Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 14:38:11 GMT
Comrade Everett is a full on adviser to the Trust these days. That was not allowed on my watch. This is just one of a few changes made after I left which make it impossible for the club to engage. The Powell interview is just a symptom of a complete misunderstanding of the rules of the game. There is a much wider malaise where the term "critical friend" is used as licence by some to have a pop at the club. The whole thing is all the more rediculous given the vast improvement in the squad and the revelations last night about player extension negotiations, summer acquisitions and a promise of January 2016 spending if we are there or thereabouts. If the Trust doesn't change it will soon get the message as 100 members come up for renewal every month. Two of my family have already declined to renew. How long before membership goes below 1,000? a new broom sweeps, oh no wait, a new broom goes back out to the bin , gets the old broom, sits back and watches the fluff fly ! you just couldn't make it up , this is exactly why I didnt hand over a fiver, I suspected it was only a matter of time until the cracks started to appear and the "old guard" returned, worming their way in , reminiscing about how they used to chin wag and lap dog to RM ,,,
|
|
|
Post by overthetop on Mar 13, 2015 18:06:09 GMT
Has Steve Dixon been on here recently?
He really hates the 'Network'. No doubt he'll be put forward for the Trust Board soon.
|
|
razil
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 154
|
Post by razil on Mar 13, 2015 18:37:30 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase.
Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside.
The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left.
The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward.
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Mar 13, 2015 20:00:36 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. Having watched the video of the meeting and listened to Steves speech I would say if he becomes chair then there is no chance of a meet and talk with RD. Calling us a franchise and calling for RD to sell up and go is not going to go down well with the club. Any chance he had ended with that speech and the trusts will too if he becomes chair imo. It is all becoming hardline.
|
|
|
Post by overthetop on Mar 13, 2015 20:58:17 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. Did you hear the new Chair's speech at the Woolwich meeting? KM watches the video of the meeting - how is she supposed to react when this new chair then contacts her for open dialogue? I must have missed out on the open applications for the new Trust Chair. I thought Razil was the Chair, I'm out of the Country for work for a week and come back to find that he's been replaced/usurped by someone who was plotting behind the Trusts back only 12 months ago. And now we find out Rick Everitt is involved in 'advising' the Trust Board. Beyond parody.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 21:10:31 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. None of which addresses the problem, which is that the Trust has been shunted up a siding, not by Mademoiselle Meire but by its own political naivete. 1) The public meeting was stupidity incarnate, because it was called with no strategic plan of what it wanted to achieve and was mainly designed to placate the likes of Rick Everitt and Steve Dixon and head them off from launching another G21-style initiative of their own, which the Trust feared would steal its thunder. As such, the only thing the meeting could ever achieve was to piss-off those with whom it claimed it wanted a dialogue. 2) It would have been better if the meeting had been convened by an indepent body like the G21 because that would not have compromised the Trust's relationship with the club. By its own stupid actions the Trust backed Katrien into a corner in which there can now be no dialogue because the Trust is regarded - with some justification - as totally untrustworthy. 3) This was illustrated by the supine manner in which the Trust ceded control of the meeting to Everitt and Dixon, who made by far the two most effective rabble-rousing speeches, because both are more skilled politicians than anybody the Trust could put up. Fuelled by deeply held personal positions, their passion was palpable : in the case of one, it was the wounded amour propre of a man who had been sacked for alleged misconduct, and in the case of the other, a genuine if irrational hatred of the network system. Whatever you think of their views, giving them a platfom to air such bile was utterly counter-productive to the needs and objectives of the Trust. 4) The organ-grinder-not-the-monkey demand to bypass the CEO and talk only to Duchatalet has been interpreted by Meire as "disrespect" of her position. Personally I agree with her. The Trust has given the impression that it contempuously regards her as a mere stooge. Frankly, if I was in her high-heeled shoes (unlikely on every count, I grant you), I would also tell the Trust to go and do one. 5) The timing of the interview in a Trust publication with axe-grinding sacked employee Powell (whose contract had been honourably paid-off in full,let us not forget) , was an idiotic act of willful self-immolation. The Trust could have run a Powell interview in any one of the other 51 weeks of the year without causing major offence. But instead, they connived with the spin doctors of the Huddersfield comms team to give a platform to the oppo manager to slag off Charlton's owner on the very day on which our sacked employee was on a mission to damage our club by walking away with the points and plunging CAFC into a relegation struggle. And the Trust then decided to hand out free of charge to every CAFC fan our enemy's attack on the way CAFC is being run on match day??? No wonder you have resigned, razil. A smart move on your part, because you have got out just in time before CAFC supporters realise that the Trust has been a golden opportunity that has been pissed away by the stupidity of those running it.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 21:20:02 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. And now we find out Rick Everitt is involved in 'advising' the Trust Board. Beyond parody. Is there any actual evidence to back this statement up? Or has it been put about as a blatant lie?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 21:23:18 GMT
So Isacc, Steve and Rick are all sitting at the Trust top table. How the f**k does that bode well for a meeting, or arguably the Trust staying in existence. It's all tasting very sour, and I genuinely feel sorry for the people that pioneered the original idea.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 21:26:12 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. None of which addresses the problem, which is that the Trust has been shunted up a siding, not by Mademoiselle Meire but by its own political naivete. 1) The public meeting was stupidity incarnate, because it was called with no strategic plan of what it wanted to achieve and was mainly designed to placate the likes of Rick Everitt and Steve Dixon and head them off from launching another G21-style initiative of their own, which the Trust feared would steal its thunder. As such, the only thing the meeting could ever achieve was to piss-off those with whom it claimed it wanted a dialogue. 2) It would have been better if the meeting had been convened by an indepent body like the G21 because that would not have compromised the Trust's relationship with the club. By its own stupid actions the Trust backed Katrien into a corner in which there can now be no dialogue because the Trust is regarded - with some justification - as totally untrustworthy. 3) This was illustrated by the supine manner in which the Trust ceded control of the meeting to Everitt and Dixon, who made make the two most effective rabble-rousing speeches, because both are more skilled politicians than anybody the Trust could put up. Fuelled by deeply held personal positions, their passion was palpable : in the case of one, it was the wounded amour propre of a man who had been sacked for alleged misconduct, and in the case of the other, a genuine if irrational hatred of the network system. Whatever you think of their views, giving them a platfom to air such bile was utterly counter-productive to the needs and objectives of the Trust. 4) The organ-grinder-not-the-monkey demand to bypass the CEO and talk only to Duchatalet has been interpreted by Meire as "disrespect" of her position. Personally I agree with her. Tthe Trust has given the impression that it contempuously regards her as a mere stooge. Frankly, if I was in her high-heel shoes (unlikely on every count, I grant you), I would also tell the Trust to go and do one. 5) The timing of the interview in a Trust publication with axe-grinding sacked employee Powell (whose contract had been honourably paid-off in full,let us not forget) , was an idiotic act of willful self-immolation. The Trust could have run a Powell interview in any one of the other 51 weeks of the year without causing major offence. But instead, they connived with the spin doctors of the Huddersfield comms team to give a platform to the oppo manager to slag off Charlton's owner on the very day on which our sacked employee was on a mission to damage our club by walking away with the points and plunging CAFC into a relegation struggle. And the Trust then decided to hand out free of charge to every CAFC fan our enemy's attack on the way CAFC is being run on match day??? No wonder you have resigned, razil. A smart move on your part, because you have got out just in time before CAFC supporters realise that the Trust has been a golden opportunity that has been pissed away by the stupidity of those running it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 21:27:46 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. Having watched the video of the meeting and listened to Steves speech I would say if he becomes chair then there is no chance of a meet and talk with RD. Calling us a franchise and calling for RD to sell up and go is not going to go down well with the club. Any chance he had ended with that speech and the trusts will too if he becomes chair imo. It is all becoming hardline. Pathetic, this is GROWN men FFS , when "Steve" hands over 20 mill then he can go half's with RD and have a say, what planet do these idiots live on ?
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 21:34:22 GMT
None of which addresses the problem, which is that the Trust has been shunted up a siding, not by Mademoiselle Meire but by its own political naivete. 1) The public meeting was stupidity incarnate, because it was called with no strategic plan of what it wanted to achieve and was mainly designed to placate the likes of Rick Everitt and Steve Dixon and head them off from launching another G21-style initiative of their own, which the Trust feared would steal its thunder. As such, the only thing the meeting could ever achieve was to piss-off those with whom it claimed it wanted a dialogue. 2) It would have been better if the meeting had been convened by an indepent body like the G21 because that would not have compromised the Trust's relationship with the club. By its own stupid actions the Trust backed Katrien into a corner in which there can now be no dialogue because the Trust is regarded - with some justification - as totally untrustworthy. 3) This was illustrated by the supine manner in which the Trust ceded control of the meeting to Everitt and Dixon, who made make the two most effective rabble-rousing speeches, because both are more skilled politicians than anybody the Trust could put up. Fuelled by deeply held personal positions, their passion was palpable : in the case of one, it was the wounded amour propre of a man who had been sacked for alleged misconduct, and in the case of the other, a genuine if irrational hatred of the network system. Whatever you think of their views, giving them a platfom to air such bile was utterly counter-productive to the needs and objectives of the Trust.4) The organ-grinder-not-the-monkey demand to bypass the CEO and talk only to Duchatalet has been interpreted by Meire as "disrespect" of her position. Personally I agree with her. Tthe Trust has given the impression that it contempuously regards her as a mere stooge. Frankly, if I was in her high-heel shoes (unlikely on every count, I grant you), I would also tell the Trust to go and do one. 5) The timing of the interview in a Trust publication with axe-grinding sacked employee Powell (whose contract had been honourably paid-off in full,let us not forget) , was an idiotic act of willful self-immolation. The Trust could have run a Powell interview in any one of the other 51 weeks of the year without causing major offence. But instead, they connived with the spin doctors of the Huddersfield comms team to give a platform to the oppo manager to slag off Charlton's owner on the very day on which our sacked employee was on a mission to damage our club by walking away with the points and plunging CAFC into a relegation struggle. And the Trust then decided to hand out free of charge to every CAFC fan our enemy's attack on the way CAFC is being run on match day???No wonder you have resigned, razil. A smart move on your part, because you have got out just in time before CAFC supporters realise that the Trust has been a golden opportunity that has been pissed away by the stupidity of those running it. In the first point, well it is an opinion I suppose, but not a fact in any way, or supported by any evidence. In the third point, well it is one take on events, but it simply didn't happen that way, nor is there any evidence supplied to back up the motivations you ascribe to people. In the fifth point the timing is not the issue, the interview published at any time would still have described the interference in team selection, and that would be damaging whenever it came out. Maybe you think the interview should never have been published.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 21:35:11 GMT
The Trust has a turnover because its bolody hard work, and often a lot of aggro particularly during the set up phase. Regarding KM I'm sorry she feels the way she does but that was not the character of the original email we sent her, which she brushed aside. The g21 thing and Rick advising the trust is also a red herring and mischief making, the Trust talks to all Charlton fans including you lot on here. The reailty is things have changed for the trust with the new owners, well before Kev left. The board is well balanced and Steve will make an excellent chair, I've been impressed with him which is why I suggested to him he put himself forward. Did you hear the new Chair's speech at the Woolwich meeting? KM watches the video of the meeting - how is she supposed to react when this new chair then contacts her for open dialogue? I must have missed out on the open applications for the new Trust Chair. I thought Razil was the Chair, I'm out of the Country for work for a week and come back to find that he's been replaced/usurped by someone who was plotting behind the Trusts back only 12 months ago. And now we find out Rick Everitt is involved in 'advising' the Trust Board. Beyond parody. and..... of course there was a "fair" and "democratic" process to appoint the "chair" , just like there was when the club appointed Luzon , pot, kettle comes to mind, FARSE
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 21:35:24 GMT
Sorry I messed up the quote system.
|
|
|
Post by overthetop on Mar 13, 2015 21:37:10 GMT
And now we find out Rick Everitt is involved in 'advising' the Trust Board. Beyond parody. Is there any actual evidence to back this statement up? Or has it been put about as a blatant lie? Only what a previous Trust Board member has suggested. Happy to take Seriously Red's statement as fact.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 21:39:11 GMT
Happy to take Seriously Red's statement as fact.
Well seriously red can't back his statement up either can he?
|
|
|
Post by overthetop on Mar 13, 2015 21:47:05 GMT
In the first point, well it is an opinion I suppose, but not a fact in any way, or supported by any evidence. In the third point, well it is one take on events, but it simply didn't happen that way, nor is there any evidence supplied to back up the motivations you ascribe to people. In the fifth point the timing is not the issue, the interview published at any time would still have described the interference in team selection, and that would be damaging whenever it came out. Maybe you think the interview should never have been published.
Sorry Webbo, but that's exactly how I see it. Are you suggesting that neither Dixon "I detest everything about the Network" and Everitt "Let's call a Season Ticket strike" were nothing but attendees of the Woolwich meeting? Both of them were the main protagonists with the microphone already booked for them before the meeting commenced. Both of them had prepared speeches. Both of them -along with the new Trust Chair, have been sitting around in the background just waiting for a coup of the Trust. And now they have the 'power' they crave. Unfortunately a lot of fans have seen through their charade. Let's just sit back and watch what our multi millionaire owner proposes to do to progress our Club. Times have changed and certain fans need to realise they are no longer welcome at the top table.
|
|
|
Post by overthetop on Mar 13, 2015 21:48:37 GMT
Happy to take Seriously Red's statement as fact. Well seriously red can't back his statement up either can he? So what is your relationship with the Trust Webbo? Are you just a member or more involved? i'm happy to be proved wrong in my assumptions and from what information I have gathered in the last few days.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 22:00:48 GMT
In the first point, well it is an opinion I suppose, but not a fact in any way, or supported by any evidence. In the third point, well it is one take on events, but it simply didn't happen that way, nor is there any evidence supplied to back up the motivations you ascribe to people. In the fifth point the timing is not the issue, the interview published at any time would still have described the interference in team selection, and that would be damaging whenever it came out. Maybe you think the interview should never have been published.
Sorry Webbo, but that's exactly how I see it. Are you suggesting that neither Dixon "I detest everything about the Network" and Everitt "Let's call a Season Ticket strike" were nothing but attendees of the Woolwich meeting? Both of them were the main protagonists with the microphone already booked for them before the meeting commenced. Both of them had prepared speeches. Both of them -along with the new Trust Chair, have been sitting around in the background just waiting for a coup of the Trust. And now they have the 'power' they crave. Unfortunately a lot of fans have seen through their charade. Let's just sit back and watch what our multi millionaire owner proposes to do to progress our Club. Times have changed and certain fans need to realise they are no longer welcome at the top table.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 22:03:45 GMT
Into the Valley had a 'booked' speaker at the meeting.
I am a member of the trust, and helped in the very early stages when it met at the Beehive, and I was at the meeting as well. I am not an officer of the trust if that's what you're asking, simply a participant on occasion.
|
|
razil
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 154
|
Post by razil on Mar 13, 2015 22:05:13 GMT
Stece Clarke chair, Steve Dixon was the other one
It wasnt a Trust meeting, nor was it an anti owner meeting
The meeting went on much longer than the video
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2015 22:12:40 GMT
In the first point, well it is an opinion I suppose, but not a fact in any way, or supported by any evidence. In the third point, well it is one take on events, but it simply didn't happen that way, nor is there any evidence supplied to back up the motivations you ascribe to people. In the fifth point the timing is not the issue, the interview published at any time would still have described the interference in team selection, and that would be damaging whenever it came out. Maybe you think the interview should never have been published.
So are you saying that you think the Woolwich meeting was a success that brought fans and management closer together??? Regarding the Powell interview so gleefully set up for the gullible Trust by the Huddersfield comms team - what do you think that unholy fifth column collaboration tells us? If you had read my post properly you would have seen that I suggested that a Powell interview could have been published in any one of the other 51 weeks of the year without offence. But to promote Powell's hostile words towards CAFC in a mag distributed free to every supporter, home and away, on the very day that our former manager was out to ruin our season was always going to be seen as an act of disloyalty - not only by Duchatalet/Meire/Murray/Luzon and the players ,but by every supporter with a mind of his or her own.
|
|
|
Post by overthetop on Mar 13, 2015 22:37:55 GMT
In the first point, well it is an opinion I suppose, but not a fact in any way, or supported by any evidence. In the third point, well it is one take on events, but it simply didn't happen that way, nor is there any evidence supplied to back up the motivations you ascribe to people. In the fifth point the timing is not the issue, the interview published at any time would still have described the interference in team selection, and that would be damaging whenever it came out. Maybe you think the interview should never have been published.
So are you saying that you think the Woolwich meeting was a success that brought fans and management closer together??? Regarding the Powell interview so gleefully set up for the gullible Trust by the Huddersfield comms team - what do you think that unholy fifth column collaboration tells us? If you had read my post properly you would have seen that I suggested that a Powell interview could have been published in any one of the other 51 weeks of the year without offence. But to promote Powell's hostile words towards CAFC in a mag distributed free to every supporter, home and away, on the very day that our former manager was out to ruin our season was always going to be seen as an act of disloyalty - not only by Duchatalet/Meire/Murray/Luzon and the players ,but by every supporter with a mind of his or her own. Particularly when the guy who gave me my copy told me that it included an interview with Chris Powell that 'smashed the myth' of the Network.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 22:57:11 GMT
In the first point, well it is an opinion I suppose, but not a fact in any way, or supported by any evidence. In the third point, well it is one take on events, but it simply didn't happen that way, nor is there any evidence supplied to back up the motivations you ascribe to people. In the fifth point the timing is not the issue, the interview published at any time would still have described the interference in team selection, and that would be damaging whenever it came out. Maybe you think the interview should never have been published.
So are you saying that you think the Woolwich meeting was a success that brought fans and management closer together??? Regarding the Powell interview so gleefully set up for the gullible Trust by the Huddersfield comms team - what do you think that unholy fifth column collaboration tells us? If you had read my post properly you would have seen that I suggested that a Powell interview could have been published in any one of the other 51 weeks of the year without offence. But to promote Powell's hostile words towards CAFC in a mag distributed free to every supporter, home and away, on the very day that our former manager was out to ruin our season was always going to be seen as an act of disloyalty - not only by Duchatalet/Meire/Murray/Luzon and the players ,but by every supporter with a mind of his or her own.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 22:59:26 GMT
You're telling me what I'm thinking now? And the interview would not have been 'without offence' whenever it was published.
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Mar 13, 2015 23:01:51 GMT
Is there any actual evidence to back this statement up? Or has it been put about as a blatant lie? Only what a previous Trust Board member has suggested. Happy to take Seriously Red's statement as fact. Rick Everett was very open on CL about advising the Trust about the recent meeting. He brought forward publication of VOTV by a fortnight to promote the meeting which was set up by the Trust to unite the fans in expressing their concerns and finding a way to develop a dialogue with the club. I won't say any more than that for it would make it very difficult for me to engage with the Trust board in case they have appetite for listening to any proposals I might have to assist them in reversing out of this cul-de-sac. At the end of the day it's up to the Trust board to navigate this situation. If they fail then either the Trust fails or perhaps the Trust membership decides it wants a different direction and different personnel in charge. The irony is that nobody has asked the fans what their view is on the current squad compared to 14 months back nor the simple question as to whether the Trust should engage with the club. Instead they've been directed by c.200 vocal posters on CL and some poor results. We did have a shocker of a question asking fans if the Trust should ignore the CEO or campaign to get rid of Duchatelet. Sorry but this is the guy who spent £4.5m on new players in the last accounts... remind me the last time any CAFC board spent that kind of money. Many, many fans believe in the concept of a Trust. Let's hope it can find a way to engage the club showing respect rather than demands. As I posted before, the new Chair of the Trust will know Murray well and ideally they can find a way to reset relations.
|
|
|
Post by webbo on Mar 13, 2015 23:09:27 GMT
You said 'comrade Everitt is a full on advisor to the Trust these days', now you say he was involved with the meeting, as you were too. Where is that a 'full on advisor these days'? A question is a question and once asked it was overtaken by those who want some kind of communication (however that may turn out!) Surely you can't censor a question being asked as one of a range of possible options can you?
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Mar 13, 2015 23:58:31 GMT
You said 'comrade Everitt is a full on advisor to the Trust these days', now you say he was involved with the meeting, as you were too. Where is that a 'full on advisor these days'? A question is a question and once asked it was overtaken by those who want some kind of communication (however that may turn out!) Surely you can't censor a question being asked as one of a range of possible options can you? My involvement was as a representative of this site because Reams couldn't make it. I was a tad surprised to be called up to speak as one of the keynote speakers but felt I did ok in articulating the views expressed here. Conversely Rick was part of the planning and publicity for the whole event. As above I won't say anymore than that for it would colour my ability to privately influence direction. On your other point, question design is key. For sure you're trying to find out opinions but that specific question has been cited as offensive by the CEO. Rightly or wrongly the Trust is getting hammered. It needs to grab hold of its agenda and navigate a path. Again I won't say more for I have a couple of ideas which might assist?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2015 10:53:38 GMT
From Day 1 the whole "CAST/ G21" enterprise was exposed for what it was. The same old tired 50 somethings, every one of them up Murray's arse while he destroyed the Club, yearning for another turn in the spotlight.
Ben Hayes found another way in via his ludicrous museum, Everitt, Perfect and Hunt etc had to wait a bit longer for this tatty flea circus.
These people are like the football fans version of piles....very painful unless you sit on them hard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2015 11:22:51 GMT
From Day 1 the whole "CAST/ G21" enterprise was exposed for what it was. The same old tired 50 somethings, every one of them up Murray's arse while he destroyed the Club, yearning for another turn in the spotlight. Ben Hayes found another way in via his ludicrous museum, Everitt, Perfect and Hunt etc had to wait a bit longer for this tatty flea circus. These people are like the football fans version of piles....very painful unless you sit on them hard. 100% spot on, the fact people can't see them for what they are is absolutely bizarre. We certainly have a high proportion of oddballs in our support!
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Mar 14, 2015 12:32:40 GMT
From Day 1 the whole "CAST/ G21" enterprise was exposed for what it was. The same old tired 50 somethings, every one of them up Murray's arse while he destroyed the Club, yearning for another turn in the spotlight. Ben Hayes found another way in via his ludicrous museum, Everitt, Perfect and Hunt etc had to wait a bit longer for this tatty flea circus. These people are like the football fans version of piles....very painful unless you sit on them hard. Firstly there is a new generation of fans and the Trust was established by fans in their 30s and 40s. We did the work and some of the appeal to the club was the fact that we weren't the "same old tired 50 somethings" Second the Trust only really attracted critics and hangers on when it grew in size. Anyone dissatisfied with its leadership or direction can get their keyboard out and make a contribution - their observations might be true or false but perceptions are everything! And there are other ways to do something about it - off-line engagement and discussion of the way forwards. There's a big discussion on CL around the Bromley Addicks meeting - some of the participants look a bit shit as they try to score their points. Some people just want to make a noise and just as certain people campaign against the ownership when it begins to deliver the best team in years, others campaign against any fan organisation. The Trust isn't perfect and I certainly don't agree with its current direction but it does have a lot of members and fan contacts. If people don't like elements of what it does they should do something about that.
|
|