| Fans Parliament 17:29 - May 21 with 108689 views | TwelveAngryMen |
Are we looking at the start a Tangerine Spring ?
Or is it an attempt to curb the growing influence of fans groups ?
Applications appear on first read of the announcement to be subject to vetting by the Club
The statement seems to infer that anyone who doesn't renew their ST is unlikely to be considered so that's anyone taking a principled NAPM stance this season to the back of the queue ! That will undoubtedly influence the dynamics of representation
Who elects the Board Rep ? I suspect its within the cabal of hand-picked representatives in which case hardly democratic - more like a Fans Cabinet
Which Club officials will they meet ? It does say to be fair to include Club directors so in reality that's suggesting it will involve Karl or Owen
It will be interesting to see how this pans out
http://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/article/club-announces-launch-of-fans-parliame [Post edited 21 May 2015 17:35]
|  |
| |  |
| Fans Parliament on 19:07 - May 28 with 2683 views | terminallytangerine |
| Fans Parliament on 19:03 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
It's totally bizarre Halifax!!
The clue ought to be in the name "Fans Parliament"... If it is to have any remote credibility at all then the representatives should not even be applying to the club, but rather the whole thing should be essentially managed by the fans themselves. The sensible thing to do would be to hand to an independent fans body and we have a perfectly good one, who can then oversee the process and ensure that a proper democratic process takes place, instead of the usual Oyston controlled Shiite.
This is precisely where we ended up with BSA ...A fans representative, who are essentially 'controlled' by the club chairman.
How can these people represent US if we have no say in determining who they are? They are Club representatives if Karl picks them or has any influence over who they are ....simple as that.
Yes there must be sensible parameters to ensure the whole thing is not a total farce, but it is a pointless exercise if Karl is not prepared to allow the fans the freedom to select their own reps without his interference.
Totally pointless (and that is before we even come to the matter of whether any power will be conceded) |
Controlled?
Not true, but let's not get on that well trodden roundabout. |  | | |
| Fans Parliament on 19:14 - May 28 with 2674 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 19:03 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
It's totally bizarre Halifax!!
The clue ought to be in the name "Fans Parliament"... If it is to have any remote credibility at all then the representatives should not even be applying to the club, but rather the whole thing should be essentially managed by the fans themselves. The sensible thing to do would be to hand to an independent fans body and we have a perfectly good one, who can then oversee the process and ensure that a proper democratic process takes place, instead of the usual Oyston controlled Shiite.
This is precisely where we ended up with BSA ...A fans representative, who are essentially 'controlled' by the club chairman.
How can these people represent US if we have no say in determining who they are? They are Club representatives if Karl picks them or has any influence over who they are ....simple as that.
Yes there must be sensible parameters to ensure the whole thing is not a total farce, but it is a pointless exercise if Karl is not prepared to allow the fans the freedom to select their own reps without his interference.
Totally pointless (and that is before we even come to the matter of whether any power will be conceded) |
As for the clap trap about ST's and not allowing NAPM, I'm struggling to see how we can expect any strength at all in an argument from people too weak principled to take a stand?
We know that those who are most likely to be remaining as ST's are those most likely to capitulate or bend to Oyston spin, because essentially that is what they have already done... Take that a step further and those people who would rather take these scraps from Oystons table instead of trying to actually negotiate terms that suit the fans and it becomes quite obvious the 12 will be made up of the weakest voices amongst us.
At times it makes me wonder if people just like the idea of being a part of it and really have no bones at all about the integrity of the process they are agreeing to sign up to.
The same people who were first with their hands up to attend the BSA meetings that ostracised normal long standing BFC supporters.
Openess and transparency not secret handshakes cheers!! [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:15]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 19:17 - May 28 with 2670 views | terminallytangerine |
| Fans Parliament on 19:14 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
As for the clap trap about ST's and not allowing NAPM, I'm struggling to see how we can expect any strength at all in an argument from people too weak principled to take a stand?
We know that those who are most likely to be remaining as ST's are those most likely to capitulate or bend to Oyston spin, because essentially that is what they have already done... Take that a step further and those people who would rather take these scraps from Oystons table instead of trying to actually negotiate terms that suit the fans and it becomes quite obvious the 12 will be made up of the weakest voices amongst us.
At times it makes me wonder if people just like the idea of being a part of it and really have no bones at all about the integrity of the process they are agreeing to sign up to.
The same people who were first with their hands up to attend the BSA meetings that ostracised normal long standing BFC supporters.
Openess and transparency not secret handshakes cheers!! [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:15]
|
I think we have descended into ritual abuse mode here BFC3 so I'll leave you to it. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 19:18 - May 28 with 2670 views | Lala |
| Fans Parliament on 19:03 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
It's totally bizarre Halifax!!
The clue ought to be in the name "Fans Parliament"... If it is to have any remote credibility at all then the representatives should not even be applying to the club, but rather the whole thing should be essentially managed by the fans themselves. The sensible thing to do would be to hand to an independent fans body and we have a perfectly good one, who can then oversee the process and ensure that a proper democratic process takes place, instead of the usual Oyston controlled Shiite.
This is precisely where we ended up with BSA ...A fans representative, who are essentially 'controlled' by the club chairman.
How can these people represent US if we have no say in determining who they are? They are Club representatives if Karl picks them or has any influence over who they are ....simple as that.
Yes there must be sensible parameters to ensure the whole thing is not a total farce, but it is a pointless exercise if Karl is not prepared to allow the fans the freedom to select their own reps without his interference.
Totally pointless (and that is before we even come to the matter of whether any power will be conceded) |
Why is it bizarre? Every single time,in the past,that you have walked through the turnstiles on a Saturday you too have supported that chairman,fact,like it or not.
Just because other people don't jump ship at eactly the point you do,or don't agree with your way forward it doesn't make it bizarre.
My end goal here is to support whoever can achieve success or at least survival for BFC,by whatever means. Your goal seems to be making sure everybody does it your way. |  |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 19:20 - May 28 with 2666 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 19:14 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
As for the clap trap about ST's and not allowing NAPM, I'm struggling to see how we can expect any strength at all in an argument from people too weak principled to take a stand?
We know that those who are most likely to be remaining as ST's are those most likely to capitulate or bend to Oyston spin, because essentially that is what they have already done... Take that a step further and those people who would rather take these scraps from Oystons table instead of trying to actually negotiate terms that suit the fans and it becomes quite obvious the 12 will be made up of the weakest voices amongst us.
At times it makes me wonder if people just like the idea of being a part of it and really have no bones at all about the integrity of the process they are agreeing to sign up to.
The same people who were first with their hands up to attend the BSA meetings that ostracised normal long standing BFC supporters.
Openess and transparency not secret handshakes cheers!! [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:15]
|
Yes controlled...absoluty no question about that whatsoever.
Any organisation that is forced to operate under terms that influence its ability to operate with complete independence is being controlled.
If they were not controlled then there would have been absolutely no point in Karl wanting them to drop their independence.... No point at all...
Edit to add, there's no ritual abuse TT, but again merely realism....I think most would agree that in terms of standing up to Karl Oyston the people who have already capitulated are going to be those who provide the weakest opposition.
If this is to even be taken remotely seriously then it must engage with the broadest range of opinion as opposed to being limted to the most moderate...Therefore NAPM must be treated on an equal footing to those who have presently got ST's.... [Post edited 28 May 2015 20:05]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 19:34 - May 28 with 2630 views | 20togo |
| Fans Parliament on 19:14 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
As for the clap trap about ST's and not allowing NAPM, I'm struggling to see how we can expect any strength at all in an argument from people too weak principled to take a stand?
We know that those who are most likely to be remaining as ST's are those most likely to capitulate or bend to Oyston spin, because essentially that is what they have already done... Take that a step further and those people who would rather take these scraps from Oystons table instead of trying to actually negotiate terms that suit the fans and it becomes quite obvious the 12 will be made up of the weakest voices amongst us.
At times it makes me wonder if people just like the idea of being a part of it and really have no bones at all about the integrity of the process they are agreeing to sign up to.
The same people who were first with their hands up to attend the BSA meetings that ostracised normal long standing BFC supporters.
Openess and transparency not secret handshakes cheers!! [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:15]
|
right, first time I've seen this thread and it's took a while to read.
Some points
Fact is, BSA Committee members including female ones have been abused many times. Yes, bfc3 I know you say it's wrong but I find a distinct lack of condemnation in your views on it. Sorry, just saying it's wrong doesn't cut it for me.
Secondly, BST and it's members have consistently critcised/abused BSA for having dialogue for so long with the Oystons. For BST to now want to step into BSA's shoes by having talks is totally hypocritical. BST could achieve no more than BSA did. In fact because of KO's aversion to them, they'd achieve less imo.
The same also applies to the FP. TAM talks of BST's pre-set conditions being realistic but that's not really the point. They may well be realistic to BST but it really isn't rocket science to know that they won't be considered as realistic to the Oystons. And unfortunately as owners of 80% of the business it's their opinions that count.
And the fans paliament is a non-starter for me as well. For a variety of reasons. Firstly, if BSA couldn't achieve a change in policy then certainly a FP won't. So what other purpose could a FP achieve. At least BSA achieved many other things such as the various fundraising functions and Hall of Fame - all of which needed co-operation from the club.
The time for talking has gone. We want the Oystons to go, nothing less than that is acceptable. And the fans groups BST/TK's need to build up the external pressure on them to do that. [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:48]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 19:37 - May 28 with 2622 views | ArchibaldKnox |
| Fans Parliament on 19:20 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
Yes controlled...absoluty no question about that whatsoever.
Any organisation that is forced to operate under terms that influence its ability to operate with complete independence is being controlled.
If they were not controlled then there would have been absolutely no point in Karl wanting them to drop their independence.... No point at all...
Edit to add, there's no ritual abuse TT, but again merely realism....I think most would agree that in terms of standing up to Karl Oyston the people who have already capitulated are going to be those who provide the weakest opposition.
If this is to even be taken remotely seriously then it must engage with the broadest range of opinion as opposed to being limted to the most moderate...Therefore NAPM must be treated on an equal footing to those who have presently got ST's.... [Post edited 28 May 2015 20:05]
|
Earlier in the season, I said I would probably renew my 1-year ST for my own personal family reasons despite how I felt about the club's owners. That 'probably' has now become 'certainly not'. And we all agree on that. We cannot square the owning family's behaviour over the past 9 months with the prospect of me putting £600 into their pockets. Which, on past performance, they might use to buy a stately home or a stupid number plate, spend on champagne for their lovely late night guests, loan interest-free to one of their many ridiculous, loss-making little corporate entities or, worst of all, legally bully and financially gouge ordinary supporters. While the actual core activity of football is left aside to wither.
Over the past year they have taken the mickey out of supporters, conned us with the 'Riga Revolution', lied about the progress of club improvements, filled our club with the highest number of the worse players seen for many years, shafted their own employees by denying them the resources to do their jobs, destroyed the team spirit any club needs to function, and simply been the most unpleasant characters you would ever dread of meeting. Why on earth would anyone with any decent upbringing and moral standing want to associate with such people and suffer their intended humiliation of us? Well, we don't. We might want to go to matches to enjoy friends' company, following our common interest, but that enjoyment has now been polluted and ruined by the actions of the people our money supports.
And the same goes for the so-called Fans' Parliament. These representatives will not be seen as ordinary fans. Being selected by the Chairman, they will be judged as the Oystons' cronies. They will be 12 individual cronies who will not have ANY mechanism or organisation which they can use to communicate with the bulk of the fans. So they will certainly not pass any real feedback to the club, it will only be their own opinions and hearsay. So it will be highly dependent on a few selected individual's attitudes. Probably people such as those who passed on Frank Knight's facebook screen grab to the family. They will obviously not be given any resources. On past evidence (BSA etc) they will be treated, not with respect, but as plebs, tools to be used and discarded when eventually convenient. Since it is Oyston’s creature, it seems appropriate that the FP is only filled with ST holders, i.e. people who continue to believe that there is something creditable in paying for the Oystons’ lifestyles and the way they run the club. But I would not want to associate with it.
Members of the existing Supporters Groups might listen to them out of politeness and curiosity, but understandably will refuse to recognise that the FP members represent anyone but themselves, and probably will just turn their collective back on them. So what function do they perform? They have no legitimacy and no constituency. They are not even a credible BSA replacement. They are simply Koko's latest wheeze, a talking shop so that he can pretend he listens, even though he has stated several times in the past he would NEVER listen to the fans. Have you forgotten 'The Dark Lord' ? At that time, he seemed to be just winding people up, and even then the responses he posted showed a closed mind and it ended, inevitably, in the dismissal of the supporters. Same with his column in the Gazette, just brazen 'I can do no wrong' stuff.
Given the Oystons' disgusting behaviour I would not want to spend a minute in the same room as them. And now, no longer want to breathe the same air as them in the stadium. They have proven now they live on the dark side. So that's it. We will miss the ritual of match days, but we will find something to fill that gap. It really is not worth polluting one's mind with these people or regretting, with their every nasty move, that I am might be contributing to that by paying for it. Funding nasty people to do more harm to others is not a good thing for one’s karma. So... Not A Penny More. Turn off their oxygen. If they decide to kill the club rather than sell it all, then woe betide them.
[Thanks Biggie. Some of the most well-reasoned posts I have seen on this MB lately.] [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:52]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 19:40 - May 28 with 2614 views | Lala |
| Fans Parliament on 19:37 - May 28 by ArchibaldKnox |
Earlier in the season, I said I would probably renew my 1-year ST for my own personal family reasons despite how I felt about the club's owners. That 'probably' has now become 'certainly not'. And we all agree on that. We cannot square the owning family's behaviour over the past 9 months with the prospect of me putting £600 into their pockets. Which, on past performance, they might use to buy a stately home or a stupid number plate, spend on champagne for their lovely late night guests, loan interest-free to one of their many ridiculous, loss-making little corporate entities or, worst of all, legally bully and financially gouge ordinary supporters. While the actual core activity of football is left aside to wither.
Over the past year they have taken the mickey out of supporters, conned us with the 'Riga Revolution', lied about the progress of club improvements, filled our club with the highest number of the worse players seen for many years, shafted their own employees by denying them the resources to do their jobs, destroyed the team spirit any club needs to function, and simply been the most unpleasant characters you would ever dread of meeting. Why on earth would anyone with any decent upbringing and moral standing want to associate with such people and suffer their intended humiliation of us? Well, we don't. We might want to go to matches to enjoy friends' company, following our common interest, but that enjoyment has now been polluted and ruined by the actions of the people our money supports.
And the same goes for the so-called Fans' Parliament. These representatives will not be seen as ordinary fans. Being selected by the Chairman, they will be judged as the Oystons' cronies. They will be 12 individual cronies who will not have ANY mechanism or organisation which they can use to communicate with the bulk of the fans. So they will certainly not pass any real feedback to the club, it will only be their own opinions and hearsay. So it will be highly dependent on a few selected individual's attitudes. Probably people such as those who passed on Frank Knight's facebook screen grab to the family. They will obviously not be given any resources. On past evidence (BSA etc) they will be treated, not with respect, but as plebs, tools to be used and discarded when eventually convenient. Since it is Oyston’s creature, it seems appropriate that the FP is only filled with ST holders, i.e. people who continue to believe that there is something creditable in paying for the Oystons’ lifestyles and the way they run the club. But I would not want to associate with it.
Members of the existing Supporters Groups might listen to them out of politeness and curiosity, but understandably will refuse to recognise that the FP members represent anyone but themselves, and probably will just turn their collective back on them. So what function do they perform? They have no legitimacy and no constituency. They are not even a credible BSA replacement. They are simply Koko's latest wheeze, a talking shop so that he can pretend he listens, even though he has stated several times in the past he would NEVER listen to the fans. Have you forgotten 'The Dark Lord' ? At that time, he seemed to be just winding people up, and even then the responses he posted showed a closed mind and it ended, inevitably, in the dismissal of the supporters. Same with his column in the Gazette, just brazen 'I can do no wrong' stuff.
Given the Oystons' disgusting behaviour I would not want to spend a minute in the same room as them. And now, no longer want to breathe the same air as them in the stadium. They have proven now they live on the dark side. So that's it. We will miss the ritual of match days, but we will find something to fill that gap. It really is not worth polluting one's mind with these people or regretting, with their every nasty move, that I am might be contributing to that by paying for it. Funding nasty people to do more harm to others is not a good thing for one’s karma. So... Not A Penny More. Turn off their oxygen. If they decide to kill the club rather than sell it all, then woe betide them.
[Thanks Biggie. Some of the most well-reasoned posts I have seen on this MB lately.] [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:52]
|
Great post 20's,on many levels.
We disagree on the FP but I respect that stance,especially when it isn't iterated in a way that is trying to ridicule mine,or the opinion of others. [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:46]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Fans Parliament on 20:03 - May 28 with 2564 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 19:34 - May 28 by 20togo |
right, first time I've seen this thread and it's took a while to read.
Some points
Fact is, BSA Committee members including female ones have been abused many times. Yes, bfc3 I know you say it's wrong but I find a distinct lack of condemnation in your views on it. Sorry, just saying it's wrong doesn't cut it for me.
Secondly, BST and it's members have consistently critcised/abused BSA for having dialogue for so long with the Oystons. For BST to now want to step into BSA's shoes by having talks is totally hypocritical. BST could achieve no more than BSA did. In fact because of KO's aversion to them, they'd achieve less imo.
The same also applies to the FP. TAM talks of BST's pre-set conditions being realistic but that's not really the point. They may well be realistic to BST but it really isn't rocket science to know that they won't be considered as realistic to the Oystons. And unfortunately as owners of 80% of the business it's their opinions that count.
And the fans paliament is a non-starter for me as well. For a variety of reasons. Firstly, if BSA couldn't achieve a change in policy then certainly a FP won't. So what other purpose could a FP achieve. At least BSA achieved many other things such as the various fundraising functions and Hall of Fame - all of which needed co-operation from the club.
The time for talking has gone. We want the Oystons to go, nothing less than that is acceptable. And the fans groups BST/TK's need to build up the external pressure on them to do that. [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:48]
|
20's ...
I feel uncomfortable about commenting on specific incidents where I do not have all the facts, but let me be clear about one thing at least....I absolutely believe that any form of intimidation of our fellow supporters under any circumstances is totally and utterly abhorrent and it is definitely something that I would speak out against if I saw it happening.
On your second point, I think that the reason why BST are trying to settle the terms of engagement up front here is for precisely the reasons that you have stated....BSA failed, despite many years of effort as essentially they had no power or influence... in fact one could argue that they actually had much more power and influence before dropping the 'I', which is precisely why Karl wanted to take control of what he perceived at the time to be a threat....BISA similar to SISA and the trust were a strong and well organised group, who clearly provided Karl with a few headaches, by contrast BSA were allowed to have their say, listened to when it suited his agenda and roundly ignored and patted on the head when it didn't.
So if we are to enter into a similar arena again, then it MUST be done with the groundrules already in place and n particular a devolution of some power to those who are engaging in the process. No Power - No Point! Of course as we have seen here, Karl even wants to handpick the reps themselves, set parameters for who can or cannot be involved and essentially provide them with no real influence...In other words... Lip Service!!
Incidentally I do actually see no point at all in BST engaging in simple dialogue with the Club, save to say that "We tried, We failed and now we are free to move on" and I think essentially that is where BST are at....The idea of dialogue is simply a means by which to state that they have tried and as such the next stage in the process is justifiable.
[Post edited 28 May 2015 20:09]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:05 - May 28 with 2564 views | basilrobbiereborn |
| Fans Parliament on 19:37 - May 28 by ArchibaldKnox |
Earlier in the season, I said I would probably renew my 1-year ST for my own personal family reasons despite how I felt about the club's owners. That 'probably' has now become 'certainly not'. And we all agree on that. We cannot square the owning family's behaviour over the past 9 months with the prospect of me putting £600 into their pockets. Which, on past performance, they might use to buy a stately home or a stupid number plate, spend on champagne for their lovely late night guests, loan interest-free to one of their many ridiculous, loss-making little corporate entities or, worst of all, legally bully and financially gouge ordinary supporters. While the actual core activity of football is left aside to wither.
Over the past year they have taken the mickey out of supporters, conned us with the 'Riga Revolution', lied about the progress of club improvements, filled our club with the highest number of the worse players seen for many years, shafted their own employees by denying them the resources to do their jobs, destroyed the team spirit any club needs to function, and simply been the most unpleasant characters you would ever dread of meeting. Why on earth would anyone with any decent upbringing and moral standing want to associate with such people and suffer their intended humiliation of us? Well, we don't. We might want to go to matches to enjoy friends' company, following our common interest, but that enjoyment has now been polluted and ruined by the actions of the people our money supports.
And the same goes for the so-called Fans' Parliament. These representatives will not be seen as ordinary fans. Being selected by the Chairman, they will be judged as the Oystons' cronies. They will be 12 individual cronies who will not have ANY mechanism or organisation which they can use to communicate with the bulk of the fans. So they will certainly not pass any real feedback to the club, it will only be their own opinions and hearsay. So it will be highly dependent on a few selected individual's attitudes. Probably people such as those who passed on Frank Knight's facebook screen grab to the family. They will obviously not be given any resources. On past evidence (BSA etc) they will be treated, not with respect, but as plebs, tools to be used and discarded when eventually convenient. Since it is Oyston’s creature, it seems appropriate that the FP is only filled with ST holders, i.e. people who continue to believe that there is something creditable in paying for the Oystons’ lifestyles and the way they run the club. But I would not want to associate with it.
Members of the existing Supporters Groups might listen to them out of politeness and curiosity, but understandably will refuse to recognise that the FP members represent anyone but themselves, and probably will just turn their collective back on them. So what function do they perform? They have no legitimacy and no constituency. They are not even a credible BSA replacement. They are simply Koko's latest wheeze, a talking shop so that he can pretend he listens, even though he has stated several times in the past he would NEVER listen to the fans. Have you forgotten 'The Dark Lord' ? At that time, he seemed to be just winding people up, and even then the responses he posted showed a closed mind and it ended, inevitably, in the dismissal of the supporters. Same with his column in the Gazette, just brazen 'I can do no wrong' stuff.
Given the Oystons' disgusting behaviour I would not want to spend a minute in the same room as them. And now, no longer want to breathe the same air as them in the stadium. They have proven now they live on the dark side. So that's it. We will miss the ritual of match days, but we will find something to fill that gap. It really is not worth polluting one's mind with these people or regretting, with their every nasty move, that I am might be contributing to that by paying for it. Funding nasty people to do more harm to others is not a good thing for one’s karma. So... Not A Penny More. Turn off their oxygen. If they decide to kill the club rather than sell it all, then woe betide them.
[Thanks Biggie. Some of the most well-reasoned posts I have seen on this MB lately.] [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:52]
|
AK, I thought that was a good post until you launched into that speculative attack on the type of people who might put themselves forward for the FP. You don't know any of that, you are merely speculating and being unnecessarily pejorative in doing so. I mean, what on earth has the Frank Knight case got to do with this?
All the stuff about people "being judged" is revealing too. I think you are absolutely right to forecast it - people WILL behave as you say they will in condemning others. But it is the essence of the point Lala has been trying to put across - that some people think that the only way is their way, and they don't seem to want to countenance the possibility that folk who think and act in a different way might be just as well-intentioned as they are. TAM, to be fair to him, always tried to avoid this sort of thing. BSTs elite, more or less, have followed suit. It is an example that far too few people are following.
We appear to be approaching something that looks like it might be the beginning of the end game. If it is, I personally would rather that at least some of the club's support is talking to the chairman, even if they aren't directly influencing him. And whilst over the next few months that may end up being BST, it isn't at the moment, and I think there is a case for having something imperfect plugging the vacuum than nothing at all. I don't think that is being short-sighted, or unprincipled, or cronyism - it's just a different way of looking at an intractable problem. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 20:29 - May 28 with 2511 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 20:05 - May 28 by basilrobbiereborn |
AK, I thought that was a good post until you launched into that speculative attack on the type of people who might put themselves forward for the FP. You don't know any of that, you are merely speculating and being unnecessarily pejorative in doing so. I mean, what on earth has the Frank Knight case got to do with this?
All the stuff about people "being judged" is revealing too. I think you are absolutely right to forecast it - people WILL behave as you say they will in condemning others. But it is the essence of the point Lala has been trying to put across - that some people think that the only way is their way, and they don't seem to want to countenance the possibility that folk who think and act in a different way might be just as well-intentioned as they are. TAM, to be fair to him, always tried to avoid this sort of thing. BSTs elite, more or less, have followed suit. It is an example that far too few people are following.
We appear to be approaching something that looks like it might be the beginning of the end game. If it is, I personally would rather that at least some of the club's support is talking to the chairman, even if they aren't directly influencing him. And whilst over the next few months that may end up being BST, it isn't at the moment, and I think there is a case for having something imperfect plugging the vacuum than nothing at all. I don't think that is being short-sighted, or unprincipled, or cronyism - it's just a different way of looking at an intractable problem. |
I think you only have to look at a quick cross section of those willing to participate in the FP and those who aren't to see where people who will apply sit on the bumspiderswingometer Robbie . 
So whilst we may perhaps be guilty of a bit of pre-judgement....in all likelihood the balance of the 12 will be made up of those who have essentially been the least likely to disagree with Oyston policy and most likely to agree with it...In other words precisely the people Karl wants, because he knows he will have them in his pocket with relative ease. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:32 - May 28 with 2511 views | 20togo |
| Fans Parliament on 20:03 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
20's ...
I feel uncomfortable about commenting on specific incidents where I do not have all the facts, but let me be clear about one thing at least....I absolutely believe that any form of intimidation of our fellow supporters under any circumstances is totally and utterly abhorrent and it is definitely something that I would speak out against if I saw it happening.
On your second point, I think that the reason why BST are trying to settle the terms of engagement up front here is for precisely the reasons that you have stated....BSA failed, despite many years of effort as essentially they had no power or influence... in fact one could argue that they actually had much more power and influence before dropping the 'I', which is precisely why Karl wanted to take control of what he perceived at the time to be a threat....BISA similar to SISA and the trust were a strong and well organised group, who clearly provided Karl with a few headaches, by contrast BSA were allowed to have their say, listened to when it suited his agenda and roundly ignored and patted on the head when it didn't.
So if we are to enter into a similar arena again, then it MUST be done with the groundrules already in place and n particular a devolution of some power to those who are engaging in the process. No Power - No Point! Of course as we have seen here, Karl even wants to handpick the reps themselves, set parameters for who can or cannot be involved and essentially provide them with no real influence...In other words... Lip Service!!
Incidentally I do actually see no point at all in BST engaging in simple dialogue with the Club, save to say that "We tried, We failed and now we are free to move on" and I think essentially that is where BST are at....The idea of dialogue is simply a means by which to state that they have tried and as such the next stage in the process is justifiable.
[Post edited 28 May 2015 20:09]
|
bfc3
Again I think you are deliberately being provocatively unfair with your comments. BSA achieved many good things. And let's be blunt on this. How many clubs can you name where the fans do have any influence? BFC like the vast majority of clubs have rich owners who simply run the clubs as they see fit. The fans of those clubs have little or no influence when it comes to how the club is run. You may not care to admit to that but I see it pretty much as a fact. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:39 - May 28 with 2499 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 20:32 - May 28 by 20togo |
bfc3
Again I think you are deliberately being provocatively unfair with your comments. BSA achieved many good things. And let's be blunt on this. How many clubs can you name where the fans do have any influence? BFC like the vast majority of clubs have rich owners who simply run the clubs as they see fit. The fans of those clubs have little or no influence when it comes to how the club is run. You may not care to admit to that but I see it pretty much as a fact. |
Sorry 20's, I'm not trying to be unfair, I'm possibly exaggerating slightly to make a point.
The point I was making is that BSA probably had more power before engaging with Karl...I'd also say the same about BST, I think their power comes in their ability to tackle him directly, bluntly and without fear of any real consequence...Once they start to engage in dialogue, then they would have to do so on Karls terms and obviously under the implied threat that dialogue would be withdrawn if they didn't behave .
With modern media the way it is, then there really is no need for direct dialogue to exert pressure and influence an outcome. [Post edited 28 May 2015 20:43]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:40 - May 28 with 2498 views | ArchibaldKnox |
| Fans Parliament on 20:05 - May 28 by basilrobbiereborn |
AK, I thought that was a good post until you launched into that speculative attack on the type of people who might put themselves forward for the FP. You don't know any of that, you are merely speculating and being unnecessarily pejorative in doing so. I mean, what on earth has the Frank Knight case got to do with this?
All the stuff about people "being judged" is revealing too. I think you are absolutely right to forecast it - people WILL behave as you say they will in condemning others. But it is the essence of the point Lala has been trying to put across - that some people think that the only way is their way, and they don't seem to want to countenance the possibility that folk who think and act in a different way might be just as well-intentioned as they are. TAM, to be fair to him, always tried to avoid this sort of thing. BSTs elite, more or less, have followed suit. It is an example that far too few people are following.
We appear to be approaching something that looks like it might be the beginning of the end game. If it is, I personally would rather that at least some of the club's support is talking to the chairman, even if they aren't directly influencing him. And whilst over the next few months that may end up being BST, it isn't at the moment, and I think there is a case for having something imperfect plugging the vacuum than nothing at all. I don't think that is being short-sighted, or unprincipled, or cronyism - it's just a different way of looking at an intractable problem. |
BRR, that's generally what a judgement is, a forming of an opinion on what people see. People make judgements every minute of their lives. There's nothing special, or revealing about the word itself. I could have used 'view' but it does not bring into play that how people interpret things does depend upon their own position too, that is an inevitable part of human nature. But I think we are talking about the overall likelihood of many people's opinions here, an average position if you like. Which, overall, seems unlikely to fit well with Lala. But someitimes you really do pick on one tiny bit and try and twist words to impart more meaning than was intended.
Those putting themselves up for the FP will be seen by many as playing the O's game. And in doing so, they may be setting themselves up for the same treatment that BSA eventually got. BSA might have cut the links with the Chairman themselves, but after that, do you think he will ever talk with those individuals in the same role again? I expect he has dismissed them from mind. The Frank Knight mention was possibly a little vituperative, but there are still sycophants around, and over the past year that event has probably been the best demonstration of them. With the worst possible consequences but eventually the best outcome as well. That deserves to be remembered for both sides. No, those actually involved in instigating it would never be on the FP as they are too well known. But there will be others, probably those who inhabit hospitality on match days. You were at the last game weren't you? Even the West stand seemed united in their condemnation of the Oystons. Those in the hospitality lounges seemed under siege. So where else will the FP members come from? People who think they are able to change the Oystons? Like a good woman marrying a bad man? Knights riding in on white chargers to save the club? Given that the Chairman chooses, it will be mainly the sycophants. Any of them that prove to be in the awkward squad can be sacked off. They are handpicked, so they can be easily unpicked.
No, for us, it is just the sheer unpleasantness of it all. Being associated with such horrible events and behaviours just leaves a bad taste in the mouth. That we might be enabling this behaviour, by funding it, is unconscionable. If my words are emotive it is simply that I find this emotional. Not for me the calm reasoned approach that others adopt, but I do try to avoid direct abuse.
If we are in the end game, then that will be speeded up if the owners know that the decision that we (2 STs amongst many, no doubt) are making is a permanent one. We will not be cajoled by a Fans' Parliament. We realise that, in the football world, the Oystons are now a busted flush. There will be no generosity or support from other clubs for BFC now, we are the embarrassing creepy uncle that everyone turns away from. Since the Chairman has repeatedly said he does not listen to anyone, and his behaviour has proven that, then why continue to indulge him? You said it was an intractable problem. There is no option now but isolation; the way you would treat an infectious plague. The patient BFC recovers or it dies, it's his choice. The rest of us will rejoice if BFC recovers under existing owners (that I doubt) or new owners, or we will bury the old club and start again. The best hope is that a new miracle drug (new owners) is found. [Post edited 28 May 2015 20:41]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:42 - May 28 with 2483 views | Rusty2Stands |
| Fans Parliament on 20:32 - May 28 by 20togo |
bfc3
Again I think you are deliberately being provocatively unfair with your comments. BSA achieved many good things. And let's be blunt on this. How many clubs can you name where the fans do have any influence? BFC like the vast majority of clubs have rich owners who simply run the clubs as they see fit. The fans of those clubs have little or no influence when it comes to how the club is run. You may not care to admit to that but I see it pretty much as a fact. |
I agree 20's. But how many clubs are run like ours?
I can think of Newcastle, but I'd take Ashley over the Oystons any day of the week. Even a mate of mine who is a Newcastle STH admits the Oystons are far worse than Ashley.
And he detests Ashley.
At the vast majority of clubs the supporters wouldn't want or need to comment on how the club is run. That's because the owners are trying to do their best for the club. Even if they're failing, at least they're trying.
Our owners aren't even trying. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:48 - May 28 with 2478 views | 20togo |
| Fans Parliament on 20:39 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
Sorry 20's, I'm not trying to be unfair, I'm possibly exaggerating slightly to make a point.
The point I was making is that BSA probably had more power before engaging with Karl...I'd also say the same about BST, I think their power comes in their ability to tackle him directly, bluntly and without fear of any real consequence...Once they start to engage in dialogue, then they would have to do so on Karls terms and obviously under the implied threat that dialogue would be withdrawn if they didn't behave .
With modern media the way it is, then there really is no need for direct dialogue to exert pressure and influence an outcome. [Post edited 28 May 2015 20:43]
|
Any view on my point about other clubs and fans having no influence?
Look, I understand the need for BST to go through the process but in view of the amount of criticism bsa came under from the likes of yourself and many others with regards to them having dialogue then I can't help but feel that to comtemplate in engaging with the Oystons is hypocritical to say the least.
But it would be interesting to see the result if a proposal was put to it's members as to whether they should attempt to engage in dialogue.
Sorry, I've gone a bit of topic. I'll repeat the FP should be a non-starter. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:49 - May 28 with 2476 views | Lala |
| Fans Parliament on 20:42 - May 28 by Rusty2Stands |
I agree 20's. But how many clubs are run like ours?
I can think of Newcastle, but I'd take Ashley over the Oystons any day of the week. Even a mate of mine who is a Newcastle STH admits the Oystons are far worse than Ashley.
And he detests Ashley.
At the vast majority of clubs the supporters wouldn't want or need to comment on how the club is run. That's because the owners are trying to do their best for the club. Even if they're failing, at least they're trying.
Our owners aren't even trying. |
What I don't get is,if you don't want to be a part of it,then why not just ignore it's existence and carry on along your own road.
I have seen some approaches towards our current situation,that quite frankly I find pretty daft,but I don't attack people with venom for choosing a path that I wouldn't. What are people afraid off,because that's how it comes across to me. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 20:51 - May 28 with 2474 views | straightatthewall |
| Fans Parliament on 20:05 - May 28 by basilrobbiereborn |
AK, I thought that was a good post until you launched into that speculative attack on the type of people who might put themselves forward for the FP. You don't know any of that, you are merely speculating and being unnecessarily pejorative in doing so. I mean, what on earth has the Frank Knight case got to do with this?
All the stuff about people "being judged" is revealing too. I think you are absolutely right to forecast it - people WILL behave as you say they will in condemning others. But it is the essence of the point Lala has been trying to put across - that some people think that the only way is their way, and they don't seem to want to countenance the possibility that folk who think and act in a different way might be just as well-intentioned as they are. TAM, to be fair to him, always tried to avoid this sort of thing. BSTs elite, more or less, have followed suit. It is an example that far too few people are following.
We appear to be approaching something that looks like it might be the beginning of the end game. If it is, I personally would rather that at least some of the club's support is talking to the chairman, even if they aren't directly influencing him. And whilst over the next few months that may end up being BST, it isn't at the moment, and I think there is a case for having something imperfect plugging the vacuum than nothing at all. I don't think that is being short-sighted, or unprincipled, or cronyism - it's just a different way of looking at an intractable problem. |
It's staggering that people are missing the key points over and over again.
To those that talk about people needing to see a different point of view or accepting that others see it another way. That's fine. People have different opinions. However in this specific scenario there are people proposing a point of view that has already been TRIED and has already FAILED. What people like me are pointing out is that doing the same thing again won't bring a new outcome no matter how hard you want to believe that it will. Every ounce of logic and common sense supports what I'm saying and nothing supports the counter argument.
If one way failed, then another way NEEDS to be tried.
For those that are suggesting that the BST is seeking dialogue. Wrong. They are seeking dialogue ON THEIR TERMS. It's a clear and obvious difference that sets it apart from 12 random season ticket holders taking up this 'challenge' and trying to discuss things with Karl. What I've failed to see from anyone who is saying this is a good idea is a view that the owners of the club need to bring something to this party. People are talking like this is a way back FOR US. No. It's a way back FOR THEM and they are the ones who need to be meeting requirements for discussion or coming to the table with some firm action.
Given that we all know they'd never agree to the BST's requests, it's clear that supporters shouldn't just give in at the first position, but hold their stance and demand ACTION not WORDS. We've waited long enough FFS.
And finally, and perhaps most importantly, stop to consider just where and when we are in the year. And its this point in particular that will see people get grief for supporting this offer. It's designed to alienate those who are refusing to back the owners with CASH. The one thing they have shown means the world to them. Last nights statement, the fans parliment, whispers of Ollie coming back. All designed to get people interested and hopeful of change after the worst season I can recall in my time supporting the club. A season that was so obviously on its way from the previous awful season and the sinking ship that started leaking on September 1 2012 when it was obvious Ollie had been refused the players he and we knew would give us a massive chance of promotion to the Premier League.
It's plain and simple. Going onto this sham will be to the detriment of the effort of people who are truly trying to save this club and get us back to a position where we can at least feel like a football club again. Going along with their sham offers and half-hearted 'we'll see what we can do's' is a recipe for total disaster and a spineless act. Dig in and recognise that we are in it for the long haul. |  |
| We got Bogdanovic, Oyston got very rich |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 20:54 - May 28 with 2471 views | 20togo |
| Fans Parliament on 20:48 - May 28 by 20togo |
Any view on my point about other clubs and fans having no influence?
Look, I understand the need for BST to go through the process but in view of the amount of criticism bsa came under from the likes of yourself and many others with regards to them having dialogue then I can't help but feel that to comtemplate in engaging with the Oystons is hypocritical to say the least.
But it would be interesting to see the result if a proposal was put to it's members as to whether they should attempt to engage in dialogue.
Sorry, I've gone a bit of topic. I'll repeat the FP should be a non-starter. |
Of course rusty, no other club comes remotely close to being as badly run as ours. But my point remains, when it comes to board room decisions fans have little or no influence. Yet people castigate BSA and suggest BST should try. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:55 - May 28 with 2467 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 20:48 - May 28 by 20togo |
Any view on my point about other clubs and fans having no influence?
Look, I understand the need for BST to go through the process but in view of the amount of criticism bsa came under from the likes of yourself and many others with regards to them having dialogue then I can't help but feel that to comtemplate in engaging with the Oystons is hypocritical to say the least.
But it would be interesting to see the result if a proposal was put to it's members as to whether they should attempt to engage in dialogue.
Sorry, I've gone a bit of topic. I'll repeat the FP should be a non-starter. |
To be honest 20's I think fans across the board (not just BFC) get a pretty raw deal and so to be honest I accept very few have real influence...That is not to say that other Clubs don't show their supporters a whole load more consideration than ours do however.
For me it really isn't about having massive influence as such it is a simple case of us needing different owners with a totally different philosophy. Talking to the Oystons won't change them, owning a 20% stake in the boardroom won't change them, it really is a complete waste of time engaging with them full stop.
With BST, I think they have to tick the box, but I agree that actively engaging in dialogue or supporting them in doing so is hypocritical and it is pointless.
Incidentally, no comment from you regarding my comments above regarding fan intimidation...Did I make myself clear enough? | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 20:59 - May 28 with 2464 views | Lala |
| Fans Parliament on 20:55 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
To be honest 20's I think fans across the board (not just BFC) get a pretty raw deal and so to be honest I accept very few have real influence...That is not to say that other Clubs don't show their supporters a whole load more consideration than ours do however.
For me it really isn't about having massive influence as such it is a simple case of us needing different owners with a totally different philosophy. Talking to the Oystons won't change them, owning a 20% stake in the boardroom won't change them, it really is a complete waste of time engaging with them full stop.
With BST, I think they have to tick the box, but I agree that actively engaging in dialogue or supporting them in doing so is hypocritical and it is pointless.
Incidentally, no comment from you regarding my comments above regarding fan intimidation...Did I make myself clear enough? |
What way hasn't failed SATW? As in,no progress has been made however you look at it,despite ALL of the initiatives tried so far. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 21:03 - May 28 with 2459 views | 20togo |
| Fans Parliament on 20:55 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
To be honest 20's I think fans across the board (not just BFC) get a pretty raw deal and so to be honest I accept very few have real influence...That is not to say that other Clubs don't show their supporters a whole load more consideration than ours do however.
For me it really isn't about having massive influence as such it is a simple case of us needing different owners with a totally different philosophy. Talking to the Oystons won't change them, owning a 20% stake in the boardroom won't change them, it really is a complete waste of time engaging with them full stop.
With BST, I think they have to tick the box, but I agree that actively engaging in dialogue or supporting them in doing so is hypocritical and it is pointless.
Incidentally, no comment from you regarding my comments above regarding fan intimidation...Did I make myself clear enough? |
Yes you did and I recognise that. But what I will add is that intimidation can be done un-noticed by others so of course people will never know the specifics.
Anyway I'm off to watch Madam Secretary. A good series on Sky Living. Catch up later. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 21:04 - May 28 with 2453 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 20:49 - May 28 by Lala |
What I don't get is,if you don't want to be a part of it,then why not just ignore it's existence and carry on along your own road.
I have seen some approaches towards our current situation,that quite frankly I find pretty daft,but I don't attack people with venom for choosing a path that I wouldn't. What are people afraid off,because that's how it comes across to me. |
Lala,
It's inevitable that people will have an opinion on the FP and I think it's important to realise that much of that will be borne out of fear....The fear that the efforts to try and isolate Karl over the past months and to highlight him for hat he is, will be undermined by people essentially playing out a charade.
Surely even you can see that it would be better to have no FP at all (and as such ensure that the world can see he remains uninterested in the fans) if the only purpose that it serves is for Karl to hide behind the pretense of fan engagement. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 21:11 - May 28 with 2446 views | Lala |
| Fans Parliament on 21:04 - May 28 by BFCx3 |
Lala,
It's inevitable that people will have an opinion on the FP and I think it's important to realise that much of that will be borne out of fear....The fear that the efforts to try and isolate Karl over the past months and to highlight him for hat he is, will be undermined by people essentially playing out a charade.
Surely even you can see that it would be better to have no FP at all (and as such ensure that the world can see he remains uninterested in the fans) if the only purpose that it serves is for Karl to hide behind the pretense of fan engagement. |
I'm not sure BFC,I think that that approach re isolating Karl isn't the way forward,long term. They own the company,to some degree you can't ever totally isolate him,can you not see that?
A different approach,one that re-opens lines of communication,doesn't mean fans have to surrender,not at all. If you aren't happy with the outcome of any FP then just carry on the way you choose,no harm done. Or just don't personally validate the outcome of any FP. In the meantime some people may want to give it a try.
PS 'surely even you can see' is so patronising,and exactly why I take umbridge with subtle undermining comments like that.
As an aside, I am not a season ticket holder,and if I was,this is so not my bag,but for anybody else,go for it I say. Be that fly on the wall. [Post edited 28 May 2015 21:15]
| |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 21:12 - May 28 with 2439 views | BFCx3 |
| Fans Parliament on 21:03 - May 28 by 20togo |
Yes you did and I recognise that. But what I will add is that intimidation can be done un-noticed by others so of course people will never know the specifics.
Anyway I'm off to watch Madam Secretary. A good series on Sky Living. Catch up later. |
Well if things are done un-noticed 20's, then there are clearly two separate versions of events to consider and in fairness I don't even know what one of them is at present. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
