Clifford Nelson

I am trully delighted that so many fans are appreciating Papa Waigo, who I have tried to champion off late. He has got talent to burn, but also some rough edges which needs smoothing over. In any case he should be in the starting line-up every time to have a good chance to get to grips with the football played and the standard of refereeing. When he learns a bit of english I'm sure that he can be coached into a really magnificent player. The only comparison with Antonio that may be meaningful is that they are both right footed.

Against Hartlepool Papa Waigo scored one and made one. In the last few games before that he got a few minutes per game and created several clear chances. That is what I saw, and I consider that to be real talent. Maybe the different talent of somebody who several italian Serie A and B clubs thought worth buying, and somebody who may, possibly, make it coming up from non-league, but without absolute certainty. Personally I feel that Antonio was found out after a couple of games, after which he hasn't produced much danger. Waigo should be a starter at all times.

I struggle to see the class and style as well, and it's only because AP says that he's got it that I assume that it is there somewhere. He looks in stature as if he would have class, but as for action...What I see afore me is too often missed passes and uncertainty about what his role is. On the other hand I also see a slight improvement when he is allowed a more offensive role, and over the last few games I've also noticed a few successful tackles. I struggle badly with the idea that players who don't seem to have a lot of success on this level are likely to be a real influence higher up in the leagues. Class will out, as they say, and failure here will be failure there. I also think it is a myth that there is an awful lot of difference between L1 and CCC. Between the top of CCC and the bottom of L1, yes, but as for the rest it's not a lot in it.

It is a great feeling and we are a lucky bunch of supporters with a set up like this. On the other hand it is also a work in progress, and AP has some way to go before he is happy with his squad and what it is doing. We have clearly started scoring goals, hurrahhh, and a winning mentality is under construction, but there are tweakings to do in the defending department and major surgery to do in the first team squad beyond the bench. Some of the critique can be a bit wild, but it is also progress to question a 3-2away win, rather than the wimpering defeats we have become used to. To suggest that we shouldn't retain a critical attitude is way off the mark.

I note a change in me which has occurred. I didn't have a niggly feeling that it could all go wrong! Years of being used to us losing in the cup against lower division opposition seems to be on the turn. I felt certain that we were going to win and would have been very surprised if we hadn't. And quite nice to see a discussion about that we may be conceding too many, whilst we actually keep winning. AP will be very aware of the situation and will eventually tighten up the defense, but as I keep going on about: As a manager, your team is always a compromise between scoring and conceding. When this season started we couldn't score. Now we do, and the trick is to tighten up without losing that ability, which is not an easy job. But I'm certain that AP is on to it.

Bart deserves our full support. Anybody thinking anything else must be mad. We shouldn't be quick to cut off the support for players the way it happens for some. One who deserves our support is Papa Waigo who reasonably must be getting a start soon. For talent he is head and shoulders over Antonio, who is playing a one dimensional game which was easily found out. I wish that Waigo can get the fans behind him again, because he has got genuine quality.

4-4-2 is a matter of faith. All other systems are a betrayal of englishness, invented by people in the EU only to spite or irritate Great Britain. With our trusted 4-4-2 we will repel the foreign invaders. On a more serious side, Connolly's arrival to form made anything else impossible. But what we have gained with another scoring striker is a midfield with control of the game. I can't say that Hammond and Schneiderlin looks impressive on their own in CM. I'm also not impressed by Antonio, who is a bit too unsofisticated for my taste, and was quickly found out by opposing defenses. But to replace him with James in a position where he is usually nullified by aggressive LBs?! Waigo is the player with quality who made more chances in his sub appearances than he was properly entitles to.

We lost the battle of the midfield and as a result Norwich controlled long periods of the game. I am not convinced of Schneiderlin in a two man central midfield pairing. It worked with a third midfielder sitting behind the two of them, but not the two on their own. If we are to persevere with this formation, which I'm also not convinced about, then we need a more defensively minded CM. At the moment it takes too long for both Hammond and Schneiderlin to get back after offensive forays. Murty was a clear advantage over James, who ought to be tried back in a central midfield role. Trotman seems a little bit over confident at times which gets him into trouble needlessly, but let's not forget that two matches ago we wanted him signed. Just as against Charlton Waigo managed to create real danger on several occasions in the little time he was on the pitch. Antonio didn't. When it comes to talent it's clear where it is in abundance. Restore him to the starting line-up.

I've got my seat in the Kingsland and am displaced to the Itchen. Is it just me who feels that there is something missing in the Itchen. A reluctance to sing, rather nice and kind, a bit of the masculinity of a football crowd missing.

I think the delay in the delivery of the letter has to do with the final legal completion of the winding up of the old SLH. It must surely have been clear that there were no money or assets in the complany which hadn't already been distributed to creditors. But it wouldn't be correct to confirm that to all shareholders without the legal niceties having been completed.

Seems like the only sensible solution, taking into account that AP will not drop him. I always wanted to see how he could cope with being the defensive CM. However, the consequence of that is to maintain the 4-5-1/4-3-3 system, unless he is to drop Schneiderlin or Hammond as well. Or he would have to drop Connolly! In view of all the upheaval it would cause it looks to me that Murty will have to look forward to a long time on the bench. Getting injured, I'm afraid, didn't do his career a bit of good.

It won't be the end of the matter until some real knowledge has leaked out, and that is unlikely for some time. I had problem getting past the conclusion that Fry was an incompetent joker who very nearly lost us the club. I knew that was the wrong conclusion, but I had difficulty seeing past it until some of the postings on this thread. I'm satisfied enough to start worrying about the Charlton game tomorrow, so that is kind of a result. It will take longer to stop worrying, it is like it has become rubbed in over years. You know the drill: A striker who hasn't scored in the last thirty will be visiting SMS; a team which hasn't won away since last year; the one legged apprentice we did let go; etc. etc. We just knew what was about to happen, and we were always right. Mind you, this is ammunition for another thread.

Grateful for your thread, FF, it feels like it has improved some of the understanding. My first reaction was that the insolvency industry was taking the p*ss, but it is also possible that Fry played a very difficult hand.

Let's put it in another way, since Hammond was worth £400K, how much would Mellis be worth? Antonio is unlikely to cost us anything.

I smell a tough game tomorrow night and if the boys aren't really up for it we won't win it. Charlton is a really decent team with CCC ambition, at the top of the table. At the top of our game we'll have them, but otherwise.....

I don't think it's a matter of concerns about Fry's competence, just some of us who have difficulty just leaving the unanswered questions behind. This specific issue probably because it is easy to blame Fry, but at closer inspection an insolvency expert from a recognised firm couldn't be quite as daft as all that, could he? And I think that with your comments and those from a few others it starts to emerge that it wasn't as simple as that. It also, of course, had nothing to do with us supporters. That's not why he was here, which I pointed out earlier. He was the creditors man, here to get as much as possible for them. That is coming a bit nearer to satisfy my need for understanding what went on as far as he was concerned. Next in my curiosity is that there must have been money in the Pinnacle bid at the point Fry checked them out. So where on earth did Mickey Fialka come into it. Would anyone with any sense have fronted a bid with him as the future Chairman of the club? Fialka rang instant warning bells with most of us here on the forum at the time and he was exposed by the Echo in less than 24 hours. It looks like an indication that the people with the money didn't have any understanding of PR, so who could they have been?

It is the first time I have seen it pointed out that Markus Liebherr didn't want to pay the non-returnable deposit, but it fits with Nicola Corteses statement at the fan's forum, that ML had already made an offer to buy the club. If he was ready to complete the sale, why would he want to pay £1/2M for the privilege? Especially as he didn't intend to make something out of the ashes of SLH but intended to pay all the creditors off and start financially with a completely new company. He knew who the creditors were and how much was owned, so further due diligence wasn't going to reveal anything of major relevance. Assuming that without the money SLH would fold before the sale could be achieved, the gamble on Pinnacle wasn't a gamble at all, but a necessary step to get hold of some money and keep the sinking ship afloat. Under those circumstances I can see Fry and his bosses agreeing to the deal in the hope that something came of it. At least it would buy another two weeks, because in case of liquidation the creditors - who Fry represented - could be suspected to get a much worse deal. Does that scenario hold water?

Logically I think you are right, because that means that Fry has got some excuse for having opted for Pinnacle. It means that there were somebody with real money on board at that time, which raises other interesting questions, for instance, what on earth was the use for Micky Fialka?! And if he/they really wanted to use Fialka as a front, who on earth were they?! And if there was proof of funds, didn't it raise suspicions that Leon Crouch had to cough up the £1/2M? There is an element of panic in the decision making of Fry if there is that many questions presenting itself as obvious. We we minutes away from total collapse? And still, why wasn't he discussing the matter with Liebherr/Cortese who had already made an offer? There is something in all of this which doesn't make sense if you think that Fry was a professional person trying to do a professional job.

On all the available facts I think you're right. and I believe that Fry himself made it known that RL had "offered" to stay behind and "advice", although Begbies Traynor believed that to be an obstacle rather than a help. There is still this question about why Fry gave Pinnacle exclusivity rights. As the appointed Administrator he had an obligation of assuring himself that the prospective buyer actually had the money. That would at the very least be through information from the buyer's bank. We all know that they didn't have the money, and I discount the possibility that the bank lied to Fry. So what are then the alternatives? Was there money available at one point which was withdrawn later? Or didn't Fry pursue his professional obligations? And why did he discount the overtures from Cortese? He would, or at least should, have known him as a european banker, and he would have been told that he acted on behalf of Markus Liebherr. Didn't "Liebherr" mean anything to him? Whatever else he knew he ought to have realised that this was a very serious buyer with very serious money. Those are, I think, the outstanding questions which it looks unlikely that we'll ever get answers to, but it rather looks like large mistakes to me, and as I have said previously I doubt that I would have gotten an award for the outcome alone in my line of business.

No, I won't start a fight. There are enough people around here who seems to be fighting with you all the time. I will just ignore you in future.

The note in swedish says that for 'rights' reasons it is only working inside Sweden.

Old Djurgar'n showed that there was one more fight in the old "iron radiators" left. Happiness has been restored. Now waiting for their EGM on Wednesday, new chairman and board, more money and a sporting plan which will bring us back to the top. It has been a terrible season and major changes are on the cards.

I'm delighted to see that somebody, somewhere rates him. I hope that he'll earn a contract and that everyone will live happily ever after.

Some of us have more of an interest in history than others, and find it difficult to just leave unanswered questions behind without at least plausible explanations. I don't think that makes people like us better or worse than anybody else. This thread was started by an historian and raised an issue of interest to people of that ilk (me for instance). Mark Fry is in the title, so it seems rather obvious what it was about. It is less obvious why you just didn't leave the thread alone, since you're not interested in it, rather than barge in and have a go at those who likes to discuss it. Seems a bit like seeking out a fight for the sake of it.

If he is that highly thougt of at Chelsea the whole discussion will be entirely academic, because he will stay there to eventually star with them in the PL. Of course he will get fitter and stronger, but that wasn't my concern. In the time I've spent with youngsters in both football and otherwise I have yet to see strength of character suddenly emerge in those who haven't got it. I have seen plenty of boys with the pace and technique to die for, but I wasn't much wrong in my prediction that they weren't going to make a professional grade, because they lacked the burning desire to assert themselves in the rain, in the cold, when the team was 2-0 down, when their opposite number also had talents, etc. One or two who had the desire did rather better with football as a career, even though their given technical skills weren't as great. I have seen Mellis from my seat in the stands, and couldn't possibly profess to know the lad. I also agree that he isn't a wide player. But if you nevertheless is put out wide by the boss, then you work hard and try your best, but to me it didn't look as if he did. If you're a CM you have got duties going both forward and back. I think he performed very well in the offensive role both against Rovers and Gillingham, but I am still waiting to see some enthusiasm in chasing back or putting in a tackle, and two of Rovers goals can be traced to him not bothering with his defensive duties. If AP signs him then he is seeing something I don't, and as I have said before, I'll bow to his greater expertise and look forward to what is to come. If not I won't be too disappointed.