Dane Murphy breaks the silence

at some point... when the club is in better hands. But at this point I think I’m just done with it. Sure not for good, but there is nothing about this ownership that I’m willing to support.

 

I'm with you on the owners DW but I'll still be there. It's my Club not theirs.

 

I went on Saturday to support the young lads on the pitch and in the dugout. I trained my binoculars on the directors box, but saw only empty seats. The cowards didn't bother to turn up. I went ballistic when Alex Mowatt scored - a little bit of wee and lots of tears came out. I clapped at the end as the players came over. I enjoyed what was a really good game.

Afterwards I started to think that Alex, Cauley Woodrow and maybe Kenny Dougall may end up leaving in January, and who would blame them? That upsets me more that the Stendel separation. As a fan, under these owners there's nothing to look forward to. The squad will be either of relegation standard, or will be decimated until it becomes relegation standard.

Owners: Have you any clue how this feels? Good luck with selling season tickets next season. Leave, and soon.

 

That's what it's usually like, it's like polar opposites comparing the atmosphere on here to what it like on matchday.

Take this site with a pinch of salt and a laugh and enjoy the matches on Saturdays.

 

I’ve come to learn that this place is rather on the negative side not just in football terms but generally.

 

Dane Murphy was in the directors box along with James Cryne, Mrs Cryne and another bloke who could have been Conway, not a clear view of him.

 

Agreed about the Crynes, Conway wasn't there though, unless he was incognito. I don't blame Dane Murphy for the situation, in the same way that I don't blame Whitey and our superb media team for "that" statement. The Crynes get the benefit of the doubt from me, after all, they're Reds fans too.

 

I am usually decisive. But this is messing with my head,. Dalestyke has got it right. I didn't want to be there Saturday but from 3pm I did. But I didn't. They may want shut. In other thoughts maybe Daniel has done something which they want to take up legally, hence the silence. I think not but who knows. I am so glad they played ok and got a draw. I still think what they have done and how they have done it is appalling. Tough times to come.

 

I just what to say that there seems to be assertions from some quarters that Daniel may be subject to legal action by the club, and the club don't want to comment as a result.

If people want to ponder whether legal action may be behind the clubs silence.... just consider that the club could be the ones subject to legal action for its actions AGAINST Daniel.

You know, those calling for open minds and all that.

 

I was told last week that both parties believe they have grounds, on differing matters, but that there's not a chance either/any will go to court... you'll have to speculate as to why that may be as I don't want to suggest anything that I later cannot confirm or deny or elaborate on without potentially getting into trouble myself. A remote possibility but I'd rather not run the risk.

It's believed, or was believed last week, that the likeliest outcome will be that both sides will drop and go separate ways. If that's the case I think it will be a long time, if ever, before what actually happened is in public domain and I'm not sure how the club will attempt to draw a line under it publicly. The only way I think it will all come out in the near future is if one side persists and some details are leaked to the press, perhaps intentionally by one of the parties involved...

It's important to note that the above comes from someone within the club who will not be privy to goings on at board level. I was not told any specifics regarding the claims of either side, either because the person does not know or because they didn't want to say. I also don't know whether the situation has changed since last week. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the above and don't expect anybody to believe a word I say anyway. I am, after all, a pretty much anonymous messageboard poster with the alias Wilmersdorfer Winky. You can take it or leave it.

 

That seems very logical to me. I've seen numerous instances where a claim is met with counterclaim to try and force something to go away by confronting it in an aggressive manner rather than face up to responsibilities.

If the club were completely in the right, I'd fully expect it to have been leaked by now or put out some form of statement that suggested its position was one of strength to detract from criticism.

That they haven't is highly telling to me. The then bizarre publication of a soundbite from the CEO to say they have been useless at communicating.... through just one channel that many people wont have seen... just adds petrol to a white hot bonfire.

Maybe we could do with experience at CEO level as well as in the squad.

Thanks for outlining that very nuanced bottom covering precis... completely understand the vagueness, I wouldn't want anyone getting in bother if our owners turn out to be very thin skinned and highly litigious.

 

Chortle!