CARD STATEMENT - Response to Invitation from the Club

I took both of my sons to The Valley for the first time back in March, for the Middlesbrough match (2-0).
We were going to be introduced to the crowd at half time but it was changed, on the day, to before the match.
The ground was pretty empty at that time, as the mock funeral was going on outside the ground. But even so, It was good of the club to organise that for us - 'Jimmy Seed's great grandsons first visit etc'. I think Olly Groome was behind it.
I'm not quite sure why it was changed to before the match. I was wondering if it had anything to do with the protests?
Anyway, we sat in the family stand with some friends we'd brought along to the match, and the boys loved the protests. The atmosphere was incredible, and there was never a moment when we felt the protests had become threatening in any way.
We actually felt quite moved, and very lucky to witness the passion of the fans. It certainly cemented Tommy's support for the Addicks. An incredible day, all in all.
We also played really well!

Muttleys' one depressing line speaks to the Shakespearean tragedy our club has become under this regime.

Is not one of the most telling aspects the involvement of a PR firm? A professional football club to speak to it supporters, a largely captive audience (who else really cares) needs to pay a PR company.

So bankrupt are the full time Senior Management Team to protect their image from the actions of groups of spirited club enthusiasts, who all have their own livelihoods to earn, they need the professional crutch of a mass market spin organisation.

There have been challenges to the CARD response. We should welcome those who express a different view. CARD has no need to be defensive. The higher ground is about embracing the broadest cathedral of opinion.

Remain confident of the campaign to remove the club executive but recognise there will always be challenging decisions. Statistics suggest thousands of absent friends are relying on the outcome.

There is a reasoned argument to be won.

Communication is not just about reaffirming your position. It is about winning hearts & minds. There is an argument for talking, tactical or otherwise. Dialogue is a constructive option. Cambridge and others have challenged the CARD response. I chose to do so myself. Refusing talks prompts a natural reaction. At times everybody needs to listen to the "naysayer" in the room.

There is however an overriding prerequisite for entering into any dialogue.

It is the evidence of good faith.

By all means challenge the CARD statement to determine an alternative action/response but to do so you have to look beyond the "it is always good to talk" maxim and put the response in context. For every alternative I found the CARD response exceeded that alternative. The response is clear. It is concise. It references the collective determination of a range of representative groups. It clarifies the context of the decision made.

To have accepted the invitation will have blurred the edges of the debate to be "spun" in a different direction. Indeed until it was declined some already had.

The compelling issue, as alluded to and the one which needs to be made every day is, was this offer for talks made in "good faith". Was the invitation a genuine attempt to engage in serious debate? If so, Why now? What was the catalyst? If so why the immediate release to the media?

Even if you accept the possible prompting of a Charlton stalwart - the PR decision to go to the media completely undermines the initiative. PR games or corporate incompetence you decide. The PR slant can only position this as yet another meaningless, manipulative Meire missive just days after the owners' tick box exercise with T20k representatives.

It is no isolated PR message. After the Duchatelet interaction, the season ticket holders meet with Slade, the SMT meetings with 2 regional groups and a 3rd with Bromley prior to the Coventry game. The PR message is we are meeting fans just CARD will not talk. We have listened & responded recruiting a British Manager & players yet some supporters still attack us

Yet there is history here. Meetings with Meire do not engage to deliver a new direction for the club. The November Fans meeting, Fan Forums, the CAST dialogue all bear witness. They were corporate tick box exercises. There is a difference between meeting and engaging in talks.

The response to the invitation was a well constructed and very pertinent piece of prose.

The refusal to talk and resultant protests will be spun. Expect draconian security for the Coventry game. Their message "How else are we to respond to the protests?" PR games will continue. This latest interaction merely draws a few more lines in the sand.

The one plus is even after a disastrous period for the club, there is still the passion to generate noise across social media. People still care enough to take a view on the future of their club. The challenge is of course there are two sides to the debate though it is a distorted debate.

It is argued CARD can only be viewed as a negative campaign. It is against and aimed at removing the club executive. The balance is of course it is the removal of a negative ideology and the related destructive executive performance.

Yet look beyond the bluster and Anti CARD proponents offer no comfort to the regime. Their argument is solely negative. No coherent defence of the regime merely subjective projections and endless attacks on CARD "personalities". It is the barren approach of all too many political debates

As CARD continues reflect opponents offer no regime endorsement, most dislike confrontation and want to watch a game; others just accept the club will always fail; while others believe the regime will only depart if we return to the Championship.

The few who offer any support are locked into the cognitive dissonance of there is no one else, of positioning any failings as in the past, as the "club" being unlucky. At one level it is hard not to have some sympathy because;

I defy anyone to point to the vision the executive is trying to deliver, to identify the performance successes they have delivered, to offer any evidence of any playing progression and or success on the field of play. Indeed I implore anyone to tell me why they have confidence in the owner of the club and his executive to deliver to the clubs' best interests.

The results seen over 33 months of this regime indicate the professional capabilities of the club in terms of its personnel, its ideology and its infrastructure are simply not fit for purpose.

No PR strategy on the planet will alter that unfortunate truth.

Grapevine49 said:

For every alternative I found the CARD response exceeded that alternative. The response is clear. It is concise. It references the collective determination of a range of representative groups. It clarifies the context of the decision made.

@Grapevine49 I bloody love your posts mate, but only you could portray CARD's excellent response as "concise"! All things are relative eh?