Wilkins - What really went on...

[Deportivo Seagull]

The same reason why Knight couldnt stop the club appointing him in the first place and why he couldn't sack him in January ..... maybe he doesnt hold the power within the Boardroom.

Totally agree, trouble is no one on here seems to think this is the case

 

[The Large One]

If Wilkins was always goin to be sacked, you put in his successor as soon as you can.

What advantage was there leaving Wilkins in charge planning next years playing staff and indeed releasing and retaining players without any input from a new manager ?

There is also the fairness to Wilkins himself.

But given the bigger picture, and bearing in mind the decision to get rid was taken in January/February, it would have been more destructive to get rid there and then, especially as we were doing quite well.

I don't know at what point Adams was lined up as replacement, but I think the club removed Dean at the first pertinent opportunity.

I'm GUESSING that Micky wasn't lined up until the time of Wilkins' player contract decisions.

 

[The Large One]

The same reason why Knight couldnt stop the club appointing him in the first place and why he couldn't sack him in January ..... maybe he doesnt hold the power within the Boardroom.

There's no 'maybe' about it. He doesn't hold the power in the boardroom.

He is the largest shareholder, though not, of course, the majority shareholder.

 

[BigGully]

But given the bigger picture, and bearing in mind the decision to get rid was taken in January/February, it would have been more destructive to get rid there and then, especially as we were doing quite well.

I don't know at what point Adams was lined up as replacement, but I think the club removed Dean at the first pertinent opportunity.

I'm GUESSING that Micky wasn't lined up until the time of Wilkins' player contract decisions.

I am told that it wasnt a unanimous decision in May to dismiss Wilkins, then it would follow that maybe the decision was never made in Jan/Feb to dismiss Wilkins, it was just the date that Knight made his own views known to some fans !!!

Assuming that Adams was lined up and available before the time of the contract decisions, it was uneccessary for Wilkins and unhelpful to the club to let that happen.

 

[The Large One]

I am told that it wasnt a unanimous decision in May to dismiss Wilkins, then it would follow that maybe the decision was never made in Jan/Feb to dismiss Wilkins, it was just the date that Knight made his own views known to some fans !!!

I don't know the voting procedures on the board - whether they need a two-thirds / one-third split or over 50%, but it almost certainly doesn't have to be unanimous. But that's largely irrelevant, and not the point I'm making. The decision, by whatever majority vote, was almost certainly taken long before the actual deed happened.

Assuming that Adams was lined up and available before the time of the contract decisions, it was uneccessary for Wilkins and unhelpful to the club to let that happen.

That is a very big assumption on which to base your hypothesis.

 

[Seagull73]

What I always find amazing about threads to do with Uncle Dick is people perpetually criticising him for being forthright, ego-driven, arrogant, intent on getting his own way etc…as if he’s a pale imitation of the gentle lover he once was (“ooh, you’ve changed Dicky! You’re not the man I married, you’ve chaaanged!”) And I know it’s patronising to suggest these people weren’t around/paying attention between 1995 and 1998, but if he didn’t have that kind of personality there’s no way he’d have stuck through all the guff with one-eyed Bill and the FA and ultimately saved the club. It was Herculean self-absorption and determination which allowed him to do that.

Wilkins didn’t have the bravado and gritty charisma to be a manager. He couldn’t flutter his lashes at businessmen or callously squash egotistical mediocrities. He was a dodgem juddering across the glitter and grease of a Formula One racing track. Micky is our Marilyn Monroe in Adidas half-shells and hair gel. This time next year etc etc…

 

[Seagull73]

Careful, questioning Knight tends to result in being called an idiot or being patronised...

You berk - you just sound like Arthur now.

 

[BigGully]

I don't know the voting procedures on the board - whether they need a two-thirds / one-third split or over 50%, but it almost certainly doesn't have to be unanimous. But that's largely irrelevant, and not the point I'm making. The decision, by whatever majority vote, was almost certainly taken long before the actual deed happened.



That is a very big assumption on which to base your hypothesis.

My first assumption would be that the voting procedure would be the main money man ( Tony Bloom ) releases funds if the other Board members agree with his view. I would suspect without him on board no amount of voting will allow an important issue to go through without his consent.

My second assumption is that from the time Knight wanted Wilkins out, he would be actively seeking a replacement. I dont know when Adams was secured as a replacement, but the timing either implies that Adams was not secured at that time, or maybe the board ( Bloom ) were not ready to accept Knights desire for Wilkins dismissal.

But IF Adams was secured prior to the contractual decision then it is unforgiveable.

 

[Taxman]

did biggully ever sort out that person hanging around the schools

 

[The Large One]

My first assumption would be that the voting procedure would be the main money man ( Tony Bloom ) releases funds if the other Board members agree with his view. I would suspect without him on board no amount of voting will allow an important issue to go through without his consent.

Not quite. Bloom might be in a position to release his own funds for the club to acquire players, but once those funds go through the club, they have to be approved.

But Tony Bloom and Ray Bloom together can still be outvoted by Dick Knight alone.

My second assumption is that from the time Knight wanted Wilkins out, he would be actively seeking a replacement. I dont know when Adams was secured as a replacement, but the timing either implies that Adams was not secured at that time, or maybe the board ( Bloom ) were not ready to accept Knights desire for Wilkins dismissal.

But IF Adams was secured prior to the contractual decision then it is unforgiveable.

I would say this - and there is certain level of assumption here.

Four or five days before Adams was revealed as manager, it was Dick Knight's birthday, for which he had a party. At gatherings like this, the 'inner circle' (no, I am not one) get a gist of what is going on at the club. People chat, opinion are sought etc, all the while assuming certain level of discretion and a certain amount of confidentiality.

Apparently, not one mention was made of Micky Adams, and certainly not in the context of him returning, let alone Dean being given the Spanish Archer. Nothing. And many of those who were there were just as surprised as the rest of us were when the appointment was announced.

Now it could be that the deal had been done before the party and those in the know were sworn to complete silence. OR... it could that the deal hadn't been done by then.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I'm not sure why we are getting into a debate about the voting procedure on the board, or how relevant it is anyway.

Tony Bloom is a big shareholder and his money makes a difference to what the Club can do. But he isn't a board member.

As I read the situation, the directors like to present a united front in public. This probably means that they try to achieve a consensus before any major decisions are made. It's the best way to run any business.

 

[The Large One]

I'm not sure why we are getting into a debate about the voting procedure on the board, or how relevant it is anyway.

Tony Bloom is a big shareholder and his money makes a difference to what the Club can do. But he isn't a board member.

As I read the situation, the directors like to present a united front in public. This probably means that they try to achieve a consensus before any major decisions are made. It's the best way to run any business.

Blimey, didn't realise that.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Mr Harry Richard Knight 1,602,500 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr William John Brown 1,100,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Anthony Bloom 850,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Pig City Incorporated Limited 750,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Kevin Griffiths 582,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Raymond Bloom 535,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Friday-ad Holdings Limited 500,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Derek Leonard Chapman 460,750 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Michael Stanley Hastilow 150,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Robert Leonard Pinnock 142,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr J Gold 100,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr John Edward Vickers 50,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Joseph David Hirschel 15,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Peter Fleming Mcdonnell 10,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Edward Norman David 10,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr John Town 5,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Martin John Perry 130 Ordinary Gbp 1.00

 

[Titanic]

Mr Harry Richard Knight 1,602,500 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr William John Brown 1,100,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Anthony Bloom 850,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Pig City Incorporated Limited 750,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Kevin Griffiths 582,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Raymond Bloom 535,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Friday-ad Holdings Limited 500,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Derek Leonard Chapman 460,750 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Michael Stanley Hastilow 150,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Robert Leonard Pinnock 142,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr J Gold 100,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr John Edward Vickers 50,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Joseph David Hirschel 15,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Peter Fleming Mcdonnell 10,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Edward Norman David 10,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr John Town 5,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Martin John Perry 130 Ordinary Gbp 1.00

I believe Michael Hastilow now has 250,000 shares.

 

[BigGully]

I'm not sure why we are getting into a debate about the voting procedure on the board, or how relevant it is anyway.

Tony Bloom is a big shareholder and his money makes a difference to what the Club can do. But he isn't a board member.

As I read the situation, the directors like to present a united front in public. This probably means that they try to achieve a consensus before any major decisions are made. It's the best way to run any business.

Of course they try to achieve a concesus, that doesnt always mean that they achieve it though, of course thats quite normal.

I would say though that if Tony Bloom felt he wanted to offer a serious cash injection for any issues such as Falmer or new players on the proviso of the dismissal of the manager, I am guessing the other board member might concur.

We are between a rock and a hard place, we are at the mercy of the money men and their own whims, sometimes though decisions really do not make any footballing sense.

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

We are between a rock and a hard place, we are at the mercy of the money men and their own whims, sometimes though decisions really do not make any footballing sense.

Then thank God that a fair few of the money men on the board, and certainly the biggest one, is a fan first and money man second

 

[Knotty]

Mr Harry Richard Knight 1,602,500 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr William John Brown 1,100,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Anthony Bloom 850,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Pig City Incorporated Limited 750,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Kevin Griffiths 582,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Raymond Bloom 535,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Friday-ad Holdings Limited 500,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Derek Leonard Chapman 460,750 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Michael Stanley Hastilow 150,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Robert Leonard Pinnock 142,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr J Gold 100,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr John Edward Vickers 50,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Joseph David Hirschel 15,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Peter Fleming Mcdonnell 10,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Edward Norman David 10,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr John Town 5,000 Ordinary Gbp 1.00
Mr Martin John Perry 130 Ordinary Gbp 1.00

These are shareholders.

A shareholder is not necessarily a board member nor does a board member have to be a shareholder.

 

[BigGully]

These are shareholders.

A shareholder is not necessarily a board member nor does a board member have to be a shareholder.

I am guessing you accept that your list does not necessary reflect the power within the club

 

[vulture]

The Truth

Wilkins was fine until December when he went for advice on having a hair transplant...when told the cost he went and asked knight for a pay rise...knight said no...how ever Hammonds agent promised Wilkins a slice of pie if hammond signed on .....so when Hammond went....wilkins had to face up to being bald for the rest of his life....he started to break down and had fall outs with players with nice thick hair as he was jealous....

 

[BensGrandad]

My first assumption would be that the voting procedure would be the main money man ( Tony Bloom ) .

Is Tony Bloom the main money man?