Is it time for Dick Knight to go ?

[algie]

Thats technically not true. DK has not put any significant money in the club for several years. The other directors have shelved out their cash.

And to answer the other question, I am told by someone who works closely to the Blooms that someone else on the current board has provisionally agreed to take over as Chairman when DK feels the time is right. So please don't keep suggesting DK is the only answer. Now that Falmer is coming, there will be no shortage of people wanting the job.

Thats technically not true. DK has not put any significant money in the club for several years. The other directors have shelved out their cash.

No but he has contributed in other ways which have helped to keep the club stable.
There's no doubt he has put a lot of energy into other matters.

 

[Nemesis]

I don't wake up DTES like i use to in the dark days shitting myself that the club i love and had such great times could be no more.I really thought there was a point when this was going to happen.I remember the deadline day to pay that tax bill, worried stiff all morning and suddenly Leeds saved my and your club.
All through that period the future of the club was in my mind.Going to work,shopping etc it was there nagging at my thoughts.
I don't get that anymore.

Thank you Dick Knight

Bloody hell-I echo those sentiments. Guess we're on the same side after all...

 

[Giraffe]

There's no doubt he has put a lot of energy into other matters.

For some reason that put a horrid image involving Liz Costa into my mind!! I think it's time to call it a night!!

Opinions are opinions. It's mine that Dick would be better moving to the President role before fans turn on him than after which would really be a disgrace. But I also respect the view that he deserves to do as he wishes for all he has done in the past. I don't agree with this view and sometimes think the vociferous way he is defended actually spreads the problem. A man that can do no wrong is a dangerous man indeed. However we're all Albion fans, and football is what we care about, and the game wouldn't be the same if all opinions were the same. Night night one and all.

Boxing Day here we come. Albion 6 Colchester 0 (two Hammond own goals, a cameo sub appearance from Adams in the last minute, when after being held aloft by Virgo he nods in the sixth!! Marvellous scenes!)

 

[algie]

Bloody hell-I echo those sentiments. Guess we're on the same side after all...

No probs mate

 

[BensGrandad]

obviously not.

at the end of teh day, he will have delivered Falmer...that is the bottom line.

Personally I would suggest that the moment the first game is played, he should step aside and be made life president with a huge thanks and a fond goodbye

The correct and sensible suggestion

 

[Acker79]

What would you want from this replacement? The only thing I can think you are (or anyone else is) asking for is for someone with all DK's plus points but also a lot more money.

Not ONE SINGLE PERSON has actually answered the question about what they'd want from a new chairman. Never mind naming the bugger, some basic criteria would be good. What would this "ideal candidate" have - now, looking to the future - that DK doesn't?

Money would be nice, but I don't see him as the money man.

I want a chairman who doesn't chase off potential players because he wants to preserve a reputation as a tough negotiator. I don't want a chairman who spends more than we can afford, but, for example, if we can afford to pay a potential player £550 a week, would like to pay him £500, we shouldn't stubbornly refuse to pay the £550 just because the chairman wants to prove himself a tough negotiator or call the player's bluff.

I also want a chairman who doesn't let his disdain of agents get in the way of doing a good deal.

I want a chairman who doesn't sign players based on family contributions.

I want a chairman who doesn't let his ego make him fire perfectly respectable managers

A chairman who doesn't look at us having a division average attendance and using that as motivation to fire a respectably successful manager and bring in an old legend to pop the attendance.

I want a chairman who doesn't fire a respectably successful manager because said manager supported a player.

I want a chairman who doesn't palm off unpopular decisions to the board, then runs around the media claiming responsibility for good decisions (see McGhee, Retaining services and firing)

I want a chairman who, if he has a background in advertising, can actually sell the club to potential players. (I don't mean trade it, I mean convince them that Brighton is "the place to be" for them. Both the younger players who would like the active city life and the potential to be in on the ground level of a team in transition to greatness, new stadium, etc and to the older players who can have the peace and quiet of hove, and have a role as a leader in the team, giving back to football, helping develop some excellent young prospects, with the support of the club as they perhaps start going for their coaching badges, etc).

I want a more open chairman who gives a good reason for firing a manager who has a very (relatively) successful season, and even claims he would have fired him if we got promoted.

I want a chairman who is driven to continually prove he deserves the props he gets and not rely on one thing he did (with the help of a lot of people) 12 years ago.


I know Dick Knight probably fits some of these. But there are also a lot of rumours about Knight and the way he works. And what I want from a chairman is not to be he sort that does the things he is rumoured to do. You want to know what I want from a chairman, that is it. Or at least some of it. Again, not saying some of it doesn't fit him.

 

[Giraffe]

Money would be nice, but I don't see him as the money man.

I want a chairman who doesn't chase off potential players because he wants to preserve a reputation as a tough negotiator. I don't want a chairman who spends more than we can afford, but, for example, if we can afford to pay a potential player £550 a week, would like to pay him £500, we shouldn't stubbornly refuse to pay the £550 just because the chairman wants to prove himself a tough negotiator or call the player's bluff.

I also want a chairman who doesn't let his disdain of agents get in the way of doing a good deal.

I want a chairman who doesn't sign players based on family contributions.

I want a chairman who doesn't let his ego make him fire perfectly respectable managers

A chairman who doesn't look at us having a division average attendance and using that as motivation to fire a respectably successful manager and bring in an old legend to pop the attendance.

I want a chairman who doesn't fire a respectably successful manager because said manager supported a player.

I want a chairman who doesn't palm off unpopular decisions to the board, then runs around the media claiming responsibility for good decisions (see McGhee, Retaining services and firing)

I want a chairman who, if he has a background in advertising, can actually sell the club to potential players. (I don't mean trade it, I mean convince them that Brighton is "the place to be" for them. Both the younger players who would like the active city life and the potential to be in on the ground level of a team in transition to greatness, new stadium, etc and to the older players who can have the peace and quiet of hove, and have a role as a leader in the team, giving back to football, helping develop some excellent young prospects, with the support of the club as they perhaps start going for their coaching badges, etc).

I want a more open chairman who gives a good reason for firing a manager who has a very (relatively) successful season, and even claims he would have fired him if we got promoted.

I want a chairman who is driven to continually prove he deserves the props he gets and not rely on one thing he did (with the help of a lot of people) 12 years ago.


I know Dick Knight probably fits some of these. But there are also a lot of rumours about Knight and the way he works. And what I want from a chairman is not to be he sort that does the things he is rumoured to do. You want to know what I want from a chairman, that is it. Or at least some of it. Again, not saying some of it doesn't fit him.

 

[Acker79]

he acts as a voice for the whole board, he does not make all the decisions on his own as some would believe.

One of those people would be Dick Knight himself. A couple of summers ago it was "the board's" (unpopular) decision to keep McGhee. The following October it was Dick Knight on Sky sports talking about how he personally made the decision, it was his choice, he listened to the fans and he made the(very popular decision) to get rid of McGhee.

When Knight acts like he makes decisions, and is more than just a voice for the board, you can't blame the fans for treating him as a decision maker, too.

 

[Ernest]

Money would be nice, but I don't see him as the money man.

I want a chairman who doesn't chase off potential players because he wants to preserve a reputation as a tough negotiator. I don't want a chairman who spends more than we can afford, but, for example, if we can afford to pay a potential player £550 a week, would like to pay him £500, we shouldn't stubbornly refuse to pay the £550 just because the chairman wants to prove himself a tough negotiator or call the player's bluff.

I also want a chairman who doesn't let his disdain of agents get in the way of doing a good deal.

I want a chairman who doesn't sign players based on family contributions.

I want a chairman who doesn't let his ego make him fire perfectly respectable managers

A chairman who doesn't look at us having a division average attendance and using that as motivation to fire a respectably successful manager and bring in an old legend to pop the attendance.

I want a chairman who doesn't fire a respectably successful manager because said manager supported a player.

I want a chairman who doesn't palm off unpopular decisions to the board, then runs around the media claiming responsibility for good decisions (see McGhee, Retaining services and firing)

I want a chairman who, if he has a background in advertising, can actually sell the club to potential players. (I don't mean trade it, I mean convince them that Brighton is "the place to be" for them. Both the younger players who would like the active city life and the potential to be in on the ground level of a team in transition to greatness, new stadium, etc and to the older players who can have the peace and quiet of hove, and have a role as a leader in the team, giving back to football, helping develop some excellent young prospects, with the support of the club as they perhaps start going for their coaching badges, etc).

I want a more open chairman who gives a good reason for firing a manager who has a very (relatively) successful season, and even claims he would have fired him if we got promoted.

I want a chairman who is driven to continually prove he deserves the props he gets and not rely on one thing he did (with the help of a lot of people) 12 years ago.


I know Dick Knight probably fits some of these. But there are also a lot of rumours about Knight and the way he works. And what I want from a chairman is not to be he sort that does the things he is rumoured to do. You want to know what I want from a chairman, that is it. Or at least some of it. Again, not saying some of it doesn't fit him.

I hope the Knight lickers respond to this

 

[clippedgull]

Anyone who wants Knight out are absolute morons.Nothing else to say.Yes he has made mistakes but doesn't warrant him going.I hope he remains chairman untill his last breath.Unless of course he decides to step aside for a richer man to take control.

+1

 

[clippedgull]

I want a more open chairman who gives a good reason for firing a manager who has a very (relatively) successful season, and even claims he would have fired him if we got promoted.

That's all well and good, but it might have been a personal matter that DW didn't want the world to know about, and I think we all have to respect that.

 

[bhaexpress]

Every time this subject comes up one thing is overlooked. With no tangible assets it's hardly likely a Simon Jordon or a rich Arab will step in. Who would take over ?

 

[clippedgull]

Every time this subject comes up one thing is overlooked. With no tangible assets it's hardly likely a Simon Jordon or a rich Arab will step in. Who would take over ?

Agree. Although it wouldn't surprise me if David Gold came back into the picture as Falmer nears completion. although I would still like DK to have a senior role within the club.

 

[Ernest]

Every time this subject comes up one thing is overlooked. With no tangible assets it's hardly likely a Simon Jordon or a rich Arab will step in. Who would take over ?

It's not asking about a takeover if Dick Tight died today would the club fold or would someone already involved step up and take over ?

 

[bhaexpress]

It's not asking about a takeover if Dick Tight died today would the club fold or would someone already involved step up and take over ?

Who knows ? Let's face it there's been no attempts to oust him has there ? When we are in Falmer then yes it could be rather different but for all his faults there are plenty of far bigger knobs as chairmen throughout the league.

 

[DTES]

I know Dick Knight probably fits some of these. But there are also a lot of rumours about Knight and the way he works. And what I want from a chairman is not to be he sort that does the things he is rumoured to do. You want to know what I want from a chairman, that is it. Or at least some of it. Again, not saying some of it doesn't fit him.

Yawn.

I'd actually read all of this, Ernest, and I was about to go through line-by-line stating how there's no evidence for any of them, but I don't need to - Acker has himself admitted they're all rumour.

I can, however, abbreviate your post into one short requirement:

You are looking for a man who can run a football club that has thousands of fans, about whom not one single rumour will start after he makes a decision that one of said fans disagrees with.

When you come back from bloody Cuckooland, think about how utterly ridiculous that is, and sit quietly in the corner.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I am told by someone who works closely to the Blooms that someone else on the current board has provisionally agreed to take over as Chairman when DK feels the time is right. So please don't keep suggesting DK is the only answer. Now that Falmer is coming, there will be no shortage of people wanting the job.

The Chairman is a member of the Board of Directors. So who would replace him?

This is the choice:-

Ray Bloom, Derek Chapman, Martin Perry, Robert Comer.

 

[The Large One]

I know Dick Knight probably fits some of these. But there are also a lot of rumours about Knight and the way he works. And what I want from a chairman is not to be he sort that does the things he is rumoured to do. You want to know what I want from a chairman, that is it. Or at least some of it. Again, not saying some of it doesn't fit him.

So the nature of your wish list is based on rumour?

 

[The Large One]

The Chairman is a member of the Board of Directors. So who would replace him?

This is the choice:-

Ray Bloom, Derek Chapman, Martin Perry, Robert Comer.

You can strike out the middle two for a start.

Not convinced Ray Bloom wants the job, and I'm not sure, to be honest, who Robert Comer is. Is he not the financial chappie working with the Falmer team?

 

[cjd]

You can strike out the middle two for a start.

Not convinced Ray Bloom wants the job, and I'm not sure, to be honest, who Robert Comer is. Is he not the financial chappie working with the Falmer team?

Yes...Robert Comer is the financial director.