Views from the Sieve

So the weeks most talked about podcast has the next instalment ready for your perusal.

In this episode we talk to Supporters Club Chairman, Russell Elmes as well as the impressive young manager of Dag & Red Ladies team, Jake Halsey.

We also have the next instalment of Cockney Byrites Storytime and in this weeks Classic Daggers, Terry chats about a record breaking player.

It's another long one but hopefully from now on all sides can work together, put any differences aside and move on.

Thanks in advance for listening

https://soundcloud.com/choochoofilms/a- ... enty-seven

Also, Eastleigh manager Andy Hessentieler (hope that is correct) kindly popped in just to do the National League scores.

Daggernewbie wrote:Now they have interviewed Steve Thompson are Joel & Terry going return the compliment and interview the supporters club to hear their side of the story ?

And the first thing Russell says is I've not listened to the Thommo interview... Doh!

Mike the Dagger wrote:

Daggernewbie wrote:Now they have interviewed Steve Thompson are Joel & Terry going return the compliment and interview the supporters club to hear their side of the story ?

And the first thing Russell says is I've not listened to the Thommo interview... Doh!

Who can blame him with the full time hours he puts in for the supporters club.

Maybe that's how we got into this sorry mess with people relying on hearsay and whispers. It would have been prudent to listen to the Thommo interview before defending yourself. Not taking away the hard work Russell puts in and I feel a bit sorry for him having to defend the actions of others. Maybe the flag people should put their side.

ARNU wrote:Maybe the flag people should put their side.

Unfortunately the flag owners are unable to do this as they are currently unable to get out from under the bus where the Supporters Club have thrown them.

"Allegedly"

I’m sorry but I feel the need to step in here and defend Russell.

It may well have been ‘prudent’ for him to have listened to the Thompson podcast first, but this a man who has recently been in poor health, has ever increasing aggravation with his eyesight, works extremely hard as SC Chairman and was under pressure from various parties to put the SC side across – so he managed to oblige and took part in this, with what I imagine was very little preparation time.

Despite not listening to the previous Podcast I thought he came across extremely well, gave honest answers to every single question asked of him and gave a fair and reasonable side of events from the ‘other’ side.

Talk of throwing the flag owners under the bus is way off the mark and very unfair on Russell.

dagger4eva wrote:I’m sorry but I feel the need to step in here and defend Russell.

It may well have been ‘prudent’ for him to have listened to the Thompson podcast first, but this a man who has recently been in poor health, has ever increasing aggravation with his eyesight, works extremely hard as SC Chairman and was under pressure from various parties to put the SC side across – so he managed to oblige and took part in this, with what I imagine was very little preparation time.

Despite not listening to the previous Podcast I thought he came across extremely well, gave honest answers to every single question asked of him and gave a fair and reasonable side of events from the ‘other’ side.

Talk of throwing the flag owners under the bus is way off the mark and very unfair on Russell.

Wouldn't it have been better to put the interview off then and get some prep time in? Surely better to be prepared next week?

dagger4eva wrote:Talk of throwing the flag owners under the bus is way off the mark and very unfair on Russell.

Supporters Club statement 26/10/17:

"We would like to add that the members in question had several meetings with Mr. Hopkin and Mr. Bennett."

"The paper in question was handed over to Mr. Hopkin by the members in, we believe, good faith."

"...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."

Supporters Club statement 8/2/18:

"We note the comments on the club statement about a viscous campaign against the managing director. We are not aware of any such campaign but assume that this refers to the ‘obviously fake email’. The members involved thought long and hard before bringing it to the attention of Glyn Hopkin. As far as the committee is concerned this was shown to Glyn Hopkin in good faith."

Russell on the Podcast:

"I didn't know what they (the flag owners) wanted to talk to him (Hopkin) about, I didn't ask."

"...the flag owners produced what the club are calling a 'clumsy fake email.'"

yet...

"I knew that the email was given to the flag holders in confidence."

Not having a go, but not listening to the previous interview is an error as he said he was defending some of the points made in the previous interview. He came across very well and is a legend otherwise.

More infighting on the back of another interview

If the flag owners are now under a bus does that mean that they won't be bringing their stupid f***ing flags to future games?

To be fair to Russell, he told us before recording that he had not listened to the podcast, he had tried but due to a technical problem with his tablet he was unable to. He also offered to come back next week after he had heard it.
As we had him there we decided to go ahead with the interview.
It wasn't as if Russell was unaware of some of the issues that Steve had brought up in the previous podcast. To be fair he only addressed the stuff he had heard about.

No infighting from me. I like Russell and I like Thommo. Let's not call everything infighting. It was a minor mistake that if the other side had made it I'd have bought it up too ( if Mike hadn't already). Nobody died , he came across fine. Clearly a misunderstanding the whole sorry mess.

It was interesting to read Paul Gwinn's email to the SC on 14th July 2017 stating the Confederate flag was banned but that he, personally, was willing to hand over £120 for the flag. I haven't seen what the response was. They knew it was an issue, they had the offer to compensate them for it in writing and refused it. July was the Summer, correct?

Also interested to know why the flag issue could have been solved with a meeting "in the Summer", when the same meeting in August (still the Summer) didn't resolve the issue.

At that meeting they agreed that the club (or the Supporters Club for that matter) could not stop the flag being taken to away games, not that the flag was acceptable to the club. Am I reading that correctly?

I also wonder who passed "the clumsy fake email" over to the flag holders at Woking? If they ever climb out from under the bus, they might want to answer that one.