Peter Crouch joins the Dulwich Hamlet board

[mick mccartney]

I realise that I'm one of the people who's opinion is now easily swept aside and/or ridiculed here, but if anyone can find a way to square Hamlet's stated 'anti gambling' stance with the election of a high profile pro-gambling celebrity, I'd love to hear their workings.

Oh, and scousedom - I'm still waiting for you to explain your comment about my opinion and 'hits'.

mate , i'm with you all the way . interesting fixture on July 17th , All Bets Are Off ( podcast) v The Peoples F.C. even more interesting , the venue . would you believe New Lodge , Billericay ? funny how the world turns , eh ?

 

[scousedom]

I realise that I'm one of the people who's opinion is now easily swept aside and/or ridiculed here, but if anyone can find a way to square Hamlet's stated 'anti gambling' stance with the election of a high profile pro-gambling celebrity, I'd love to hear their workings.

Oh, and scousedom - I'm still waiting for you to explain your comment about my opinion and 'hits'.

Why are you coming back to this now? Can’t be because the thread has been dead quiet for 48 hours.

 

[editor]

Why are you coming back to this now? Can’t be because the thread has been dead quiet for 48 hours.

Maybe it's because I've asked you five times now and have waited patiently for an answer, even after you insisted I answer every single 'point' in your opinionated post.

So it would be nice if you stuck to your word now and explained what you meant by what looked like a very offensive post.

 

[TonyWalt]

Oh good, I thought, a new post on the Peter Crouch thread, I wonder if there is more information…….only to find, it was more on this petty argument.

 

[editor]

Oh good, I thought, a new post on the Peter Crouch thread, I wonder if there is more information…….only to find, it was more on this petty argument.

When someone apparently accuses you of manufacturing an opinion on something you feel strongly about purely for the sake of 'clicks,' I think it's reasonable to ask for clarification because I find it a really offensive suggestion.

And it's only carrying on because the accuser has refused to back up his claim after being asked 6 times.

 

[NPDHFC]

It is pretty tiresome though, eh?

 

[editor]

It is pretty tiresome though, eh?

Absolutely agree. And that's why I've tried to get an answer so I can move on. But if someone appeared to be wildly misrepresenting your honesty and conviction - and you were publicly identifiable on this forum - I'm sure you'd like to get the issue clarified ASAP, no?

And in more related news, I emailed Ben Clasper a few days with my concerns about Crouch and gambling. To his credit, he promptly answered with an email that was so detailed and lengthy that I'm still taking it all in!

 

[NPDHFC]

I'd probably just let it go tbh, but each to their own I suppose.

 

[B.I.G]

Absolutely agree. And that's why I've tried to get an answer so I can move on. But if someone appeared to be wildly misrepresenting your honesty and conviction - and you were publicly identifiable on this forum - I'm sure you'd like to get the issue clarified ASAP, no?

And in more related news, I emailed Ben Clasper a few days with my concerns about Crouch and gambling. To his credit, he promptly answered with an email that was so detailed and lengthy that I'm still taking it all in!

Is it bullshit though?

 

[editor]

Is it bullshit though?

No. It was a long and considered response, and I'm grateful that he took the time to answer. That's not to say I agree with everything he wrote, mind. I still think it's a terrible idea overall.

 

[B.I.G]

No. It was a long and considered response, and I'm grateful that he took the time to answer. That's not to say I agree with everything he wrote, mind. I still think it's a terrible idea overall.

I’m surprised. Everything he says in public is condescending bollocks. Especially the bit about Crouch fitting in on the football side since Gav won’t be discussing anything with him at all.

 

[Stuart Fordyce]

I’m surprised. Everything he says in public is condescending bollocks. Especially the bit about Crouch fitting in on the football side since Gav won’t be discussing anything with him at all.

Yes, unless the club are foisting a very inexperienced coach on Gavin and Junior. That said Gavin never talks to anyone bar the South London Press on a very occasional basis so we won't really know.

 

[tonysingh]

There's been a glut of these fly on the wall documentaries over the last several years. I really am struggling to think of a single one where the club and it's fans have come out of it positively.

 

[Pink Panther]

Oh good, I thought, a new post on the Peter Crouch thread, I wonder if there is more information…….only to find, it was more on this petty argument.

The manager's view:

No coaching role for new Dulwich Hamlet director Peter Crouch

Peter Crouch will not be handed a coaching role by Dulwich Hamlet. It was announced last week that the former England international had been appointed as a director at the National League South sid…

londonnewsonline.co.uk

 

[editor]

The manager's view:

No coaching role for new Dulwich Hamlet director Peter Crouch

Peter Crouch will not be handed a coaching role by Dulwich Hamlet. It was announced last week that the former England international had been appointed as a director at the National League South sid…

londonnewsonline.co.uk

What a mess.

 

[Hamlet Pete]

Love how Gav slams the league at the end though

 

[scousedom]

Maybe it's because I've asked you five times now and have waited patiently for an answer, even after you insisted I answer every single 'point' in your opinionated post.

So it would be nice if you stuck to your word now and explained what you meant by what looked like a very offensive post.

Sigh....
I said what I meant. Here it is again.

For a moderator you aren’t very moderate. And that’s my point.

When I said it, did I think you were deliberately being extreme? Yes.
On calmer reflection over the following days did I? Less so.
Do I now? Somewhere in the middle.

As has been pointed out elsewhere on this and other threads, who's had their mind changed in all this fume?

 

[scousedom]

(Oops, hit reply too early).
All that's happened - in classic urban style - is that the argument has become more and more heated, positions taken have become more and more extreme, hyperbole has been ramped up and up...

And all the while, views and positions are being stated on the basis of knowing only a small fragment of the picture. [Now that's not the fault of the people here, and greater transparency would be great - although there is a balance to be struck, we can't know everything] We have no idea what the financials of the club are looking like this season, and how disastrous the "play a season with no crowds" scenario looks.

The people (volunteers klaxon) at the Club know this, they see the full picture, they take a decision on that better-informed basis. They are trying - after a ridiculously hard 18 months - to keep the club going through another ridiculously hard 12 months. I dread to think how negatively it would affect them reading the volume and violence of negative opinion on here - I hope they don't.

By all means, express views, have debate etc. But at some point wouldn't it be nice if limitations of understanding were acknowledged, if consensus was sought, if a view was commonly held it was acted on and left there (in which regard kudos on contacting Ben). But more generally, wouldn't it be better if the pattern of discussions wasn't just towards more and more extreme and polarised positions on each side, creating and exacerbating division? That the phrase "classic urban" didn't refer to people with almost everything in common if they stopped to think just screaming at each other into the void? Because there's enough of that out there already.

 

[StephenMac]

(Oops, hit reply too early).
All that's happened - in classic urban style - is that the argument has become more and more heated, positions taken have become more and more extreme, hyperbole has been ramped up and up...

And all the while, views and positions are being stated on the basis of knowing only a small fragment of the picture. [Now that's not the fault of the people here, and greater transparency would be great - although there is a balance to be struck, we can't know everything] We have no idea what the financials of the club are looking like this season, and how disastrous the "play a season with no crowds" scenario looks.

The people (volunteers klaxon) at the Club know this, they see the full picture, they take a decision on that better-informed basis. They are trying - after a ridiculously hard 18 months - to keep the club going through another ridiculously hard 12 months. I dread to think how negatively it would affect them reading the volume and violence of negative opinion on here - I hope they don't.

By all means, express views, have debate etc. But at some point wouldn't it be nice if limitations of understanding were acknowledged, if consensus was sought, if a view was commonly held it was acted on and left there (in which regard kudos on contacting Ben). But more generally, wouldn't it be better if the pattern of discussions wasn't just towards more and more extreme and polarised positions on each side, creating and exacerbating division? That the phrase "classic urban" didn't refer to people with almost everything in common if they stopped to think just screaming at each other into the void? Because there's enough of that out there already.

Genuine question before reversion to 'classic urban':
Why isn't there some transparency about the financial situation rather than just dark insinuations when people question Crouch's involvement with the club? If there's a problem surely supporters should be told about it.

Whether you like it or not a lot of people are deeply sceptical about his involvement and I've seen very little from the club to put their minds at rest.

 

[B.I.G]

(Oops, hit reply too early).
All that's happened - in classic urban style - is that the argument has become more and more heated, positions taken have become more and more extreme, hyperbole has been ramped up and up...

And all the while, views and positions are being stated on the basis of knowing only a small fragment of the picture. [Now that's not the fault of the people here, and greater transparency would be great - although there is a balance to be struck, we can't know everything] We have no idea what the financials of the club are looking like this season, and how disastrous the "play a season with no crowds" scenario looks.

The people (volunteers klaxon) at the Club know this, they see the full picture, they take a decision on that better-informed basis. They are trying - after a ridiculously hard 18 months - to keep the club going through another ridiculously hard 12 months. I dread to think how negatively it would affect them reading the volume and violence of negative opinion on here - I hope they don't.

By all means, express views, have debate etc. But at some point wouldn't it be nice if limitations of understanding were acknowledged, if consensus was sought, if a view was commonly held it was acted on and left there (in which regard kudos on contacting Ben). But more generally, wouldn't it be better if the pattern of discussions wasn't just towards more and more extreme and polarised positions on each side, creating and exacerbating division? That the phrase "classic urban" didn't refer to people with almost everything in common if they stopped to think just screaming at each other into the void? Because there's enough of that out there already.

Ah. The old it might affect people negatively.

Perhaps if people at the club could change their minds rather than arrogantly thinking they know best. We wouldnt always be close to financial disaster / lose the people that got us to where we are to be replaced by the need for more money and more exposure.

I certainly can’t think of anyone better placed to be be a director of the club than some celebrity that we pretend has a connection to the club.

Its not urban that needs alternative voices its those in charge of the club. Perhaps someone that could have said how about rather than this documentary we set a budget more suitable to the needs of the club rather than what Gavin wants.

 

[B.I.G]

After all. Did we not get the tins out and go fund mes just to honour the contracts of players that a sensibly run club would not have awarded to the players in the first place since we did not have any financial security at that time.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

FWIW I have a lot of faith in the people in charge of the club. I think they're straight up decent people and they've done enormous amounts of work to keep the club going in really difficult circumstances and deserve an enormous amount of credit for it. It's not about having a go at anyone for me and it's not a question of trust.

For me personally though I'm not really on board with the ethos that seems to be the reasoning behind a lot of this (and this isn't just particular to the board or anything) that it's always for the best to have more fans coming in, more publicity, bigger budgets etc etc. I feel like the spirit that first got me going regularly has gone to be honest - I don't particularly find going to matches (obv pre-covid etc) that enjoyable any more. And it's hard for me to see this documentary as anything other than another step along that line.

Maybe that's just self-indulgent, and I'm not the one with responsibility for the budget of course, but it's how I feel about it.

 

[editor]

Sigh....
I said what I meant. Here it is again.

When I said it, did I think you were deliberately being extreme? Yes.
On calmer reflection over the following days did I? Less so.
Do I now? Somewhere in the middle.

As has been pointed out elsewhere on this and other threads, who's had their mind changed in all this fume?

I wasn't asking about that, as well you know.

I was asking about your comment about 'hits'. You made me go through all sorts of hoops before you would deign to support your statement, and you still haven't got the balls to say what you actually meant. But I can't be arsed to listen to any more of your deceitful obfuscation, so let's leave it.

Genuine question before reversion to 'classic urban':
Why isn't there some transparency about the financial situation rather than just dark insinuations when people question Crouch's involvement with the club? If there's a problem surely supporters should be told about it.

Whether you like it or not a lot of people are deeply sceptical about his involvement and I've seen very little from the club to put their minds at rest.

Does anyone actually know what his role is, practically?

 

[scousedom]

Genuine question before reversion to 'classic urban':
Why isn't there some transparency about the financial situation rather than just dark insinuations when people question Crouch's involvement with the club? If there's a problem surely supporters should be told about it.

Whether you like it or not a lot of people are deeply sceptical about his involvement and I've seen very little from the club to put their minds at rest.

So I have absolutely no knowledge of this and not pretending to. Making that clear at the start.

However, if I think about how the Club would approach budgeting this year, they're going to be looking at a few scenarios. I think we can all agree on that? And that those would likely be best case (full crowd allowance to every game), worst case (no crowds to any game) and a few in the middle.

The variation between best and worst is massive. I've no idea how massive but if best is (roughly) 25 games at 2,000 fans at average of £7 a ticket. Then say double it for in-ground spend. That's £700,000. Discount the in-ground spend by I dunno 75% because it's not all profit and you are still at £437,500*. So the budgeting modelling exercise could show a potential gap subject to the path of Covid in the season of approaching half a million quid.

Now, in my opinion, that isn't a case of "there is a problem and we're not being told". It's a case of "there could be a problem, given a set of circumstances, and (partly because we can't trust the League) the problem could be very significant".

I think this management have been good at sharing actual financials. I don't think anyone expects them to share budgeting or modelling forecasts though? That's not been done before (to my knowledge). They have said publicly that there is a problem if we can't play in front of crowds. They said that all last season, and especially around the time we stopped playing. And indeed, last season kind of addresses your point because at the point the potential problem became an actual problem, we were told all about it. And they have been saying so since in highlighting how they have been trying to get information out of the League on what will happen in the event of more lockdowns etc. So they have said there could be a problem under given circumstances. They haven't said what the scale of the problem is or could be but I don't think they should. For one thing, budget forecasts weren't shared previously (to my knowledge), nor is it standard for other clubs to do so (to my knowledge), and anyway we can back-of-the-envelope it if we want (I'm sure someone will do a far better job than I have).



*Incidentally, if you divide that by 40 (weeks) you get an £11,000 a week wage budget which feels ballpark ish right...? (Right as in accurate not as in appropriate).

 

[scousedom]

I wasn't asking about that, as well you know.

I was asking about your comment about 'hits'. You made me go through all sorts of hoops before you would deign to support your statement, and you still haven't got the balls to say what you actually meant. But I can't be arsed to listen to any more of your deceitful obfuscation, so let's leave it.


Does anyone actually know what his role is, practically?

My reply about a lack of moderation was in direct response to your questions asking what I meant about hits. My reply is what I meant. But if you still need it spelled out…

You seem to want to be accused of manufacturing a specific viewpoint for traffic. That is not what I meant. What I meant - as my post earlier today elaborated on - was that this site has a tendency to thrive (get hits) on entrenched extreme positions screaming at each other, or at an absent enemy, rather than calming down and searching for consensus or more understanding (the “doesn’t get hits” part).

I’m very happy to talk like adults about this at a game, but equally understand if you think “fuck you guy”. After all I recognise that while I’m not being critical in the way you think I am, I am I suppose saying I don’t like a significant aspect of the culture of this (your) site. So it’s perfectly fair for you to say you’ve a million better things to do than chat to me.

And as I think you, I and the rest of these people have had enough of this - and as I’m painfully aware of the irony of decrying argument while simultaneously being engaged in one - I’m taking a break from commenting on this.

 

[B.I.G]

My reply about a lack of moderation was in direct response to your questions asking what I meant about hits. My reply is what I meant. But if you still need it spelled out…

You seem to want to be accused of manufacturing a specific viewpoint for traffic. That is not what I meant. What I meant - as my post earlier today elaborated on - was that this site has a tendency to thrive (get hits) on entrenched extreme positions screaming at each other, or at an absent enemy, rather than calming down and searching for consensus or more understanding (the “doesn’t get hits” part).

I’m very happy to talk like adults about this at a game, but equally understand if you think “fuck you guy”. After all I recognise that while I’m not being critical in the way you think I am, I am I suppose saying I don’t like a significant aspect of the culture of this (your) site. So it’s perfectly fair for you to say you’ve a million better things to do than chat to me.

And as I think you, I and the rest of these people have had enough of this - and as I’m painfully aware of the irony of decrying argument while simultaneously being engaged in one - I’m taking a break from commenting on this.

People putting forward their views is a positive. People talking about the feelings of volunteers and the fact the club doesn’t care about the views of those that disagree is a negative.

What does the club do to reward their volunteers? Pay them? Award them shares.

Do nothing? While everyone else gets paid.

 

[NPDHFC]

Classic Urban

 

[Pink Panther]

So I have absolutely no knowledge of this and not pretending to. Making that clear at the start.

However, if I think about how the Club would approach budgeting this year, they're going to be looking at a few scenarios. I think we can all agree on that? And that those would likely be best case (full crowd allowance to every game), worst case (no crowds to any game) and a few in the middle.

The variation between best and worst is massive. I've no idea how massive but if best is (roughly) 25 games at 2,000 fans at average of £7 a ticket. Then say double it for in-ground spend. That's £700,000. Discount the in-ground spend by I dunno 75% because it's not all profit and you are still at £437,500*. So the budgeting modelling exercise could show a potential gap subject to the path of Covid in the season of approaching half a million quid.

Now, in my opinion, that isn't a case of "there is a problem and we're not being told". It's a case of "there could be a problem, given a set of circumstances, and (partly because we can't trust the League) the problem could be very significant".

I think this management have been good at sharing actual financials. I don't think anyone expects them to share budgeting or modelling forecasts though? That's not been done before (to my knowledge). They have said publicly that there is a problem if we can't play in front of crowds. They said that all last season, and especially around the time we stopped playing. And indeed, last season kind of addresses your point because at the point the potential problem became an actual problem, we were told all about it. And they have been saying so since in highlighting how they have been trying to get information out of the League on what will happen in the event of more lockdowns etc. So they have said there could be a problem under given circumstances. They haven't said what the scale of the problem is or could be but I don't think they should. For one thing, budget forecasts weren't shared previously (to my knowledge), nor is it standard for other clubs to do so (to my knowledge), and anyway we can back-of-the-envelope it if we want (I'm sure someone will do a far better job than I have).



*Incidentally, if you divide that by 40 (weeks) you get an £11,000 a week wage budget which feels ballpark ish right...? (Right as in accurate not as in appropriate).

Various information was given to shareholders at an EGM around 8 weeks ago. I thought a bit more information might have been made public by now, but as a "back of an envelope" effort this is a fair summary. Under the circumstances I'd say our directors have done remarkably well to mitigate the losses to a five figure sum by utilising various government support schemes, having already committed to playing contracts before the League shafted us. Nevertheless the club made a loss that will now have to be clawed back during the forthcoming season. Five sixths of all losses made by the club since the pandemic began occurred during the four months we were made to play behind closed doors.

It was stated at a public forum in December 2019 that we had a "top six" playing budget (which must have been in the region of £11k a week) and that the club was "debt free". The club budgeted responsibly for last season in accordance to information given by the National League before the season started, cutting the playing budget by 40% to "about average for the division". However we were completely shafted when the National League committee misled clubs to expect to be compensated according to average gate receipts, leaving us with only about half the grant money we'd budgeted to receive. Had we known we weren't going to get more money from the lottery grant I'm sure we would have set a lower playing budget and would not have made a loss at all.

 

[YTC]

I'd just like to say that in response to B.I.G's point (and i'm very dissapointed he didnt just text me, as he has my number) - No one on the board gets paid at the club. I havent taken a wage from the club since August 2019. The only people that get paid are players, coaches, Dave who runs the bar and bar/matchday staff.

People putting forward their views is a positive. People talking about the feelings of volunteers and the fact the club doesn’t care about the views of those that disagree is a negative.

What does the club do to reward their volunteers? Pay them? Award them shares.

Do nothing? While everyone else gets paid.

This is just absolutely not fucking true. We are constantly talking to everyone that comes and helps. I've read Ben's response to editor and it's exactly how we all feel. We have been looking for someone to help at board level (not coaching level) for well over a year now. PC fills that gap. We're currently reviewing the agreements of the doc to make sure we're happy with everything at the moment as the announcement was rushed due to PC's filming commitments.

You know what really hurts me, personally, the most? Almost everyone in this thread has my number or email, and not one of you has reached out to me to ask about anything. You just wind each other up on here, make gross miscalculations about things and make us all wonder why the hell we get up every morning and try and run this football club.

I think i'll be taking a break from here again.

You all know where to find me.

T

 

[B.I.G]

I'd just like to say that in response to B.I.G's point (and i'm very dissapointed he didnt just text me, as he has my number) - No one on the board gets paid at the club. I havent taken a wage from the club since August 2019. The only people that get paid are players, coaches, Dave who runs the bar and bar/matchday staff.



This is just absolutely not fucking true. We are constantly talking to everyone that comes and helps. I've read Ben's response to editor and it's exactly how we all feel. We have been looking for someone to help at board level (not coaching level) for well over a year now. PC fills that gap. We're currently reviewing the agreements of the doc to make sure we're happy with everything at the moment as the announcement was rushed due to PC's filming commitments.

You know what really hurts me, personally, the most? Almost everyone in this thread has my number or email, and not one of you has reached out to me to ask about anything. You just wind each other up on here, make gross miscalculations about things and make us all wonder why the hell we get up every morning and try and run this football club.

I think i'll be taking a break from here again.

You all know where to find me.

T

My point being that volunteers should be rewarded with shares in the club.

I think its a good idea.