[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

If you think this guy is such an arsehole why give him so much airtime. He’ll be laping it up.

Are you talking about Elliott, or Sherbert?

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

I think Elliott claims Herbert showed up at Barnard Castle unannounced and spotted him in the pub, before clinging on to him. I have been told he is not liked around the club, but I think they humour him. Still, humouring or not, he should be given the cold shoulder.

A couple of times on social media Sherbert made some reference to having a drink together in a pub at Barnard Castle. There was even the inference that Hilton had been there too, and that there had been a toast when Elliott said one day he (Elliott) would “be King”. Sherbert tagged Elliott in one of the posts, and Elliott was clearly very uncomfortable. A sort of “I don’t know what you’re talking about” response.

[Apollo11]

TheJuryeffsOut wrote:

Just so I’m not mistaken, is this Herbert character the guy who became best mates with Hilton, took over the Facebook group, tried to get peoples addresses, made veiled threats and is on crown court bail for some sort of football related criminal charge ?

I’ve never seen pictures of him with Hilton to back up the idea that they were actually mates. I’ve seen a picture of Sherbert with Simon Elliott, as well as a very matey video of them together outside a pub in Barnard Castle (where Elliott lives).

1 user thanked author for this post.

TheJuryeffsOut

[Apollo11]

WonderGoals wrote:

According to Dean a week or two ago he stated 4 or 5 needed to go out to help balance the books. Ferris, Pugh and Bennett have already gone with Chapman probably on his way come January to be replaced by a cheaper loan youngster.

Southport can sign Carver on a perm contract to get him completely off the books. Smith will end up going back to Hearts as well. Going by what Dean was told I think all those just about cover it.

It’ll be a blow to lose Smith.

[Apollo11]

Pele wrote:

Another one postes just now.
Don’t know how to post pictures or I would but elliot tells him

“Me and Michelle want you in the ground 100%”

I have seen this screenshot you’re referring to.

[Apollo11]

ironfromafar wrote:

In hindsight its pretty obvious Hilton was and probably will continue to be a professional conman and frauster , put zero money into the club and robbed what ever he could along the way lie after lie before being exposed, i hope more comes out about this crook and at some point he gets his fingers burnt.

I expect The Athletic will still publish their second article at some point.

[Apollo11]

Pele wrote:

“Me and Michelle want you in the ground 100%”

Glanford Park? Or Scunthorpe’s version of ‘sleeping with the fishes’?

1 user thanked author for this post.

cassidystash

[Apollo11]

Pele wrote:

He posted a screenshot of a conversation with Elliott ,with Elliot telling him he isn’t banned.

There’s some sort of close connection between those two. There have been matey videos and photos posted in the past.

[Apollo11]

sufc_not_on_tour wrote:

I spoke to Paul Hurrell on the subject of Herbert the other week.
He told me he had been told to keep away from GP for his own safety.
Apparently, there’s members on the Facebook forum not happy with him.

He shouldn’t be ‘told to keep away from GP for his own safety’… He should be banned from GP for good. Launching a mobile phone would be the legitimate reason – but then bragging constantly about it on social media and also stirring up division in the ways that he did was appalling. The guy is a liability to the reputation of the club.

2 users thanked author for this post.

TheJuryeffsOut, Deereyme66

[Apollo11]

Cliff Byrne’s Right Peg wrote:

Deereyme66 wrote:

Apollo11 wrote:

Ferrite wrote:

Remember though: there’s no gland in Glanford!

Not now Sherbert is banned, no.

Is he actually banned?

Hopefully so; Dark times when our only form of communication was through his Facebook rants alongside Wham

He was more than an unwitting conduit, he was stirring the pot good and proper.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Apollo11]

Ferrite wrote:

Remember though: there’s no gland in Glanford!

Not now Sherbert is banned, no.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[Apollo11]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Noticed Dean was getting a bit of stick on social media last night, and the club in one post, though I think ‘SUFC, you’ve ruined my f***ing life’ is a bit dramatic. Even I don’t think that and I’m a right misery.

The club being run into the ground by a conman could be considered something that might ruin your life. Losing a Tuesday night match away in November could not.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Heath, Deereyme66, Ferrite, TheJuryeffsOut

[Apollo11]

Iron-awe wrote:

It’s not even a major problem anyway…

The actual biggest problem this country has is the subservience of the working class. Gaslit for generations by the establishment – whipping up whatever hate it takes to keep the scum in their place.

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

The good times always seem to coincide with the exact time the person was in their prime or youth. Older people bemoaning that times have changed for the worse is a tale as old as time.

Things have changed for the worst. It was shit then and it’s shitter now.

[Apollo11]

bartonscorpion wrote:

Our country is wrecked, and is no longer in control of any problem, the trouble is who ever gets to be in Government will not action anything either, there was a time when it was a respected country and good for its people to live in, but you must admit that is not the case, and can anyone think that it will ever change?????????????????

Of course things get actioned – in the interests of the establishment. There is absolutely no interest in making your life better. It’s a class war, fought to keep you down.

2 users thanked author for this post.

bartonscorpion, Northumbiron

[Apollo11]

lesgeo wrote:

Agreed.
However, Whitehall did not so much have a poor game – but rather, seemed to have been excluded from it.
So many decent chances to cross the ball into the box were simply not taken.

We’ve only got ourselves to blame… but when the final whistle blew I did also wonder how the hell we lost that game 3-1. One of those occasions when the result is a bit freakish and doesn’t tell the true story? Or another worrying indicator that JD is able to set a very good side up but not do anything meaningful to alter it to suit what’s going on? For my money, a little bit of both.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Sanfran49

[Apollo11]

I watched the game online… There was a lot of activity in the middle between the centre circle and their box, and not enough whipped in from out wide. As much as I love watching Scunthorpe United short pass other teams out of existence, I also feel there’s not enough ‘old style fourth division rubbish’ (ie. directness in our attack) mixed in amongst all the tippy-tappy. I’m not advocating a return to elbows and leg-break tackles, either, but a bit more meat with the gravy wouldn’t go amiss.

[Apollo11]

Iron-awe wrote:

Torpey in his pomp would have eaten Whitehall for breakfast, Whitehall is more of a wind up merchant than a target man IMO but he gets goals so I guess he is doing his job, just don’t like the way he goes about it.

I agree with you (other than the bit about the way he goes about things) but there’s something vaguely ridiculous about Whitehall which makes him much more likeable than Torpey somehow…

[Apollo11]

Plymiron wrote:

Very complementary on the whole and expect us to be promoted with are squad size and money spent.
Danny Whitehall does get quite some stick for falling over a tad easy on occassion :)
Everyone comments on why Butters is playing at this level – and most moan about the standard of referees :)
UTI

Fair enough points, I think – though I myself haven’t noticed Whitehall going over that much – certainly no more than any other target man.

[Apollo11]

Plymiron wrote:

I do try and get the away Commentary but not always available at this level – nice to get their view of how we are performing.

That’s an interesting way round of doing it, hadn’t thought of that. What’s been the general consensus so far this season?

[Apollo11]

He’ll be Prime Minister heading into the next GE.

[Apollo11]

Iron Age wrote:

Good vocal support from the few Gloucester fans, well done.
Noticed that they sang out for Gloucestershire, as other fans have their own county, I may have missed it but I haven’t heard Lincolnshire being sung out by our fans since 1974. What a bad decision it was to create the hated Humberside.

“Panic on the streets of Carlisle, Dublin, Dundee, North Lincolnshire” wouldn’t have had quite the same ring to it, though.

1 user thanked author for this post.

barriethomas

[Apollo11]

Northumbiron wrote:

We’re back on character assassination again are we?

Merely expressing a point of view. He’s probably a very nice bloke with a firm handshake.

[Apollo11]

… imho, of course…

[Apollo11]

WonderGoals wrote:

I do find it a little weird as didn’t Elliot said himself he was looking to be on the board and gave the impression that he was already a director.

Not sure what’s going on there !

Almost certainly a condition of Directorship that you have to put money in. Elliott hasn’t put any of his own money in. As ever, he’s elevated his own profile by riding on the financial coattails of others. Like the whole Sharp / Elliott thing last Christmas / New Year. It was only Sharp that had funds.

[Apollo11]

cassidystash wrote:

He’s brought in significant advertising revenue over the years. If he doesn’t have spare cash to put in (and I guess not many do) then he’s doing what he can to help the Club. Can’t see why his contribution seems to upset one or two.

So you’ve actually put more of your own cash in than Elliott, yet you don’t fist-pump and heart-slap to incite an ego-stroke from the crowd.

Bringing in advertising money is great, but it’s no short-cut to sainthood, imho.

[Apollo11]

Bishops Finger wrote:

Simon Eeliot still not a director at Companies House.
I find that a bit strange given his fist pumping, chest beating performance on the pitch a month ago.
He should either sign up and commit to the club like the rest of the board or simply be stripped of his privileges.

He doesn’t actually have any money to put in, imho. Reputation over the years built on the back of someone else’s dollar. Involvement is about the kudos and maintaining profile of the Elliott ‘brand’.

[Apollo11]

Northumbiron wrote:

AKA The King’s Speech…..

King Charles said the Football Governance Bill, which will introduce a regulator, will “safeguard the future of football clubs for the benefit of communities and fans”.

A strengthened owners’ and directors’ test is part of the plan.

The regulator also aims to prevent historic clubs going out of business, and give fans greater input.

About blooming time!

Doesn’t this proposed bill only cover the first five steps of league football? I haven’t had the time to look into it properly and read further, so may be wrong – but I’m sure that’s what I read in brief.

[Apollo11]

I watched online, with BBC RH commentary. It was a good first half – a super performance and two superb goals. The second half was a little less fun, perhaps because Banbury seemed to alter their shape which knocked United out of their stride a little bit. All in all, though, a very successful and entertaining evening.

1 user thanked author for this post.

bartonscorpion

[Apollo11]

What a waste of time bringing him in. I’d have said this whether he’d gone out on loan or not. Baddum-tish.

[Author]

Posts