| The Stan Conundrum 22:20 - Mar 9 with 5277 views | PlanetHonneywood |
I can see the club's point in all of this.
So maybe as we're at the time of renewing ST and memberships, perhaps supporters can be given an option to make a donation to Stan of say, no less than a fiver. It won't qualify for Gift Aid I'm afraid, but it might work for everyone's mutual interest.
Anyone know if we've tapped the bookies for a few quid? God knows he's given them enough over the years!
Apologies if already considered previously. |  |
| |  |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:34 - Mar 9 with 4544 views | daveB |
He has a go fund me page so anyone can donate to help him |  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:48 - Mar 9 with 4513 views | nadera78 |
I assume you're talking about the statement from the club earlier today.
I followed - but then quickly unfollowed - the @StanBenefit dude on Twitter. Whoever was running that account was rude, confrontational and needlessly aggressive towards the club, Lee Hoos and anyone who didn't instantly agree with his demands.
The club has a genuine balancing act here - everyone wants to help Stan and see him through this situation as best as possible, but the truth is that there an awful lot of ex-QPR players who are in just as bad a position as him and haven't had a fraction of the help. And I don't just mean right now, but going back many years. There's talk about Frank Sibley on another thread, just being one example of this. Dave Thomas, too, and I'll bet many with difficulties we don't even know about.
Through the new Forever Rs club QPR are looking to right some of the past wrongs re our ex-players, who we've shamefully neglected in the past, and is helping people where they can and it is appropriate.
When the benefit match takes place I'll buy a ticket and throw a few quid in the hat, just like most of us. But it really doesn't help anyone to see people behaving with such bully boy tactics, and being so downright nasty to club employees who simply want to see things being done the right way. |  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 23:10 - Mar 9 with 4469 views | smegma |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:48 - Mar 9 by nadera78 |
I assume you're talking about the statement from the club earlier today.
I followed - but then quickly unfollowed - the @StanBenefit dude on Twitter. Whoever was running that account was rude, confrontational and needlessly aggressive towards the club, Lee Hoos and anyone who didn't instantly agree with his demands.
The club has a genuine balancing act here - everyone wants to help Stan and see him through this situation as best as possible, but the truth is that there an awful lot of ex-QPR players who are in just as bad a position as him and haven't had a fraction of the help. And I don't just mean right now, but going back many years. There's talk about Frank Sibley on another thread, just being one example of this. Dave Thomas, too, and I'll bet many with difficulties we don't even know about.
Through the new Forever Rs club QPR are looking to right some of the past wrongs re our ex-players, who we've shamefully neglected in the past, and is helping people where they can and it is appropriate.
When the benefit match takes place I'll buy a ticket and throw a few quid in the hat, just like most of us. But it really doesn't help anyone to see people behaving with such bully boy tactics, and being so downright nasty to club employees who simply want to see things being done the right way. |
Apparently the div on Twitter was slagging me off on some site today then deleted it. I never saw it but it appears he deleted the post when people who know of me came on and stood up for me. Probably felt embarrassed so deleted it.appears if you don't agree with about 5 self serving egotists , you get abused. They openly slag off club employees who have no right to reply as they are club representatives. It's not the first time its happened as one of them slaughtered Andy Evans in AKUTRs a couple of months ago. Then you see the clip of the young man on Victoria Derbyshire and see what great work Andy and the Community Trust staff do.They've also turned on Dave Thomas of AKUTRs which was outrageous as he had backed them all the way.
Don't worry, they'll be crawling back under their stones shortly. | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 23:34 - Mar 9 with 4430 views | Brightonhoop |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:48 - Mar 9 by nadera78 |
I assume you're talking about the statement from the club earlier today.
I followed - but then quickly unfollowed - the @StanBenefit dude on Twitter. Whoever was running that account was rude, confrontational and needlessly aggressive towards the club, Lee Hoos and anyone who didn't instantly agree with his demands.
The club has a genuine balancing act here - everyone wants to help Stan and see him through this situation as best as possible, but the truth is that there an awful lot of ex-QPR players who are in just as bad a position as him and haven't had a fraction of the help. And I don't just mean right now, but going back many years. There's talk about Frank Sibley on another thread, just being one example of this. Dave Thomas, too, and I'll bet many with difficulties we don't even know about.
Through the new Forever Rs club QPR are looking to right some of the past wrongs re our ex-players, who we've shamefully neglected in the past, and is helping people where they can and it is appropriate.
When the benefit match takes place I'll buy a ticket and throw a few quid in the hat, just like most of us. But it really doesn't help anyone to see people behaving with such bully boy tactics, and being so downright nasty to club employees who simply want to see things being done the right way. |
Totally agree. The Club is fault here for not leading, but the folk who seek to speak for Stan have been utter cnts to the Club and should fck off so the real can flow.
Nobody wanted a war over Stan of all ex-players but it's become a farse.
Fcking sickened frankly.
Clubs brought it on itself tbh should have taken the bull by the horns years ago. It has traded on Stans image for years and owes him big time.
We dont do these things well and now is the time to take care of him as one of our own all shyte set aside.
Genuinely dont see it happening. Way to many sad case egos making an absolute mess of things that should be done with grace and have no chance. Tw4ts.
I hope for the family a large amount goes on.
It;s Stan fcking Bowles. What's the conundrum? [Post edited 9 Mar 2017 23:38]
|  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 20:54 - Mar 10 with 4193 views | StanBenefit |
Nice language and grasp of the situation. I am not a div or a bully and there are two sides to every fallout. I've got this issue to where it is now pls show some respect and give credit where due. The club have very poorly communicated to keep the fans informed. They haven't yet earned our trust that they will get this done or in time for Stan, who may not have long to live. I apologise for exampling a counter view however I did not invite the abuse and after all the work I've done I feel strongly that it was for a just reason beyond counter argument. That's all I have to say. Stand up if you love Stan Bowles | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 21:06 - Mar 10 with 4179 views | smegma |
| The Stan Conundrum on 20:54 - Mar 10 by StanBenefit |
Nice language and grasp of the situation. I am not a div or a bully and there are two sides to every fallout. I've got this issue to where it is now pls show some respect and give credit where due. The club have very poorly communicated to keep the fans informed. They haven't yet earned our trust that they will get this done or in time for Stan, who may not have long to live. I apologise for exampling a counter view however I did not invite the abuse and after all the work I've done I feel strongly that it was for a just reason beyond counter argument. That's all I have to say. Stand up if you love Stan Bowles |
If you are replying to me, I did not abuse you, I never have. But you've abused quite a few people, look at other posts above.
I used the word div as that's how I see certain people. The person who gave me stick is a div. if that's you, so be it.
Even Lee Hoos as said your comments are divisive. | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:42 - Mar 10 with 4112 views | mygeneration |
I have known Andy Evans for years and the amazing work he has done in the name of QPR. He is inspirational. Anybody who slags him off must be ignorant of the great work he has done. |  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 07:30 - Mar 11 with 4016 views | Roller |
Perhaps you’d be so kind as to explain exactly where we are?
As an observer, it seems to me that we’ve dropped back into the old ways of fighting among ourselves rather than uniting behind the cause. To unite we need to be open to other people’s point of view, welcoming to their thoughts and encouraging to their participation. From what I’ve read certain individuals are more concerned with mudslinging than finding solutions, more concerned with ownership of certain ideas than bringing them to fruition and more concerned with haranguing everybody else into precisely their concept rather than actually focusing on the goal.
I’m not on Facebook or Twitter and so only have anecdotal evidence to form my opinions from. The most recent example is from a good friend of mine who has just been banned from a Facebook group for having the audacity to have different ideas to the organisers. All the points they made were pertinent and forward looking, and, properly employed, they would have been more use to the cause than the organisers will ever realise.
Can you please explain where we are, where we are going and why my impressions are wrong? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Stan Conundrum on 08:52 - Mar 11 with 3923 views | smegma |
| The Stan Conundrum on 07:30 - Mar 11 by Roller |
Perhaps you’d be so kind as to explain exactly where we are?
As an observer, it seems to me that we’ve dropped back into the old ways of fighting among ourselves rather than uniting behind the cause. To unite we need to be open to other people’s point of view, welcoming to their thoughts and encouraging to their participation. From what I’ve read certain individuals are more concerned with mudslinging than finding solutions, more concerned with ownership of certain ideas than bringing them to fruition and more concerned with haranguing everybody else into precisely their concept rather than actually focusing on the goal.
I’m not on Facebook or Twitter and so only have anecdotal evidence to form my opinions from. The most recent example is from a good friend of mine who has just been banned from a Facebook group for having the audacity to have different ideas to the organisers. All the points they made were pertinent and forward looking, and, properly employed, they would have been more use to the cause than the organisers will ever realise.
Can you please explain where we are, where we are going and why my impressions are wrong? |
What Facebook group banned your friend? | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 11:04 - Mar 11 with 3829 views | Roller |
| The Stan Conundrum on 08:52 - Mar 11 by smegma |
What Facebook group banned your friend? |
I'd prefer not to add to the mud slinging so I'll rather keep that out of the debate. We really want to avoid the full "People's Front of Judea" here don't we? | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 11:52 - Mar 11 with 3774 views | smegma |
| The Stan Conundrum on 11:04 - Mar 11 by Roller |
I'd prefer not to add to the mud slinging so I'll rather keep that out of the debate. We really want to avoid the full "People's Front of Judea" here don't we? |
I can make a good guess | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 10:34 - Mar 13 with 3579 views | W7Ranger |
| The Stan Conundrum on 11:52 - Mar 11 by smegma |
I can make a good guess |
POL is my guess. |  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 12:57 - Mar 13 with 3490 views | simmo |
| The Stan Conundrum on 20:54 - Mar 10 by StanBenefit |
Nice language and grasp of the situation. I am not a div or a bully and there are two sides to every fallout. I've got this issue to where it is now pls show some respect and give credit where due. The club have very poorly communicated to keep the fans informed. They haven't yet earned our trust that they will get this done or in time for Stan, who may not have long to live. I apologise for exampling a counter view however I did not invite the abuse and after all the work I've done I feel strongly that it was for a just reason beyond counter argument. That's all I have to say. Stand up if you love Stan Bowles |
"I followed - but then quickly unfollowed - the @StanBenefit dude on Twitter. Whoever was running that account was rude, confrontational and needlessly aggressive towards the club, Lee Hoos and anyone who didn't instantly agree with his demands. "
A shame that you seem to be alienating those that would like to support the cause and actually want the same thing as you, but struggle to personally align themselves with somebody so aggressive and confrontational. Absolutely you deserve credit for being so determined and making sure this issue is given the due consideration by the club, but you have personally attacked many in QPR and it's support base which is counter-productive for the cause.
Andy Evans especially is a credit to this club and everything I want it to stand for, his understanding and love for QPR and the area goes beyond just a job and he deserves every plaudit that comes his way.
Regarding the benefit match, I hope the club find a way to accomodate this ASAP and continue to recognise former players, I will get a ticket and/or put some money in once it comes around as I did during the benefit day last season. It's a shame that it has come to this level of in-fighting and that the club and parts of the support base are against each other, especially when in theory everybody wants the same thing. [Post edited 13 Mar 2017 13:01]
|  |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 13:46 - Mar 13 with 3408 views | connell10 |
| The Stan Conundrum on 07:30 - Mar 11 by Roller |
Perhaps you’d be so kind as to explain exactly where we are?
As an observer, it seems to me that we’ve dropped back into the old ways of fighting among ourselves rather than uniting behind the cause. To unite we need to be open to other people’s point of view, welcoming to their thoughts and encouraging to their participation. From what I’ve read certain individuals are more concerned with mudslinging than finding solutions, more concerned with ownership of certain ideas than bringing them to fruition and more concerned with haranguing everybody else into precisely their concept rather than actually focusing on the goal.
I’m not on Facebook or Twitter and so only have anecdotal evidence to form my opinions from. The most recent example is from a good friend of mine who has just been banned from a Facebook group for having the audacity to have different ideas to the organisers. All the points they made were pertinent and forward looking, and, properly employed, they would have been more use to the cause than the organisers will ever realise.
Can you please explain where we are, where we are going and why my impressions are wrong? |
Good post mate, I'm a tad confused by all this also! |  |
| AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!! | | Poll: | best number 10 ever? |
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 14:25 - Mar 13 with 3339 views | Northernr |
I think the one thing we can agree on in all of this is it's a shame it's going like this, with people falling out and calling each other out, moaning about who's on a committee or not, who said what to who, who's idea this was or that was.
When you see Andy Evans getting grief that's absolutely beyond the pale for me, that guy is QPR to his core and is absolutely brilliant at his job. He's beyond reproach. Same with Dave Thomas at AKUTRs and people giving him stick.
I'll be interested to see what's said about this at the forum on Thursday. The insinuation, and outright accusation at times, is that the club is dragging its feet on this, has no appetite for a match, and even that they're just delaying and delaying until, not to put too fine a point on it, it's too late. But why would they do that? Benefit game raising money for best ever player = fantastic publicity, right thing to do, everybody grateful, no brainer. Delaying it until it's too late = massive PR own goal, national newspaper coverage. Why would they, it doesn't make any sense?
Aren't Hoos and the club simply making sure it's organised and financed correctly so that it makes the money the family needs? Testimonials do take some arranging, and are usually spread over a whole year with different events, a specific committee and stuff like that. This, initially, just seems to be "we never had a testimonial for him so we should have one immediately because he's ill" followed by a load of grief for the club for not arranging it immediately. I've seen talk of a protest at the Rotherham game because they haven't named a date for the game yet - how can you name a date if you don't have an opponent? Presumably we'd want Man City down here, to draw a crowd and for the personal connection, but their calendar is absolutely chocker and suggestions like international weekends won't work for them. How can you name a date without an opponent?
There are things that would need to be paid for and the automatic assumption that 18,000 people would turn up and the game would make an absolute mint is a dangerous one - testimonials have been poorly attended at QPR in the past (Gallen, Macca), there could be a tube strike that day, it could pis it down with rain, it could come at a time when the first team has loads of games and people are cash strapped etc etc. You could plan the game for a Tuesday night in October next year and then when it comes round find the fixture list has us playing seven first team fixtures that month including away at Sunderland, Middlesbrough and Blackburn which will mean everybody is skint and no first team players will be available for it. You have to hope for the best but plan for the worst don't you? If it costs £50k just to put the game on why not just give the £50k to him?
And what about the likes of Sibley and Thomas who are ill too? One would hope in time the Forever R's club will grow into a proper ex players association with a pot of money to help in such cases, but until then are we just going to harangue the club for individual benefit matches for everybody? It's easy to look at the money QPR toss away all the time on modern day footballers and say they should be paying for more worthy stuff like Dave Thomas' guide dog and so on, but no business would ever add the liability for the end of life care for former employees to its balance sheet.
The match is a good idea in principal and if organised correctly could be a great and much needed thing, but seeing club employees and other QPR fans set upon like this isn't right. Coming out and asking these questions or saying these things or sticking up for the club when you think it's being harshly criticised... Hoos saying "well it needs to be properly organised"... none of this means you're an enemy of Stan, or the benefit match idea, or anything really.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 14:35 - Mar 13 with 3292 views | 2Thomas2Bowles |
| The Stan Conundrum on 14:25 - Mar 13 by Northernr |
I think the one thing we can agree on in all of this is it's a shame it's going like this, with people falling out and calling each other out, moaning about who's on a committee or not, who said what to who, who's idea this was or that was.
When you see Andy Evans getting grief that's absolutely beyond the pale for me, that guy is QPR to his core and is absolutely brilliant at his job. He's beyond reproach. Same with Dave Thomas at AKUTRs and people giving him stick.
I'll be interested to see what's said about this at the forum on Thursday. The insinuation, and outright accusation at times, is that the club is dragging its feet on this, has no appetite for a match, and even that they're just delaying and delaying until, not to put too fine a point on it, it's too late. But why would they do that? Benefit game raising money for best ever player = fantastic publicity, right thing to do, everybody grateful, no brainer. Delaying it until it's too late = massive PR own goal, national newspaper coverage. Why would they, it doesn't make any sense?
Aren't Hoos and the club simply making sure it's organised and financed correctly so that it makes the money the family needs? Testimonials do take some arranging, and are usually spread over a whole year with different events, a specific committee and stuff like that. This, initially, just seems to be "we never had a testimonial for him so we should have one immediately because he's ill" followed by a load of grief for the club for not arranging it immediately. I've seen talk of a protest at the Rotherham game because they haven't named a date for the game yet - how can you name a date if you don't have an opponent? Presumably we'd want Man City down here, to draw a crowd and for the personal connection, but their calendar is absolutely chocker and suggestions like international weekends won't work for them. How can you name a date without an opponent?
There are things that would need to be paid for and the automatic assumption that 18,000 people would turn up and the game would make an absolute mint is a dangerous one - testimonials have been poorly attended at QPR in the past (Gallen, Macca), there could be a tube strike that day, it could pis it down with rain, it could come at a time when the first team has loads of games and people are cash strapped etc etc. You could plan the game for a Tuesday night in October next year and then when it comes round find the fixture list has us playing seven first team fixtures that month including away at Sunderland, Middlesbrough and Blackburn which will mean everybody is skint and no first team players will be available for it. You have to hope for the best but plan for the worst don't you? If it costs £50k just to put the game on why not just give the £50k to him?
And what about the likes of Sibley and Thomas who are ill too? One would hope in time the Forever R's club will grow into a proper ex players association with a pot of money to help in such cases, but until then are we just going to harangue the club for individual benefit matches for everybody? It's easy to look at the money QPR toss away all the time on modern day footballers and say they should be paying for more worthy stuff like Dave Thomas' guide dog and so on, but no business would ever add the liability for the end of life care for former employees to its balance sheet.
The match is a good idea in principal and if organised correctly could be a great and much needed thing, but seeing club employees and other QPR fans set upon like this isn't right. Coming out and asking these questions or saying these things or sticking up for the club when you think it's being harshly criticised... Hoos saying "well it needs to be properly organised"... none of this means you're an enemy of Stan, or the benefit match idea, or anything really.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
I'm against a testimonial for the reasons given.
Do a fund maybe the club can sanction it, promote it at games and in the program and stuff, fans that are fighting to club should back it too
Maybe Clive and other fan forums can sticky the links, it may be internet buckets but it's more sensible. |  |
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 14:41 - Mar 13 with 3268 views | Rangersw12 |
| The Stan Conundrum on 20:54 - Mar 10 by StanBenefit |
Nice language and grasp of the situation. I am not a div or a bully and there are two sides to every fallout. I've got this issue to where it is now pls show some respect and give credit where due. The club have very poorly communicated to keep the fans informed. They haven't yet earned our trust that they will get this done or in time for Stan, who may not have long to live. I apologise for exampling a counter view however I did not invite the abuse and after all the work I've done I feel strongly that it was for a just reason beyond counter argument. That's all I have to say. Stand up if you love Stan Bowles |
Can you advise why you're desperate for a testimonial (when the cost is 50k) when as others have said wouldn't it be better to just raise the money for Stan ? | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:07 - Mar 13 with 3210 views | simmo |
| The Stan Conundrum on 14:41 - Mar 13 by Rangersw12 |
Can you advise why you're desperate for a testimonial (when the cost is 50k) when as others have said wouldn't it be better to just raise the money for Stan ? |
Didn't we already do that during Stan Bowles day last season? I think it raised about 15k+ which whilst good, is nowhere near enough for his ongoing care (I base this largely on the information I got from the Guardian article last week, which also said private accomodation was around £600 per week).
I think if we can organise a testimonial in conjunction with the raising of funds on the day, that will equate to a decent amount. But as above, it's a very difficult and complicated thing to organise in the current climate and takes time if done properly. There certainly wouldn't be any point in doing it for the sake of doing it and not maximising the money.... | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:11 - Mar 13 with 3203 views | Rangersw12 |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:07 - Mar 13 by simmo |
Didn't we already do that during Stan Bowles day last season? I think it raised about 15k+ which whilst good, is nowhere near enough for his ongoing care (I base this largely on the information I got from the Guardian article last week, which also said private accomodation was around £600 per week).
I think if we can organise a testimonial in conjunction with the raising of funds on the day, that will equate to a decent amount. But as above, it's a very difficult and complicated thing to organise in the current climate and takes time if done properly. There certainly wouldn't be any point in doing it for the sake of doing it and not maximising the money.... |
How much is he realistically going to make from a testimonial?
Especially as they have been so poorly supported over the years
I think it would be better off raising the 50k and giving it to Stan rather than using that on a match that might only attract 6k | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:35 - Mar 13 with 3166 views | simmo |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:11 - Mar 13 by Rangersw12 |
How much is he realistically going to make from a testimonial?
Especially as they have been so poorly supported over the years
I think it would be better off raising the 50k and giving it to Stan rather than using that on a match that might only attract 6k |
Yeah you could be right, I guess that's part of the planning - to see if the club can sort out the details and see how to maximise the money that can be made and if that would then be a better option than other attempts to raise funds. Difficult one to negotiate and hopefully the money in the fund currently has helped up until now. | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:45 - Mar 13 with 3138 views | paulparker |
Be good if Les can pull in a favour from Spurs and get them here for a pre season friendly and how about all proceeds go to Thomas, bowles & sibley rather than just stan
Everton are also a good club with these things how about them or maybe we could pull in a foreign team like a sevilla or Valencia
if a load of fans can hang around the club shop at 7am for a poxy white shirt im pretty sure we could sell out for 3 of our favourite sons |  |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 16:41 - Mar 13 with 3046 views | barbicanranger |
Can't say I have been overly close to this topic because of:
1) The forcefulness with which it was carried out by the organiser
2) As a club that has had very few testimonials over the years I can't / don't see why one ex-player should receive special treatment - there must be several ex-players of lesser stature that are / were in a bad a way and did not receive this support. Maybe an annual event to raise money for a fund for all ex-players? Saying the club traded on Stan's name is pushing it.
3) As others have pointed out, if the point is to raise money at this immediate time for him then a (spontaneous) football match at loftus road is probably not the best way to do this as the event will be in the minus before a ball is even kicked, it is an ends with the purpose |  | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:27 - Mar 13 with 2872 views | connell10 |
| The Stan Conundrum on 16:41 - Mar 13 by barbicanranger |
Can't say I have been overly close to this topic because of:
1) The forcefulness with which it was carried out by the organiser
2) As a club that has had very few testimonials over the years I can't / don't see why one ex-player should receive special treatment - there must be several ex-players of lesser stature that are / were in a bad a way and did not receive this support. Maybe an annual event to raise money for a fund for all ex-players? Saying the club traded on Stan's name is pushing it.
3) As others have pointed out, if the point is to raise money at this immediate time for him then a (spontaneous) football match at loftus road is probably not the best way to do this as the event will be in the minus before a ball is even kicked, it is an ends with the purpose |
Mate the club have traded on stans name , i dont think thats pushing it! | |
| AND WHEN I DREAM , I DREAM ABOUT YOU AND WHEN I SCREAM I SCREAM ABOUT YOU!!!!! | | Poll: | best number 10 ever? |
| |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:55 - Mar 13 with 2848 views | smegma |
| The Stan Conundrum on 14:25 - Mar 13 by Northernr |
I think the one thing we can agree on in all of this is it's a shame it's going like this, with people falling out and calling each other out, moaning about who's on a committee or not, who said what to who, who's idea this was or that was.
When you see Andy Evans getting grief that's absolutely beyond the pale for me, that guy is QPR to his core and is absolutely brilliant at his job. He's beyond reproach. Same with Dave Thomas at AKUTRs and people giving him stick.
I'll be interested to see what's said about this at the forum on Thursday. The insinuation, and outright accusation at times, is that the club is dragging its feet on this, has no appetite for a match, and even that they're just delaying and delaying until, not to put too fine a point on it, it's too late. But why would they do that? Benefit game raising money for best ever player = fantastic publicity, right thing to do, everybody grateful, no brainer. Delaying it until it's too late = massive PR own goal, national newspaper coverage. Why would they, it doesn't make any sense?
Aren't Hoos and the club simply making sure it's organised and financed correctly so that it makes the money the family needs? Testimonials do take some arranging, and are usually spread over a whole year with different events, a specific committee and stuff like that. This, initially, just seems to be "we never had a testimonial for him so we should have one immediately because he's ill" followed by a load of grief for the club for not arranging it immediately. I've seen talk of a protest at the Rotherham game because they haven't named a date for the game yet - how can you name a date if you don't have an opponent? Presumably we'd want Man City down here, to draw a crowd and for the personal connection, but their calendar is absolutely chocker and suggestions like international weekends won't work for them. How can you name a date without an opponent?
There are things that would need to be paid for and the automatic assumption that 18,000 people would turn up and the game would make an absolute mint is a dangerous one - testimonials have been poorly attended at QPR in the past (Gallen, Macca), there could be a tube strike that day, it could pis it down with rain, it could come at a time when the first team has loads of games and people are cash strapped etc etc. You could plan the game for a Tuesday night in October next year and then when it comes round find the fixture list has us playing seven first team fixtures that month including away at Sunderland, Middlesbrough and Blackburn which will mean everybody is skint and no first team players will be available for it. You have to hope for the best but plan for the worst don't you? If it costs £50k just to put the game on why not just give the £50k to him?
And what about the likes of Sibley and Thomas who are ill too? One would hope in time the Forever R's club will grow into a proper ex players association with a pot of money to help in such cases, but until then are we just going to harangue the club for individual benefit matches for everybody? It's easy to look at the money QPR toss away all the time on modern day footballers and say they should be paying for more worthy stuff like Dave Thomas' guide dog and so on, but no business would ever add the liability for the end of life care for former employees to its balance sheet.
The match is a good idea in principal and if organised correctly could be a great and much needed thing, but seeing club employees and other QPR fans set upon like this isn't right. Coming out and asking these questions or saying these things or sticking up for the club when you think it's being harshly criticised... Hoos saying "well it needs to be properly organised"... none of this means you're an enemy of Stan, or the benefit match idea, or anything really.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Great post. I agree with you on every point. That's you and me now on the divs hate list. | | | |
| The Stan Conundrum on 22:58 - Mar 13 with 2843 views | smegma |
| The Stan Conundrum on 15:11 - Mar 13 by Rangersw12 |
How much is he realistically going to make from a testimonial?
Especially as they have been so poorly supported over the years
I think it would be better off raising the 50k and giving it to Stan rather than using that on a match that might only attract 6k |
Well one bloke claimed over 10k Brentford & QPR fans would travel to the Etihad WHEN they organise the game up there !!!!
And 500 Carlisle fans would do the same. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
