Adam Le Fondre

https://x.com/hibscentral/status/1811159796374196365?s=46&t=jmxs-mZWT_cnYbURW-GKJw

48:30 in for Hibs content

Appears the rumours were true about ALF and the club hierarchy re his contract. Bit unclear though as we announced it as 1 year deal with option of a second and ALF says it was a two year deal and he had to take the second year out.

Must have been appearance based.

As ALF says, I actually don’t mind it from a busieness/football point of view. I think things like this will be very common

But for no one to speak to him about it is mental and really poor.

Thankfully I can’t see that happening under Malky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unseen work

https://x.com/hibscentral/status/1811159796374196365?s=46&t=jmxs-mZWT_cnYbURW-GKJw

48:30 in for Hibs content

Appears the rumours were true about ALF and the club hierarchy re his contract. Bit unclear though as we announced it as 1 year deal with option of a second and ALF says it was a two year deal and he had to take the second year out.

Must have been appearance based.

As ALF says, I actually don’t mind it from a busieness/football point of view. I think things like this will be very common

But for no one to speak to him about it is mental and really poor.

Thankfully I can’t see that happening under Malky.

---

I suppose many sides to a story - what with the mood music tending towards a Monty exit they possible wanted to give the manager less of a constraint? Esp as injuries unfortunately meant we didn’t reap the rewards of having ALF on board. We’ll see whether he’s back to being fully available next season FWIW I rated and rate him. Just our rotten luck with injuries.

Basically, we're not taking up the option, your game time is now finished, or rip up the optional carry on playing, either way he wasn't staying after the season.

Hiding in corridors probably sums up our CEO and "owner".


Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

He said he didn't want to go out on loan because he wasn't fit enough to play but he wanted Hibs to be playing him, which is a bit odd. He was good when he was fit enough to be on the pitch but it wasn't often enough. From what he said about his previous club, it sounds like he prefers club owners to speak to him about his contract rather than his boss. I suppose he could go and knock on their door if he was bothered about it. It seems he wants to keep playing so hopefully he'll get a deal somewhere.

Like NM didn’t have enough problems 2 guys who know nothing about football dictating who he can and can’t play in an already terribly assembled squad, wouldn’t surprise me if he was told the same regarding Hanlon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unseen work

https://x.com/hibscentral/status/1811159796374196365?s=46&t=jmxs-mZWT_cnYbURW-GKJw

48:30 in for Hibs content

Appears the rumours were true about ALF and the club hierarchy re his contract. Bit unclear though as we announced it as 1 year deal with option of a second and ALF says it was a two year deal and he had to take the second year out.

Must have been appearance based.

As ALF says, I actually don’t mind it from a busieness/football point of view. I think things like this will be very common

But for no one to speak to him about it is mental and really poor.

Thankfully I can’t see that happening under Malky.

---

Hope the people who have given me abuse for sharing the info I get told from the club listened to that. I posted the situation with ALF and Kensell on here months ago.

Just to add, if people don’t see this as being a massive red flag that makes Kensell’s position even more untenable then I don’t know what else needs to happen. He has to go. Dictating who plays and who doesn’t, especially when we were chasing top six and Vente was bang out of form, was disgraceful and there are zero guarantees he won’t do it again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChuckNor

Just to add, if people don’t see this as being a massive red flag that makes Kensell’s position even more untenable then I don’t know what else needs to happen. He has to go. Dictating who plays and who doesn’t, especially when we were chasing top six and Vente was bang out of form, was disgraceful and there are zero guarantees he won’t do it again.

---

I get what you're saying and I actually agree. But ALF said himself he understood it and it was a part of football. It was the lack of communication that bothered him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnM1875

I get what you're saying and I actually agree. But ALF said himself he understood it and it was a part of football. It was the lack of communication that bothered him.

---

Difficult conversations should be instigated by the person who is the decision maker IMO. It at least shows a set of bollocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dmas

Like NM didn’t have enough problems 2 guys who know nothing about football dictating who he can and can’t play in an already terribly assembled squad, wouldn’t surprise me if he was told the same regarding Hanlon

---

Nonsense, Monty and Sergio decided they wanted the age lowered, hence why we lost Paul and Lewis, the same goes for ALF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChuckNor

Just to add, if people don’t see this as being a massive red flag that makes Kensell’s position even more untenable then I don’t know what else needs to happen. He has to go. Dictating who plays and who doesn’t, especially when we were chasing top six and Vente was bang out of form, was disgraceful and there are zero guarantees he won’t do it again.

---

We did well to get to a position we weren’t extending his contract for me.

Clubs do this type of thing all the time to avoid extending contracts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J-C

Nonsense, Monty and Sergio decided they wanted the age lowered, hence why we lost Paul and Lewis, the same goes for ALF.

---

Monty wanted to keep and play ALF.

ALF's account of events is definitely a red flag for Ian Gordon and Ben Kensell's involvement on the football side.

We had a DoF at the time - he might have been recovering from his operation but this is the sort of decision that should be between the Head Coach and the DoF.

We certainly (imho, at least) shouldn't be in a position where the Head Coach wants a player, who has a contract in place to facilitate that, being overridden by the CEO and/or owner.

That's a football decision.

If Monty had been involved in that decision making process then he should have positioned it to ALF as his decision.

I agree with Chuck Nor that it's a big red flag, if this was Hearts and Romanov we'd have been pishing ourselves at them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B.H.F.C

We did well to get to a position we weren’t extending his contract for me.

Clubs do this type of thing all the time to avoid extending contracts.

---

I do get that, and you're right (even ALF acknowledges it) that it's common in football for players to fall out of favour or become unaffordable etc.

I would have far more sympathy for the club's decision if ALF was two years in and had an option of a third, there's enough time passed for either party to have a sense of whether that extension was appropriate.

In ALF's case though, he's just signed the deal and that year extension was a big part of his decision making.

The disparity between Monty's wishes and what Kensell and Gordon we're pushing is cause for alarm as well.

ALF certainly has a lot to say. Sounds like a bitter ex player that we didn't want to keep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

Monty wanted to keep and play ALF.

ALF's account of events is definitely a red flag for Ian Gordon and Ben Kensell's involvement on the football side.

We had a DoF at the time - he might have been recovering from his operation but this is the sort of decision that should be between the Head Coach and the DoF.

We certainly (imho, at least) shouldn't be in a position where the Head Coach wants a player, who has a contract in place to facilitate that, being overridden by the CEO and/or owner.

That's a football decision.

If Monty had been involved in that decision making process then he should have positioned it to ALF as his decision.

I agree with Chuck Nor that it's a big red flag, if this was Hearts and Romanov we'd have been pishing ourselves at them.

---

Totally agree it’s ridiculous, thoughts about NM and Sergio aside that sort of rubbish doesn’t help anyone trying to get results, they are part of the process of putting a squad together they can’t then tie a managers hands because they’ve changed their mind countless times and now player x isn’t suitable for the next big idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChuckNor

Hope the people who have given me abuse for sharing the info I get told from the club listened to that. I posted the situation with ALF and Kensell on here months ago.

---

I also posted similar . Some folk are blinded by hibs and think nothing is wrong .

Pity we couldn’t do that to Ben K over his totally over inflated contract. With terrible players he gave long term contracts, which his draining out resources and his impacting our ability to sign players.

Ben and Ian G playing at running a fitba club.

Fully expecting the accounts to year end June 2024 not to be as rosy as he promised at the AGM. I suspect they will delay the issuing of these .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Since452

ALF certainly has a lot to say. Sounds like a bitter ex player that we didn't want to keep.

---

If you listen to it, he's really pragmatic about it and speaks very highly of his time here, he doesn't come across bitter in any sense of the word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

I do get that, and you're right (even ALF acknowledges it) that it's common in football for players to fall out of favour or become unaffordable etc.

I would have far more sympathy for the club's decision if ALF was two years in and had an option of a third, there's enough time passed for either party to have a sense of whether that extension was appropriate.

In ALF's case though, he's just signed the deal and that year extension was a big part of his decision making.

The disparity between Monty's wishes and what Kensell and Gordon we're pushing is cause for alarm as well.

---

McDermott was never a DoF . A big smoke screen. We are skint and they doing everything to get players out the door.

Terrible way to treat ALF. If he played more , we’d have made top 6. Massive financial hit not making top 6

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Since452

ALF certainly has a lot to say. Sounds like a bitter ex player that we didn't want to keep.

---

Total
Opposite . He had a two year deal
. He did nothing wrong . I’m
Guessing your the type
That moans when a hibs player heads west for massive pay rises

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B.H.F.C

We did well to get to a position we weren’t extending his contract for me.

Clubs do this type of thing all the time to avoid extending contracts.

---

Yes. But Ben should have had the balls to speak to ALF. He loves the limelight when he thinks he’s done well …

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

I do get that, and you're right (even ALF acknowledges it) that it's common in football for players to fall out of favour or become unaffordable etc.

I would have far more sympathy for the club's decision if ALF was two years in and had an option of a third, there's enough time passed for either party to have a sense of whether that extension was appropriate.

In ALF's case though, he's just signed the deal and that year extension was a big part of his decision making.

The disparity between Monty's wishes and what Kensell and Gordon we're pushing is cause for alarm as well.

---

I think the biggest issue was that we had a completely absent Director of Football. If we were rumbling on the same as we were at the point then I’d be thinking it was a huge red flag but, with the changes made, I don’t think it’s something that’ll be repeated.

This isn’t me sticking up for Kensell/Gordon because it’s clear that they have made some terrible decisions over the last few years. I guess, in this case, I find it easier to accept as we got to the right outcome IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chipper1875

McDermott was never a DoF . A big smoke screen. We are skint and they doing everything to get players out the door.

Terrible way to treat ALF. If he played more , we’d have made top 6. Massive financial hit not making top 6

---

If he'd been fit to play more he'd have played more. McDermott was obviously the director of football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chipper1875

McDermott was never a DoF . A big smoke screen. We are skint and they doing everything to get players out the door.

Terrible way to treat ALF. If he played more , we’d have made top 6. Massive financial hit not making top 6

---

ALF talks about McDermott's role in bringing him to the club, I agree that he didn't do what you'd expect a DoF to do, but his focus was on recruitment and I think there's enough evidence to say that he at least impacted that.

The wider DoF role though, I don't think he or Kensell really understood what that was and we wasted a year until Malky came in to do it properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B.H.F.C

I think the biggest issue was that we had a completely absent Director of Football. If we were rumbling on the same as we were at the point then I’d be thinking it was a huge red flag but, with the changes made, I don’t think it’s something that’ll be repeated.

This isn’t me sticking up for Kensell/Gordon because it’s clear that they have made some terrible decisions over the last few years. I guess, in this case, I find it easier to accept as we got to the right outcome IMO.

---

I guess it comes down to whether or not you think that the end justifies the means.

From what I've heard about the situation, there's no doubt in mind that the club could and should have handled that situation better while still achieving the same outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chipper1875

Total
Opposite . He had a two year deal
. He did nothing wrong . I’m
Guessing your the type
That moans when a hibs player heads west for massive pay rises

---

I don’t think he did have a two year deal. It was announced as a one year deal with a one year option. There was obviously some kind of condition attached to that.

Would be interesting to hear our side of the story, though doubt we ever will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by B.H.F.C

I don’t think he did have a two year deal. It was announced as a one year deal with a one year option. There was obviously some kind of condition attached to that.

Would be interesting to hear our side of the story, though doubt we ever will.

---

That's right, a year with another year triggered by appearances, I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chipper1875

Total
Opposite . He had a two year deal
. He did nothing wrong . I’m
Guessing your the type
That moans when a hibs player heads west for massive pay rises

---

Trying too hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChuckNor

Just to add, if people don’t see this as being a massive red flag that makes Kensell’s position even more untenable then I don’t know what else needs to happen. He has to go. Dictating who plays and who doesn’t, especially when we were chasing top six and Vente was bang out of form, was disgraceful and there are zero guarantees he won’t do it again.

---

A bit dramatic.

I don’t know if the comms could have been improved or not, we’re just hearing one side. As a long term decision for the football club it is probably the right thing and certainly nothing unusual about this type of outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

I guess it comes down to whether or not you think that the end justifies the means.

From what I've heard about the situation, there's no doubt in mind that the club could and should have handled that situation better while still achieving the same outcome.

---

If it comes down to a CEO or whoever not talking to the guy about it then, aye, that’s a complete lack of balls and doesn’t reflect well.