So people can think better of Kilkenny for coming out and saying how they feel about Bates in public, yet it's wrong for Bates to say how they feel about Kilkenny in public? It's hyprocrisy. The anti-Bates agenda overrides the anti-Kilkenny agenda, it's as simple as that. You know, you remind me of Ken Bates.
Have you read the Kilkenny interview? "I didn’t want to say anything but after what Ken Bates has said, I have to say my piece." We criticised Kilkenny's playing ability on here, a football forum. We're fans, it's completely different from the Chairman of a football club insulting him and Bristol in his programme notes, newspapers and radio. I don't think Kilkenny is good enough, and I'm glad he's gone. In his interview he hasn't even mentioned his contract really, he's just said that he was insulted by Bates and made out to be a bad guy and how unneccessary that was. Clivetime, there is nothing more pathetic than someone clinging onto their opinion, even when it's clearly been proven wrong.
