows Dick Knight well will pretend he's perfect - which of us is? (Apart from me, obviously) But I think it was Oscar Wilde who said you could judge a man by his friends. Okay, so some people on here have what you describe as a "cosy relationship to the 'great man'" - well, what does that tell you? It tells me that they got to know him and he has earned their loyalty - because they are under no obligation to support him now. I can assure you that they are not 'blinded by his faults.' Most of the members of the falmer For All team that I know will cheerfully admit those faults, but they like him anyway. The fact that he retains the friendship of some pretty impressive people tells you a lot about the man.

 

[British Bulldog]

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the people who are slagging off Dick Knight now actually got off their arses themselves and got stuck in when the club needed them most? And please don't say 'that's not relevant' - it is!

I hate these I'm superior to you type of posts because I was there, Maybe some people with opinions now were not even old enough to get involved in things before? It's a bit like old people moaning at you for not knowing what it was like during the war and it leaves you thinking you should be apologising for not being born earlier.

 

[London Irish]

I am out of the loop at the moment. I'm in Germany and haven't read the book. All I'm saying is that there are some pretty nasty comments about DK on here, and I'm surprised at them. I'm not actually taking sides either. Given the state of modern football TB's role was, is and will be utterly vital. The new adminstration are as keen to listen and act on initiatives and ideas as the old one was from my experience - the problems raised by many fans are to do with the way the game is going as a whole, not the way the Albion is being run. I think that within the constraints of that the current board are doing all they can do listen to us. It's up to each individual fan who feels uneasy with the way the game is going to decide whether their love for the Albion is greater than their dislike of the way the game is going. I have made that choice: I'm Brighton till I die. I think DK is doing his best, for good reasons, to try and ensure that we continue to have a say (we still do, absolutely) and TB and Paul Barber are doing their best to take the club forward within the constraints of the modern game while listening to and taking account of the views of us supporters. Now soundcheck, beer, gig

Interesting thoughts. But I think Bloom/Barber and their fellow owners/CEOs at other football clubs are exactly the people creating the modern game - they should get credit or be criticised for that, depending on whether you agree with the trend.

 

[Hungry Joe]

I don't think anyone who knows Dick Knight well will pretend he's perfect - which of us is? (Apart from me, obviously) But I think it was Oscar Wilde who said you could judge a man by his friends. Okay, so some people on here have what you describe as a "cosy relationship to the 'great man'" - well, what does that tell you? It tells me that they got to know him and he has earned their loyalty - because they are under no obligation to support him now. I can assure you that they are not 'blinded by his faults.' Most of the members of the falmer For All team that I know will cheerfully admit those faults, but they like him anyway. The fact that he retains the friendship of some pretty impressive people tells you a lot about the man.

Fair enough. I do think though that some of the so called Inner Circle had their own egos massaged to the extent that they still treat any public criticism of Dick as some sort of BHA treason, which is what gets up my nose, and a fair few others by the looks of it.

 

[London Irish]

The debate about DK's character is as irrelevant as that of Poyet's or Bloom's or whoever of their major players - it's their role that needs judging, not whether you fancy a beer with them

 

[Hungry Joe]

The debate about DK's character is as irrelevant as that of Poyet's or Bloom's or whoever of their major players - it's their role that needs judging, not whether you fancy a beer with them

Rubbish. When you've written a book which questions the characters of some very important people within the club it is very relevant.

 

[Creaky]

I think that TB had every right to want to be Chairman, he had been bailing out DK for years. A man who has put +£100 Million of his own money into building the stadium who has been largely involved with running the club for a long time, when It would not have been built without - that is a fact, as the financial crisis meant the banks were never going to lend us the necessary money. At the time of a new era for the club it was the right movement for him to come out of the shadows as it were.

So should Swansea Council appoint the manager of Swansea FC - after all they built the Liberty Stadium and let the club play there rent free in the same way as Community Stadium Limited built and own the Amex and let BHAFC play there rent free?

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Interesting thoughts. But I think Bloom/Barber and their fellow owners/CEOs at other football clubs are exactly the people creating the modern game - they should get credit or be criticised for that, depending on whether you agree with the trend.

But is there any other option, apart from taking the AFC Wimbledon/FC United of Manchester route? Swansea maybe, with their 20% ownership by their supporters' trust? The Portsmouth experiment will also be worth watching ...

 

[symyjym]

Good from you to defend DK even though it appears your views on the Poyet sacking don't quite accord

What is the context to what you are referring to?

 

[dejavuatbtn]

I hate these I'm superior to you type of posts because I was there, Maybe some people with opinions now were not even old enough to get involved in things before? It's a bit like old people moaning at you for not knowing what it was like during the war and it leaves you thinking you should be apologising for not being born earlier.

You should count yourself lucky if you didn't have to go through a lot of the shit that DK, with others, led us out of. If you weren't there you can still have an opinion, but it just might not be as credible as those who were. Those who weren't young enough should offer some gratitude to DK that they still have a team to support.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Rubbish. When you've written a book which questions the characters of some very important people within the club it is very relevant.

Well, he questions Martin Perry's behaviour over the Tony Bloom takeover. But in the acknowledgements he calls him a "trusted lieutenant." Perhaps it's because he trusted him that he felt let down that one time. Being critical of one thing someone does is hardly questioning their character.

 

[London Irish]

Rubbish. When you've written a book which questions the characters of some very important people within the club it is very relevant.

Does he really do that? He lays out honestly his disagreements with "the very important people" and his own feelings about how those disagreements impacted his own state of mind, disappointment, feeling let down etc. But I haven't seen anything where he damns the character of those people, except of course the real villains he rescued us from.

 

[Hungry Joe]

Those who weren't young enough should offer some gratitude to DK that they still have a team to support.

Do you mean 'old enough'? It's these kind of views that are the problem. Of course we all owe Dick massive gratitude, apart from the obvious 'comedy' posts I can't see any that deny that. Dick absolutely deserves to be Life President, absolutely deserves a bar named after him, absolutely deserves the overused term of Brighton legend. But for me he has let himself down with this book and opened a can of worms at a time when we are just getting over the bad publicity of the Poyet end. In my opinion he's shown a lack of class, especially the Brutus dig at Perry, baffling.

 

[ewe2]

Do we now have 2 camps ? 2 powerful egos ! If we do then i am afraid the "Club " and us the fans will suffer....!!!!!

 

[Hungry Joe]

Does he really do that?

To me yes, he has. However, I accept that my reading of the comments is coloured by my personal experience.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Do we now have 2 camps ? 2 powerful egos ! If we do then i am afraid the "Club " and us the fans will suffer....!!!!!

Hungry Joe and London Irish?

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Is Martin Perry upset with Dick Knight. Anyone know?

 

[drew]

That's one way of looking at it. But it ignores the question of what exactly does the Chairman of a football club do.

Stuff like building up a relationship with the big names in the game, realising that there's more to running a football club than paying for the stadium, establishing a rapport with the fans ...

DK had genuine concerns about TB's inexperience in these matters and felt that a DK/TB "double act" would have been a better way to go about it - leading in time to TB taking over as Chairman.

TBs business empire would appear to be much bigger than DKs. I'm sure he didn't get where he is without being able to judge others, make alliances where necessary etc etc. After all, the other chairman he would be dealing with are other business men too.

You could say Tony Bloom had more experience than Dick Tight did when he took over seeing as Harry & Ray Bloom were on the board for years and for Tight to say he needed to teach Tony Bloom to me would have been f**king insulting

Have to agree with this.

The "twelve years" remark rather conveniently ignores the fact that the stadium plans were held up by planning inquiries, which delayed what might reasonably have been expected to take a much shorter time - and been sorted before the global economic downturn. I'm not sure any member of the Bloom family could have secured planning approval any sooner than DK - and his army of able helpers, which includes Attila, his Lordship, Lady Bracknell and others - did.

No, I'm just making the point that DK was the only man who could have saved the club as he was the only one who could connect with the fans with his social marketing and entrepreneurial skills, not forgetting that he was also the only one who had the balls to take it on.

The club needed the fans and the fans needed a spokesman and leader, DK was that man and he had the charisma a determination to see the project through.

He made the right decision to bring TB in, and I am also saying that we need to remember that he did all the hard work.

That is a very bold statement. DK galvanised a syndicate to save the club and did an exceptional job in doing so but if he hadn't been around who knows who else might have stepped up to the mark.

Correct me if I am wrong; the Goldstone Groundsite was sold twice in a matter of months, originally for £9m and then a few months later changed hands again for £18m?

Sold for about £7.9 and about a year later when the site was cleared and possible ground works started it went for about £24m. Having said that it was a disappointing deal from the clubs perspective (and by club, I don't mean the board at the time).

I for one am in favour of fans owning nominal shares because it gives a formal position to those who wish to hold the Club accountable to their most important stakeholders ie the fans. This is a perfectly healthy, democratic process that most firms and third sector entities are comfortable with. It is not about the number of shares or their value (which bean counters here are inevitably obsessed with). Given the history here, and the quasi-monopoly position any football club has over its supporters, it is the least we should expect.


The 2nd paragraph above is one view of history. My memory recalls it from a different angle. Knight, Perry, Chapman and Pinnock kept the Club afloat through the most impossible financial straitjacket that was Withdean and the need to fund an extortionate Planning campaign. How they persuaded people like Norman Cook to pay £1m for a parking space to keep the Club going. The imaginative wheeling and dealing and campaigning that delivered 3 promotions against the odds and (finally) the Stadium permission.

It is absolutely true that without Tony Bloom's money the Stadium would not have been built, at least not to the same superb spec. And we are all in his debt for this. But his timing was that of the Lizard who knew when to move, and it was 10 years after he was following the Albion from the back of away Director's boxes spending the whole 90 minutes gambling on his phone. It is too simple to say he let Knight et al do all the hard work. My take is just that it is less black and white than most on here portray it. As ever.

PG

But wasn't TBs money keeping the club afloat long before he became chairman?

Of running a football club - none.

Of running people-oriented businesses, in need of good communication, strategies and planning - about 30 years' experience.

Tony has sound business acumen of course, but it's not in the same realm. However, together, him and Dick could have been dynamite.

I doubt you can build up a multi million pound business without being astute at dealing with people at the appropriate level.


This whole business stinks of sour grapes. Bloom is perfectly entitled to be chairman from the time he injected the cash for the stadium. If DK was concerned then why not agree to be his vice chairman however, if he had the audacity to suggest he could mentor the young apprentice, I suspect the young apprentice would take offence and probably justifiably. The attack on MP is well below the belt and if the petty mindedness continues you can envisage a time when DK gets banned from the club altogether which would be a desperately sad way to end his association with the club. I would add that you cannot compare DK as a life president to the sorry excuse for one which is (sorry, was) Ken Bates.