Again, you just come over as a bit of a prat to be honest, probably accounts for the pro- Allam delusions too
I can live with that from tosspots like you. You do realise you come over as a condescending and pompous twat who like's sneering at successful people who do things for others, don't you? Probably accounts for the mouth frothing when the Allams are mentioned. Go on, I'll let you have the last word.
I get the impression he was installed as a stop-gap & then led to believe that he'd be given an opportunity to prove himself. That was taken away from him by the refusal of a transfer budget. I'd guess he's signed some sort of non-disclosure document when he was paid off so he doesn't speak about the details. The whole sordid business has put him off, which in itself shows Nick to be a man of values.
I asked earlier about how these NDA's work and I'm still none the wiser. I have no clear idea of what went on, I've only heard rumours. I don't even know if an NDA exists. If such a thing as an NDA does exist, doesn't it imply either NB's principles come at an affordable price, or there was something that occurred that NB, presumably under advice, felt unable to defend, either due to cost or content? I'm led to believe that a contract signed under duress is invalid?
Nobody answered because they either don't know what went on, or if they're close enough to Nick to know what the arrangement was, they certainly wouldn't post about it on here. An NDA is simply an agreement between at least two parties, that details of certain information will not be shared with any third party.
Aye, that bit's clear, but it doesn't have to be specific a out NB. What it does suggest that, either there was some wrong doing, in which case an NDA could have been signed under duress, or that principles have a price. Don't get me wrong, I know that not everything is black and white. Sometimes it can be difficult to defend an allegation, even if it is not wholly accurate, and all any of us know are rumours.
As we've been constantly reminded, he didn't need the money. Makes you wonder what needed keeping secret and at what price really. Which is what this boils down to, speculation, suggestion and rumour with hints of ITK but can't talk. Laughable really.
Aye, I suggested as such earlier and asked about it existing or not. The situation certainly begs a lot of questions, and is wide open to all sorts of suggestions.
I feel sorry for you, what you've written here and elsewhere speaks for itself. No understanding of anything related to Hull City or football, you don't even understand the irony of yourself calling other people 'plastic fans'
I said at the time his sacking was the right decision for the wrong reasons. If he'd been let go for poor results/performances on the pitch I don't think anybody could have legitimately argued. Especially not given the man who replaced him.
In some ways I agree about the results but on the other hand he was learning the job too so you could say he wasn't given enough time and also was sacked for the wrong reasons by Happy Tigers mates
Yes you could. He took over with us 8th. NP was considered to be doing such a good job in getting us to 8th with a tiny squad and a tiny budget that he was offered more money to go elsewhere. Barmby kept up that level of performance and we finished 8th with the same tiny squad and no budget.
And achieved a higher win% over his 3/4 of a season than Stevebruce has managed to achieve with us, or in his career, despite having tens of millions to throw around.
