Just about a year on from the last interview, DiggerDagger.com catches up with Dave Bennett.
http://www.fansfocus.net/dagenhamandred ... id=8324634
Interview with Dave Bennett
-
- Posts: 3960
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 6:08 pm
Decent, thanks Mike. My flag is right in the thick of it in the photo used
So, taking Dave Bennett at his word (and I've no reason to doubt his word) Thommo did not ban the flags or send an email to 21 clubs as claimed elsewhere and the club have tried without success to speak to the flag owners but are still willing to speak with them. So the hysteria can end now?
- Auntie Merge
- Posts: 2225
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:43 pm
There are huge inaccuracies in Dave Bennett's interview and his assumptions about the flags.
Firstly. The club has known who owns the confederate flag. They were at the fans forum. The owner of the confederate flag asked a question as to why the meeting about the flag had been cancelled and was told by Paul Gwinne that there would be NO meeting about the flag.
The fans forum was on 3/8/17 and it was said that the North Korean flag was not banned, although I did not report it - why would I? It was incidental.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2717&start=10#p34016
The North Korean flag has been around for ages. Everton might have been the first time Dave Bennett noticed it, but it had been around for a lot longer.
When I started this thread
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2761
Only the Confederate Flag was banned from home games. There was no mention by the club whatsoever of banning the North Korean Daggers flag.
Since the fans forum I understand the supporters club have received no communication from the club that the North Korean flag was now banned. Seeing as the banning of the Confederate flag was given in an email, surely an email would be sent about North Korea?
I also, as a member of the supporters club, find the criticism the supporters club get uncalled for and unjust. They are always available and always on call to support any member and have meetings with the club, when the club make themselves available. It's a wonder why the supporters club committee haven't resigned en masse given the unnecessary hate they receive.
Firstly. The club has known who owns the confederate flag. They were at the fans forum. The owner of the confederate flag asked a question as to why the meeting about the flag had been cancelled and was told by Paul Gwinne that there would be NO meeting about the flag.
The fans forum was on 3/8/17 and it was said that the North Korean flag was not banned, although I did not report it - why would I? It was incidental.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2717&start=10#p34016
The North Korean flag has been around for ages. Everton might have been the first time Dave Bennett noticed it, but it had been around for a lot longer.
When I started this thread
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2761
Only the Confederate Flag was banned from home games. There was no mention by the club whatsoever of banning the North Korean Daggers flag.
Since the fans forum I understand the supporters club have received no communication from the club that the North Korean flag was now banned. Seeing as the banning of the Confederate flag was given in an email, surely an email would be sent about North Korea?
I also, as a member of the supporters club, find the criticism the supporters club get uncalled for and unjust. They are always available and always on call to support any member and have meetings with the club, when the club make themselves available. It's a wonder why the supporters club committee haven't resigned en masse given the unnecessary hate they receive.
- Mike the Dagger
- Posts: 2307
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:09 am
- Contact:
I'm not active on the forum at the moment as I have taken my blue and white scarf and gone on a flounce, however I don't feel I can let the post above be the last word here on the interview published at DiggerDagger on Tuesday.
This is a proper storm in a teacup! The interview gave a different perspective yes, but "huge inaccuracies". Really?
If we are on "huge inaccuracies", the original post on this issue stated that the email had been sent to all future opponents this season, which is not true. This thread was then locked, North Korean style... ;)
Both sides here, the Board and Supporters Club, have got the best interests of the club in mind and surely given current news events, displaying a flag that is viewed as racist by a fair majority in the US and elsewhere, it does make sense not to have this associated with the club. Surely the owner of the flag can appreciate this even if it was not originally intended as such?
It seems both sides feel the other is not talking, so maybe it is time for the parties to meet up to talk this issue, and the other underlying issues behind the current impasse, including winter coats etc, which seem to be mostly personality based to me, through. I talk to both sides and they are perfectly reasonable groups of people most of the time.
This will hopefully mean that all parties can pull together again to ensure that the Daggers are successful on the pitch and off it, which should be everyone's goal, surely?
For clarification, this is all personal opinion...Auntie Merge wrote:There are huge inaccuracies in Dave Bennett's interview and his assumptions about the flags.
Firstly. The club has known who owns the confederate flag. They were at the fans forum. The owner of the confederate flag asked a question as to why the meeting about the flag had been cancelled and was told by Paul Gwinne that there would be NO meeting about the flag.
The fans forum was on 3/8/17 and it was said that the North Korean flag was not banned, although I did not report it - why would I? It was incidental.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2717&start=10#p34016
The North Korean flag has been around for ages. Everton might have been the first time Dave Bennett noticed it, but it had been around for a lot longer.
When I started this thread
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2761
Only the Confederate Flag was banned from home games. There was no mention by the club whatsoever of banning the North Korean Daggers flag.
Since the fans forum I understand the supporters club have received no communication from the club that the North Korean flag was now banned. Seeing as the banning of the Confederate flag was given in an email, surely an email would be sent about North Korea?
I also, as a member of the supporters club, find the criticism the supporters club get uncalled for and unjust. They are always available and always on call to support any member and have meetings with the club, when the club make themselves available. It's a wonder why the supporters club committee haven't resigned en masse given the unnecessary hate they receive.
This is a proper storm in a teacup! The interview gave a different perspective yes, but "huge inaccuracies". Really?
If we are on "huge inaccuracies", the original post on this issue stated that the email had been sent to all future opponents this season, which is not true. This thread was then locked, North Korean style... ;)
Both sides here, the Board and Supporters Club, have got the best interests of the club in mind and surely given current news events, displaying a flag that is viewed as racist by a fair majority in the US and elsewhere, it does make sense not to have this associated with the club. Surely the owner of the flag can appreciate this even if it was not originally intended as such?
It seems both sides feel the other is not talking, so maybe it is time for the parties to meet up to talk this issue, and the other underlying issues behind the current impasse, including winter coats etc, which seem to be mostly personality based to me, through. I talk to both sides and they are perfectly reasonable groups of people most of the time.
This will hopefully mean that all parties can pull together again to ensure that the Daggers are successful on the pitch and off it, which should be everyone's goal, surely?
- Auntie Merge
- Posts: 2225
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:43 pm
I am currently awaiting proof that my statement was correct. If it finds out I am wrong (a rare occurrence btw) then I will accept I am wrong and amend things accordingly. But my sources tell me I am not wrong.If we are on "huge innaccuracies", the original post on this issue stated that the email had been sent to all future opponents this season, which is not true. This thread was then locked, North Korean style... ;)
Dave Bennett mentioning the flags is ill advised when Glyn Hopkin is trying to resolve things amicably. His 'personal opinion' was hugely inaccurate as proven in my post. If the club really wants everyone to pull together then people should shut up and not give interviews about subjects and meetings that they have not been party too.
Also, having such a dig at the supporters club, who IMO do a brilliant job, is not the way a director of the football club should behave.
- Mike the Dagger
- Posts: 2307
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:09 am
- Contact:
Proof ought to be easy to come by, all you need is a single email from anyone at Dagenham & Redbridge FC to any one of 19 clubs on the subject. You know enough people that ought to be able to come straight back on that.Auntie Merge wrote:I am currently awaiting proof that my statement was correct. If it finds out I am wrong (a rare occurrence btw) then I will accept I am wrong and amend things accordingly. But my sources tell me I am not wrong.If we are on "huge innaccuracies", the original post on this issue stated that the email had been sent to all future opponents this season, which is not true. This thread was then locked, North Korean style... ;)
Dave Bennett mentioning the flags is ill advised when Glyn Hopkin is trying to resolve things amicably. His 'personal opinion' was hugely inaccurate as proven in my post. If the club really wants everyone to pull together then people should shut up and not give interviews about subjects and meetings that they have not been party too.
Also, having such a dig at the supporters club, who IMO do a brilliant job, is not the way a director of the football club should behave.
What is "hugely inaccurate"?
Which "dig at the supporters club" are you referring to?
And for clarity, I asked about the flags as it was the current hot topic apparently. Dave was open and honest in his reply (as he has always been with me).
Jesus fecking Christ this flag shite is getting on mine and I guess a lot of others bloody nerves,get it sorted.
Why don't the club just give the confederate flag owner back some dosh so he can get another one.And while we are at it,most grounds you visit these days all seem to have nice big flags that stay in the ground at the back of a stand.So why don't the club get a nice big flag (red & blue halved obviously) up in the ol tbs just behind the lads,that they and can supporters agree on.Happy days, everyones a winner and bloody well move on.
Why don't the club just give the confederate flag owner back some dosh so he can get another one.And while we are at it,most grounds you visit these days all seem to have nice big flags that stay in the ground at the back of a stand.So why don't the club get a nice big flag (red & blue halved obviously) up in the ol tbs just behind the lads,that they and can supporters agree on.Happy days, everyones a winner and bloody well move on.
-
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 5:18 pm
How's this for a flag ..,
- Attachments
-
- Thommogate
- IMG_1676.JPG (97.55 KiB) Viewed 22645 times
- Auntie Merge
- Posts: 2225
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:43 pm
I see the Supporters Club have posted a response to Dave Bennett's interview.
https://daggerssc.wordpress.com/2017/08 ... agger-com/
https://daggerssc.wordpress.com/2017/08 ... agger-com/
Comparing the interview with the supporters club statement, they actually dispute very little of what Bennett says, when you drill down into the detail. The following is my take.
It is common ground that the North Korean Flag was a jibe at Thommo and the board. It is common ground that there have been complaints about the Trump Daggers Flag.
The Supporters Club accept that they were contacted by a supporter on behalf of Bennett in connection with attempts to identify the owner of the flag. They were aware of the identity of the owner of the flag, but had agreed not to identify him. They are critical of the club for not directly contacting the supporters club and that the matter could have been swiftly resolved if the club had done so. However, it is not clear why the supporters club failed to contact the club once they became aware of the issue with the flag through indirect contact. They could have offered to be an intermediary without naming the owner of the flag.
The supporters club appear to dispute that an offer of reimbursement was made by Bennett, although they accept he had asked to know how much the flag cost. It seems probable to me that the reason that the price was requested was because of an offer to reimburse. This is consistent with the email of 14th July to which the Supporters Club refer as withdrawing Bennett’s offer and banning the Trump Flag and the offer to reimburse being made again by the Chairman but declined by the owner of the flag.
The supporters club state that “He implies that Glyn decided to ban the flags after incidents at a number of games this season.” The relevant part of the interview reads “The flags turned up at Boreham Wood and Eastleigh, and with events in the USA and North Korea, plus the behaviour of a few supporters that let the club down badly at Eastleigh, Glyn decided to ban the flags from games under our existing ground rules that don’t allow racist or inflammatory banners.” In effect, the supporters club are saying that there is no evidence that the flags caused poor behaviour, or that the owners engaged in such behaviour. They do not deny the flags fall within the description of inflammatory or racist, which is in no way intended to impute any such intention to the owners of the flags. If the club are dealing with the behaviour of a small element of supporters, it makes sense to deal with the flags as part of that. I do however agree that pre-takeover, it does not seem appropriate for a single director to be making the decision to ban flags, this should be an issue for the board or the safety officer.
The Supporters Club deny that they have dictated who should attend meetings. They are not right about this, as it evident from their statement that: “The only stipulation was that they could see no point in having a meeting with just Steve Thompson and Dave Bennett. In fact, they would be more than happy to meet all four Directors and in particular Dave Bennett, as they have points to raise with him regarding what was said during his contact with the unofficial supporter”
The supporters club state that they had arranged a meeting with the owners, but I am not clear who they mean, given that the takeover has not taken place. Bennett states that meetings were requested at short notice but that this was not always possible. That is not disputed by the Supporters Club, who provide reasons why that has, understandably, been the case. There is therefore no real factual dispute.
My conclusions are that the Supporters Club dispute that official contact was made with them, but do not dispute that they were aware that Bennett wanted to speak to the owner of the flag. They were aware of at least one offer to reimburse the owner, which they communicated to the owner and was refused. The Supporters Club do not dispute that the club has the power to ban the flags, but they quite reasonably question the power of Glyn Hopkin alone to ban them. The Supporters club do not dispute that they cancelled meetings at short notice. The Supporters Club’s contention that they have not made stipulations as to who they will meet with is unsustainable.
It is common ground that the North Korean Flag was a jibe at Thommo and the board. It is common ground that there have been complaints about the Trump Daggers Flag.
The Supporters Club accept that they were contacted by a supporter on behalf of Bennett in connection with attempts to identify the owner of the flag. They were aware of the identity of the owner of the flag, but had agreed not to identify him. They are critical of the club for not directly contacting the supporters club and that the matter could have been swiftly resolved if the club had done so. However, it is not clear why the supporters club failed to contact the club once they became aware of the issue with the flag through indirect contact. They could have offered to be an intermediary without naming the owner of the flag.
The supporters club appear to dispute that an offer of reimbursement was made by Bennett, although they accept he had asked to know how much the flag cost. It seems probable to me that the reason that the price was requested was because of an offer to reimburse. This is consistent with the email of 14th July to which the Supporters Club refer as withdrawing Bennett’s offer and banning the Trump Flag and the offer to reimburse being made again by the Chairman but declined by the owner of the flag.
The supporters club state that “He implies that Glyn decided to ban the flags after incidents at a number of games this season.” The relevant part of the interview reads “The flags turned up at Boreham Wood and Eastleigh, and with events in the USA and North Korea, plus the behaviour of a few supporters that let the club down badly at Eastleigh, Glyn decided to ban the flags from games under our existing ground rules that don’t allow racist or inflammatory banners.” In effect, the supporters club are saying that there is no evidence that the flags caused poor behaviour, or that the owners engaged in such behaviour. They do not deny the flags fall within the description of inflammatory or racist, which is in no way intended to impute any such intention to the owners of the flags. If the club are dealing with the behaviour of a small element of supporters, it makes sense to deal with the flags as part of that. I do however agree that pre-takeover, it does not seem appropriate for a single director to be making the decision to ban flags, this should be an issue for the board or the safety officer.
The Supporters Club deny that they have dictated who should attend meetings. They are not right about this, as it evident from their statement that: “The only stipulation was that they could see no point in having a meeting with just Steve Thompson and Dave Bennett. In fact, they would be more than happy to meet all four Directors and in particular Dave Bennett, as they have points to raise with him regarding what was said during his contact with the unofficial supporter”
The supporters club state that they had arranged a meeting with the owners, but I am not clear who they mean, given that the takeover has not taken place. Bennett states that meetings were requested at short notice but that this was not always possible. That is not disputed by the Supporters Club, who provide reasons why that has, understandably, been the case. There is therefore no real factual dispute.
My conclusions are that the Supporters Club dispute that official contact was made with them, but do not dispute that they were aware that Bennett wanted to speak to the owner of the flag. They were aware of at least one offer to reimburse the owner, which they communicated to the owner and was refused. The Supporters Club do not dispute that the club has the power to ban the flags, but they quite reasonably question the power of Glyn Hopkin alone to ban them. The Supporters club do not dispute that they cancelled meetings at short notice. The Supporters Club’s contention that they have not made stipulations as to who they will meet with is unsustainable.