SCR Phone In Special

[BigGully]

Have you any evidence for any of your allegations? Just wondering, seeing as you seem to be in the know an' all. I'm interested to learn of where all these snippets have come from.

Accept it if you want or dismiss it if you wish.

 

[The Large One]

Is the wrong answer .....

You talk utter bollocks most of the time and your pretentious little retort there does you no favours whatsoever.

You have absolutely no qualification I doubt on either playing the game or being remotely close to anyone that actually might know what goes on within the club, something that you find extremely irksome.

Dean Hammond was not fancied by Knight, Knights own personal view of the player blurred any likely agreement.

Wilkins did think Hammond was worth hanging on to and that is one of many clashes that Wilkins had to fight with Knight, there was only going to be one winner, Chairman tend not to sack themselves.

It was never really a problem with salaries and Wilkins only man-management weaknesses was to try to address any of Knights meddling in playing affairs.

Reid's little outburst was a prelude to Wilkins sacking, it was trying to sow a seed of doubt within the fanbase before the unreasonable sacking on the Thursday.

I am told Reid is a close family friend of the Knights. It does make you think !

It cannot be right for any individual to smear any other individuals without due cause, even in the name of BHA.

That must be unacceptable and counter productive in the longer term.

You watch what might happen to El-Abd, I hope that Adams fancies him because I am told Knight is also not a fan of his either.

We will see how this one is played out, but lets see if Knight has a personal dig at him too, should he leave.

And in the wrong corner... BIG GULLY.

Did you find my answer 'pretentious'? You must have a slim grasp on English language then. I thought it was fairly basic and straightforward.

Actually, in this instance, I do have some evidence, including some from the Chairman himself, and some from Mr Wilkins, not that I am going to share it with anyone who aligns themselves with bhadeb, although Lord B and y2Dave, I think you'll find, already have told the true story. In other words, the decision to sack Dean was effectively taken in January.

 

[BigGully]

Well i thought Knight was a fan of El-Abd, unless he lied to everyone last match of the season when he announced that he felt that he deserved player of the season, or this that just a good joke?

I am sure you might find some favourable comments about Wilkins managerial skills too by Knight a week or two ago.

 

[BigGully]

And in the wrong corner... BIG GULLY.

Did you find my answer 'pretentious'? You must have a slim grasp on English language then. I thought it was fairly basic and straightforward.

Actually, in this instance, I do have some evidence, including some from the Chairman himself, and some from Mr Wilkins, not that I am going to share it with anyone who aligns themselves with bhadeb, although Lord B and y2Dave, I think you'll find, already have told the true story.

Evidence of what ?

That Knight wanted Hammond and Wilkins backed that view up ??

Or are we talking something else ?

I dont need to know your source, but what stance are we talking about ?

 

[The Large One]

Evidence of what ?

That Knight wanted Hammond and Wilkins backed that view up ??

Or are we talking something else ?

I dont need to know your source, but what stance are we talking about ?

Evidence of what Wilkins and Knight think/thought of Hammond. Obviously they were different conversations at different times, but Wilkins obviously rated Hammond, as did Knight. Really.

To say that, before the contract negotiations started, Knight didn't want Hammond at the club is just not true. Afterwards, I suspect there was a great deal more ambivalence - but not before.

Go back a couple of pages, and you'll find the nub of what Wilkins' dismissal is about, courtesy of Lord Bracknell.

 

[bhadeb]

I think one of Dicks 'ratings of Hammond' was go or rot in the reserves

 

[BigGully]

Evidence of what Wilkins and Knight think/thought of Hammond. Obviously they were different conversations at different times, but Wilkins obviously rated Hammond, as did Knight. Really.

To say that, before the contract negotiations started, Knight didn't want Hammond at the club is just not true. Afterwards, I suspect there was a great deal more ambivalence - but not before.

Go back a couple of pages, and you'll find the nub of what Wilkins' dismissal is about, courtesy of Lord Bracknell.

I am going to have to say that wasnt really true what Knight told you.

As I understand it, Knight was not a big fan and was pretty non plussed on securing an agreement.

The negotiations had to be jump started by Wilkins as it would be usual for Hammond's contractual situation to be dealt with earlier.

Throughout negotiations there didnt seem any urgency in securing a deal, mirroring Knights ambivilance and indicated a likely impasse.

Although I dont know Hammond I have been told that he is a great lad and really didnt want to move from Brighton, Knights later character assassination of him was shameful.

This seems a personality trait that I think is unfair and counter productive.

It leads that Reids piece was also contrived to smear Wilkins before Adams imminent appointment.

 

[bhadeb]

Is the right answer.

thanks Big Gully - some people see it all/know it for the truth

 

[BigGully]

I think one of Dicks 'ratings of Hammond' was go or rot in the reserves

Hammond was told in no uncertain terms that if he didnt go to Colchester he would never play for the first team.

To be honest that was one of Knights brinkmanships successes.

If Knight was sure that Hammond would leave soon after fro free I can understand this stance, I am just surprised that Hammond fell for it.

 

[Nemesis]

Accept it if you want or dismiss it if you wish.

I normally form my own opinions, based on what is presented to me. So far you've made allegations with absolutely nothing to back them up. A little evidence that what you're saying is FACT would go a long way to convincing everybody. No evidence and it's merely speculation. Considering your position (very anti-Dick Knight) it would be easy to suspect you of shit stirring or sour grapes unless you can back up your allegations.

 

[Nemesis]

thanks Big Gully - some people see it all/know it for the truth

We're still waiting for your 'Truth'. Or had you forgotten to post it?

 

[The Large One]

I am going to have to say that wasnt really true what Knight told you.

As I understand it, Knight was not a big fan and was pretty non plussed on securing an agreement.

The negotiations had to be jump started by Wilkins as it would be usual for Hammond's contractual situation to be dealt with earlier.

Throughout negotiations there didnt seem any urgency in securing a deal, mirroring Knights ambivilance and indicated a likely impasse.

Although I dont know Hammond I have been told that he is a great lad and really didnt want to move from Brighton, Knights later character assassination of him was shameful.

This seems a personality trait that I think is unfair and counter productive.

It leads that Reids piece was also contrived to smear Wilkins before Adams imminent appointment.

You see, you're convinced that Dick goes around telling lies. I wish you were there when Dick told me all these lies about Hammond, and put him straight about what he was really thinking about him. I am sure he would really felt relieved to have been able to tell you the 'truth', and get it off his chest once and for all. This is stuff, of course, from BEFORE the contract negotiations started.

If Dick didn't rate Hammond, he would have said that he didn't want him at the club. Whether I (or whoever he'd have told it to) would relay that message on here is another matter. Dick only said he didn't want Hammond at the club AFTER it became apparent he wasn't going to sign, and therefore needed some money in a transfer fee, rather than letting him go for nothing at the end of the season.

There is no doubt that Hammond is a lovely lad, but in this instance, it's irrelevant. Reid's piece is also irrelevant.

Read Harty's 'Lord B = Nostradamus' thread to know how long the decision had been brewing for.

 

[bhadeb]

Exactly Dean tries to do the job he is given (manage the team) but he dosen't do what Chairman Dick wants so he sacks him and quite cleary has let half the seagulls party know about it - trully proffesional !! still that probably why we have heard much from yorkie and ned

 

[BigGully]

I normally form my own opinions, based on what is presented to me. So far you've made allegations with absolutely nothing to back them up. A little evidence that what you're saying is FACT would go a long way to convincing everybody. No evidence and it's merely speculation. Considering your position (very anti-Dick Knight) it would be easy to suspect you of shit stirring or sour grapes unless you can back up your allegations.

Sorry, but I have no particular agenda here and I cannot offer names.

I am not particularly anti DK really, although being informed of some of his actions in relation to the footballing side of things does make me disappointed and frustrated to how some people are perceived by those actions.

I am sure in the other 95% of his life he is a very nice man and I cant comment on most of the other things that he might bring to the club.

But I am interested in the footballing side of things and believe until this is wrestled away from DK we are likely never realise our true footballing potential, which thankfully is really what any club is truely about.

 

[The Large One]

Sorry, but I have no particular agenda here and I cannot offer names.

I am not particularly anti DK really, although being informed of some of his actions in relation to the footballing side of things does make me disappointed and frustrated to how some people are perceived by those actions.

I am sure in the other 95% of his life he is a very nice man and I cant comment on most of the other things that he might bring to the club.

But I am interested in the footballing side of things and believe until this is wrestled away from DK we are likely never realise our true footballing potential, which thankfully is really what any club is truely about.

What side of the footballing things? Picking the team? Buying players without the manager's consent?

 

[Old Greg]

I am not particularly anti DK really,

PAH!

 

[BigGully]

You see, you're convinced that Dick goes around telling lies. I wish you were there when Dick told me all these lies about Hammond, and put him straight about what he was really thinking about him. I am sure he would really felt relieved to have been able to tell you the 'truth', and get it off his chest once and for all. This is stuff, of course, from BEFORE the contract negotiations started.

If Dick didn't rate Hammond, he would have said that he didn't want him at the club. Whether I (or whoever he'd have told it to) would relay that message on here is another matter. Dick only said he didn't want Hammond at the club AFTER it became apparent he wasn't going to sign, and therefore needed some money in a transfer fee, rather than letting him go for nothing at the end of the season.

There is no doubt that Hammond is a lovely lad, but in this instance, it's irrelevant. Reid's piece is also irrelevant.

Read Harty's 'Lord B = Nostradamus' thread to know how long the decision had been brewing for.

But what you are told depends on your personal relationship with that person.

If someone close to the club like DK made a comment to me it would be kinda irrelevant, because he would give the club line.

If I slid up to Dick Knight last week and asked his feelings of Wilkins managerial ability he would of said that he did a great job and we are happy blah, blah, blah.

If I was a personal friend, family member or trusted confidant then of course the information would of been clearly different.

 

[BigGully]

What side of the footballing things? Picking the team? Buying players without the manager's consent?

I am interested on the football successes of BHA and there is a general consensus that a Chairman that meddles and effects team players and morale adversedly effects that success.

I think the dynamic of some on here is to get a new stadium and maybe were not all totally focused on what actually matters, our football team.

 

[Waterhall Wizard]

Apologies Frutos......................

Coming back to the thread:

WHERE'S MY APOLOGY HARTY? When is Radio Snooze going to give a telephone number for people from abroad to phone in as promised over a month ago? How is Harry the Pimp supposed to interrupt his busy schedule of looking after his business interests in Tenerife to call your show, when he hasn't got a bloody telephone number?

 

[Nemesis]

I am interested on the football successes of BHA and there is a general consensus that a Chairman that meddles and effects team players and morale adversedly effects that success.

I think the dynamic of some on here is to get a new stadium and maybe were not all totally focused on what actually matters, our football team.

So the new stadium has no impact on our football team? The delays, the huge outpouring of cash over the years? The uncertainty? The inability to attract better players? I'm glad the people that matter remained focused on getting this frigging stadium approved and under-way without spending millions that we didn't/don't have.

As for your comment about a general consensus about a meddling chairman seems to be about 4 of you. hardly a general consensus. If DK was the meddler that you claim, why the hell would Adams come back? He nearly signed for Walsall but came to The Albion when it was made known to him that he was wanted. Hardly likely to happen if the chairman continually meddles is it? Especially knowing Micky Adams.