Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Fans' Forum tonight ?

145791013

Comments

  • Maybe the dirty protests talked about weren't really intended to be protests after all...
  • As far as I understand it football clubs leak like a sieve. One bit of evidence for that is all the stuff leaked about Big Bob's behaviour. If KM or RD want to shut down the Fan's Forum because it leaks, then they might as well shut down the training ground as well.
  • seth plum said:

    As far as I understand it football clubs leak like a sieve. One bit of evidence for that is all the stuff leaked about Big Bob's behaviour. If KM or RD want to shut down the Fan's Forum because it leaks, then they might as well shut down the training ground as well.

    This!
    They leak because there is a demand...and the holders of information either gain self worth from doing so or they have a purpose.

    The point of fan groups, whatever the structure is to harness that energy and demand for information into a positive force.

    Now perhaps the boys and girls who hold leadership roles might agree amongst themselves the best way forwards and then make it happen?

    As I posted previously the football strategy is completely opaque and this fosters speculation about motives and competence.

    @Grapevine49‌ has asked where people want to go with this... To see the CEO out of post?

    The communication ought to be better and perhaps the supporters Trust might offer assistance by asking the right questions and engaging direct with the club.

    People are overcomplicating this. Me? I'm off to Watford to see for myself :)

  • You're being way too defensive, Fanny which is not like you. I was not criticising you nor other volunteers but I do have an issue with it taking two weeks for the minutes to be published and everyone sworn to secrecy like MI5 in the meantime. I actually suggested in an earlier post that a full - time employee of the club should take minutes and publish within a day or two - that would show respect to fans.

    I'd like to think the Trust represent my views at these meetings, along with those of c1,000 other fans based on the findings of their surveys and regular contact. Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.
  • You're being way too defensive, Fanny which is not like you. I was not criticising you nor other volunteers but I do have an issue with it taking two weeks for the minutes to be published and everyone sworn to secrecy like MI5 in the meantime. I actually suggested in an earlier post that a full - time employee of the club should take minutes and publish within a day or two - that would show respect to fans.

    I'd like to think the Trust represent my views at these meetings, along with those of c1,000 other fans based on the findings of their surveys and regular contact. Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    Yes, I AM defensive, Weegie, and with reason IMO.

    Were you, or anyone else for that matter interested in what was discussed at FF level in the past ?

    Was anyone worried that minutes ( whether of no real value or of a high degree of importance) weren't published until relatively recently ?

    Do you make sure that you search out & read said published minutes each quarter ?

    I may be wrong (again) but I'd expect the answer to these questions is a resounding "no".

    But, on this occasion, because emotions are running high for obvious reasons, this has become a "hot potato" with the flames fanned in no uncertain terms by AB and his "leak".

    It may be that he has no respect for rules & regulations, whether verbally agreed or as part of a constitution, but I like to think I'm a trustworthy, honest individual .....

    May I respectfully request that if you have any suggestions, complaints or any observations you wish to add to the agenda of the next meeting in April, you email them to the address for the FF on the OS. I can assure you they will be given due consideration and you will be able to read the feedback in those posted minutes when the time comes. And, funnily enough, Craig (VIP rep) has just emailed to say he has the minutes ready to forward to Katrien so they should be published early next week.

    Finally, your feeling that the Trust should be represented by 3 or 4 reps given size of member base should be put forward by razil if it is the wish of his committee. But I have my doubts that this would be agreed by the FF members as this would set a precedent along the lines of proportional representation and would be totally unworkable due to the space allocated in Bartrams for said purpose. It is also extremely unlikely that a vote would be required on a specific issue, so more than one rep per Supporter Group would serve no purpose....except that razil might have to sit on my lap :-)

    Hope that helps and that , following this upsetting past few days for all concerned with our Club, we can all pull together to support our team whilst agreeing to disagree with each other in a respectful manner.

    No more from me on this thread. Promise.





  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.



  • Are we all going millwall away?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Are we all going millwall away?
  • edited January 2015

    . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
  • Jean, I don't want to fall out over this - let's not give Roland and Co that pleasure. I did not mean to upset you personally at all and apologies if I did.

    In short, I do take notice of FF issues and have always been a bit bothered that it takes a long time for the minutes to come out as that loses momentum from the meeting. I am particularly concerned this time about the club considering Fri eve kick-offs which would seriously and negatively impact my options of home matches to attend.

    Anyway, onwards and downwards...xx
  • Where are we all meeting for millwall away?
  • Tavern said:

    Where are we all meeting for millwall away?

    If AFKA wasn't out getting pissed you'd be getting a stern word sometime soon.
  • PL54 said:

    Tavern said:

    Where are we all meeting for millwall away?

    If AFKA wasn't out getting pissed you'd be getting a stern word sometime soon.
    lol
  • Tavern said:

    PL54 said:

    Tavern said:

    Where are we all meeting for millwall away?

    If AFKA wasn't out getting pissed you'd be getting a stern word sometime soon.
    lol
    There's a button for that.
  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
    Nobody from the Trust has even mentioned this idea to each other, let alone to the outside world, Henry, so pack it in. Actually we are talking about rotating who actually occupies the one place we have to take the pressure off Razil.
  • Sponsored links:


  • So who exactly is on this fans forum then?
  • edited January 2015

    . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
    Nobody from the Trust has even mentioned this idea to each other, let alone to the outside world, Henry, so pack it in. Actually we are talking about rotating who actually occupies the one place we have to take the pressure off Razil.
    I think AB and Henry have a point. No disrespect ,but the trust should be held in a much higher esteem than the fans forum or the nwka, city addiks....etc .
    After all, if the wheels do fall off completely then many will be expecting the trust to pick up the pieces.
  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
    Nobody from the Trust has even mentioned this idea to each other, let alone to the outside world, Henry, so pack it in. Actually we are talking about rotating who actually occupies the one place we have to take the pressure off Razil.
    I think AB and Henry have a point. No disrespect ,but the trust should be held in a much higher esteem than the fans forum or the nwka, city addiks....etc .
    After all, if the wheels do fall off completely then many will be expecting the trust to pick up the pieces.
    I think people expect us to be addressing more important issues than how many seats we have on the Fans Forum. And we are.
  • PL54 said:

    Tavern said:

    Where are we all meeting for millwall away?

    If AFKA wasn't out getting pissed you'd be getting a stern word sometime soon.
    Not necessarily. He was out getting pissed when I got mine...

  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
    Nobody from the Trust has even mentioned this idea to each other, let alone to the outside world, Henry, so pack it in. Actually we are talking about rotating who actually occupies the one place we have to take the pressure off Razil.
    I think AB and Henry have a point. No disrespect ,but the trust should be held in a much higher esteem than the fans forum or the nwka, city addiks....etc .
    After all, if the wheels do fall off completely then many will be expecting the trust to pick up the pieces.
    I think people expect us to be addressing more important issues than how many seats we have on the Fans Forum. And we are.
    Obviously the visibility of the programme sellers is a key issue.

    Personally, I'm more concerned about the direction in which the club is moving and the fact the our CEO is upset about some justified criticism that has been heading her way over communication with the fans.

    We've all seen how the previous puppet lawyer on the Board treated us and to be honest, I expected more from Katrien.

  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
    Nobody from the Trust has even mentioned this idea to each other, let alone to the outside world, Henry, so pack it in.
    Yes they have. On this thread.

  • Has the healing process kicked in yet?
  • . Agree with whoever said above that the Trust should actually have 3 or 4 reps on FF given size of member base.

    I really hope that that isn't Trust official policy.

    Ten months ago there was a lot of discussion on here to the effect that all or any grievances with the club should articulated through the trust.

    However the club seems determined to treat the trust as if it is on a par with much smaller organisations representing very narrow constituencies and engage with it alongside them at a controlled meeting, the issues with which have been explored above and we needn't revisit.

    So do we now believe the trust is on a par with Syd's train travellers or however many members there are in East Kent Addicks or similar, and if so how does this square with the previous position?

    That's not a slight on the other groups, just a question as to whether the trust is in a different category as previously implied or is just another group among many?
    If that is how the Trust feels then maybe it should leave the fans forum.

    I'm sure the high esteem in which they are held by so many at all levels within the club will mean that they can have even more influence and access than they do now.
    Nobody from the Trust has even mentioned this idea to each other, let alone to the outside world, Henry, so pack it in.
    Yes they have. On this thread.

    Well I can assure you that the first time I heard such an idea was when @airman brown floated it in his VOTV online article last week. Personally while I appreciate the point Airman makes, I don't think it would actually make any difference. I think he was mainly pointing out how unsatisfactory the clubs approach to dialogue has been.

    And I've been in touch with all other board members all week, pulling together that statement, which was very much a team effort and bloody hard work to complete.The Fans Forum didn't feature once in our consideration of what we should say or do. I doubt it will feature on the next one tonight or tomorrow, either. There are far more important issues to discuss.


Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!