[Apollo11]

…he appears to be a diminutive poacher striker stuck in target man type body…

That’s a good way of putting it. I do think there’s a very decent player in there – but (despite being top scorer) you don’t often come away from a match with the impression that he’s turned in a really good performance.

[Apollo11]

cassidystash wrote:

Beestin and Wilson both available for his position so don’t need DSF IMO.
I’d like to keep Smith though.

Neither as good as Smith.

[Apollo11]

Absolutely a key player. Returning to his parent club would be a severe blow to our promotion chances.

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

From a legal eagle / eager beaver site:

“Is doxing illegal?

Dependent on the circumstances , doxing may constitute an offence under a number of UK laws. It can amount to harassment, malicious communications, computer misuse offences, data protection. It may also include blackmail and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, if the consequences cause “psychological harm that involves more than mere emotions such as fear, distress or panic”.

In this case it would be considered harassment.

[Apollo11]

At least we avoided Whamageddon.

[Apollo11]

I also know that Simon Elliot has not and will not put a penny of his own money into the club, this came directly from James Moody… … I doubt Simon is taken seriously, I think he’s just there because she felt fans wanted it.

So, as I have asked before, what does he actually contribute?

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

Substantial if your talking the likes of me, but not when we’re talking about a multiple millionaire,it was hardly likely leave him down to his last million. And he wanted back what he put in. Will be interesting to see whether the ground will be owned by a separate company to the club, either way they’ll want back what they pay for it.

Perhaps Sharp presumed he could be part of any Board that Hilton put together? Perhaps Hilton refused to accommodate that. I’d suggest that the whole ‘wanting it back’ thing at that particular moment was a ploy, a way for Sharp to annoy Hilton. If not, do you think he’s still suing the club for the 150k despite being on the Board?

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

Always said St Simon and Ian not so Sharp were cheapskates.

Sharp put a substantial amount of money in. That’s not being a cheapskate.

[Apollo11]

In the end I was so desperate to get out as they were to get me out and the consortium were not interested and most refused to back it as the head of it refused to put any money of his own in. He preferred to travel 120 miles to do self promoting photo shoots at Jimmys hospital bedside and publishing them before he was back in his car. Whilst they were seeing me paying out they happily let me suffer, that’s why I stopped the finance. I publicised a move to Gainsborough and threw myself under the bus completely by banning some high profile supporters which I never would have done. It was all to show the the consortium I had out stayed my welcome and it wasn’t going to be yesterdays chip paper that everyone kept telling me it would so I stayed in a hostile environment funding it. I wanted them to think they had to step up or the club would go. (I never would have let the club go) I’m fortunate though that Michelle stepped up as the consortium didn’t.

Elliott’s proposed consortium fell apart because he actually had no money of his own so was coattailing, but plenty of ego and entitlement – and those actually with the money (including Sharpe) had little trust and ditched him to rally around modest Michelle instead. Elliott then somehow manoeuvred his way into the new set-up.

Is that what we’re supposed to read out of this? It certainly closely matches other stuff I’ve heard said.

[Apollo11]

Itonironiron wrote:

This is what this site does. Spins a false story and refuse to look at he truth. I notice not one email address was provided as you do not want site of the facts, the stories you create are more entertaining I suppose. The evidence is there but he’s not wrong, look a those number, can somebody please tell me where any extra income has appeared from other than what he’s itemised. His payroll and HMRC statements are fact I have them. Il repeat you can see them.

So if this money he took is true and it’s not just hate fuelled rabble then I ask you all, where did it come from. Everything I’ve seen shows me he lost money.

Not providing email addresses doesn’t mean an aversion to facts (your version of). It just means nobody wanted to give you their email address.

[Apollo11]

Why has he sent this letter and those supporting documents to you in particular, if you don’t mind me asking?

[Apollo11]

Itonironiron wrote:

I have an email from Hilton with evidence of his losses and that he did pay the tax in January. A quite informative piece on the clubs finances. It won’t allow me to paste it here for some reason but il happily forward the email if somebody provides one.

Copy and paste it?

[Apollo11]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Steve wrote:

Looking for something on the Facebook group to complain about..

Can easily be spotted through the Scunthorpe United photographers

What exactly is meant by this post? Naming and shaming via photographs on the Facebook group?

He’s suggesting that people do not really have legitimate concerns about this issue, and that they have just been going through the Facebook group actively looking for anything to complain about. Also, that the club posts photos of the crowd and people are identifiable in those – so anyone else doing the same is fair enough (ie. ‘what’s the difference?’)…

I’d say the difference is we have all accepted that the club uses photos in this manner, and have agreed to the potential of being photographed as part of the ‘contract’ effectively signed by buying a ticket.

That’s very different to a non-employee taking photographs of sections of the crowd and posting them online. You would reasonably assume that photos a fan takes at a match and posts online would be of the football – so what is the actual purpose of this person doing this and then posting on Facebook? It could be innocent (‘a bit of fun’) though it lacks good judgement and, aside from anything else, is creepy.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

The BBc reported it on the 30th of Jan and in Hiltons statement on the 19th of September

I think it was during one of the audio interviews which was posted by the club and then withdrawn, he was also adamant it had been paid.

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

You’re a strange one awg. Having a go at Sharp for wanting a loan back when he had no idea he would be able to be involved with the club, but trusting that a con man was actually working well for the club.

In their own ways Swann and Hilton used Sharp’s money, Elliott used the kudos.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

The timescale for clearing the debt with the HMRC is 3/6 months and not forgetting Swanny already had a time to pay agreement in place with the HRMC for £192,000 at the time Hilton took over so your saying the HMRC then gave Hilton a further time to pay agreement and was able to rack up another say £250,000 over the next 7 months. Really

In the early days of his tenure Hilton said he had completely cleared the HMRC debt – but a couple of months later he said it had actually been an agreement to pay in instalments. He must have paid the first to release any legal action imminent at that time – but it’s possible he then didn’t pay any of the other instalments, and continued to accrue a second HMRC debt for non-payment due for ongoing operations.

[Apollo11]

CMC wrote:

Apollo11 wrote:

Unfortunately with Some in the club i don’t see that changing anytime soon.

Not disagreeing with you, just wondering what you mean by that?

Don’t know if you delve into social media Apollo but some of the parasites are on there thanking the 3 SUFC officials often enough.

Parasites?

[Apollo11]

Unfortunately with Some in the club i don’t see that changing anytime soon.

Not disagreeing with you, just wondering what you mean by that?

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

It’s a pity the other 95% couldn’t be arsed to do their homework on his background – if they had, then like us, they’d have known he was a ‘wrong un’ much earlier and we’d have cleared him off a lot sooner.

We now need Guinevere and her Knights of the Round Table to get us running on an even keel with creditors paid off, wages paid on time, any outstanding wages to former players/employees settled, pensions and NI payments updated and paid on time, redundancy payments made, CCJs fulfilled, HMRC paid etc.
Only then will normality have been restored.
I’d rather support a debt free and honourable but poor performing team in the NLN than a morally & financially bankrupt team in L1 or L2 bending & breaking the rules and the law.

Based on those exact terms, ‘normality’ is a several years project if it is even achievable at all. Good luck to all concerned – running a club is hard enough financially without having to wipe Hilton’s arse into the bargain.

[Apollo11]

That is to say, someone on the current Board of Directors backed Hilton and insulted fans who dared to question him – and has failed to address that mistake or apologise since the takeover.

1 user thanked author for this post.

SODIron

[Apollo11]

It didn’t stop some backing him to the hilt, with added insults and threats, some on this board..

… and someone on the actual Board.

[Apollo11]

Steve wrote:

Looking for something on the Facebook group to complain about..

Can easily be spotted through the Scunthorpe United photographers

Eh?

[Apollo11]

Iron-awe wrote:

Well Butterfield almost walked one in second half on Saturday after a brilliant run beating several players on the way but ultimately the box was that congested he just ran out of room to get a decent shot in.

Yes, that was quite a moment – and just a tad unfortunate that Butterfield messed the shot up. It brought to mind a brilliant goal scored in that exact fashion, at that same end of GP about thirty years ago. Neil Gregory (if you remember him?).

[Apollo11]

Apollo11 wrote:

As I’ve said on here before, I think it’s great to watch United coming out from the back and passing the opposition off the park – I’m not sure we’ve had a side as good at it as this lot. But there is definitely something lacking up front in the current system.

I’d love to see a really strong striker at the business end of this team (Flounders, Daws, Eyre, Forrester, Sharp, Hooper) as I think this would help with decision making in and around the box. I wouldn’t say anyone in the current side is shirking responsibility and they’re all working – but perhaps overworking moves.

There seems to be a problem with just giving it a crack.

I should add: Obviously United have scored a few goals from distance this season, but in general it seems to me that things are often overworked in and around the box.

[Apollo11]

As I’ve said on here before, I think it’s great to watch United coming out from the back and passing the opposition off the park – I’m not sure we’ve had a side as good at it as this lot. But there is definitely something lacking up front in the current system.

I’d love to see a really strong striker at the business end of this team (Flounders, Daws, Eyre, Forrester, Sharp, Hooper) as I think this would help with decision making in and around the box. I wouldn’t say anyone in the current side is shirking responsibility and they’re all working – but perhaps overworking moves.

There seems to be a problem with just giving it a crack.

[Apollo11]

I seldom bother having a look on the Facebook group – but I just did. It’s so galling to see Herbert on a charm offensive after months of being the abuser-in-chief.

[Apollo11]

CMC wrote:

Hull City have banned one of their fans doing vlogs, but they’re a more professional operation than we are right now.

Perhaps more to do with questionable tone and content rather than the actual doing of a vlog?

[Apollo11]

Iron-awe wrote:

Fair enough Apollo 11, LBH, Whitehall is a pale shadow of Steve Torpey in the role he is playing for us this season, no comparison whatsoever, he is not a good target man type player and needs to be part of a pair up top to be effective enough IMO.

I do like Whitehall, but I completely agree with you. I would like to see him in a partnership with some short-arsed terrier who scores 15 to 20 goals per season.

[Apollo11]

It’s common sense. There’s a clear line being crossed and I am sure the club (or whoever should do so) will address it.

Do I want to go inside the ground and take photos and videos of the match or of my mates and perhaps put some of them online on my socials? Of course I do, yes.

Do I want to go inside the ground and take photos of people who are unaware that they are being photographed, and then publish them online in a publicly accessible group? No, of course not.

[Apollo11]

Iron-awe wrote:

Where does all that leave people like Gareth who does a great job with Iron Army, has he an appropriate licence?, I presume he has the club’s permission to film inside and around the ground but there are loads of you tube vlogs for a huge amount of football clubs run every week in this country, where do they all stand legally?

I imagine that most clubs, SUFC included, turn something of a blind eye to this stuff – the rules around equipment, and the fact that their supporters take photos, videos, whatever (ie. it’s the nature of modern life). However, in the case of these crowd photos I suspect they’ll draw a line and ask the person taking and publishing them to stop because they are intrusive.

[Author]

Posts