I would just like to throw in some thoughts on 'effective ' action. I don't pretend they provide any clear answers.
The first thing is that we have got to have a clear message about what we want to happen as a result of the action. The problem with "Roland out" for many of us is, who comes in, and will they be any better?
The second thing is that the action we take has to be something that as many fans as possible feel they can then participate in. As we can see here, many are uncomfortable with a boycott of a game.
The third thing is that the action is one that is visible and so can be easily reported by the media (and therefore gets back to Roland, who will of course not be at the ground).
My favourite examples of actions that tick those boxes are the Swedish and Norwegian fans actions against TV messing with their schedules. They had the advantage of a clear goal - no more Monday night football. In the Swedish case it involved co-operation between bitter rivals in a televised local derby, AIK and Djuurgarten. At a pre-arranged time during the game, both sets of fans went totally silent. Then they suddenly switched themselves on again - and then set off such a barrage of flares that the game had to be brought to a halt. That was a huge problem for the TV coverage, and of course the audience knew why it had happened. In the Norwegian case, the fans worked out which part of the stadium was generally in line with TV cameras. At a pre arranged time during the game everyone in that section got up and left, having first put up banners with their message.
Both protests achieved their goal I believe. I have links to videos of both somewhere, if people are interested.
being a wall fan reading your forum makes me chuckle you class yourself way way above us with the smallwall and wankwall oh how my ribs hurt but you are just like us clinging on every result look back and just as us have a hard core of 6 thousand fans
Any boycott will pass by unnoticed. I don't think the regime considers our presence as being of any or much importance at all. Certainly the financial loss of a collapse in season ticket sales will not affect Mr Duchatelet's thinking. Ujpest, Alcocon and Carl Jeiss are not members of the network because of their pulsating crowds in full stadiums, bums on seats are a minor consideration it seems to me.
Let me clutch at the flimsiest of straws.
The excuse for sacking Peeters was presented to us as reaction to a downturn in results. If this is true, and to me it's a big if, then it suggests the regime cares about something to do with Charlton, not the fans, but the results.
So if the regime delivers results we are happy and will turn up (well I will), and if the regime doesn't deliver we at least lose Luzon, which would represent something positive.
If we continue to be so dire, and keep to the Luzon/Duchatelet axis, the boycott will look after itself and be continual, and still probably pass without murmur from the regime.
For what it's worth I don't believe all this is driven by a desire to make money. Intriguingly if the whole shebang is driven by a desire to demonstrate that football clubs can break even, and find a level where they can do so, then I would be more encouraged because at least then I would know where we're heading.
He is a businessman. So only aim is money no matter how or who or what it upsets or cripples on the way.
If he saw football success as the way to that profit he would invest in the squad and have a proper manager.
So the profit must come from gates and merchandise with low costs to break even and player manipulation for his personal profit. Three strikers bought on his English clubs accounts and lent abroad for long periods must be for example part of this.
Who knows but a businessmans nose for money is behind it. We need to bloody that nose.
being a wall fan reading your forum makes me chuckle you class yourself way way above us with the smallwall and wankwall oh how my ribs hurt but you are just like us clinging on every result look back and just as us have a hard core of 6 thousand fans
Yet we still average around 15k at home.
Remind me how many punters were at your last home game? Was it 8317?.
being a wall fan reading your forum makes me chuckle you class yourself way way above us with the smallwall and wankwall oh how my ribs hurt but you are just like us clinging on every result look back and just as us have a hard core of 6 thousand fans
Yet we still average around 15k at home.
Remind me how many punters were at your last home game? Was it 8317?.
Arithmetic not your strong suit FolkestoneWall. Sadly you live up to the Thick Millwall stereotype. It is no coincidence that we have had a few Millwall fans on here after you won.
What would happen if at a prearranged time (a certain amount of minutes after kickoff at the Huddersfield match) everyone returned to the concourses? The atmosphere in the enclosed spaces is always good for a sing song and building camaraderie. Then after 15 minutes, or a certain amount of time, everyone returns. The effect of everyone disappearing for a large amount of time, will be effective, symbolically, and I think generate interest amongst supporters not immediately involved (where's everyone going? I can hear them, etc. Oh that's what it's about!).
It might be a good way to start.
I saw this at a high profile la Liga game a couple of years ago but cant remember who. At half time the fans, and I mean everyone of them in their equivalent of the covered end, disappeared on to the concourse and did not return until 10 minutes in to the second half. When they returned they did it to a crescendo of noise and it took another 5 to 10 minutes for them to get settled back in to their seats.
At the time I thought what a brilliant way to bring your grievances to the boards attention, but only boycotting your team for 10 minutes.
What would happen if at a prearranged time (a certain amount of minutes after kickoff at the Huddersfield match) everyone returned to the concourses? The atmosphere in the enclosed spaces is always good for a sing song and building camaraderie. Then after 15 minutes, or a certain amount of time, everyone returns. The effect of everyone disappearing for a large amount of time, will be effective, symbolically, and I think generate interest amongst supporters not immediately involved (where's everyone going? I can hear them, etc. Oh that's what it's about!).
It might be a good way to start.
I saw this at a high profile la Liga game a couple of years ago but cant remember who. At half time the fans, and I mean everyone of them in their equivalent of the covered end, disappeared on to the concourse and did not return until 10 minutes in to the second half. When they returned they did it to a crescendo of noise and it took another 5 to 10 minutes for them to get settled back in to their seats.
At the time I thought what a brilliant way to bring your grievances to the boards attention, but only boycotting your team for 10 minutes.
What would happen if at a prearranged time (a certain amount of minutes after kickoff at the Huddersfield match) everyone returned to the concourses? The atmosphere in the enclosed spaces is always good for a sing song and building camaraderie. Then after 15 minutes, or a certain amount of time, everyone returns. The effect of everyone disappearing for a large amount of time, will be effective, symbolically, and I think generate interest amongst supporters not immediately involved (where's everyone going? I can hear them, etc. Oh that's what it's about!).
It might be a good way to start.
I saw this at a high profile la Liga game a couple of years ago but cant remember who. At half time the fans, and I mean everyone of them in their equivalent of the covered end, disappeared on to the concourse and did not return until 10 minutes in to the second half. When they returned they did it to a crescendo of noise and it took another 5 to 10 minutes for them to get settled back in to their seats.
At the time I thought what a brilliant way to bring your grievances to the boards attention, but only boycotting your team for 10 minutes.
For elf & safety reasons, I think this is a bad idea ( although I applaud the "doing something en masse ideas)
The East Stand concourse for one, would be severely overcrowded if all occupants congregated there. Imagine kids being crushed, elderly fans stumbling etc etc.
Not a good advertisement for our Club, I'm afraid.
Many of the people most likely to join in a protest have already stopped going. Amongst those still there you will get a big element of the 'no-one can tell me what to do, I support my team' type mentality. Season ticket renewal time will be the first time Roland notices, but I don't know if even that will bother him.
I have been a season ticket holder since 1985 but have only been to one home game in 3 months
It's not cos the team are rubbish because I have been there and done that (still not over 0-2 v Dagenham)
It's just that I don't like the club anymore, the owners, most of the players and the depressing realisation that the 5/6 hours out of my day on a Saturday could be better spent doing something else more exciting, like putting the bins out
The whole support them through thick and thin has finally beat me.
Will go to Millwall though
Interesting thread this. With a heavy heart, I have just read every comment. I did consider starting a thread like this myself but thought I'd get a load of abuse so well done to the original thread starter and other people that have commented for having the balls to say how a lot of us are feeling.
The above comment perfectly sums up exactly how I'm feeling. I've been a season ticket holder for 20 years but I've just lost all enthusiasm. Seriously considering not renewing next year. Saturday is my 1 day off a week & I feel like I'm wasting it by doing something I'm really not enjoying which leaves me dejected & frustrated. I hate feeling like this but when the thing you've loved doing every Saturday for as long as you can remember becomes a chore, it's time to find a new hobby
I would just like to throw in some thoughts on 'effective ' action. I don't pretend they provide any clear answers.
The first thing is that we have got to have a clear message about what we want to happen as a result of the action. The problem with "Roland out" for many of us is, who comes in, and will they be any better?
The second thing is that the action we take has to be something that as many fans as possible feel they can then participate in. As we can see here, many are uncomfortable with a boycott of a game.
The third thing is that the action is one that is visible and so can be easily reported by the media (and therefore gets back to Roland, who will of course not be at the ground).
My favourite examples of actions that tick those boxes are the Swedish and Norwegian fans actions against TV messing with their schedules. They had the advantage of a clear goal - no more Monday night football. In the Swedish case it involved co-operation between bitter rivals in a televised local derby, AIK and Djuurgarten. At a pre-arranged time during the game, both sets of fans went totally silent. Then they suddenly switched themselves on again - and then set off such a barrage of flares that the game had to be brought to a halt. That was a huge problem for the TV coverage, and of course the audience knew why it had happened. In the Norwegian case, the fans worked out which part of the stadium was generally in line with TV cameras. At a pre arranged time during the game everyone in that section got up and left, having first put up banners with their message.
Both protests achieved their goal I believe. I have links to videos of both somewhere, if people are interested.
As well as needing a "clear message", PA , my feeling is that we need to find RD's Achilles' heel ( or the Belgian equivalent) as the first step.
What could possibly get his attention and hurt him at the same time ?
If we examine the more recent history of football ( especially in England) can we identify any measures that fans have successfully taken to grab the attention of their owner - curtailing income considerations aside ?
Would perhaps suggest everyone go to the match as normal but hang around outside the ground for the first 20 minutes rather than enter.. sing a song or two outside.. it'll create a bit of a 'what is going on here' type scenario from KM and co. during the start of the match. then we can go in to support the lads in red. It'd be picked up by the opposing fans and tv/media if there's enough people
The goal of it? To show RD that fans aren't to be played with, they shouldn't just 'accept' whatever he wants to do to our club because he has some money... the worse it gets the more extreme the fans actions will get. The most extreme in his case will be just a couple k attendance with no match day sales.
Would perhaps suggest everyone go to the match as normal but hang around outside the ground for the first 20 minutes rather than enter.. sing a song or two outside.. it'll create a bit of a 'what is going on here' type scenario from KM and co. during the start of the match. then we can go in to support the lads in red. It'd be picked up by the opposing fans and tv/media if there's enough people
The goal of it? To show RD that fans aren't to be played with, they shouldn't just 'accept' whatever he wants to do to our club because he has some money... the worse it gets the more extreme the fans actions will get. The most extreme in his case will be just a couple k attendance with no match day sales.
Sod's law, we'd score 2 or 3 goals in that 20 minutes !
In the late 1970s, there were some "village idiots" on the terraces who held up banners telling Mr Glikstein exactly what we thought of his stewardship of the club, in particular, the sale of our best players. The next day, photos of said banners (I think one said "25 years of sweet FA" or some such) appeared in all the Sunday papers. It caused quite a storm and forced the club to comment in public about the situation.
No reason why that could not be done again, with the bonus that they would be seen on sky sports and maybe other TV too.
I would just like to throw in some thoughts on 'effective ' action. I don't pretend they provide any clear answers.
The first thing is that we have got to have a clear message about what we want to happen as a result of the action. The problem with "Roland out" for many of us is, who comes in, and will they be any better?
The second thing is that the action we take has to be something that as many fans as possible feel they can then participate in. As we can see here, many are uncomfortable with a boycott of a game.
The third thing is that the action is one that is visible and so can be easily reported by the media (and therefore gets back to Roland, who will of course not be at the ground).
My favourite examples of actions that tick those boxes are the Swedish and Norwegian fans actions against TV messing with their schedules. They had the advantage of a clear goal - no more Monday night football. In the Swedish case it involved co-operation between bitter rivals in a televised local derby, AIK and Djuurgarten. At a pre-arranged time during the game, both sets of fans went totally silent. Then they suddenly switched themselves on again - and then set off such a barrage of flares that the game had to be brought to a halt. That was a huge problem for the TV coverage, and of course the audience knew why it had happened. In the Norwegian case, the fans worked out which part of the stadium was generally in line with TV cameras. At a pre arranged time during the game everyone in that section got up and left, having first put up banners with their message.
Both protests achieved their goal I believe. I have links to videos of both somewhere, if people are interested.
As well as needing a "clear message", PA , my feeling is that we need to find RD's Achilles' heel ( or the Belgian equivalent) as the first step.
What could possibly get his attention and hurt him at the same time ?
If we examine the more recent history of football ( especially in England) can we identify any measures that fans have successfully taken to grab the attention of their owner - curtailing income considerations aside ?
Dudu Dahan? He seems to have influence over Roland.
being a wall fan reading your forum makes me chuckle you class yourself way way above us with the smallwall and wankwall oh how my ribs hurt but you are just like us clinging on every result look back and just as us have a hard core of 6 thousand fans
Would perhaps suggest everyone go to the match as normal but hang around outside the ground for the first 20 minutes rather than enter.. sing a song or two outside.. it'll create a bit of a 'what is going on here' type scenario from KM and co. during the start of the match. then we can go in to support the lads in red. It'd be picked up by the opposing fans and tv/media if there's enough people
The goal of it? To show RD that fans aren't to be played with, they shouldn't just 'accept' whatever he wants to do to our club because he has some money... the worse it gets the more extreme the fans actions will get. The most extreme in his case will be just a couple k attendance with no match day sales.
Sod's law, we'd score 2 or 3 goals in that 20 minutes !
Whether or not I renew depends on what happens between now and the end of the season, I don't mean results, I mean whether or not Roland develops respect for CAFC. I personally don't think he cares whether I and others renew or not, and he certainly wouldn't care if we had a demo like the Blackpool fans' against Oyston. I won't leave Valley Gold though.
I think Prague's idea about doing something in full view of the camera's will be the best thing. With Airmans knowledge of the seating, is it possible that we could buy a good section of the seats directly behind the away and home dugouts? (would think camera's would have a lot of focus on Chrissy). Then we could unfurl a Liege type banner across from behind the away dugout to the home dugout - something along the lines of the severed head with Rolands head being the one severed, or maybe Chrissy's head in a 'killer' pose (or something similar,but striking, you know what i mean)- at least the media could relate it back to Liege, and it would likely get more media coverage than just ANOTHER walk-out or boycott that doesnt even hit the papers. I'm prepared to fund some of the banner cost. Who else? #justthinking
I think Prague's idea about doing something in full view of the camera's will be the best thing. With Airmans knowledge of the seating, is it possible that we could buy a good section of the seats directly behind the away and home dugouts? (would think camera's would have a lot of focus on Chrissy). Then we could unfurl a Liege type banner across from behind the away dugout to the home dugout - something along the lines of the severed head with Rolands head being the one severed, or maybe Chrissy's head in a 'killer' pose (or something similar,but striking, you know what i mean)- at least the media could relate it back to Liege, and it would likely get more media coverage than just ANOTHER walk-out or boycott that doesnt even hit the papers. I'm prepared to fund some of the banner cost. Who else? #justthinking
While cameras are in the gantry above the east, the press are all at the front of the upper west and can't easily see the lower west. For that reason and others the north is a better location for a banner.
Comments
;-)
Remind me how many punters were at your last home game? Was it 8317?.
At the time I thought what a brilliant way to bring your grievances to the boards attention, but only boycotting your team for 10 minutes.
But not until the 89th minute.
:-)
The East Stand concourse for one, would be severely overcrowded if all occupants congregated there. Imagine kids being crushed, elderly fans stumbling etc etc.
Not a good advertisement for our Club, I'm afraid.
But keep the ideas coming !
Season ticket renewal time will be the first time Roland notices, but I don't know if even that will bother him.
The above comment perfectly sums up exactly how I'm feeling. I've been a season ticket holder for 20 years but I've just lost all enthusiasm. Seriously considering not renewing next year. Saturday is my 1 day off a week & I feel like I'm wasting it by doing something I'm really not enjoying which leaves me dejected & frustrated. I hate feeling like this but when the thing you've loved doing every Saturday for as long as you can remember becomes a chore, it's time to find a new hobby
What could possibly get his attention and hurt him at the same time ?
If we examine the more recent history of football ( especially in England) can we identify any measures that fans have successfully taken to grab the attention of their owner - curtailing income considerations aside ?
The goal of it? To show RD that fans aren't to be played with, they shouldn't just 'accept' whatever he wants to do to our club because he has some money... the worse it gets the more extreme the fans actions will get. The most extreme in his case will be just a couple k attendance with no match day sales.
No reason why that could not be done again, with the bonus that they would be seen on sky sports and maybe other TV too.
It's official.
According to the Blackpool banner, Roland isn't the worst owner in football!
57 seconds into this BBC video
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-31081462
Then we could unfurl a Liege type banner across from behind the away dugout to the home dugout - something along the lines of the severed head with Rolands head being the one severed, or maybe Chrissy's head in a 'killer' pose (or something similar,but striking, you know what i mean)- at least the media could relate it back to Liege, and it would likely get more media coverage than just ANOTHER walk-out or boycott that doesnt even hit the papers.
I'm prepared to fund some of the banner cost.
Who else?
#justthinking