Maybe because people say Hilton’s saved the club in response to any question of a Hilton decision or worry over a plan, particularly on Facebook and Twitter?
I have no problem with wait and see and don’t know if this GP rumour has any basis. So I am not blaming Hilton for anything surrounding this at the moment. However, after Swann I am more cautious and sceptical, and Hilton’s made mistakes so far, and these have caused mistrust among some, along with the bad record on Company’s House. These may have an explanation, but are bound to cause worry among some. Blaming those with worries over legitimate questions (no, not the Hilton is a drugs baron stuff) won’t alleviate concern. There have been attempts by Hilton to stamp his mark on the club, and they have been just as poorly executed and communicated as anything the club has done for the past few years. No twisting of facts needed for justifying a sceptical position for him.
I have said before that I am in Hilton’s group 2 fron his past remarks. I am wanting the club to succeed, which means hoping Hilton’s plans work. This doesn’t mean I won’t refuse to criticise elements I find concerning. I am aware of outlandish claims, but they aren’t the reason for any scepticism. I have a post on here saying why I thought the Ilkeston Iron thing was illogical.
