- This topic has 136 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 3 days ago by
.
-
I also applaud Jimmy. He seems to appreciate how precious (if unstable) a job in professional football is. Far too many in his position regard it as ‘having made it’ so no further effort required. I still think a few shifts at the steelworks (or similar depending on location) would show those lucky enough to be paid, for what many of us did for nothing, how fortunate they are and how they should work to protect what they have.
I’m hoping the club plugs back into the community. I seem to remember things like steelworks visits.
1 user thanked author for this post.
So it’s suddenly okay for someone who served both Swann and Hilton to take over the club is it?
Blimey, she’s only owned the club a few hours. Give her a chance
1 user thanked author for this post.
Well, I am pleased NI’s desire for unity didn’t last long. Sounds like you want division.
As I said, I don’t recall Harness berating fans like others did who positioned themselves with Hilton. That was my issue, not solely working for the club. It’s why I and others didn’t critique her, Roj or the other directors either. Credit to Simon for putting this deal together, it would be nice for an apology, but the important thing is to learn from errors and not berate fans again like that.
If we want unity, we need movement from all sides. Including those who weren’t Hilton sceptics. Which means not more nonsense about what others have said from you or others.
The gist of this thread has been don’t let anyone who supported Hilton to get involved with the takeover.
Do I hear the sound of tunes being changed!
Not at all. No changed tune. No hypocrisy.
You’re conflating support of the club itself with support of Hilton.
Michelle supported SUFC, in her customary quiet and professional manner behind the scenes, as she has done through the tenures of several Chairmen.
The others mentioned in this thread were public and highly vocal in their support of Hilton – and that makes it an entirely different thing.
3 users thanked author for this post.
The gist of this thread has been don’t let anyone who supported Hilton to get involved with the takeover.
That’s not true is it? It’s clearly explained what I consider to be right and supporting Hilton wasn’t a reason to bar anyone that was proposed here .To claim it was is wrong. I am clear that the dog whistling nature which led to abuse a whole new level of abuse in my time watching the Iron and violence is my issue
1 user thanked author for this post.
I believe the statement from Michelle covers more of the truth than the majority of the posters on here, Hilton taken no fee and wiped out personal monies invested & Elliott massively assisted. Maybe all was not as black and white!! As many here believe.
Hilton took no fees might be true, but why would he take any? He broke the club ffs
3 users thanked author for this post.
Hilton took no fees might be true, but why would he take any? He broke the club ffs
many question if any personal money was invested, this statement doesn’t define amounts but unless we are being mislead again money was put in and SE has also helped massively. He broke the club FFS! No mention of the previous years of awful ownership. This mess didn’t happen over 9 months but many years
1 user thanked author for this post.
I believe the statement from Michelle covers more of the truth than the majority of the posters on here, Hilton taken no fee and wiped out personal monies invested & Elliott massively assisted. Maybe all was not as black and white!! As many here believe.
I’d expect that arriving at that club statement to have had a high level of interpersonal politics involved. These things are almost always worded to be palatable and in favour of all parties. They’re usually designed to set-up a narrative all have agreed upon, and don’t necessarily reflect the truth.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I believe the statement from Michelle covers more of the truth than the majority of the posters on here, Hilton taken no fee and wiped out personal monies invested & Elliott massively assisted. Maybe all was not as black and white!! As many here believe.
I’ve seen too many statements released into the public domain which don’t reflect reality but serve a purpose.
2 users thanked author for this post.
I don’t think a word of politeness in a shortish statement is some great saving grace for Hilton. Swann didn’t destroy our club, Hilton stepped in and could have saved it. He didn’t and nearly destroyed us.
1 user thanked author for this post.
And Swann is vital to the club getting GP back so we’d do well to remember that.
1 user thanked author for this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.