MacDonald signs for Ebbsfleet.

[bsmith]

Ah yes, there are more comments. Still have to agree with fleetzone.

[Trevor]

I make that 14 players signed up for next season of which only 2 are forwards so I expect some activity in that area pretty soon.

 

 

[kaizen]

Originally Posted By: Trevor

I make that 14 players signed up for next season of which only 2 are forwards so I expect some activity in that area pretty soon.

That's the area that needs tweaking!

[jc]

Originally Posted By: Slartibartfast

Not so sure about Keeling, no surprise that he has gone back to play for Burger King but a massive dissapointment to find that living legend and alround good guy Jacko left because he couldn't quit his job on the farm was replaced by another part time farmer. I have no complaints about Keelings performances last season and I wish him all the best for the future but if we were going to play a farmer on the left wing I'd pick Cobham over Essex every time.

Originally Posted By: Ian_D

It's a real shame we've lost Ross though. If that's the real reason then shame on the club - Ross is obviously waiting to see if anyone else i.e a league club is interested and it's a real shame the club are not willing to be his back up, when they should be for such a valuable player.

Spot on, both of you. Assuming Ross was willing to stay if a move to a bigger club didn't come through, it seems a shame we couldn't have waited a little longer - especially with three centre-backs excluding Gary MacDonald already signed up for next season.

Best of luck Ross - looks like, after Jacko's departure and now yours, I'll have to find a new favourite player again.

[kmj]

Ian, until I read your message I had absolutely no idea that J Keeling was only part-time. And noting what Slarti has added that he is a farmer too, I am having difficulty in reconcilling all of the official reasons given by the directors and manager at the time and since for releasing Jimmy. In the absence of any confirmation from the Club (which seems unlikely to be forthcoming)I can conclude that it is a severe case of double standards and misrepresentation. Can we ever trust anything they say in the future?

[Slartibartfast]

Originally Posted By: kmj

Can we ever trust anything they say in the future?

I'm not sure I'd go quite that far but to many of us Jacko was Mr Gravesend and Northfleet and probably represented better than anyone what supporting your local team rather than a 'big' team is all about.
Players come and go and inevitably, however much you like them, they will eventually retire/move on but players like Jacko are few and far between and when you get one like that you should treasure them.
I was dissapointed when Jacko left but accepted the reasons given. It may well be that when he was released those reasons were true but subsequently compromises were made in order to put a (bloody good)side together, but with the benefit of hindsight it now looks like Jacko was treated pretty shabbily and he deserved better than that.

[Ian_D]

Ditto, well said Slarti.

[David Holden]

Originally Posted By: kmj

Ian, until I read your message I had absolutely no idea that J Keeling was only part-time. And noting what Slarti has added that he is a farmer too, I am having difficulty in reconcilling all of the official reasons given by the directors and manager at the time and since for releasing Jimmy. In the absence of any confirmation from the Club (which seems unlikely to be forthcoming)I can conclude that it is a severe case of double standards and misrepresentation. Can we ever trust anything they say in the future?

You are aware of what commitments Jon made to day-time training then?

Or are you just generalising on the basis of insufficient information?

[kmj]

Your message implies that you accept that he was a part-timer. This was not common knowledge of course. In fact it was, it now appears, a Club secret. I am taking at face value what Ian has posted. No one has said that he is incorrect. That includes yourself.

 

What I do know is exactly what Roly Edwards and Jason Botley have told me in direct conversations with them about the club making no exceptions to the full-time rule. Liam was not prepared to accommodate part-timers and they backed him 100% in this decision. Only now it appears that they didn't in this instance.

 

So, perhaps you could enlighten us with your own inside knowledge about how JJ as a part-time player could not be accommodated, but JK as a part-time player could. How do their cases differ exactly in the training that each was able to undertake? You imply that you probably know the answer.

 

And also why the secrecy?

 

Reply awaited.

[David Holden]

I don't know the differences between Jackson's and Keeling's ability to train with the full timers anymore than you do, which is why I wouldn't post such stupid comments as "I can conclude that it is a severe case of double standards and misrepresentation. Can we ever trust anything they say in the future?"

 

Still it's good to see an officer of the trust backing the club.

[kmj]

The message I posted was a personal opinion honestly held in accordance with information I had been given directly by officers of the Club as an individual supporter, not in my role as Society Secretary which post-dated the majority of conversations in question. It was a shock to discover that we were not after all a Club only with full-time players.

 

I back the Club in accordance with the democratic decisions taken by members of the Fleet Trust. I take my duties very seriously. I am ultimately answerable to the membership, which, if you were currently a member of the Trust, you would be well aware of.

[David Holden]

You will need a complete conscience by-pass to now carry on as an officer of the trust.

 

How can you negociate with the Club's Chairman and Secretary having now openly accused them of lying, and just as importantly how can they negociate with you.

 

Incidently JK was offered, and accepted, the same terms which JJ was offered and declined. Double standards, it would appear not

[DA11]

I think this communication should now be conducted in private.

[kmj]

Where exactly do you claim that I have accused anybody of "lying"? I have done no such thing.

[David Holden]

Quote:

What I do know is exactly what Roly Edwards and Jason Botley have told me in direct conversations with them about the club making no exceptions to the full-time rule. Liam was not prepared to accommodate part-timers and they backed him 100% in this decision. Only now it appears that they didn't in this instance.

 

Or

 

Quote:

I am having difficulty in reconcilling all of the official reasons given by the directors and manager at the time and since for releasing Jimmy. In the absence of any confirmation from the Club (which seems unlikely to be forthcoming)I can conclude that it is a severe case of double standards and misrepresentation. Can we ever trust anything they say in the future?

[kmj]

It still doesn't say what you allege.

[David Holden]

Then we shall have to agree to differ on the interpretation.

[Stu M]

Originally Posted By: jc

Assuming Ross was willing to stay if a move to a bigger club didn't come through, it seems a shame we couldn't have waited a little longer

That said, I remember it striking me as peculiar at the time that Charlie MacDonald had particularly singled Ross out in a recent interview as someone who could and should be in the league, so perhaps with Ross clearly hedging his bets and remaining non-committal about signing, Daish felt his hand forced. It is a shame, because Ross was one of my favourite players too, but I wonder if it had been a less popular player, we might be saying that if he was dallying over a contract for that long, then better to let him off the leash...

[Andy Y. (G&NFC)]

Originally Posted By: kmj

Your message implies that you accept that he was a part-timer. This was not common knowledge of course. In fact it was, it now appears, a Club secret. I am taking at face value what Ian has posted. No one has said that he is incorrect. That includes yourself.

What I do know is exactly what Roly Edwards and Jason Botley have told me in direct conversations with them about the club making no exceptions to the full-time rule. Liam was not prepared to accommodate part-timers and they backed him 100% in this decision. Only now it appears that they didn't in this instance.

So, perhaps you could enlighten us with your own inside knowledge about how JJ as a part-time player could not be accommodated, but JK as a part-time player could. How do their cases differ exactly in the training that each was able to undertake? You imply that you probably know the answer.

And also why the secrecy?

Reply awaited.

Err, I'm not Trustee of the club or anything, but I knew he was a part-timer. All you had to do was read some of the player notes in some of the away programmes from last season.


It might simply be a case that Jacko (who I know pretty well) has more responsibility with the running of his family business than JK.

[jc]

Originally Posted By: Andy Y. (G&NFC)

It might simply be a case that Jacko (who I know pretty well) has more responsibility with the running of his family business than JK.

A good point. It could well be, therefore, that John was offered time out when necessary, but ultimately ended up attending more training sessions than Jacko would have been able to.

That said, the whole episode does demonstrate that the club were willing to compromise regarding our full-time status. I suppose it's a question of how far the 'rules' can be bent, but in Jacko's exceptional case I'd like to think they could be bent a little bit further. The whole '100% full-time' thing shouldn't be too rigid.