Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

A selection of the very best posts and/or most memorable threads on KUMB since the current Forum launched in 2002.

Moderator: Gnome

Post Reply
QuintonNimoy
Posts: 8167
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by QuintonNimoy »

bobd_uk wrote:I'd like to know what people think SD has to gain by not spending the money? It's not like he's getting any of it.

If he stands up to the board and says no too often, they'll just replace him with their own yes man anyway. He can't really win.
I'm not sure what money you're referring to, I think our summer trading was relatively even including Collins going on the last day. The main gripe is that we're left with one proper experienced striker in the whole squad with only a youngster as backup. We signed Kovac permanently, even Diamanti might be questionable as he's not a fully fledged striker. As I quoted him above Dux is long on the list of 'people who can play there', but we're desperately short on anyone who can actually play there as their first choice position.

Did we need Kovac more than a striker? Did we need Diamanti (a forward, but not a striker) more than a striker? Would their fees combined have got us a player we'd be better off with as a whole?

I think the squad looks like it'll survive, but there are some ugly gaps; a RB who doesn't want to be here, no backup for Cole, the lack of left back cover now exposed, that kind of thing.

As others have pointed out we've been here before and it didn't work out well. I have more faith in Zola than I did in Roeder, not a good starting point though.
SBB
Posts: 728
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:29 am

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by SBB »

[quote="DanielHammer"]. In july Duxbury gave an interview with this site and another site where he said no players would be sold unless it was with the say so of zola to help prosper the club. Well Savio has been sold and Collins has been sold and that has pushed the squad backwards.


In your opinion................(which of course you are entitled to)
bobd_uk
Posts: 7860
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:27 am
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 75 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by bobd_uk »

bobd_uk wrote:I'd like to know what people think SD has to gain by not spending the money? It's not like he's getting any of it.
QuintonNimoy wrote:I'm not sure what money you're referring to
The £6-7m (ish) that we were prepared to spend on Chamakh yesterday, had he agreed to come.
User avatar
Albie Beck
Posts: 9648
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:42 am
Has liked: 617 likes
Total likes: 640 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by Albie Beck »

That's a good post, Daniel. I suspect most of us appreciate that Dux doesn't work in ideal circumstances, and he is not allowed by the financial constraints to be as "creative" as he - or we - would like.

I think we also understand that he cannot give us a blow-by-blow commentary of what he is doing and justify each and every action as it is taking place - for reasons of commercial sensitivity alone that would be suicidal.

But I do think that when the dust has settled, when (if) we have recruited Tristan MkII, he should give us all an insight into what they were trying to do, what they achieved and what they failed at. Then we can have a better understanding, and perhaps some sympathy.
QuintonNimoy
Posts: 8167
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by QuintonNimoy »

bobd_uk wrote:The £6-7m (ish) that we were prepared to spend on Chamakh yesterday, had he agreed to come.
I'm not sure where that would have come from to be honest, I have my doubts it would have been that simple. We'd apparently agreed terms with Bordeaux, I'm not sure that means we had a suitcase full of money.
bobd_uk
Posts: 7860
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 11:27 am
Has liked: 2 likes
Total likes: 75 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by bobd_uk »

QuintonNimoy wrote:I'm not sure where that would have come from to be honest, I have my doubts it would have been that simple. We'd apparently agreed terms with Bordeaux, I'm not sure that means we had a suitcase full of money.
We should, at the very least, have the Collins money available. I've no idea if it was a lump sum now, or spread over a period of time, but there should be something in the kitty. Be interesting to see if there's anything available come January. My money is on no.
QuintonNimoy
Posts: 8167
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by QuintonNimoy »

bobd_uk wrote:We should, at the very least, have the Collins money available. I've no idea if it was a lump sum now, or spread over a period of time, but there should be something in the kitty. Be interesting to see if there's anything available come January. My money is on no.
I think there's a strong possibility that the Collins money was used to balance the books re Diamanti/Kovac when it became clear that no one was going to buy Upson which would have left cash over for a striker. My guess is we wouldn't have bought a recognised striker without having raised a significant sum from the sale of a big name, just a guess though. The Chamakh thing sounds very oddt to me, a weird way of going about things these days.

January trading will probably depend to some extent at least on the league position, without new ownership (if CB make it out of moratorium - if not the next bank in line) the position will almost certainly remain sell to buy.
User avatar
Jigga
Posts: 1413
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 12:38 pm
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by Jigga »

bristolhammerfc wrote:So we have sold a premiership first choice defender to a serious rival, sold a player our expert Nani chose as a top prospect for the premier league, touted our England centre half to just about anyone, replaced an international proven right back with a player that can't tackle, bought a left back that doesn't play even when our first choice left back is injured, let a young player with some premiership experience go on loan, whilst playing Hines with no experience in the same role.

We signed a player who was at Livorno who has one good season behind him, a centre back who couldn't hack it in the Dutch leagues, and failed to sign a Division one Goalkeeper. We signed a player who was on loan but would have jumped ship had any other club made an offer.

Jiminez we have yet to see, we even let Kovac go before re signing him out of desperation.

The premier league is a simple league really. If you don't have strength in depth you fail. If you don't score goals you fail. If you rely on inexperience you fail. We tick all three boxes.

I will continue to support the club I love, but fear another last day nail biter, avoiding relegation.

Our CEO a self confessed Man Utd fan will walk away with a big pay off, whilst we will be left thinking on what could have been.


The man has lied so many times I don't think he even knows the truth anymore.
:thup: This is the harsh reality of our situation. Lets hope GZ and SC can manage with the limited resources at their disposal, I pray to god we don't go on a losing streak as I can see the youngsters heads dropping and we could be bang in trouble. Our saving grace as many have pointed out is the shower of **** that makes up the bottom of the prem table each year. Fortunately we have at lease 4-6 teams worse off than us.

I am hoping we get sold before January then have funds available to purchase the striker we so desperately need in the next transfer window. I have a feeling Duxbury is under orders to balance the books with a conditional offer imminent. (Just a gut feeling).

Let's all forget about the lack of transfer activity and start hoping we get taken over again. ITK's can anyone shed any light? Are we any closer to being sold?

If we get taken over I hope we get a new CEO :evil:
User avatar
JonG86
Posts: 6072
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:35 pm
Has liked: 11 likes
Total likes: 77 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by JonG86 »

bristolhammerfc wrote:So we have sold a premiership first choice defender to a serious rival, sold a player our expert Nani chose as a top prospect for the premier league, touted our England centre half to just about anyone, replaced an international proven right back with a player that can't tackle, bought a left back that doesn't play even when our first choice left back is injured, let a young player with some premiership experience go on loan, whilst playing Hines with no experience in the same role.
That's all your opinion, which of course you are entitled to. However in my opinion Faubert is more than capable of replacing Neill (if we don't get Neill that is, he is still available).

Savio has been sold back to an Italian club, a good Italian club that was after him when we bought him, because he had failed to settle. I don't think even Nani or Zola ould tell if a player will settle or not. Savio is clearly a good player if a Champions League team are willing to spend their limited budget on him.

Did we tout our England Centre Half to everyone? I thought it was his agent trying to stir up interest. I guess you can read it how you want it. You have decided to state somehting which is opinion as fact. Daprela probably isn't match fit, so wouldn't you think its a good idea to get him up to tht level before throwing him in at the deep end?
bristolhammerfc wrote: Jiminez we have yet to see, we even let Kovac go before re signing him out of desperation.
We released Kovac because his club were asking for too much, the club got him for less than was asked for. Bad business? I guess you will find a way of being negative about that deal anyway.
bristolhammerfc wrote: The premier league is a simple league really. If you don't have strength in depth you fail. If you don't score goals you fail. If you rely on inexperience you fail. We tick all three boxes.
We have scored 3 goals in 3 games (more than quite a few teams in the premier league...), we have strength in depth in all areas of the squad bar one, where we rely on youth instead (or a bosman signing) and finally we have nearly always relied on our young players to come through. No one was complaining about relying on inexperience when Mark Noble started in the first team during our "Great Escape".
bristolhammerfc wrote: I will continue to support the club I love, but fear another last day nail biter, avoiding relegation.
There are much, much worse clubs in the premier league than us. Off the top of my head: Blackburn, Bolton, Hull, Burnley, Wolves, Birmingham, Pompey and Stoke have much weaker squads than we do.
bristolhammerfc wrote: Our CEO a self confessed Man Utd fan will walk away with a big pay off, whilst we will be left thinking on what could have been.
The man has lied so many times I don't think he even knows the truth anymore.
As I have show, it is easy to spin things one way or the other. Just depends on how you want to spin them. You have decided to take an overly negative view on the entire situation. I would be willing to bet that we won't be facing relegation by the end of the season and will be more likely to be sitting mid table again.
welbeck
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 12:54 pm

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by welbeck »

Did you ask him 1) "Who he supported as a boy" and 2) "Why doesn't he work for them?"
User avatar
westham,eggyandchips
Posts: 25139
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: On the tour bus
Has liked: 1978 likes
Total likes: 1465 likes

Re: Good work Scott Duxbury

Post by westham,eggyandchips »

sendô wrote::thup: Good post there Big_Russ. Nice to see someone posting on here with a bit of sense and objectivity.
Seconded. :thup:
crowbars
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:17 am
Location: essex

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by crowbars »

I dont post on here very often, but reading all this, felt the need to add my thoughts, like most of you on this site I was very dissapointed no striker came in yesterday, gutted as a matter of fact especially loosing ginge as well.

I have a few thoughts going through my mind one of the main ones is why does everyone feel the need to slate SD, who after all is a employee of the club working through a very bad financial situation, I understand that people are saying he lied in his earlier Q&A but lets be real he was trying to be positive in a very difficult period of time for the club, new owners (in his case new employers) money to sheff utd etc.

Im sure he would have liked nothing more than spending 8-10 million on a striker we would be all going crazy about, but considering the collins transfer never went through until late yesterday, as was released time wasnt there. People also need to remember last week that Livorno announced the Diamanti transfer a lot earlier than us, bought 2 new players, then reports on Thursday morning were circulating that we never had the money to complete the purchase, even VH was mentioning sites in Italy saying the same, do you realy believe that Duxbury would have sanctioned the transfer knowing there was alledgedly no money in the bank to make the down payment, none of us know what was going on. SOBET to the rescue !!!! We are at the begining of the season, season tickets have been paid for Sky money is in, but we couldnt make a down payment of £2 million, still Duxbury tried to maintain a positive stance, give the guy a break lets get behind our club, if he would have come out doom and gloom that would have really helped us wouldnt it. We are stuck with the owners we have, for the time being, Duxbury has to work with what he has.

I agree that we, especially financially could be in for a very difficult 4 months, but on the playing side none of us know whats going to happen, at Christmas last year who would have expected us to be knocking on Europe's door but we were, Diamanti is a forward/ attacking Midfielder, so was one of our best ever strikers in 1985 and we played with 2 small strikers up front that year, who knows how good or bad they will be only time will tell, but I for 1 like many others on this site, will always be :crest: through thick and thin.
QuintonNimoy
Posts: 8167
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by QuintonNimoy »

JonG86 wrote:Savio has been sold back to an Italian club, a good Italian club that was after him when we bought him, because he had failed to settle. I don't think even Nani or Zola ould tell if a player will settle or not. Savio is clearly a good player if a Champions League team are willing to spend their limited budget on him.
Jon, this is not the official line - it was mostly down to costs apparently. It's all very well to berate other people for stating their opinion as fact but it's not so easy to avoid doing it yourself, as you do in numerous instances in this particular post.
User avatar
buck
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:50 pm

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by buck »

Green had a little dig about strikers last weekend, Tony Cottee has today, and all the fans have too.

The general feeling is we all have been let down, and it's because of his comments this summer and the lack of the clubs transfer activity throughout that we all feel this.

He's not made many friends recently has he?
User avatar
West Ham Matt
Karl Pilkington
Posts: 19666
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 3:51 pm
Location: SACK THE BOARD!!!
Has liked: 160 likes
Total likes: 583 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by West Ham Matt »

buck wrote:Green had a little dig about strikers last weekend, Tony Cottee has today, and all the fans have too.

The general feeling is we all have been let down, and it's because of his comments this summer and the lack of the clubs transfer activity throughout that we all feel this.

He's not made many friends recently has he?
Sir Trev also did.
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66965
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2436 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by bubbles1966 »

Until someone comes clean about the numbers relating to Savio we'll obviously continue with conjecture that he was either;

a) A misjudgement by Nani (?) / Zola (?) who flopped spectacularly considering the "club record fee" that was paid:

b) There was no great loss because he really didn't cost us much money, which means the West Ham PR machine was content to allow a substantial deception of it's supporters in January by pretending it was investing substantially following the sale of Bellamy;

c) A mixture of both.

Given the opportunity, could this question be raised please. Thank you.
DanielHammer
Posts: 1177
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 8:55 pm

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by DanielHammer »

some sort of action needs to be taken to raise awareness of our situatio and to try and push through a sale, having names such as cottee and brooking on board definately helps.
Ironworx
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 7:52 am

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by Ironworx »

bubbles1966 wrote:Until someone comes clean about the numbers relating to Savio we'll obviously continue with conjecture that he was either;

a) A misjudgement by Nani (?) / Zola (?) who flopped spectacularly considering the "club record fee" that was paid:

b) There was no great loss because he really didn't cost us much money, which means the West Ham PR machine was content to allow a substantial deception of it's supporters in January by pretending it was investing substantially following the sale of Bellamy;

c) A mixture of both.

Given the opportunity, could this question be raised please. Thank you.
As I understand it the Savio purchase was a labyrinth of pay extra if he does this that and the other clauses, and that a club record fee would only be notionally possible if he had done all of them...

As he did the best part of f*** all I doubt if any of them kicked in.
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 40710
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
Has liked: 1904 likes
Total likes: 1612 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by Cuenca 'ammer »

Reminds me of a certain twitchy one who refused to play a certain player due to it would have triggered a "must buy clause" in the contract of maybe it would have triggered an increase in the payments.

Was at Pompey the first time around I think.

Perhaps IF Savio would have started and completed a single game the 9 million pound clause would have kicked in. Because it seemed certain that he didn't iirc.

:lol:
User avatar
bristolhammerfc
Posts: 10209
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:50 pm
Location: In the city of Brunel, balloons and banksy
Has liked: 197 likes
Total likes: 609 likes

Re: Scott Duxbury: The KUMB Q&A

Post by bristolhammerfc »

DanielHammer wrote:some sort of action needs to be taken to raise awareness of our situatio and to try and push through a sale, having names such as cottee and brooking on board definately helps.

This has been happening since the Icelandic economy collapse.
Post Reply