Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Club For A Quid protest (Aug 2020)
Comments
-
Any booze taken has to be paid for. It has the potential to deflect from what the vast majority of attendees were trying to achieve. If it means us doing a collection on here, I will chip in but those that consumed it ought to pay for it. It isn't what we are about. Having said that, overall, I think the protest was a success in terms of news coverage.0
-
Are we still on this about the booze? It was stated on Saturday nite that money had been left for it. It’s Monday morning and people are still rabbiting about the booze needing paying for 😞MuttleyCAFC said:Any booze taken has to be paid for. It has the potential to deflect from what the vast majority of attendees were trying to achieve. If it means us doing a collection on here, I will chip in but those that consumed it ought to pay for it. It isn't what we are about. Having said that, overall, I think the protest was a success in terms of news coverage.12 -
I’ve had the house red wine in the west stand restaurant a few times. Wouldn’t touch it again even if it was free.6
-
God, the stench of charred martyrs on here is overwhelming.0
-
I am glad to hear that.stop_shouting said:
Are we still on this about the booze? It was stated on Saturday nite that money had been left for it. It’s Monday morning and people are still rabbiting about the booze needing paying for 😞MuttleyCAFC said:Any booze taken has to be paid for. It has the potential to deflect from what the vast majority of attendees were trying to achieve. If it means us doing a collection on here, I will chip in but those that consumed it ought to pay for it. It isn't what we are about. Having said that, overall, I think the protest was a success in terms of news coverage.1 -
I was happy with the demo and proud of those who took part. The boardroom thing seemed to be getting more attention than the larger group outside. That in itself was good when it was attracting the national media. It lost a bit of shine with the booze/PlayStation thing but still good. But Southall giving permission to drink the booze, so people did? Sorry, if that's true it's daft. We need Southall out of our club forever. His permission to drink wine from a boardroom we want him out of should have been a red flag. And that's why the discussion drags along.12
-
I was wondering if it was a screw-top or needed a corkscrew. And, if it needed a corkscrew, was there one there or did someone bring one?IdleHans said:Am I the only one wondering if the wine was any good?1 -
Alwaysneil said:
Was @ricky_otto over helping out?DOUCHER said:
just catching up - would have been an honour to pick u but wasn't there - if the dane weren't on the case i guess i'd be more worried and felt the need to be there - instead i had a day of bowls, poker, snooker, chinese, loads of beer and porn hub - out of the football season that's the perfect saturday - seeing as the missus was otherwise engaged.AFKABartram said:Apparently at the end everyone has to line up against the wall and the ‘ITK Captains’ get to pick which 5 they can go for a beer with.
pick me @DOUCHER please :-)
no, he's not rock n roll enough0 -
Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.5 - Sponsored links:
-
One final thing I'll add regarding the booze that was consumed in the boardroom.stop_shouting said:
Are we still on this about the booze? It was stated on Saturday nite that money had been left for it. It’s Monday morning and people are still rabbiting about the booze needing paying for 😞MuttleyCAFC said:Any booze taken has to be paid for. It has the potential to deflect from what the vast majority of attendees were trying to achieve. If it means us doing a collection on here, I will chip in but those that consumed it ought to pay for it. It isn't what we are about. Having said that, overall, I think the protest was a success in terms of news coverage.
None of the fridges were switched on, you have to be a savage to drink 21 degree sauvignon blanc, plus room temperature lager.
The real issue is the people filling their bags with the stuff, that for me was a step over the line.2 -
If Wigan fans occupied their boardroom and drank it dry for free I am one person who would not condemn them, not even be indifferent, but think good on 'em.
The equipment has been returned and it looks as if things were paid for after a fashion and the alleged urination was about pouring away some overheated sauvignon blanc that was undrinkable as mentioned by @PopIcon above.
If this was reported about Wigan fans, or Valencia fans for that matter, I would end up being impressed by their commitment to the cause.9 -
Anyone heard from Shay Given about his opinions on Saturdays protest4
-
I am interested, exactly who did Mouthall speak to, that lead to him saying it was alright to help themselves to any drink. Somebody is in touch with him and probably keeping him in touch with whats going on. I believe, in your ranks, you must have a traitor (if that is not too strong a word)SE7toSG3 said:
I dont believe he was ever asked for anything Jim, certainly not his permission,JamesSeed said:Why is anybody asking Southall permission for anything?
I have no doubt that in his warped self justifying mind he may have offered it up as the evnt unfolded but I don't believe anyone asks him for it, why would we, we thinknhe is a crook1 -
The catering contract is outsourced I believe, therefore the wine probably belongs to them and not CAFC?
1 -
The wine I bought from the East Stand concourse last season was horrible, I'd hope it was better than that!IdleHans said:Am I the only one wondering if the wine was any good?2 -
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.13 -
@dickplumb this one?dickplumb said:Got into the West Stand but didn't go into the boardroom. Well done to all those that attended. Great speech by Darren and a blonde Lady who I didn't know. Makes me proud to be a Charlton fan. Best 1 pound I have spent.
That's Sarah Monahan, the daughter of Jackie Monahan, who used to run the Junior Reds trips in the late 80s (and probably beyond, but I'd aged out of eligibility by that point)
7 -
The more that join, the bigger their voice will be.MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
It is a fiver.8 -
No....The club would have been responsible for it as it would have been accounted for as stock and more importantly signed for.ME14addick said:The catering contract is outsourced I believe, therefore the wine probably belongs to them and not CAFC?0 - Sponsored links:
-
MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
I think that's an assumption. I think this new lot represent a very large number of Charlton fans who may or may not feel CAST represent them and may have felt unrepresented or disenfranchised up to this point.
For the record I think there is room for both. CAST as the diplomatic and committee- type body and FFF for an alternative representation who are a bit more direct in their action and communication. It doesn't have to necessarily be one body and in that case it can alienate those who do not feel represented by one or the other.
This way you can have 2 bodies representing far greater swathes of the fanbase. Both bodies could even liaise on matters and work together rather than being exclusive of each other.
Collaboration and unity across the fanbase is imperative to having a fanbase that has real power in the years ahead and rifts or opposing factions will only serve to undermine it.
Whilst no representative group or groups will ever truly represent the views of all fans (impossible when you are dealing with tens of thousands of fans) by having 2 groups with different approaches working together you will largely cover most bases and be able to create more of than unity by allowing a wider spectrum to feel represented and that they have a voice.9 -
If he did actually say that, who in their right mind couldn’t have worked it out that he is in no position whatsoever to do so.ross1 said:
I am interested, exactly who did Mouthall speak to, that lead to him saying it was alright to help themselves to any drink. Somebody is in touch with him and probably keeping him in touch with whats going on. I believe, in your ranks, you must have a traitor (if that is not too strong a word)SE7toSG3 said:
I dont believe he was ever asked for anything Jim, certainly not his permission,JamesSeed said:Why is anybody asking Southall permission for anything?
I have no doubt that in his warped self justifying mind he may have offered it up as the evnt unfolded but I don't believe anyone asks him for it, why would we, we thinknhe is a crook
That excuse wouldn’t stand up in a court of law for one second.2 -
I agree. But as spokesperson/s for fans the group that is more action based isn't the best group to do the diplomacy when required. These sort of groups are better with an air of secrecy about them. There have been some recent developments that could have ended up doing us more harm than good and it is dangerous if these are associated with all or most fans.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
I think that's an assumption. I think this new lot represent a very large number of Charlton fans who may or may not feel CAST represent them and may have felt unrepresented or disenfranchised up to this point.
For the record I think there is room for both. CAST as the diplomatic and committee- type body and FFF for an alternative representation who are a bit more direct in their action and communication. It doesn't have to necessarily be one body and in that case it can alienate those who do not feel represented by one or the other.
This way you can have 2 bodies representing far greater swathes of the fanbase. Both bodies could even liaise on matters and work together rather than being exclusive of each other.
Collaboration and unity across the fanbase is imperative to having a fanbase that has real power in the years ahead and rifts or opposing factions will only serve to undermine it.
Whilst no representative group or groups will ever truly represent the views of all fans (impossible when you are dealing with tens of thousands of fans) by having 2 groups with different approaches working together you will largely cover most bases and be able to create more of than unity by allowing a wider spectrum to feel represented and that they have a voice.0 -
Dodger has spunk.MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.0 -
Didn't think Dodger was there as she read out a message from him - was that because he was in the boardroom?aliwibble said:
@dickplumb this one?dickplumb said:Got into the West Stand but didn't go into the boardroom. Well done to all those that attended. Great speech by Darren and a blonde Lady who I didn't know. Makes me proud to be a Charlton fan. Best 1 pound I have spent.
That's Sarah Monahan, the daughter of Jackie Monahan, who used to run the Junior Reds trips in the late 80s (and probably beyond, but I'd aged out of eligibility by that point)0 -
You criticise what you think is an assumption but then assume something about fans and who they will be represented by. CAST has a membership who pay in, it’s transparent in that respect.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
I think that's an assumption. I think this new lot represent a very large number of Charlton fans who may or may not feel CAST represent them and may have felt unrepresented or disenfranchised up to this point.
For the record I think there is room for both. CAST as the diplomatic and committee- type body and FFF for an alternative representation who are a bit more direct in their action and communication. It doesn't have to necessarily be one body and in that case it can alienate those who do not feel represented by one or the other.
This way you can have 2 bodies representing far greater swathes of the fanbase. Both bodies could even liaise on matters and work together rather than being exclusive of each other.
Collaboration and unity across the fanbase is imperative to having a fanbase that has real power in the years ahead and rifts or opposing factions will only serve to undermine it.
Whilst no representative group or groups will ever truly represent the views of all fans (impossible when you are dealing with tens of thousands of fans) by having 2 groups with different approaches working together you will largely cover most bases and be able to create more of than unity by allowing a wider spectrum to feel represented and that they have a voice.
What appear, to me, to be random albeit passionate fans only seem to represent themselves. Possibly with the best of intent but they aren’t really accountable and are just loose cannons who might harm the interests of fans generally.1 -
iainment said:
You criticise what you think is an assumption but then assume something about fans and who they will be represented by. CAST has a membership who pay in, it’s transparent in that respect.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
I think that's an assumption. I think this new lot represent a very large number of Charlton fans who may or may not feel CAST represent them and may have felt unrepresented or disenfranchised up to this point.
For the record I think there is room for both. CAST as the diplomatic and committee- type body and FFF for an alternative representation who are a bit more direct in their action and communication. It doesn't have to necessarily be one body and in that case it can alienate those who do not feel represented by one or the other.
This way you can have 2 bodies representing far greater swathes of the fanbase. Both bodies could even liaise on matters and work together rather than being exclusive of each other.
Collaboration and unity across the fanbase is imperative to having a fanbase that has real power in the years ahead and rifts or opposing factions will only serve to undermine it.
Whilst no representative group or groups will ever truly represent the views of all fans (impossible when you are dealing with tens of thousands of fans) by having 2 groups with different approaches working together you will largely cover most bases and be able to create more of than unity by allowing a wider spectrum to feel represented and that they have a voice.
What appear, to me, to be random albeit passionate fans only seem to represent themselves. Possibly with the best of intent but they aren’t really accountable and are just loose cannons who might harm the interests of fans generally.
No criticism at Muttley's post meant from me. I thought by wording it "I think that's an assumption" outlines it's my opinion rather than criticism.
I've read here and elsewhere that many don't and haven't felt represented by CAST for whatever reason and this new emergence offers alternative representation that appeals to many as evidenced by feedback on here and elsewhere such as social media.
CAST's membership numbers aren't in the 10s of thousands which would indicate that they are only representing a proportion of fans. That's not a criticism of CAST who I think do great work especially given it's their own time and effort....the only reason I have never signed up is because I didn't want to use paypal but otherwise would have.
I can see that the new supporters' group makes people uncomfortable because they are not as polished and formal and have a bit of an edge by comparison but that's a reflection of our fanbase. Some appear to be uncomfortable with that perhaps but that's the reality. Our fanbase is made up of people from all walks of life with very different outlooks so it is right and natural that all voices are represented rather than just what certain people feel is representative.
Some may relate to CAST and feel they represent them and F4F don't. Others may relate to F4F and not see representation in CAST. Others including myself can feel represented by both and I think that having 2 sets of different representatives can give more coverage across the spectrum of our fanbase and working together and collaboratively can only be a good thing when the common objectives of both will be the good our club....regardless of the differing approaches to method and communication.
7 -
The commonality is we all want a vibrant Charlton free of all this shit.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:iainment said:
You criticise what you think is an assumption but then assume something about fans and who they will be represented by. CAST has a membership who pay in, it’s transparent in that respect.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
I think that's an assumption. I think this new lot represent a very large number of Charlton fans who may or may not feel CAST represent them and may have felt unrepresented or disenfranchised up to this point.
For the record I think there is room for both. CAST as the diplomatic and committee- type body and FFF for an alternative representation who are a bit more direct in their action and communication. It doesn't have to necessarily be one body and in that case it can alienate those who do not feel represented by one or the other.
This way you can have 2 bodies representing far greater swathes of the fanbase. Both bodies could even liaise on matters and work together rather than being exclusive of each other.
Collaboration and unity across the fanbase is imperative to having a fanbase that has real power in the years ahead and rifts or opposing factions will only serve to undermine it.
Whilst no representative group or groups will ever truly represent the views of all fans (impossible when you are dealing with tens of thousands of fans) by having 2 groups with different approaches working together you will largely cover most bases and be able to create more of than unity by allowing a wider spectrum to feel represented and that they have a voice.
What appear, to me, to be random albeit passionate fans only seem to represent themselves. Possibly with the best of intent but they aren’t really accountable and are just loose cannons who might harm the interests of fans generally.
No criticism at Muttley's post meant from me. I thought by wording it "I think that's an assumption" outlines it's my opinion rather than criticism.
I've read here and elsewhere that many don't and haven't felt represented by CAST for whatever reason and this new emergence offers alternative representation that appeals to many as evidenced by feedback on here and elsewhere such as social media.
CAST's membership numbers aren't in the 10s of thousands which would indicate that they are only representing a proportion of fans. That's not a criticism of CAST who I think do great work especially given it's their own time and effort....the only reason I have never signed up is because I didn't want to use paypal but otherwise would have.
I can see that the new supporters' group makes people uncomfortable because they are not as polished and formal and have a bit of an edge by comparison but that's a reflection of our fanbase. Some appear to be uncomfortable with that perhaps but that's the reality. Our fanbase is made up of people from all walks of life with very different outlooks so it is right and natural that all voices are represented rather than just what certain people feel is representative.
Some may relate to CAST and feel they represent them and F4F don't. Others may relate to F4F and not see representation in CAST. Others including myself can feel represented by both and I think that having 2 sets of different representatives can give more coverage across the spectrum of our fanbase and working together and collaboratively can only be a good thing when the common objectives of both will be the good our club....regardless of the differing approaches to method and communication.3 -
0
-
The reasons are key, but no one will talk about them.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:iainment said:
You criticise what you think is an assumption but then assume something about fans and who they will be represented by. CAST has a membership who pay in, it’s transparent in that respect.RodneyCharltonTrotta said:MuttleyCAFC said:
I'd much rather have CAST who will represent a larger number of Charlton fans. Although I am not a member. I don't understand why some fans are pushing Dodger forwards at every opportunity and are being so aggressive to those questioning it. I won't deny that he has done some good things and I am grateful for those, but is more likely to be a diversive figure than a uniting one.DOUCHER said:Scoham said:Full Sky Sports interview with Dodger.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrobnJw3KaQ&feature=emb_logo
Just watched that - first time I've seen dodger and heard him speak - very impressed, he'll do for me and if there has to be one person to channel things through, i'd be happy with him. Down to earth, articulate and will have appeal to the majority of football fans.
I think that's an assumption. I think this new lot represent a very large number of Charlton fans who may or may not feel CAST represent them and may have felt unrepresented or disenfranchised up to this point.
For the record I think there is room for both. CAST as the diplomatic and committee- type body and FFF for an alternative representation who are a bit more direct in their action and communication. It doesn't have to necessarily be one body and in that case it can alienate those who do not feel represented by one or the other.
This way you can have 2 bodies representing far greater swathes of the fanbase. Both bodies could even liaise on matters and work together rather than being exclusive of each other.
Collaboration and unity across the fanbase is imperative to having a fanbase that has real power in the years ahead and rifts or opposing factions will only serve to undermine it.
Whilst no representative group or groups will ever truly represent the views of all fans (impossible when you are dealing with tens of thousands of fans) by having 2 groups with different approaches working together you will largely cover most bases and be able to create more of than unity by allowing a wider spectrum to feel represented and that they have a voice.
What appear, to me, to be random albeit passionate fans only seem to represent themselves. Possibly with the best of intent but they aren’t really accountable and are just loose cannons who might harm the interests of fans generally.
No criticism at Muttley's post meant from me. I thought by wording it "I think that's an assumption" outlines it's my opinion rather than criticism.
I've read here and elsewhere that many don't and haven't felt represented by CAST for whatever reason and this new emergence offers alternative representation that appeals to many as evidenced by feedback on here and elsewhere such as social media.
CAST's membership numbers aren't in the 10s of thousands which would indicate that they are only representing a proportion of fans. That's not a criticism of CAST who I think do great work especially given it's their own time and effort....the only reason I have never signed up is because I didn't want to use paypal but otherwise would have.
I can see that the new supporters' group makes people uncomfortable because they are not as polished and formal and have a bit of an edge by comparison but that's a reflection of our fanbase. Some appear to be uncomfortable with that perhaps but that's the reality. Our fanbase is made up of people from all walks of life with very different outlooks so it is right and natural that all voices are represented rather than just what certain people feel is representative.
Some may relate to CAST and feel they represent them and F4F don't. Others may relate to F4F and not see representation in CAST. Others including myself can feel represented by both and I think that having 2 sets of different representatives can give more coverage across the spectrum of our fanbase and working together and collaboratively can only be a good thing when the common objectives of both will be the good our club....regardless of the differing approaches to method and communication.0
