[Albion] McGhee 99% likely to leave by end of week!

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

And because he has invested so much money he probably thinks that he can (quite rightly) have a say in who he wants to be the football manager?

 

[Uncle Buck]

And because he has invested so much money he probably thinks that he can (quite rightly) have a say in who he wants to be the football manager?

Why?

We have been told that we have the best man for the job...

 

[Rougvie]

Here's a far better remedy - why doesn't he just say he is not going to commercially benefit from the building of the stadium?

Why should he, he has been dragged into a personal vendetta between the factions of the board that wanted McGhee out and the golfing buddies that want McGhee to stay.

None of this is about Falmer, YOU are the only one to sugest Derek Chapman is in it for the contracts, that must explain why he was putting money in before anyone had even THOUGHT of Falmer.

Did he have a f***ing Crystal Ball ?

I can accept you allagience to McGhee, you are entitled to that, but all you have done today is try to make the sorry few followers you have believe that Derek Chapman is somehow in it for a fast buck, my advice is to check your FACTS on what that man has contributed to the club in his lifetime, you wont tho, because you are an absolute CLOWN.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Why?

We have been told that we have the best man for the job...

I know thats what we have been TOLD but I for one dont believe it!!!

 

[Lord Bracknell]

But this aint a power struggle you plank

But, if you believe the Argus, it clearly is.

The question that's in my mind is:- why does Naylor want us to believe that there's a power struggle going on?

Is he simply acting as a front for McGhee (who prefers to see himself as a victim of board room wrangles, rather than a manager who simply failed to deliver what the board expected)?

Or is Naylor being wound up by someone else?



I personally think that it's simply McGhee who is behind today's story. I hope so, anyway.

But I can understand how others might be looking for something rather more murky.

 

[Uncle Buck]

QUOTE]Originally posted by London Irish
Here's a far better remedy - why doesn't he just say he is not going to commercially benefit from the building of the stadium?

Why should he, he has been dragged into a personal vendetta between the factions of the board that wanted McGhee out and the golfing buddies that want McGhee to stay.

None of this is about Falmer, YOU are the only one to sugest Derek Chapman is in it for the contracts, that must explain why he was putting money in before anyone had even THOUGHT of Falmer.

Did he have a f***ing Crystal Ball ?

I can accept you allagience to McGhee, you are entitled to that, but all you have done today is try to make the sorry few followers you have believe that Derek Chapman is somehow in it for a fast buck, my advice is to check your FACTS on what that man has contributed to the club in his lifetime, you wont tho, because you are an absolute CLOWN. [/QUOTE]

That sort of makes sense.

 

[sully]

LI seems to me to make some valid points, any potential conflict of interests could have the power to scupper us I would guess, however, as I understand it, you cant just appoint a contractor, you need to have tendered to at least 4 contractors by European Law, of course, you could then still just appoint your favourite anyway, I dont know enough about this process to be sure though. Does anyone else?

I think you're wrong here.

EU rules do not apply to private companies, but for publicly funded contracts (Government, Local Authority, etc).

There are no rules that say a private company has to tender for anything. They can waste their money however they please as they are answerable to their shareholders, not the public.

However, as has been stated, Adenstar are not big enough or experienced enough to take on the entire contract for the stadium. There is every chance that they will be considered for the groundworks and substructure works, though.

McAlpines are also not a certainty for the main contract, either, though their competition seems to be bankrupting themselves on failed (financially) projects at an alarming rate.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

But, if you believe the Argus, it clearly is.

The question that's in my mind is:- why does the Naylor want us to believe that there's a power struggle going on?

Probably because it sells (more) newspapers than MM is sacked/resigns/replaced?

Nothing like a bit of sensationalism to get the blood flowing!!!

I would venture that the board thought we would stay up this season - by the skin of our teeth but yes that we would. This was probably shortsighted but Crewe and Rotherham and Gillingham and Grimsby did manage to hang on for at least 2 or 3 seasons before they dropped back again. By this point hopefully Falmer would have started to have been built so there would be lots of positivity about the place as people could see that it was happening - thus avoiding the stadium, facilities argument.

 

[blockhseagull]

But, if you believe the Argus, it clearly is.

The question that's in my mind is:- why does the Naylor want us to believe that there's a power struggle going on?

Is he simply acting as a front for McGhee (who prefers to see himself as a victim of board room wrangles, rather than a manager who simply failed to deliver what the board expected)?

Or is Naylor being wound up by someone else?



I personally think that it's simply McGhee who is behind today's story. I hope so, anyway.

But I can understand how others might be looking for something rather more murky.

I think you are spot on, it has been said that MM and Naylor are buddies and after the MM is the man for the job article by Naylor this looks like another piece to make it look like MM is a victim or the fall guy for something more sinister.

In my opinion it is as simple as DK and MP want MM and the new investor doesn't, they will have talks and sort it out simple as that

 

[Lord Bracknell]

EU rules do not apply to private companies, but for publicly funded contracts (Government, Local Authority, etc).

There are no rules that say a private company has to tender for anything. They can waste their money however they please as they are answerable to their shareholders, not the public.

There's enough public funding going into the Falmer project (to say nothing of the City Council's interest as landowner of the whole site - including the bit that's in Lewes District) for EU tendering rules to kick in.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

In my opinion it is as simple as DK and MP want MM and the new investor doesn't, they will have talks and sort it out simple as that

And it may be that DK has finally lost his faith in McGhee.

I wouldn't blame him, particularly since MM is now clearly in bed with Naylor, making trouble.

 

[sully]

There's enough public funding going into the Falmer project (to say nothing of the City Council's interest as landowner of the whole site - including the bit that's in Lewes District) for EU tendering rules to kick in.

Obviously.

However, as has been said, that doesn't remove your mates from the tender list, you just end up with some big foreign names angling for it, too.

Having had to advertise projects in the EU Journal in the past, it's amazing how many companies waste their resources responding to adverts for projects that they are simply not qualified to undertake. It's where I first heard of Multiplex, too. The stadium specialists thought they could build a hospital!

 

[Dave the OAP]

...........and DK must have been as embarrased on Sunday as we all were.

 

[Hampden Park]

great read

 

[sir danny cullip]

And it may be that DK has finally lost his faith in McGhee.

I wouldn't blame him, particularly since MM is now clearly in bed with Naylor, making trouble.

So basically LB to sum up your opinion on the whole thing, you think that MM and Naylor are in this together and published this story to provide a smokescreen to cover the real reasons MM will eventually loose his job and blame it on a boardroom struggle?

 

[Basil Fawlty]

...........and DK must have been as embarrased on Sunday as we all were.

Espically as it was his 68th birthday.

 

[nomad_seagull]

The same argument can be used against Falmer we would never get sufficient people in to repay the mortgage.


We will never, except for big cup games, get a crowd of 22000 toa Brighton hiome game and if we are looking towards the Premiership that is too small, we couldn't survive on those gates at either the top of the Championship or the Premiership if we did get them. 15,000 is more than sufficient for us as a Div 1/Championship mediocre side.

The last season that our average home gate exceeded 10,000 was 1984/85 some 20 years ago and prior to Archer & Bellotti.

I dont believe this for a minute.

Sure with all the problems this club has had over the past few years it will take time to build up crowds when we have the capacity, but the fact that there is demand really cant be argued with.

Look at Reading, in a short time scale they have gone from Elm Park and crowds of 6,000 to a Premiership team selling out 24,000 stadium week in week out.

THe future of BHA is Falmer

 

[Dave the OAP]

great read

he wasn't that great on Sunday

 

[Icy Gull]

And it may be that DK has finally lost his faith in McGhee.

I wouldn't blame him, particularly since MM is now clearly in bed with Naylor, making trouble.

Is this you passing an opinion or do you have, as I believe you may, inside information that you are not quite divulging?

 

[Basil Fawlty]

I dont believe this for a minute.

Sure with all the problems this club has had over the past few years it will take time to build up crowds when we have the capacity, but the fact that there is demand really cant be argued with.

Look at Reading, in a short time scale they have gone from Elm Park and crowds of 6,000 to a Premiership team selling out 24,000 stadium week in week out.

THe future of BHA is Falmer

You fallen for his wind-up I'm affraid.