 | Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 20:40 28 May 2015
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]
|
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 19:37 28 May 2015
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]
|
| Forum
Reply | Lee Clark Interview
at 15:57 21 May 2015
Please do not criticise BBB like that. He had his place in that glorious season of 2009-10. In the latter half often on the bench, it must be said. But he was an integral part of one of the best teams we have seen for decades.
I must say that LC has done us all a real service in that interview. While what he has said is largely public knowledge, it is important that the ex-manager states the reasons that put such obstacles in his way preventing him from doing his job. And it all comes back to Koko. How he will hire anyone else decent, whether manager, players, coaches, or kitman is a mystery.
My guess? David Vaughan, perhaps ? [Post edited 21 May 2015 16:01]
|
| Forum
Reply | Have the O's now made it their mission to piss every Blackpool fan off?
at 19:10 29 Apr 2015
It is simple knee-jerk retaliation dressed up as a non-existent concern for a statue that was never in any danger and did not need 'maintenance'. They have had little professional PR advice in the past, and even less after Matt Williams' departure. So the club's policies and pronouncements now more accurately reflect the Chairman's character than for many years. They have simply used rough business methods to extract 'value' from others for years, whether going back to the softer 'buy a player with gate money', to getting fans to subsidise statues and signage, doing harsh deals with contractors, to take-it-or-leave-it player contractual negotiations, and the more recent thuggish financial bullying. [Post edited 29 Apr 2015 19:18]
|
| Forum
Reply | So
at 17:45 24 Mar 2015
So... is a rather famous LP by Peter Gabriel, released in 1986. |
| Forum
Reply | new blog from basilrobbiereborn
at 17:31 19 Feb 2015
You said " He needs to work, he wants to enhance his reputation, and the sooner the puerile cries of "collaborator" stop, the better off we will all be. "
Last time I saw Lee Clark working was on Saturday at pitch side. Your use of the evocative phrase 'puerile cries' led me to take you completely literally, i.e. they were cries you heard. If you were referring to internet forums I would have expected you to use the phrase "puerile comments" or "puerile posts" or even "puerile threads". You had better be more clear in your writing.
And which block is your seat in, then? If you were there on Saturday, as I assume you were, you might have heard several cries of "Collaborator" and much booing emanating from K and L blocks in the West stand, I know I did. That happened when it appeared Clark was going to take off Madine for his last sub and the 4th official put up number 24 on his board in red. In response to the booing, or when he realised that a mistake had been made, Clark grabbed the 4th official to make him change it to 29 to take McMahon off. I suppose a 29 can look very much like a 24 in Geordie handwriting. But the fact is that cries of "Collaborator" were definitely heard from those in the West stand. |
| Forum
Reply | new blog from basilrobbiereborn
at 16:02 19 Feb 2015
Which block is your seat in, BRR?
It would be interesting to know which section of the 'crowd' is shouting 'Collaborator' at Clark. |
| Forum
Reply | The Premier League say they aren't a charity
at 12:28 12 Feb 2015
All the usual suspects are named in this wiki page about the setting up of the Premier League: Parry, Dein, Quinton, Sugar (sorry, Lorrrsshugger), Greg Dyke (lost then, but later won his 'job for the boys' at the FA), Murdoch and Chisholm at Sky with a panoply of bit-part actors such as Bates, Noades and faceless BBC bureaucrats.
It's apparent now that no-one really knew what it would become, that it was as much about personalities (and clashes) than business, and that the BBC was used as a fig-leaf to justify the naked ambition of Sky's last throw gamble to save their loss-making enterprise. However, what was missing throughout was thought and consideration for any other clubs in the Football League and the grassroots of the game itself. It was all self-aggrandisement and self-enrichment. And that example has been the perfect template for others to follow, as we have found...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcasting_and_the_foundation_of_the_Premier_Leag
Edit: Interesting that before the PL politicians would have run a mile rather than associate themselves with football. Only 'odd' ones such as Michael Foot with his beloved Plymouth Argyle would openly admit to being fans. Now they all want to jump on the bandwagon and the Heir to the Heir to the Throne has visited Bloomfield Road. Having said that, grounds have improved, and there is negligible risk of being slaughtered like sheep under the uncaring eye of the police these days. And its available, live on TV, on an almost daily basis if you are prepared to, and can afford, to pay the price. So I suppose it's all been for the best, eh? [Post edited 12 Feb 2015 12:39]
|
| Forum
Reply | Tom Ince scores for Derby
at 10:44 9 Feb 2015
I agree. He will score goals for fun playing in a good team. His decline with us was not as much associated with his father as with the poor footballers Blackpool FC has had for the past two and a bit years. I would like him to be a great success for England's benefit and to remind us yet again of Koko's series of screw-ups. |
| Forum
Reply | Back to Bloomfield Road
at 00:26 8 Feb 2015
R.U.FCKN.STPD...?
edit: NOT U TEJAS, THE OP [Post edited 8 Feb 2015 18:11]
|
| Forum
Reply | OT : African Cup of Nations
at 13:02 6 Feb 2015
Bloody huge riot by the host country's fans in the 2nd semi-final... when they were 2-0 down.
Edit: And a police helicopter hovering about 30 feet above the crowds in the stand risking a crash and multiple deaths. Madness. Or Mad House. If I was the Ghana FA Chairman, I would take the whole squad home immediately and forget about the final. [Post edited 6 Feb 2015 16:32]
|
| Forum
Reply | Clark out!
at 13:09 27 Jan 2015
"First Sacred Message Board Law" ??
That suggests there are more. Please enlighten us as to the rest, oh icon. |
| Forum
Reply | FAO Bazbob/Wiz
at 23:50 25 Jan 2015
It's been a few years since Reg Dwight owned Watford...
Watford is currently owned by Gino Pozzo and his family, who also own Udinese Calcio in Italy and Granada CF in Spain.
edit to add: Although no longer the majority shareholder, Elton still holds a significant financial interest though. [Post edited 26 Jan 2015 16:39]
|
| Forum
Reply | Cubero
at 16:43 25 Jan 2015
I am afraid that 'Cubero' is Oyston's punchline to his own joke, 'the Riga Revolution'... |
| Forum
Reply | well, that was compelling
at 16:39 25 Jan 2015
Yes, succinct...
Definition: (Especially of something written or spoken) briefly and clearly expressed.
If it's brief, it cannot cover all aspects, as you rightly acknowledge. |
| Forum
Reply | travel in hope (n/t)
at 16:28 25 Jan 2015
Travel in hope? These days, I Hope in Travel. It's more enjoyable than the 'entertainment' expected.
"Little do ye know your own blessedness; for to travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive, and the true success is to labour."
(R.L. Stevenson, 1881) |
| Forum
Reply | well, that was compelling
at 16:17 25 Jan 2015
Actually, I thought it was a succinct and accurate report of the events on the field.
You could have mentioned the shape where Watford found gaps everywhere. I think we are supposed to work on that on the training ground... Oh, sorry, I forgot... |
| | ArchibaldKnox
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 92 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 92 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.