Various statements

Discuss all matters related to Dagenham and Redbridge
User avatar
Mike the Dagger
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:09 am
Contact:

The thread on yesterday's events has been shut down and the board is it seems no longer North Korea, it is apparently now Myanmar instead ;)

I would be interested in understanding what "I appreciate that this has been a vitriolic and heated discussion. Even I am shocked at some of the things posted" means as actually, given the severity of the events being discussed, what was said on that thread seemed to be a reasonable debate to me.

The Supporters Club have issued a statement on their side of this, which I have linked to in the original story http://www.fansfocus.net/dagenhamandred ... id=8324635.

I am still amazed that a group of people so far in a hole now keep on digging to be honest and my response to the statement issued follows.
Following the statement put on the club website on the 26th October 2017, on behalf of the Committee we would like to make the following observations.

2 members of the committee were present at the meeting on the 21st October at the request of our members to ensure nothing was misinterpreted or misunderstood. They were not representing or advising the members. It has always been the Supporters Club policy to help, where possible, any member who has an ongoing query or dispute that they cannot solve.
OK I get that, but surely the committee members knew why these members wanted a face to face with the guy that has invested a lot of his own money into the club that they allegedly support, particularly when they were the ones in dispute with the club over the flags.
The committee members did not hand Mr. Hopkin a copy of anything. Mr. Hopkin can confirm this. The paper in question was handed over to Mr. Hopkin by the members in, we believe, good faith.
The item on DiggerDagger clearly states that it was one of the members that handed over the photo of the email. Had the committee members seen the photo of the email, and were they satisfied that it was genuine? In "good faith", implies that they had and in fact believed that the reassurances that they had previously had from several officers of the club that a broadcast email was not sent, were lies.
We fully understood the seriousness of the situation and therefore had not divulged any information.
No idea what this means. Anyone?
We would like to add that the members in question had several meetings with Mr. Hopkin and Mr. Bennett. At no time was Mr. Payne’s name ever mentioned in any of the meetings attended by the committee or our members. As observers at these meeting we can state categorically that at all times these members handled themselves with the utmost respect and fully believed that the e-mail was genuine and given to them in good faith.
My understanding of this is that actually there was only one meeting between the flag owners, Glyn Hopkin and Dave Bennett previously, which happened after the previous interview on DiggerDagger in August. The previous statement by the Supporters Club bears this out. I understand that at this meeting both Glyn and Dave made it clear that there had been an investigation into the alleged email to all clubs and there was no truth in it.

Despite these assurances the matter was not dropped and when this clumsy effort to resurrect it two months later, and in doing so put Steve Thompson in a very difficult position was attempted, the Supporters Club Chairman and Secretary felt that it was OK to be associated with it.

As for Tony Payne not being involved, it was made clear that he was copied on the emails that were sent to AFC Fylde and Maidstone United, and I understand that he is also copied on the email photo that was handed over. Given the above investigation must have involved Glyn asking Tony whether he had seen the alleged broadcast email and to reach the conclusion that this was not sent, he must have denied it, this is by association accusing him of lying.
There has been discussion about this situation on various websites but again the committee have not spoken to or given any information to the people using these sites.

We would like our members to be assured that the Supporters Club is 100pct committed to helping the club in any way.
True, I did not speak to anyone from the Supporters Club prior to posting the story yesterday, which was in response to the football club demming the incident serious enough to issue an official statement.

TBH I believe that the current Supporters Club committee have now lost all credibility over this issue and their stance in supporting the owners of two flags that have passed their sell by date and are at best in questionable taste given current world events, particularly as they have been asked not to do so by the club owners that they are apparently "100pct committed to helping".

It is clear to me that it is the agenda of a significant group within the Supporters Club to oust Steve Thompson by any means, in this case by proving that he lied to fellow board members over what is actually not a particularly major issue. I have previously challenged various people to either come up with the alleged email or shut up. They did neither, someone apparently fabricated the item that was handed to Glyn on Saturday instead.

Steve Thompson can undoubtedly be a difficult character, but his commitment and hard work in running the Daggers over many years cannot be questioned. He has the confidence of the current board of directors and is going to be one of the investors in the change of ownership when and if this change of structure ever actually goes through.

The danger at the moment is that these actions by a minority of our fans result in them throwing the baby out with the bathwater and we lose the investment from Glyn Hopkin out of frustration with this sort of stupidity from people that seriously ought to know better.

Rant over.
dagger4eva
Posts: 1735
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 1:39 pm

If anyone is offering odds on this thread being locked - can I have a tenner at locked by 1pm.

Ta
Diggerthedog
Posts: 3898
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:08 pm

In response to Mike, re Thompson being hard working etc.

It's ok to be a difficult character? I would not get away with at my work place.

He has made a very comfortable living from being in his position so much so that he can afford to buy a stake in the club, but quite frankly is not actually very good at his job. He Oversaw the Burnett fiasco by burying his head in the sand and then tried to push through what could have been a disastrous takeover from GT.

Time to step aside Steve and let the club move forward with new leadership. If Glyn pulls out over this little thing I would be surprised.

Question I would like to asks, Why did the statement get released? why not just ignore the claims rather then inflame them.
User avatar
Mike the Dagger
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:09 am
Contact:

Diggerthedog wrote:In response to Mike, re Thompson being hard working etc.

It's ok to be a difficult character? I would not get away with at my work place.

He has made a very comfortable living from being in his position so much so that he can afford to buy a stake in the club, but quite frankly is not actually very good at his job. He Oversaw the Burnett fiasco by burying his head in the sand and then tried to push through what could have been a disastrous takeover from GT.

Time to step aside Steve and let the club move forward with new leadership. If Glyn pulls out over this little thing I would be surprised.

Question I would like to asks, Why did the statement get released? why not just ignore the claims rather then inflame them.
The world is full of difficult characters sadly. I bet you know a few yourself.

Thommo is effectively MD of a company turning over in the region of £3m per annum. He is entitled to make a living out of that, no? I agree that there have been some really bad decisions made in the past though and would hope that the new structure means that these will happen less going forward.

I'd suggest it is up to the new owner, when/if that happens to decide what that means in terms of responsibilities in the future.

As to why this statement got released, my best guess would be that the board got fed up with being accused of lying. Patience is running thin.
Chelseadagger
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:16 pm

Mike the Dagger wrote:The thread on yesterday's events has been shut down and the board is it seems no longer North Korea, it is apparently now Myanmar instead ;)

I would be interested in understanding what "I appreciate that this has been a vitriolic and heated discussion. Even I am shocked at some of the things posted" means as actually, given the severity of the events being discussed, what was said on that thread seemed to be a reasonable debate to me.

The Supporters Club have issued a statement on their side of this, which I have linked to in the original story http://www.fansfocus.net/dagenhamandred ... id=8324635.

I am still amazed that a group of people so far in a hole now keep on digging to be honest and my response to the statement issued follows.
Following the statement put on the club website on the 26th October 2017, on behalf of the Committee we would like to make the following observations.

2 members of the committee were present at the meeting on the 21st October at the request of our members to ensure nothing was misinterpreted or misunderstood. They were not representing or advising the members. It has always been the Supporters Club policy to help, where possible, any member who has an ongoing query or dispute that they cannot solve.
OK I get that, but surely the committee members knew why these members wanted a face to face with the guy that has invested a lot of his own money into the club that they allegedly support, particularly when they were the ones in dispute with the club over the flags.
The committee members did not hand Mr. Hopkin a copy of anything. Mr. Hopkin can confirm this. The paper in question was handed over to Mr. Hopkin by the members in, we believe, good faith.
The item on DiggerDagger clearly states that it was one of the members that handed over the photo of the email. Had the committee members seen the photo of the email, and were they satisfied that it was genuine? In "good faith", implies that they had and in fact believed that the reassurances that they had previously had from several officers of the club that a broadcast email was not sent, were lies.
We fully understood the seriousness of the situation and therefore had not divulged any information.
No idea what this means. Anyone?
We would like to add that the members in question had several meetings with Mr. Hopkin and Mr. Bennett. At no time was Mr. Payne’s name ever mentioned in any of the meetings attended by the committee or our members. As observers at these meeting we can state categorically that at all times these members handled themselves with the utmost respect and fully believed that the e-mail was genuine and given to them in good faith.
My understanding of this is that actually there was only one meeting between the flag owners, Glyn Hopkin and Dave Bennett previously, which happened after the previous interview on DiggerDagger in August. The previous statement by the Supporters Club bears this out. I understand that at this meeting both Glyn and Dave made it clear that there had been an investigation into the alleged email to all clubs and there was no truth in it.

Despite these assurances the matter was not dropped and when this clumsy effort to resurrect it two months later, and in doing so put Steve Thompson in a very difficult position was attempted, the Supporters Club Chairman and Secretary felt that it was OK to be associated with it.

As for Tony Payne not being involved, it was made clear that he was copied on the emails that were sent to AFC Fylde and Maidstone United, and I understand that he is also copied on the email photo that was handed over. Given the above investigation must have involved Glyn asking Tony whether he had seen the alleged broadcast email and to reach the conclusion that this was not sent, he must have denied it, this is by association accusing him of lying.
There has been discussion about this situation on various websites but again the committee have not spoken to or given any information to the people using these sites.

We would like our members to be assured that the Supporters Club is 100pct committed to helping the club in any way.
True, I did not speak to anyone from the Supporters Club prior to posting the story yesterday, which was in response to the football club demming the incident serious enough to issue an official statement.

TBH I believe that the current Supporters Club committee have now lost all credibility over this issue and their stance in supporting the owners of two flags that have passed their sell by date and are at best in questionable taste given current world events, particularly as they have been asked not to do so by the club owners that they are apparently "100pct committed to helping".

It is clear to me that it is the agenda of a significant group within the Supporters Club to oust Steve Thompson by any means, in this case by proving that he lied to fellow board members over what is actually not a particularly major issue. I have previously challenged various people to either come up with the alleged email or shut up. They did neither, someone apparently fabricated the item that was handed to Glyn on Saturday instead.

Steve Thompson can undoubtedly be a difficult character, but his commitment and hard work in running the Daggers over many years cannot be questioned. He has the confidence of the current board of directors and is going to be one of the investors in the change of ownership when and if this change of structure ever actually goes through.

The danger at the moment is that these actions by a minority of our fans result in them throwing the baby out with the bathwater and we lose the investment from Glyn Hopkin out of frustration with this sort of stupidity from people that seriously ought to know better.

Rant over.
Why don’t the club release the “fake” email and point out the obvious clues to why it is fake? It would put all of this to bed rather than carrying it on?

Also have you considered interviewing the supporters club or flag owners? Even if it’s just for variety?
User avatar
Mike the Dagger
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:09 am
Contact:

Chelseadagger wrote:
Why don’t the club release the “fake” email and point out the obvious clues to why it is fake? It would put all of this to bed rather than carrying it on?

Also have you considered interviewing the supporters club or flag owners? Even if it’s just for variety?
I've published why the club believe it is fake already.

Why don't the people that passed it over to Glyn release the fake email to show it is genuine? Maybe they could state how they came by it and why they believe it is genuine?

As for talking to the Supporters Club, to be honest, they have lost all credibility on this matter now.

In August they asked me to publish their response to the 431 word section on flags in the Dave Bennett interview, then the issued a 1,980 word ramble on their own website instead. No issue to me at all in that, and I linked to the response, which in general terms supported the facts in the original item.

This time around I have again linked the SC response in the original article. It is a lot more succinct this time but still full of holes (see the original post in this thread).

If anyone from the supporters club wants to specifically sit me down and tell me why a couple of flags that have passed their sell by date and are at best in questionable taste given current world events are so important then I am happy to do so. Russell Elmes has my number and I'd guess most of the committee know me personally.

As for the flag owners, I have no idea who they are, and if I did, they have gone way past the point of any reasonable discussion now with this latest stunt.
Diggerthedog
Posts: 3898
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:08 pm

Mike the Dagger wrote:
Diggerthedog wrote:In response to Mike, re Thompson being hard working etc.

It's ok to be a difficult character? I would not get away with at my work place.

He has made a very comfortable living from being in his position so much so that he can afford to buy a stake in the club, but quite frankly is not actually very good at his job. He Oversaw the Burnett fiasco by burying his head in the sand and then tried to push through what could have been a disastrous takeover from GT.

Time to step aside Steve and let the club move forward with new leadership. If Glyn pulls out over this little thing I would be surprised.

Question I would like to asks, Why did the statement get released? why not just ignore the claims rather then inflame them.
The world is full of difficult characters sadly. I bet you know a few yourself.

Thommo is effectively MD of a company turning over in the region of £3m per annum. He is entitled to make a living out of that, no? I agree that there have been some really bad decisions made in the past though and would hope that the new structure means that these will happen less going forward.

I'd suggest it is up to the new owner, when/if that happens to decide what that means in terms of responsibilities in the future.

As to why this statement got released, my best guess would be that the board got fed up with being accused of lying. Patience is running thin.
Characters yes, but I dont know anyone who is like Thompson is to his customers. I certainly don't begrudge the man of a wage but the club wont move forward with his continual stubborn input.
Diggerthedog
Posts: 3898
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:08 pm

Mike the Dagger wrote:
Chelseadagger wrote:
Why don’t the club release the “fake” email and point out the obvious clues to why it is fake? It would put all of this to bed rather than carrying it on?

Also have you considered interviewing the supporters club or flag owners? Even if it’s just for variety?
I've published why the club believe it is fake already.

Why don't the people that passed it over to Glyn release the fake email to show it is genuine? Maybe they could state how they came by it and why they believe it is genuine?

As for talking to the Supporters Club, to be honest, they have lost all credibility on this matter now.

In August they asked me to publish their response to the 431 word section on flags in the Dave Bennett interview, then the issued a 1,980 word ramble on their own website instead. No issue to me at all in that, and I linked to the response, which in general terms supported the facts in the original item.

This time around I have again linked the SC response in the original article. It is a lot more succinct this time but still full of holes (see the original post in this thread).

If anyone from the supporters club wants to specifically sit me down and tell me why a couple of flags that have passed their sell by date and are at best in questionable taste given current world events are so important then I am happy to do so. Russell Elmes has my number and I'd guess most of the committee know me personally.

As for the flag owners, I have no idea who they are, and if I did, they have gone way past the point of any reasonable discussion now with this latest stunt.
Where did the original copy of the email come from? The club needs to get its own house in order before they start releasing statements about others wrong doing. I would assume an internal investigation is underway as to how this email was made public.
Chelseadagger
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:16 pm

Diggerthedog wrote:
Mike the Dagger wrote:
Chelseadagger wrote:
Why don’t the club release the “fake” email and point out the obvious clues to why it is fake? It would put all of this to bed rather than carrying it on?

Also have you considered interviewing the supporters club or flag owners? Even if it’s just for variety?
I've published why the club believe it is fake already.

Why don't the people that passed it over to Glyn release the fake email to show it is genuine? Maybe they could state how they came by it and why they believe it is genuine?

As for talking to the Supporters Club, to be honest, they have lost all credibility on this matter now.

In August they asked me to publish their response to the 431 word section on flags in the Dave Bennett interview, then the issued a 1,980 word ramble on their own website instead. No issue to me at all in that, and I linked to the response, which in general terms supported the facts in the original item.

This time around I have again linked the SC response in the original article. It is a lot more succinct this time but still full of holes (see the original post in this thread).

If anyone from the supporters club wants to specifically sit me down and tell me why a couple of flags that have passed their sell by date and are at best in questionable taste given current world events are so important then I am happy to do so. Russell Elmes has my number and I'd guess most of the committee know me personally.

As for the flag owners, I have no idea who they are, and if I did, they have gone way past the point of any reasonable discussion now with this latest stunt.
Where did the original copy of the email come from? The club needs to get its own house in order before they start releasing statements about others wrong doing. I would assume an internal investigation is underway as to how this email was made public.

As someone who has seen the email, believe me if you wish but all of the evidence is on the page. In no other walk of life would a email with the details on it that it has get labeled as a fake. The idea that the club have released a statement saying it is fake with no proof is questionable. If this email gets proved to be legit, then a fair few people owe the people who have glyn the email and the supporters club a apology. Everyone is very quick to jump on the “it’s fake bandwagon” without even seeing the email or the reasons to why it is fake, do these people believe everything they read in the news paper or everything they are told? Everyone has a right to an opinion but please make an informed decision using the facts and taking a look at the email in question?
User avatar
Dagger83
Posts: 524
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:39 pm

You'll be posting the email in question then?
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Chelseadagger
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:16 pm

Dagger83 wrote:You'll be posting the email in question then?
I don’t have a copy, but I have seen it. So have others. Maybe the club could release it to clear this whole thing up and put this one to bed? Give people the opportunity to make their own minds up rather than just telling people it is fake? Telling people is fake with no proof and not showing them kind of makes the “North Korean daggers” message on the flag even more accurate than ever?
Adrian
Posts: 1261
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:09 pm

Why should the club release it?

If those that believe it to be real can prove it then they should do so. They're the ones trying to use it against the club. It's odd that it took so long for them to present to to Hopkin in the first place.

The whole thing is utterly childish. Some clearly have a pathetic vendetta against Thompson and seem to have no idea of them potential damage that they are causing by going on with this rubbish.
If I was Glyn Hopkin I'd be seriously questioning why I'd want to part with my hard-earned to end up having to deal with this stuff that isn't even playground level.

It's interesting that those that are trying to force Thompson out then complain about the club being like North Korea - they don't seem to be too aware of how their own actions can be perceived.
Chelseadagger
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:16 pm

Adrian wrote:Why should the club release it?

If those that believe it to be real can prove it then they should do so. They're the ones trying to use it against the club. It's odd that it took so long for them to present to to Hopkin in the first place.

The whole thing is utterly childish. Some clearly have a pathetic vendetta against Thompson and seem to have no idea of them potential damage that they are causing by going on with this rubbish.
If I was Glyn Hopkin I'd be seriously questioning why I'd want to part with my hard-earned to end up having to deal with this stuff that isn't even playground level.

It's interesting that those that are trying to force Thompson out then complain about the club being like North Korea - they don't seem to be too aware of how their own actions can be perceived.

Really? Why should they release it? To clear up the mess it has caused? Your right, it has caused damage, so surely it would make sense to put a stop to it by showing the fans that it is fake and that would be the final word on that right? Show people the email is a dud and that the people who have created the email are silly? Apprently it is a clumsy fake so everyone would be able to see it for what it is? All I’m suggesting is that they put a stop to this by shutting people up with the proof?
Alan
Posts: 1464
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 2:34 pm

I’ve seen the email sent to Fylde. It wasn’t copied to any other club.
User avatar
ThatRoundThing
Posts: 555
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2013 11:40 am

Not copied to any other club? So can it be presumed that Maidstone were sent a separate email?
Those concerned with the Club statement have stated that both Fylde and Maidstone were sent an email.

Was it also copied to Tony Payne?
Post Reply