Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Peter Crouch joins the Dulwich Hamlet board

Given that Bedfont have an average home attendance of 98 this season (155 last) compared to Margate’s 500+ this season it is only to be expected that one might bring greater following to the FA Cup. As I’ve said in my earlier post all this is unquantifiable. If we’ve lost all these long term supporters to the “Crouch Effect” where have they gone? I’d have loved them to be at Peckham Town but Saturday’s attendance there of 103 when Dulwich had 1800+ for Folkestone suggests otherwise. The gates for the first three games may be up compared to the first three games last season but gates against those teams, Braintree, Slough and Welling were also significantly less than the gates against the same teams last season (2705, 2705 & 3334) as opposed to this (1808, 2173 & 2320). I’m sure this has not gone unnoticed. Outside factors may or may not come into play but it’s going to be interesting how this plays out going forward. Dartford will be a very good bellwether given the crowd for a Saturday in August against a local-ish team was less than 2000+. Even with a train strike I expect the crowd to be higher.
A crowd of 100+ at Peckham is a bloody great crowd for the division, although I'm not sure what it's got to do with Dulwich Hamlet or Peter Crouch.
 
A crowd of 100+ at Peckham is a bloody great crowd for the division, although I'm not sure what it's got to do with Dulwich Hamlet or Peter Crouch.
If long term fans are leaving Dulwich Hamlet in their droves as your previous post suggests then where are these fans going? On my trips to Peckham Town, I have seen long term Dulwich fans as well as more recent converts from the early days of the most recent revival of the club under Gavin. But these are fans I also see at the Dulwich games that I am able to attend so I’m curious as to where these missing fans are now.
 
If long term fans are leaving Dulwich Hamlet in their droves as your previous post suggests then where are these fans going? On my trips to Peckham Town, I have seen long term Dulwich fans as well as more recent converts from the early days of the most recent revival of the club under Gavin. But these are fans I also see at the Dulwich games that I am able to attend so I’m curious as to where these missing fans are now.
I never said that fans were leaving 'in droves.' You've made that bit up for dramatic effect.

What I actually said was that some were attending fewer games. And there is plenty of evidence to support that assertion in this very forum.

And I never stated that they were all going to Peckham Town either, although I can't ever recall seeing them at home and not seeing any Hamlet fans there.
 
Who could have predicted this.
Greedy shits. And it's utterly shameful that Hamlet - with their self professed and loudly trumpeted anti-gambling stance - were only too happy to have him strongly associated with the club. Total hypocrisy.

Football pundits Harry Redknapp, Peter Crouch and Robbie Keane are helping to promote betting on World Cup matches despite stricter rules on celebrity gambling endorsements to protect young people.

Former England striker Crouch is a brand ambassador for gambling firm Paddy Power, appearing in advertising for the tournament.
 
Greedy shits. And it's utterly shameful that Hamlet - with their self professed and loudly trumpeted anti-gambling stance - were only too happy to have him strongly associated with the club. Total hypocrisy.
It’s just depressing how inevitable it was that a process and subsequent legislation loudly proclaimed as protecting people from harm was in fact designed all along to produce loopholes to allow the people doing the harm to carry on regardless.

On a completely unrelated note, how is the Crouch Review coming along?
 
Greedy shits. And it's utterly shameful that Hamlet - with their self professed and loudly trumpeted anti-gambling stance - were only too happy to have him strongly associated with the club. Total hypocrisy.
Clearly the conversations the club were having with Crouch about his involvement with gambling advertising had the desired effect. He must have been looking at the Big Step campaign and its supporters and laughing.
 
Clearly the conversations the club were having with Crouch about his involvement with gambling advertising had the desired effect. He must have been looking at the Big Step campaign and its supporters and laughing.
The fact that the club remain utterly unrepentant about inviting him to become part of Hamlet really fucking grates, particularly as he clearly just used them to further his own riches and career.
 
The fact that the club remain utterly unrepentant about inviting him to become part of Hamlet really fucking grates, particularly as he clearly just used them to further his own riches and career.
Fits nicely on the list of things they're going to ignore and just want to go away, alongside not having any contingency plans to maintain the playing infrastructure of the club if Gavin Rose and the Aspire Academy were no longer in place. I mean, how many questions have been asked on that only to go completely ignored over the years?
 
Saw an ad earlier promoting male mental health, all corporate branded pish. It's good to talk, that kind of spiel.

What has made me giggle is that Peter Crouch was front and centre on it. The same guy that takes coin from one of the biggest factors in male suicide, the gambling industry.

Pick a side and stick to it. You can't play both.
 
Saw an ad earlier promoting male mental health, all corporate branded pish. It's good to talk, that kind of spiel.

What has made me giggle is that Peter Crouch was front and centre on it. The same guy that takes coin from one of the biggest factors in male suicide, the gambling industry.

Pick a side and stick to it. You can't play both.
Said of a man who played for Southampton and Pompey… What should we expect.
 
Saw an ad earlier promoting male mental health, all corporate branded pish. It's good to talk, that kind of spiel.

What has made me giggle is that Peter Crouch was front and centre on it. The same guy that takes coin from one of the biggest factors in male suicide, the gambling industry.

Pick a side and stick to it. You can't play both.

Yep. It's despicable industry

Bereaved families demand investigation of every UK gambling-linked suicide

Despite an estimated 400 such deaths in England a year, charity claims regulator has looked at only two since 2015


Blood on their hands: How 500 people – mostly young men – kill themselves every year after getting hooked on gambling by ruthlessly greedy betting giants
Gambling is estimated to be the cause of 500 suicides in the UK a year


 
Obviously from a personal point of view the documentary was important to me although in the end what was apparently scheduled to be an entire episode devoted to the game on Transgender Day of Visibility was squeezed in alongside a trip to the planning office and the new sponsor. There was so much that more than disappointed over the course of a disjointed and fragmented series. I recall a former director of the club coming on here and insisting that the documentary would be used to highlight gambling on football and the club’s association with Big Step yet there was radio silence on that along with a number of causes this club has espoused in recent years. A great opportunity was missed there. I compare SOBG with the Wrexham doc and from what I’ve seen of that there seems to be much greater involvement and cooperation across the club there, something lacking at Dulwich with less than a dozen individuals focused on and an apparent unwillingness for others to involve themselves including the majority of players, full time employees and presumably the bulk of the Trust. I’ve mentioned this before but it takes until late in the final episode before the Save Dulwich Hamlet campaign even makes an appearance and then it’s with zero mention of Meadow by name. It’s at this point that Mishi makes an all too brief appearance although it takes until after the credits that he is mentioned by name. Again from a personal point of view I’ve had great feedback from so many female and nonbinary players I play with so that is still incredibly affirming but in a world cluttered with football documentaries this ain’t going to setting that world alight.
 
Obviously from a personal point of view the documentary was important to me although in the end what was apparently scheduled to be an entire episode devoted to the game on Transgender Day of Visibility was squeezed in alongside a trip to the planning office and the new sponsor. There was so much that more than disappointed over the course of a disjointed and fragmented series. I recall a former director of the club coming on here and insisting that the documentary would be used to highlight gambling on football and the club’s association with Big Step yet there was radio silence on that along with a number of causes this club has espoused in recent years. A great opportunity was missed there. I compare SOBG with the Wrexham doc and from what I’ve seen of that there seems to be much greater involvement and cooperation across the club there, something lacking at Dulwich with less than a dozen individuals focused on and an apparent unwillingness for others to involve themselves including the majority of players, full time employees and presumably the bulk of the Trust. I’ve mentioned this before but it takes until late in the final episode before the Save Dulwich Hamlet campaign even makes an appearance and then it’s with zero mention of Meadow by name. It’s at this point that Mishi makes an all too brief appearance although it takes until after the credits that he is mentioned by name. Again from a personal point of view I’ve had great feedback from so many female and nonbinary players I play with so that is still incredibly affirming but in a world cluttered with football documentaries this ain’t going to setting that world alight.

Too many people at the club are all too willing to throw themselves in front of the medias gaze whenever it falls upon us. I would contrast this with the way Mishi conducted himself with as little fanfare as possible. As you point out, Mishi barely got mentioned. That sits neck and neck for me with St Crouch of the Avarices advert today as the biggest insult to the club. If there had been no Mishi, there'd be no club. That's not to dismiss others at all, I've been around long enough to know that, but Mishi was the club and the club was Mishi.

I really do feel like someone at the club now should hold their hands up and say we were duped or something. At least, with our profile, we know what to do next time mass media comes a calling, looking for a non league club to pat on the head.

I would also, while the idea is in my mind, point out that as a support base, we are diverse in terms of skill sets (but not much else. That's perhaps for another time ;) ). We have a great many skilled writers, excellent communicators and media-savvy types. What I'm getting at is, it shouldn't be beyond us to tell our own story and make it the REAL this time.
 
Obviously from a personal point of view the documentary was important to me although in the end what was apparently scheduled to be an entire episode devoted to the game on Transgender Day of Visibility was squeezed in alongside a trip to the planning office and the new sponsor. There was so much that more than disappointed over the course of a disjointed and fragmented series. I recall a former director of the club coming on here and insisting that the documentary would be used to highlight gambling on football and the club’s association with Big Step yet there was radio silence on that along with a number of causes this club has espoused in recent years. A great opportunity was missed there. I compare SOBG with the Wrexham doc and from what I’ve seen of that there seems to be much greater involvement and cooperation across the club there, something lacking at Dulwich with less than a dozen individuals focused on and an apparent unwillingness for others to involve themselves including the majority of players, full time employees and presumably the bulk of the Trust. I’ve mentioned this before but it takes until late in the final episode before the Save Dulwich Hamlet campaign even makes an appearance and then it’s with zero mention of Meadow by name. It’s at this point that Mishi makes an all too brief appearance although it takes until after the credits that he is mentioned by name. Again from a personal point of view I’ve had great feedback from so many female and nonbinary players I play with so that is still incredibly affirming but in a world cluttered with football documentaries this ain’t going to setting that world alight.
With Crouch still being employed as the face of Paddy Power he should never, ever been allowed anywhere near the club in any kind of official capacity.

This statement sounds like it comes from an entirely different club:

 
Too many people at the club are all too willing to throw themselves in front of the medias gaze whenever it falls upon us. I would contrast this with the way Mishi conducted himself with as little fanfare as possible. As you point out, Mishi barely got mentioned. That sits neck and neck for me with St Crouch of the Avarices advert today as the biggest insult to the club. If there had been no Mishi, there'd be no club. That's not to dismiss others at all, I've been around long enough to know that, but Mishi was the club and the club was Mishi.

I really do feel like someone at the club now should hold their hands up and say we were duped or something. At least, with our profile, we know what to do next time mass media comes a calling, looking for a non league club to pat on the head.

I would also, while the idea is in my mind, point out that as a support base, we are diverse in terms of skill sets (but not much else. That's perhaps for another time ;) ). We have a great many skilled writers, excellent communicators and media-savvy types. What I'm getting at is, it shouldn't be beyond us to tell our own story and make it the REAL this time.
Tony I really don’t want to get into a who did what to help save the club but to say Mishi saved the club is plain ridiculous and an insult to those who really did.
Mishi became a great face of the campaign but he was more like Private Frazer from Dad’s Army at the start when we were thrown out.
I would say the biggest single factors were the 12th Man Team, the mystery donors of money who just wanted to make sure we paid everyone, Save Dulwich Hamlet & Tom Cullen.
Once the campaigns got rolling Mishi was amazing but believe me he thought we were sure to go out of business in the early days of our lockout.
 
Tony I really don’t want to get into a who did what to help save the club but to say Mishi saved the club is plain ridiculous and an insult to those who really did.
Mishi became a great face of the campaign but he was more like Private Frazer from Dad’s Army at the start when we were thrown out.
I would say the biggest single factors were the 12th Man Team, the mystery donors of money who just wanted to make sure we paid everyone, Save Dulwich Hamlet & Tom Cullen.
Once the campaigns got rolling Mishi was amazing but believe me he thought we were sure to go out of business in the early days of our lockout.
I imagine the oodles of positive press coming out every week from some outlets may have contributed just a tiny smidgen too.
 
Tony I really don’t want to get into a who did what to help save the club but to say Mishi saved the club is plain ridiculous and an insult to those who really did.
Mishi became a great face of the campaign but he was more like Private Frazer from Dad’s Army at the start when we were thrown out.
I would say the biggest single factors were the 12th Man Team, the mystery donors of money who just wanted to make sure we paid everyone, Save Dulwich Hamlet & Tom Cullen.
Once the campaigns got rolling Mishi was amazing but believe me he thought we were sure to go out of business in the early days of our lockout.

Mishi was the driving force behind a lot of the early work behind getting newer fans through the turnstiles. Were it not for that influx then there wouldn't have been the pressure there later on, ergo he saved the club. And yes, I am aware of his thoughts when we were locked out given I used to speak to him. Amazing I know. :thumbs:
 
Hmm. I had to re-read to check as I guess I’d approached it assuming that it did… But no, it doesn’t. It doesn’t say they lose but…
I wasn’t impressed as a result, as the internet said they won.

Made the article seem a bit stupid. But at least I know the rules are stupid now.
 
Peter Crouch’s lawyers think Peter Crouch is shit.
I could have told him that for far fewer zeros.
Thoughts Ben Clasper ?

That's way below Barney's usual quality of article, assume he was up against it deadline wise. Not sure being shit was the criteria as much as the potential appeal to U18s and this article let's trying to make a clever dig get in the way of all of the key points that should be made about the government's gambling review and the ASA. Gambling was the one thing explicitly out of scope of the fan led review due to the fact that it had it's own review in progress. It started before the fan led review and is still subject to delay even after the fan led review has made it out the other side so it is starting to get a Sue Gray whiff about it which is very concerning and this was a real missed opportunity to shine a light on that.
 
That's way below Barney's usual quality of article, assume he was up against it deadline wise. Not sure being shit was the criteria as much as the potential appeal to U18s and this article let's trying to make a clever dig get in the way of all of the key points that should be made about the government's gambling review and the ASA. Gambling was the one thing explicitly out of scope of the fan led review due to the fact that it had it's own review in progress. It started before the fan led review and is still subject to delay even after the fan led review has made it out the other side so it is starting to get a Sue Gray whiff about it which is very concerning and this was a real missed opportunity to shine a light on that.
Yes “being shit” was a shorthand… Rather than the bigger picture, and I don’t disagree with what you’re saying there, I was more interested in your view on Crouch. It was obvious it would happen of course the moment the Govt said the criteria for being able to do gambling ads was not appealing to kids that the more selfish, money-hungry celebs would line up saying no under 85 had heard of them… But to do so so blatantly and cynically, and frankly so ridiculously - I mean the idea a player’s career is judged by their final club is laughable; Ian Rush is a failed Wrexham player on that basis - frankly, you must be embarrassed that he’s associated with Dulwich?
 
Yes “being shit” was a shorthand… Rather than the bigger picture, and I don’t disagree with what you’re saying there, I was more interested in your view on Crouch. It was obvious it would happen of course the moment the Govt said the criteria for being able to do gambling ads was not appealing to kids that the more selfish, money-hungry celebs would line up saying no under 85 had heard of them… But to do so so blatantly and cynically, and frankly so ridiculously - I mean the idea a player’s career is judged by their final club is laughable; Ian Rush is a failed Wrexham player on that basis - frankly, you must be embarrassed that he’s associated with Dulwich?
again, and this is something Barney really failed on, it isn’t where you end your career that matters as opposed to appeal to 14-17 year olds and the only clubs he played for when anyone in that age bracket could possibly have been watching were Burnley and Stoke. Barney’s desire for a gag has allowed a key point to be missed that this is a very badly written guideline and this decision sets a bad but legally correct precedent. I also think this type of case is an absurd distraction, no one should be arguing about the content and line up of an ad, they should be arguing to get rid of ads.
 
again, and this is something Barney really failed on, it isn’t where you end your career that matters as opposed to appeal to 14-17 year olds and the only clubs he played for when anyone in that age bracket could possibly have been watching were Burnley and Stoke. Barney’s desire for a gag has allowed a key point to be missed that this is a very badly written guideline and this decision sets a bad but legally correct precedent. I also think this type of case is an absurd distraction, no one should be arguing about the content and line up of an ad, they should be arguing to get rid of ads.
He doesn’t have to take advantage of it though does he? He doesn’t have to be so desperate to sell gambling to kids that he instructs his lawyers to make a ridiculous argument that I’m quite sure he doesn’t believe himself (edit to add: which ignores the fact he’s a presenter on Champions League programmes loads of u18s will watch). Or is it okay to play the system and work the loophole?
 
Back
Top Bottom