Forum Replies Created
-
Some very fair and valid points made Siderite, as for journalists wanting to print the truth, have you ever read the Daily Mail? My brother, a former journalist, always said bad news is good news for a journalist, the juicer the shite the better headlines it makes, just saying 🤷
Why didn’t Hilton refute it, if it’s all a load of cobblers? The issue here evidently isn’t trust in journalism, it’s Hilton complaining that they have brought it to light. Which is what good journalism should do
1 user thanked author for this post.
I think my anger and loss of trust in this is a result of a culmination of events.
Of course we should allow rehabilitation of criminals into society and I agree with Les that there may be some unrectifiable criminals. However, it needs demonstration of rehabilitation and ownership of responsibility in action (not just words). It can also mean ramifications for the rest of your life. Rapists may be rehabilitated, but they will always be on the sex offender’s register, and so should they be. Even if it means they’re prohibited from certain jobs. The risk is too great just to spare hurt feelings. While fraudulent individuals could be rehabilitated, it should surely mean more wariness over how they conduct business, especially when they own our football club. He may have rehabilitated, but how do we know that, other than blind trust? Also, like with rapists, it may be that there is a need for a discussion over whether the risk of a fraudulent individual owning a community asset, like a football club, is too much of a risk to take a chance (he can, of course, do other jobs). Which I suspect the FA investigation will be thinking and his apparent lack of communication over name changes won’t go down well, I suspect.
We can chatter about the unfairness on Hilton, but ultimately, many have wanted stringency on how the FA deals with owners over their fit and proper status as owners. If Hilton hasn’t been open about his past and name changes with the FA, this might mean a tough decision, regardless of we think of Hilton as a person and his rehabilitated nature. If we want a fit and proper person’s test to be stringent, as many do when we see clubs in trouble, we need to be able to accept such stringency here. We have seen the consequences of weak authority from the authorities on this for many clubs, including our own.
Anyway, the question is do we believe Hilton’s rehabilitation? For me, and I can’t speak for anyone else, I have to look at what has been said. We now know Hilton committed fraud and now says he has taken ownership. Good. However, this has only been after he could no longer refute it. What could he have done? First, coming out straight away and being honest. This would have been good for transparency, but may have caused an initial lack of trust and I don’t know what the league would have made of it. The second is to not admit, but stay silent on the murmuring rumours until he had to open up. This would have got more sympathy from me, because it may mean he was just embarrassed by it and wanted to move on to a new chapter in his life. He chose a third option of saying accusations of fraud and wrong doing were caused by trouble makers at Bury, and those with an agenda, at the fan’s forum and on the Iron Army interview. He said that he hasn’t used other names other than Hilton and White. Yet the name he was sentenced under, as confirmed by Hilton, was Anderson. He has launched repeated attacks on the nature of those who have spoken about his past. He was more than happy to slander and attack them, while demanding respect and gratitude for being ‘the saviour’. He launched baseless attacks against the owners of this forum and stirred up a hornet’s nest with burners launching death threats, doxxing and libellous accusations. Even now, after an article has posted about this, he launches accusations against the journalist, who is only reporting on a situation and doing what good investigative journalists do. Speak truth to the public, letting us know the situation, warts and all. It’s in our interest, as Scunny fans, to know the information shared.
None of this demonstrates to me that he is trustworthy or given me confidence that he has truly taken ownership for his own mistakes. If he has, he wouldn’t have hurled accusations at others for daring to be honest. I give my sympathies for him experiencing depression, but that is no excuse for his treatment of others. Plenty suffer from it, yet don’t commit fraud or launch accusations against others or distort the truth. The nature of his past give me concern, but they’re not the full deal breaker. After months of fermenting a vision of him being a victim of malicious rumour, he confirms that some were true, and wants to get full sympathy after stoking division. I am sorry, but that is a red line crossed for me. I don’t see how he can rebuild any trust from my end.
Of course, it’s fair in asking what happens next. Our club is tied to the owner, but sometimes the owner is unfitting. Ideally, for me, someone else would buy the club and Hilton and the circus surrounding him clears off. However, that may be a pipe dream. Maybe Hilton can prove me wrong, but so far my concerns are growing rapidly and I have lost all trust. All in all, I cannot help but feel despondent about our situation now. Yes, it’s good on the pitch, but this off pitch drama has soured it all and that has come from years of Swann mismanagement and incompetence and a new owner I couldn’t trust if he said the Sun will rise tomorrow.
I appreciate others will want to believe after years of hardship, but I just can’t.
9 users thanked author for this post.
Very weak Ruuger, ..firstly by committing fraud.. his jail sentence was punishment…secondly by his continuous lies to supporters..name one where he has lied? If you say he didn’t reveal his jail sentence – why should he? He said he had nothing to hide ( he’d paid his sentence in full) he had no obligation to reveal it. What other lies are you referring to? You are just a wolf with one intention.
He has previously said such allegations of fraud were rubbish on the Iron Army interview when talking about the fallout from the Bury takeover and their fans’ dislike of him (having spoken to some Bury fans, they found out about his jail spell for fraud). There are other lies, like when he said the supporter’s cap was a load of nonsense, only to confirm it a week later. If you want to place your trust in a convicted fraudster with a habit of white lies over serious matters, that’s your prerogative, but I find that rather gullible.
2 users thanked author for this post.
I think he will stay.Seems there are some on here want him away, but there a few thousand out there who want him to stay. We all make mistakes need to continue to move forward
I’d be more sympathetic to this if he hadn’t lied about his past previously and claimed it was nonsense from trouble causers. Now he can’t fib, it’s easier to be open and honest. I am not writing off that he’s being genuine, but after months of nonsense from him, I am not going to be wholly sympathetic to everything. He’s destroyed trust in himself through his own actions.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Turned off after his self-pitying attacks on journalists.
He says he made mistakes and is willing to own up and change, but I’d have had far more sympathy if he didn’t hurl accusations against others, while always being the victim. He owns his mistakes, he says, but there’s always a but about those who bring these things to light. If he is going about changing his life, he’s doing it the wrong way. He might have a point about it’s hard to get second chances when you’ve been convicted and you want to change. However, people will always have wariness around such people, and you can’t blame them. I’d have had more respect if this didn’t come when forced and wasn’t after months of digs at others. Nor at journalists for doing their damn job. As for public interest, of course it’s public interest. We have had clubs collapse due to lack of transparency and such. Transparency is needed to prevent bad owners, even if it creates stress for them. I have sympathy for him dealing with depression, but that doesn’t mean we should just turn a blind eye to his tenure or worries over how he would handle the club. That could affect others’ mental health.
Credit for a frank exchange. I am less impressed by the continued accusations against others though.
2 users thanked author for this post.
The Athletic wouldn’t make an allegation without any kind of evidence, because it could lead to a libel accusation. Hilton will likely respond with accusations against the journalist and deny vociferously, but if it’s untrue he needs to take it to court. Regardless, this does nothing to counter my concerns about him at all and am worried about such a character owning the club. Name changes for personal reasons was always a questionable reason.
1 user thanked author for this post.
There needs to be a happy medium between stewards acting like wannabe coppers crossed with glorified thugs and passive spectators, surely.
1 user thanked author for this post.
‘If there is no God, who cares what you think?’ Pretty nihilistic from such a fundamental Christian. People who don’t believe in God probably care more about what others think as they’re grounded and focused in this world, this planet and others in it. Christians are more interested in their invented next world
I think the final sentence is dismissive of some Christians, but does describe some. Thanking for the rest. I can understand how my actions may impact others, so I base my decisions off this.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The clown was worse than Deadman. No control of the game whatsoever. The final whistle with time left was the icing on a bad cake.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Personally, I think the capabilities of an evolved human mind which enabled us to understand the Universe in a way no other creature can has led to the curiosities over life’s meaning, and moral systems have developed as a response to how to behave in a way befitting for society with empathy being a thing. I don’t think we need God to explain it, but I realise this is a short response to a complex topic.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I suspect there will be statements about how you can’t trust an ‘MSM’ outlet and how it must be based on rumours.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I agree that others don’t come out well, it’s not just Henderson, but he has previously sounded off about his ‘valued’ principles. He has previously claimed to have these deep values. Evidently, money talks and I don’t think it’s ‘puritanical’ to criticise someone for not giving a fig about principles for money. Were those who opposed sporting events in apartheid South Africa puritans? When nations have abhorrent regimes or principles, those who have professed a supposed care for values antithetical come across as hypocritical when they go against them. It’s so easy to wear rainbow laces in the UK, but going against a country which criminalises people for who they are when they offer loads of money, is too hard for Henderson.
The issue is complex, and I am not writing him off as a person, but his decision leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion. As it does with the others.
1 user thanked author for this post.
