I must admit that I have always been a little puzzled by the “ support the team not the regime “ tagline. If you are giving your admission money to the club to do what it wants with that money how are you not, in some way, supporting the regime?
You can do it by going to away games, attending £5 home games, somehow obtaining a free ticket and paying to attend when a major demo is planned - that’s how!
Yeah I can see that ( although those five pounds mount up ) but what about the others, almost certainly the majority who spurt that mantra, who have STs or pay full admission price.
I don't know; what about them? You tell me.
I don’t know.
That is why I’m asking the question.
Don't be coy, you said, 'If you are giving your admission money to the club to do what it what it wants with that money how are you not, in some way, supporting the regime?'
I did say that. It is a question. The question mark at the end is a dead giveaway!
You then went on to say in your next post ' ...what about the others, almost certainly the majority who spurt that mantra, who have STs or pay full admission price' -no question mark - which would suggest you think they are in some way complicit in the way that RD continues to run the club. I am one of those who has paid full admission to support the team, so I imagine you think of me as one of those who 'spurt the mantra', ergo, I am an 'apologist' or whatever pejorative you choose to use. If you want to wallow in your self- identifying martyrdom as a boycotter, go ahead, I don't care, but spare me and others who attend home games your sneery self-righteousness.
So going back to the original question about supporting the team, not the regime, do you believe that by paying full admission to attend matches you have not supported the regime?
What, exactly, do you consider the 'regime' to be?
The owner and his senior management team (when he had one), not the footballing staff/management.
I would add, however, that like @Mametz I would struggle to see how you could support the team (by paying to go to home matches) without supporting the regime, whether you like that or not.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
I must admit that I have always been a little puzzled by the “ support the team not the regime “ tagline. If you are giving your admission money to the club to do what it wants with that money how are you not, in some way, supporting the regime?
You can do it by going to away games, attending £5 home games, somehow obtaining a free ticket and paying to attend when a major demo is planned - that’s how!
Yeah I can see that ( although those five pounds mount up ) but what about the others, almost certainly the majority who spurt that mantra, who have STs or pay full admission price.
I don't know; what about them? You tell me.
I don’t know.
That is why I’m asking the question.
Don't be coy, you said, 'If you are giving your admission money to the club to do what it what it wants with that money how are you not, in some way, supporting the regime?'
I did say that. It is a question. The question mark at the end is a dead giveaway!
You then went on to say in your next post ' ...what about the others, almost certainly the majority who spurt that mantra, who have STs or pay full admission price' -no question mark - which would suggest you think they are in some way complicit in the way that RD continues to run the club. I am one of those who has paid full admission to support the team, so I imagine you think of me as one of those who 'spurt the mantra', ergo, I am an 'apologist' or whatever pejorative you choose to use. If you want to wallow in your self- identifying martyrdom as a boycotter, go ahead, I don't care, but spare me and others who attend home games your sneery self-righteousness.
You couldn’t be more wrong.
I am a boycotter and have been since the autumn of 2016. I have often posted on here regarding boycotting and I have always stated that although I disagree with people still paying to attend games I respect their decision to do so. ( If you doubt this I suggest you read my posts passim.)
What I posted earlier today was a genuine question. Yes, I do feel that the protest movement is weakened by those continuing to pay to attend, That is my point of view. There was nothing sneery about it. I did point out the facts as I saw them and asked if someone could explain how my perception was wrong.
Instead of trying to answer my question, it was you who started to sneer. Instead of that why don’t you address the original question and point out where I am wrong?
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
That is so incorrect.
Whatever you have paid to the club immediately comes under the control of the regime. The individual effect may be small but it is certainly not none whatsoever.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
That is so incorrect.
Whatever you have paid to the club immediately comes under the control of the regime. The individual effect may be small but it is certainly not none whatsoever.
It is so small it might as well be nothing. You'll disagree, but there you have it. '...spurt the mantra...' sounds pretty sneery to me, but ultimately I don't particularly care whether you think I've weakened the protest movement or not. You carry on and feel the warm glow of your self-sacrifice when RD finally ups sticks.
Agree 100% - how demoralising for the playing staff talk must be of boycotting games and whatever is going on behind the scenes between RD and the Aussies will not happen any quicker by CARDs actions.
The naivety of CARDs actions is incredible.
Time to get behind the players. Time to get behind LB and JJ.
I have a lot of admiration for those who still regularly attend. It can't be much fun. (maybe a bit better for a few games near the end of the season)
Everyone whether boycotting or not has only to justify their decision to themselves, not anyone else. From my perspective going to games of course is providing money to the club or should I say RD there's no getting around that, but another argument could be that by attending it also increases match day costs to the club as well, perhaps those that want to protest but still attend could support the spirit of CARDs statement by refusing to spend money in the ground? Its a shame that is not a compromise CAST were willing to make in their own statement to be honest.
I understand why those that attend, attend. I don't understand why they have to dig at fans who are just as passionate as them who take a different view. It works both ways of course, but not watching the team you love hurts.
When we moved to Selhurst, I took the decision to support the team there. If we had all done that, we may still be playing there, if we still had a team that is. The club did need supporters at the time but it also needed boycotters. I think the boycotters have more responsibility for getting the club back to the Valley than I did, although I was Valley Gold from its inception and did what I could! I was also willing to accept Selhurst because I thought nothing could be done about it!!!!
I am not willing to accept Duchatelet because he will ultimately kill our beloved club if we can't extracate him quickly!
Agree 100% - how demoralising for the playing staff talk must be of boycotting games and whatever is going on behind the scenes between RD and the Aussies will not happen any quicker by CARDs actions.
The naivety of CARDs actions is incredible.
Time to get behind the players. Time to get behind LB and JJ.
Agree 100% - how demoralising for the playing staff talk must be of boycotting games and whatever is going on behind the scenes between RD and the Aussies will not happen any quicker by CARDs actions.
The naivety of CARDs actions is incredible.
Time to get behind the players. Time to get behind LB and JJ.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
That is so incorrect.
Whatever you have paid to the club immediately comes under the control of the regime. The individual effect may be small but it is certainly not none whatsoever.
It is so small it might as well be nothing. You'll disagree, but there you have it. '...spurt the mantra...' sounds pretty sneery to me, but ultimately I don't particularly care whether you think I've weakened the protest movement or not. You carry on and feel the warm glow of your self-sacrifice when RD finally ups sticks.
So no point voting in a general election or referendum, right?
Agree 100% - how demoralising for the playing staff talk must be of boycotting games and whatever is going on behind the scenes between RD and the Aussies will not happen any quicker by CARDs actions.
The naivety of CARDs actions is incredible.
Time to get behind the players. Time to get behind LB and JJ.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
Why are they making cutbacks all over the shop , is it because they are flush with cash or because they want to save a few hundred pound per week Would Roland sell if the club was running at a profit or even smaller losses The bellend that owns us is a tight fucker , look at his duck taped rhythms , every penny counts to a miser
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
Why are they making cutbacks all over the shop , is it because they are flush with cash or because they want to save a few hundred pound per week Would Roland sell if the club was running at a profit or even smaller losses The bellend that owns us is a tight fucker , look at his duck taped rhythms , every penny counts to a miser
J Paul Getty, who was reported to be the riches person in the world in the 50' and 60', had a pay phone put in his mansion at Guildford for his staff to use. His PA (after his death) stated that instead of buying new shirts would wear them when they were frayed.
Getty took his 'friends' to cruffs dog show in London, when he was told it would be half price after 5PM made every one wait for 30 minutes.
Being a miser is a condition, which can affect the mega rich like Getty, the very rich like Duchatelet, or the mate who seemed to disappear when it was his round.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
Why are they making cutbacks all over the shop , is it because they are flush with cash or because they want to save a few hundred pound per week Would Roland sell if the club was running at a profit or even smaller losses The bellend that owns us is a tight fucker , look at his duck taped rhythms , every penny counts to a miser
J Paul Getty, who was reported to be the riches person in the world in the 50' and 60', had a pay phone put in his mansion at Guildford for his staff to use. His PA (after his death) stated that instead of buying new shirts would wear them when they were frayed.
Getty took his 'friends' to cruffs dog show in London, when he was told it would be half price after 5PM made every one wait for 30 minutes.
Being a miser is a condition, which can affect the mega rich like Getty, the very rich like Duchatelet, or the mate who seemed to disappear when it was his round.
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
Why are they making cutbacks all over the shop , is it because they are flush with cash or because they want to save a few hundred pound per week Would Roland sell if the club was running at a profit or even smaller losses The bellend that owns us is a tight fucker , look at his duck taped rhythms , every penny counts to a miser
J Paul Getty, who was reported to be the riches person in the world in the 50' and 60', had a pay phone put in his mansion at Guildford for his staff to use. His PA (after his death) stated that instead of buying new shirts would wear them when they were frayed.
Getty took his 'friends' to cruffs dog show in London, when he was told it would be half price after 5PM made every one wait for 30 minutes.
Being a miser is a condition, which can affect the mega rich like Getty, the very rich like Duchatelet, or the mate who seemed to disappear when it was his round.
My question for CARD Why call for a boycott now? We had hardly any action last season, we know Roland wants to sell. It looks like the slow process is not all down to him. I can't see an answer to Covered ends question about CARD going into more detail.
I think we would have been sold by now if the price was reasonable so for me it is down to him.
It takes two to tango
Do you want to buy a four year old ford fiesta off me for 10K? No offers. I have lost interest in it and am not servicing it. It has only been crashed into a wall twice! Come on, let's tango!
I think we would have been sold by now if the price was reasonable so for me it is down to him.
It takes two to tango
Do you want to buy a four year old ford fiesta off me for 10K? No offers. I have lost interest in it and am not servicing it. It has only been crashed into a wall twice! Come on, let's tango!
My paying full admission to a game has exactly the same effect on the regime's finances as someone who chooses to boycott the game, which is absolutely none whatsoever.
Why are they making cutbacks all over the shop , is it because they are flush with cash or because they want to save a few hundred pound per week Would Roland sell if the club was running at a profit or even smaller losses The bellend that owns us is a tight fucker , look at his duck taped rhythms , every penny counts to a miser
Talking of his duck tape rthyms, had to chuckle when there was a stoppage at Dulwich for the lino to tape his boot!
Comments
I am a boycotter and have been since the autumn of 2016. I have often posted on here regarding boycotting and I have always stated that although I disagree with people still paying to attend games I respect their decision to do so. ( If you doubt this I suggest you read my posts passim.)
What I posted earlier today was a genuine question. Yes, I do feel that the protest movement is weakened by those continuing to pay to attend, That is my point of view. There was nothing sneery about it. I did point out the facts as I saw them and asked if someone could explain how my perception was wrong.
Instead of trying to answer my question, it was you who started to sneer. Instead of that why don’t you address the original question and point out where I am wrong?
Is it that you can’t?
Whatever you have paid to the club immediately comes under the control of the regime. The individual effect may be small but it is certainly not none whatsoever.
'...spurt the mantra...' sounds pretty sneery to me, but ultimately I don't particularly care whether you think I've weakened the protest movement or not. You carry on and feel the warm glow of your self-sacrifice when RD finally ups sticks.
http://www.cafcpicks.com/cgi-bin/drkish/display.pl?month=201807&date=20180720&time=0508
Agree 100% - how demoralising for the playing staff talk must be of boycotting games and whatever is going on behind the scenes between RD and the Aussies will not happen any quicker by CARDs actions.
The naivety of CARDs actions is incredible.
Time to get behind the players. Time to get behind LB and JJ.
Everyone whether boycotting or not has only to justify their decision to themselves, not anyone else. From my perspective going to games of course is providing money to the club or should I say RD there's no getting around that, but another argument could be that by attending it also increases match day costs to the club as well, perhaps those that want to protest but still attend could support the spirit of CARDs statement by refusing to spend money in the ground? Its a shame that is not a compromise CAST were willing to make in their own statement to be honest.
When we moved to Selhurst, I took the decision to support the team there. If we had all done that, we may still be playing there, if we still had a team that is. The club did need supporters at the time but it also needed boycotters. I think the boycotters have more responsibility for getting the club back to the Valley than I did, although I was Valley Gold from its inception and did what I could! I was also willing to accept Selhurst because I thought nothing could be done about it!!!!
I am not willing to accept Duchatelet because he will ultimately kill our beloved club if we can't extracate him quickly!
Would Roland sell if the club was running at a profit or even smaller losses
The bellend that owns us is a tight fucker , look at his duck taped rhythms , every penny counts to a miser
His PA (after his death) stated that instead of buying new shirts would wear them when they were frayed.
Getty took his 'friends' to cruffs dog show in London, when he was told it would be half price after 5PM made every one wait for 30 minutes.
Being a miser is a condition, which can affect the mega rich like Getty, the very rich like Duchatelet, or the mate who seemed to disappear when it was his round.
Why call for a boycott now?
We had hardly any action last season, we know Roland wants to sell.
It looks like the slow process is not all down to him.
I can't see an answer to Covered ends question about CARD going into more detail.
It's also just a red tag to a Duchatelet ego sized bull... Not the smartest move by CARD imo.
His little rant about CARD captured by ROT at their last visit shows they are a very big thorn in his side.
The lengths he got the chief of police to go to at this last visit means he is, at the very least, rattled by ROT.
Every little helps as they say.