Hastings Supporters Forum - 100% Unofficial!

Gonna be a long night lol

Like you ChrisB, I don`t know whats going on, but have to agree with your last comment. Sad to see people walking away, e.g. Malibu, do you know Malibu you gave my mascot his name a few seasons ago, you suggested Harold, so it stuck, thanks and take care of yourself..
What next ?

i am aware john that neither joe or scott have been "officially" acknowledged as club photographer and i accept your point on this matter and that being dismissed and service no longer required can be interpreted as different things but it is only language to make it look better.joe has taken photographs for hufc for 3 years and was appointed as the supporters club "unofficial/official" phtographer at a meeting and was voted in by all members present at that meeting.the club has been happy to accept his photo's all this time,use them in the programmes and it was his photo's(mainly)that were used in the hastings observer.now although i have to be careful because if i state names my post will be deleted for unfounded accusations it has been no secret among quiet a few that a certain newly appointed director does not like joe knight!! i have witnessed 1st hand comments he has made about him and has tried to make things as difficult as possible for him.he has teamed up with liam-()who i must say kept trying to push my post down last night-why what you afraid of liam?)and scott to gradually push joe out of the picture.there is nothing wrong with making changes and improving how things work ie:hastings live etc but has done this with scott.even at christmas when the new calender was produced,joe was not even asked to do it or at least collabarate with scott on it,it was automatically given to scott to do.the programmes have been slowly getting more and more filled with scott's photo's and comments of what a pleasure it has been to work with scott have been publicly put out there,with no mention of joe.is this how you should treat someone who has taken photo's of every game,home and away,youth,development squad home and away? so it was no surprise to me that on the weekend of the 7/8th may when joe attended the tournament being held at the pilot field,as a paid supporter,nothing more,he was told he could not take photo's.he was asked by terry white to take photo's of his son which he did and was told by barry he couldn't take photo's.he was then asked by the organiser of tackleway that although they did have a independant photographer present he would like joe to take photo's as well.joe said he had been told he couldn't and he said i am asking you to take photo's and barry can speak to me if there is a problem.barry never did but joe was once again told not to take any further photo's.were all the other parents etc present told not to take any photo's?? a meeting was then held and a decision by the director's was made that joe's services were no longer required and liam and scott would be doing the club photo's from now on.the club has refused despite being asked to make a statement on this and have point blank refused.so as far as i am concerned the newly appointed director,who's appointment i am not personally happy with as like i say witnessed 1st hand the way he talks/treats those he doesn't like seems to have pushed and got his way in the extraction of joe knight.i must stress this is no way about me having a problem with scott white but there was alway's room for the both of them.they take very diffrent photo's and know that there are many people,myself included that love the fact that he captures the fans and atmosphere of the place,something that scott doesn't do as takes shot's of action on the field.so why we can't have both perplexes me.i am sure in due course scot's appointment of "official" club photographer will be announced,but not a word of thanks or appreciation for all that joe does ha done over the years.this is not how you should treat people,therefore this is not a passionate spur of the moment response in defence of a friend,this is outrage at a large organisation run mostly by volunteers who for their own reasons and picking and choosing who they like and getting rid of those they don't with no recourse of actions they can take as have no rights as an employee.there was no discussion on the matter decision made,goodbye.so the only action i can take is to let a many people know was has gone on and refuse to attend the club,so i will not be back.if any of this is incorrect,then i will gracefully give my apologies but like i say,the club so far has refused to give a statement on this matter.so i have done all i can on this.i may see a few of you on an awayer sometime and good luck to the lads for the coming season :)

I cannot answer all of your questions Sarah but with regards to photos at youth tournaments you are on extremely sticky ground. I am heavily involved in youth football and in fact 3 of our teams took part in that very same, and excellently run tournament.

With regards to photos at these tournaments it has to be very strictly managed and monitored because we sadly live in a very sick and perverted world these days. Photographers have to be heavily vetted and nominated as the official tournament photographer. Beyond that, parents can take photos but under no circumstances can photos of other players and teams be taken and then circulated or put on to any kind of web page or web site. All photographers also have to be CRB/CRC checked without fail and have certification to prove this. This is done every 3 years. If Joe does not have this he cannot take any photos of children at club tournaments and then circulate, simple as that. If he does do this he could find himself in trouble not only with parents who have not given permission but also with the club, The FA and most of all, the appointed photographer, who could make things very awkward.

Our youth club, and I would guess Hastings Youth and others are similar (Chris A would no more), have to get a signed agreements from every parent at the beginning of the season to take photos. If this is not done I cannot legally take photos of my own players even. Therefore if Joe has taken photos of my players at the tournament at the weekend, without my permission or being an appointed photographer to the tournament, and then put these on any kind of website/page, he could find himself in hot water as would any other person, outside of the appointed person on the day.

As I said, very sticky ground, and I do not admit to knowing everything but if he was indeed asked to not take photos I would guess this was not out of dislike for him as a person but mainly because of the reasons I have mentioned above.  Not sure how that makes anyone look silly and in my eyes is a very important thing to be doing for the sake of all.

If you are not involved with youth football or any kind of youth sport and do not understand the subject in hand, the rules and regulations, and ramifications of photos of children, you really shouldn't get involved or comment on this heavily regulated subject.

Ahhh, I see, so you wanted people to reply and was surprised by the lack of comments but ONLY if they agreed with your version of events? I have been nothing but polite and pointed out FACTS rather than an awful lot of assumptions made by yourself and others but now suddenly I am doing it to support my buddies on the management committee. One thing that can never ever be aimed at myself is taking sides. I say how I see it and have always been the same whether it is in the best interests of the club or not, and have had credit (and criticism) for my honesty from just about every supporter I speak to, so ill ignore that last comment and put it down to frustration. I have no loyalties to anyone, know very little of what has gone on, which is probably equal to you, and have just stated facts on what I do know a little bit about, youth football.

I have no concern whatsoever whether Joe took photos of my lads, even though it is illegal, I was plainly setting up a scenario of how some clubs could react, as you well know, and how they have reacted at youth tournaments in the past when people have been prosecuted for breaking strict rules on photography. They are facts!  As I said, if you are not involved with youth sport and do not understand it is probably best not to comment.

You have made many points that I cannot answer and know nothing about but little sense in us falling out over other people's issues. The only people that know the truth are Joe and the club so let them sort out the issues together rather than splashing everything across websites and facebook which helps nobody, especially Joe.

I am pretty sure any new manager wanting to join the club will take one look at this and run a mile and you have already stated you hope they get the right man in to bring the best out of the team so perhaps this should be laid to rest now and let the relevant parties sort out their issues.

Anyway all this talk of official/unofficial rules etc is just trying to detract from the main topic of this thread and my view that Joe has been treated badly and now to make me look ignorant and stupid.if Joe had breached such a serious matter than that would have surely been given as the reason for no longer needing him in his conversation with dave ormarod? And the club would have been been within there rights to state that in an official statement.this was not the case and was just told he was no longer required to take photo's. So sounds to me like a fishing expedition is going on to find a reason to justify their actions.as far as I'm concerned barry don't like him has talked negatively about him to anyone stupid enough to listen to it.barry didn't like he asked him to not take photos and didn't like it that he did so as requested by and with permission of others so used it as an excuse to say as newly appointed director if he undermines me he undermines us all and Scott is a much better person to work with so let's get rid.and apparently they all unanimously agreed with him on whatever reasons he gave them and there you have it.new director appointed Joe out the picture and no statement issued like it never happened. Anyways I'm not gonna get into a petty debates on here im saying what I believe to be correct and if I am incorrect then I will make apologies and club will give out statement to state the very serious reasons as to why Joe Knight can no longer used as a photographer at the club.I'm out of here to leave you all to chat about it,which was my original intention and good being knocked down by you John I shall say touche and see you around some time ☺

Hi Chris, just to answer the relevant questions you've raised that i actually know about

B - For the programme and the main club Facebook page ( cant speak for twitter, the website or the observer of course ) I've always picked photos from whichever source i wish ( with their permission of course ) and that as it happens i think that over the three seasons I've done it that both Joes & scotts photos in particular have both been in each and every programme that I've been involved in ( approx 90 or so programmes including cup games ) with i believe literally just one exception from one of them missed ( Not deliberately in any way ) after the last Guernsey game which also led to some issues there.

I've always used photos from all sources ( including the odd guest photo ) and no one from club or fans etc has ever asked me to prefer or not use photos from any certain source. but not obliged to print anyone's photos if i dont want to.

C - That's pretty much what has happened for the things i control for then last few years from both fans photos.

Yes Dan you have always tried to be fair and used both Joe and Scots photo's in the programme.the issues are to do with the other programme editor solely wanting to use Scots as already mentioned.yes there was issues over the Guernsey match where Joe spent out of his own pocket to travel all the way there to find not 1 photo of his was used.so I take it your saying you had no Imput into that particular programme?!

Not understanding that dan- what are you saying got missed? Was there no photographs used?if so did you choose which ones were used or not.please clarify.

I normally put in joes photos due to being his contact on FB but due to working late and picking up daughter that day meant I didn't get to do so before it got sent printers for the first time ever. Sorry if that's not a good enough reason for you on his behalf but as I say I met Joe face to face, resolved it quickly and shook on it walking away friends so really not sure why this incident matters to you so much now long after it was resolved with the person involved.

-- Edited by Dan on Monday 16th of May 2016 03:20:40 PM

strange. quite often look at photos of games and enjoy looking at Joes and sad that wont happen anymore but sure he can still do away games even if club wont let him do home ones. but dont get why club have made this decision as what harm was he doing? it look like a poor decision that achieve nothing but just make club look a bit silly. and after what the player told me that wilson quit cos of how the club is run it it is a bit of a worry.

-- Edited by Peter R on Tuesday 17th of May 2016 06:04:26 AM