Thetownend.com

Details of last nights meeting here

http://www.truststfc.com/2013/06/truststfc-supporters-club-qa-with-steve-murrall-12th-june-2013/

 
Is that it?

Probing.

This isn't the business plan thing though is it, is this just one of a regular number of meetings now - didn't see it advertised anywhere?

Sorry, but I fail to see that a meeting which involves the Advertiser and the BBC is going to get any useful information out of anyone.  Nothing against them at all....they are there to do a job, and both have been doing it quite effectively; but the likelihood of the club management telling us anything except what they choose to put into the very public forum is nil.

It might not be probing, but at least there are a few positive details in there to cling onto, especially this.


Now it does concern me how healthy that balance will look when we run out of players to sell and people to sell season tickets to, but getting our more expensive players off the books will at least put us on surer footing when we have to cross that bridge in the future.

A short but generally positive sounding Q and A.

No doubt this thread will be 7 pages of moaning about Steve Murrall driving about in a hired Mercedes whilst wearing a Rockin Robin suit filled with 50 pound notes stolen from the pension funds of recently left employees.

They cant win tbh can they.

Not with some it would seem mate. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Yes this is just the second of the planned monthly meet ups between the Club and the supporters groups, I think the business plan thing is next month?

I think this was one arranged fairly last minute due to everyones availability, the club posted it on the OS on monday I think - I thought the Adver would pick it up and the harbinger would post it on here, sorry that didn't happen, next time I'll put it on here myself.

Half a dozen presumably mainly young players to come in, loyalty scheme to help build the committed regular fan base, better deal on the catering, concerts looking like they might actually make some money, investment made where it counts in the training facilities, budgets being brought into control.

You know behind the bullshit and bluster thrown around by individuals that clearly have an agenda, I'm struggling to find much that the board have done so far that I wouldn't have done in their place.

If the last chairman had spent a bit more time getting the nuts and bolts of the business of running a football club right, and less playing fantasy football with his mate Paolo that Andrew Black might still be here.

Dean, you have been around long enough to know there are always cynics - and fucking noisy cynics at that - but what was that saying about empty vessels make the most noise?  As has been stated many times, the days of big money funding have gone, it was a good ride at the time but it is now back to reality.  There may be trouble ahead, we just don't know, but until that trouble arrives I am prepared to give Steve and Jed the benefit of the doubt.  It really does look as if they want to do the best for the club - but obviously decisions have to be made that will not prove too popular.  There appears to be player unrest at Sunderland - perhaps all is not so rosy there now!!

I'd agree with you until the final paragraph, but just as you said you struggle to see what we'd do different to the current board, I'd argue we'd also have done the same as Mr Wray.

He was given a budget, an admittedly large budget, and he spent it, with the aim of getting back to back promotions. Then the backer decided to pull the plug mid season and this plan was left in tatters.

If someone had handed you four million quid to spend on the Town would you really have frugally planned for a mid table finish, or shot the lot going for glory?

Spot on and i accept that.It seems to me though that lately a new type of fan has crept up on us who actually wants to hear bad news. I dont understand that.

That's not entirely true though.He was given a budget to see him through until January and went over this by end of September and had to beg black for more leaving us fucked in January.

This.... a million times.

This is pretty much word for word what I was about to reply.

Fair point, though as I understand it, he was only marginally over, and this was due to the TAH and Collins tribunals.

 I'm not saying he was totally blameless, but just as some want to see negative in everything Jed and Murrell do, it seems some only have bad things to say about the previous chair. I'd suggest, in both cases, it isn't quite as black and white as that.

Yep you are right.The hospitality,sponsorship etc they did a superb job i just think as someone who is sat on the fence like me that alot more people need to be understanding of why this current lot have to do what they are doing now instead of being accused of being crooks and asset stripping. Ultimatly for all the previous boards good work they done they have to be the ones who are known to be responsible for this.

Good post. The ones who regularly post defending the current incumbents seem to have their own agenda against the previous board without even realising it. It's quite funny when you're reading it to be honest.

I'd agree with that, and I think having regular meetings with the two supporters groups as promised, is massively to the new lots credit.

So do you think a wage bill of 4.5m and releasing players from contracts for having the audacity to be friends with a player the manager didnt like is good management? Thats not an agenda it is normal to think that that is a stupid way to run a club,isn't it?

Stop with your common sense.

DRS, I agree with pretty much everything you've written in this thread.

We'll know by Xmas what the intentions of the new guys are and how much to blame or not the old board were when we see our new squad and how we are faring in the league.

I certainly would not defend the present incumbents, neither will I find fault in everything they have done or said - the latest rant about who Jed follows on Twitter was a typical example of people trying to find fault whether it exists or not! - but I really enjoyed the ride under PDC but I am sure that the majority of us knew it could never last, the removal of Wray should have shown that to be obvious to all!

Did the Trust raise the question of Fredi's spreadsheet at last night's meeting?

The 'MyWorld' initiative is intriguing, looking forward to hearing more about that as well as the business plan meetings in July.

Has there been any comment from the Trust regarding this evidence that fredi supplied to them?

That's what has really been winding me up about our fanbase recently.

Me too. I think they like to call us "happy clappers" though.

I prefer the term "supporters".

Perfectly put mate.

this.
Now the trust have seen 2 spreadsheets do the two documents conflict with each other?

Got to he honest, trust members having information where other supporters are in the dark-concerned wont do the trust any favours.

Why all the happy clapper vs fans who want bad news bullshit too?
Not a matter of sides is it?
That's how's it looks. To me at least.

I heard what they received wasnt totally correct.

Even if it was it was purportedly a spreadsheet containing information on last season. When we had a different board. What relevance would it have?!

Arriba I've noticed a split in the fan base for as long as I can remember. Some fans seem to think vocally calling for a managers head and hurling abuse at him after a few games because he doesn't play a formation they like is perfectly fine, and a great way to support your team. Other fans think these people are fucking retards. I tend to be in the second group.

Cheers JJ.

Me too Tails. I thought the 4-4-2 chant at Franchise last season was particularly cringe worthy. I seemed to be in a vocal minority though.

I haven't called for KMacs head and I've not hurled abuse at him but have questioned his choice of formation and tactics - so god knows which category you put me under...

You get to sit in the corner in your own special area DV.


ronnie21's comment highlights this too - for someone who caused such a stink, fredi's information hasn't been commented on by the Trust/club as far as I've seen. I understand those connected with the club know who fredi is, so it may possibly be because legal action is underway?

If this was a 'sting' (as alluded to on another thread), it could also be a reason for the Trust not saying anything- if the stuff they've been given is false, there's little point publishing it. It would be nice to hear from them regarding that though, just so the fredi rumour mill can be put to rest.

I'll join you in the special corner too.

Yes, because that's exactly what I said isn't it DRS? A fucking classic example of totally missing the point!!

What was your point then? Why does people blaming the previous lot mean they have an agenda?

From reading what the Trust have said, they have received documentation that supports the suggestion that no player at the club was on or promised anything like £8,000-per-week. This was presumably in the form of a breakdown of wages paid to staff last season. At yesterday's meeting they - AND the supporter's club - were shown a print out by Steve Murrell that apparently showed the club currently has a healthy bank balance (as you would hope off the back of decent season ticket sales).

I don't know how those two documents could contradict each other, as they relate to totally different things, and I don't know how you could expect the Trust to make either of them public.

aren't you one of the Trust board members?

Nobody expected the Trust to make either public but I've seen no official comment from the Trust regarding the spreadsheet supplied by fredi?

edit: just found a couple of tweets that confirm the Trust received some documents, hadn't seen those before.

I wasn't at yesterday's meeting and have not personally seen the 'Fredi' documents either. I'm not going to pretend to have knowledge that I don't.

This.

Will further make my mind up on KMac when squad is complete and seeing the football they play.

Will further make my mind up on Jed and board members/backer(s) when that is all revealed, and see which direction we are heading as a club.

I didn't imply that. I've always thought you were on the Trust board so was confused by the fact you had to read what the Trust had said, I must've mistaken you for someone else.

Sorry, didn't mean to sound arsey. I am on the Trust board, but I was trying to get across that everything referred to in my post was gleaned from freely available information and not through some secret knowledge that only we 'stonecutters' have access to.

It was cringey but fuck me what a poor performance that was. No wonder people were pissed off having paid their hard earned to watch that negative rubbish.

As far as I am aware there have been no calls for Kmacs head bar a few mongs on Twitter, certainly not chants of more than the odd person at matches. But when rubbish like that is served up you have to expect fans to show their feelings.

I genuinely don't believe anyone views the Trust in that manner. I hadn't seen the comments regarding the documents on Twitter and couldn't see anything on the Trust site which had been recently updated hence my confusion.

Anyway, as others have said - is the document actually relevant given that it relates to last season and a budget agreed upon by a set of people who have subsequently departed? Without the Trust breaching any confidentiality, can it actually support any of fredi's many claims?

Not at all. The aim of these meetings, surely, is clarity. So when asked who owns the club and the response is McCrory, it is not unreasonable to ask whether he is the sole shareholder, ask for proof of the ownership of the hold co, ask whether, regardless of whose names the shares are in, whether any further arrangements are in place to control executive decisions - i.e. What is the involvement of the various individuals who appear to have influence but no official role.

Instead, for the sake of keeping friendly, it appears that nobody is prepared to delve into the detail.

My point was that many individuals on here who back certain people to the hilt are oblivious to their clear allegiances towards others. I didn't mention my leanings either way, just that it's funny to see people daring to have a go at others for expressing their own views which may differ to that of their own. It's seems that having an opinion can often be considered a crime on here which is why I don't get involved in too much debate otherwise I'd have to quit my job & spend all day on here  :D

Thats a fair enough point. My main gripe like i said is how we have some that are so anti new board they wont have a bad word said about the old lot.

I agree m8, it's fucking tedious but amusing at the same time. Like I said I tend to stay out of it because we (by that I mean everybody on here) could literally spend forever arguing about this. The fact of the matter is the majority of posters on the forum don't know anything that goes on behind the scenes making the 80% bollocks quota somewhat generous imo!!

Some sense at last.

Why aren't the Trust pushing these questions? No wonder they are seen as a laughing stock by many.

I honestly haven't seen it personally.

On the other hand, I'd suggest that it is probably wise for the Trust to play a friendly role to open up communication for the time being instead of going on an all-out attack based on the unsubstantiated, although concerning, rumours by an anonymous individual. I believe most of those questions have been asked already and received an albeit blunt response. Unless the Trust are in a position to counter those claims, why would they receive any other response should they persevere?

It wasn't a question aimed at you directly, more of a ponderous musing really.

I do I am afraid

You think they're the illuminati?

No far from it mate, but there appears to be a shroud of secret boys club about it.

Certainly is putting people off getting involved

It makes you a fan, we all question what the manager & players do from time to time.
What differentiates "the fan" from "the mong", is booing his own team when they make a mistake during a game.

Because as anyone with half a brain can work out, giving your own players dogs abuse during the game is not going to make them play any better.

Unfortunately, we seem to have quite a high proportion of "the mong"

Actually, on one or two occasions it seems to have!

We've had nothing on the field to boo about the last 2 seasons though.

I can take mistakes.

Hurled abuse once or twice at a few lazy effortless players mind you...

Can understand this.  Can almost understand over exuberant (drunk) teenagers shouting abuse.  I find it odd though when there are seemingly sober, middle aged fans shouting and moaning constantly at every mistake.  I find a barely audible 'tut' perfectly adequate in such circumstances.

I don't recall anyone suggesting the Trust is a laughing stock... Some confusion regarding their objectives and approach but good they are speaking to the board. 

You are more than welcome to your opinion but in the absence of hard evidence I take your 'many' with a pinch of salt.

I find it even more odd that they continue to pay their money to be so miserable. Why can't they do that at home?

The less retarded one.

You're still a miserable git though!

You're aware these are supposed to be informal relatively friendly meetings right? Not interrogations.

Because when you ask someone (who lets be honest is under no obligation whatsoever to even be in the room) a question and are given a fairly reasonable answer, to respond with "Liar! Prove it!" might be considered a bit rude.

Agreed on both accounts.

I disagree. There is a line between aggressive interrogation and sensible, reasoned questioning. If there is an innocent answer, then it is in everybody's interests for it to be aired and no need to hide it. We've reason enough to ask the questions given the admission that King and Power are involved. I fully appreciate the will to keep lines of communication open, but not to the extent that we pander to Murrall and McCrory's wish not to disclose a shred of who is making decisions and what the motivation for their involvement is.

Has it been admitted that King and Power are 'involved' apart from Fredi? I know that Power is allegedly dealing with player contracts etc, but so was Spencer and I don't recall anyone demanding that the previous lot revealed the structure of their ownership and what his involvement was.

Yes the Trust could possibly be more proactive but equally all we have seen are bullet points of the meeting which if that is all that was discussed verbatim would suggest that the meeting lasted about 5 minutes (10 if biscuits were provided!), its a process of discussion which has started.

In what way have the Trust pandered to anything, without being at the meeting thats quite a leap to a conclusion don't you think?

Sadly I fear that the Trust are now being discredited by association for speaking to the bogeymen.

I think it was clear Spencer was an agent riding the gravy train. Hence no questions.

I'd have liked to ask him.."Phil what exactly is a gravy train?"

A secret boys club that lets anyone join for a fiver, and any member stand to be on the board?

I'm new to the trust and its far from a secret boys club. Any member can join the board and as PWP pointed out, its only a fiver to join.

I really dont think you need to explain to fred what the trust is etc etc! Its never been the same since the days of Fred and PaulD

Any group that does not set out into the public domain a full open set of minutes, and by its own admission would rather some conversations had behind closed doors, stay behind closed doors seem pretty secretive and selective to me

They were bad times indeed mate

Yeah, it made Paul go bald for a start!

Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick!!!

I am the only one that thinks that the type of fan who never has a bad word to say about anything, the types that would even defend the cunt that is Rikki Hunt to the death, is equally mongtastic as the mongs who boo a player for a strayed pass?

Aah, come on Fred, be fair. We had stuff that we had to keep confidential from time to time, and while we aimed to be as open as we could be, some of the stuff we discussed had to be kept confidential, at least for a period of time. Necessarily so, or no-one (e.g. 3rd parties wishing to discuss investments in Fans Consortium etc) would have been prepared to discuss anything with us. I agree the Wray thing was a mistake but I don't think the current Trust board are any different to how we were in that regard generally - they're doing their best to be a trustworthy organisation that (e.g.) the club can have sensible conversations with, while being as open as they can with fans about the general direction of most things. They do lack a middle-aged swinger though mate :)
I was too *way* sexy for my shirt :D. Although it did get better (the baldness, not the sexiness)

Yeah, you kept your mystery American investors secret until that nice Mr Starnes forced you to name those Yankee cowboys.

And we'd have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids.....

Different set of circumstances all together IMHO

The Power / Emmel situation is what I suspect you are alluding to.

I see no similarities between then and now in regards to the climate and backdrop

That was one of my 'favourite' bopard-isms .  The used "We undderstand he is American and not a fan of the club" to flush out Power, then a week or two later introduced us to their very own Jim Little, who really was American and really wasn't a fan of the club.