Statement: Tonights Meeting

[yeo]

Spot on I thought it would only be me.

I appreciate that people have lives but a simple "more to follow ASAP"  would have done.Rob T and Fred Elliots "we know more than you" attitude has seriously got my goat.Own goal supporters groups let not forget who you represent  :x

[pauld]

OK, broadly, the meeting was very positive, with a genuine desire on all sides to move on from the public slanging matches and find a way forward. There was an "airing of grievances" but it became apparent there was little to be gained from recriminations over who said what to whom when and the discussion moved on. For our part (ie the Trust) we reiterated our great respect for the Wills family and that the concept of the fans' consortium was a positive response to recent events, not something that the Wills family should regard as a threat. I hope we were successful in conveying that latter point (ie that the fans' consortium concept can only bring good to the club if it succeeds).

I think it's fair to say all parties accepted that the recent bout of statement and counter-statement had been harmful to the club, and I say this without getting into "who started it" or whose fault it's all been, which, again, isn't a terribly useful debate to be having at this time. The fact is it has been harmful to the club, unsettling for the team and in turns annoying or boring for many fans. And we need, as a club, and as fans' groups to move on from that - certainly for the Trust, we've said what we had to say, and have been told by fans how they want us to respond to that, in terms of investigating the options with regards to a fans' consortium/new investors etc. Likewise, I think it's fair to say the club have had their say. And all parties at the meeting tonight keenly wanted to move on from that phase.

To some extent, this post in itself could be viewed as being a "breaking of ranks" on the joint statement - I hope not. I've tried to give a decent overview of the tone of the meeting and keep fans informed without treading on anyone's toes.

As I said at the outset, I was personally very impressed with how positive the meeting was and the determination of all participants to move on and work in the best interests of the club.

Attendees:
Club/Board: Sir Seton Wills, James Wills, Martyn Starnes, Ben Lambert, Sandy Gray, Chris Tanner
Fans: Andy Ratcliffe, Paul Davis (TrustSTFC), Nigel Bennett, Roger Bunce (Supporters' Club), Rob "Who ate all the sandwiches?" Tuck (L&P)
Referee: Cliff Puffett

I'm sorry not to have posted something sooner - Yeovil, I fully accept the point and I'd intended to put some more flesh on the bones earlier in the evening, but couldn't as I got home to a maelstrom of kids and ill missus, who promptly went to bed. Since then the youngest has been up and down all night cos he ain't feeling too crash-hot either. Which is completely immaterial in terms of people wanting more details etc but in all honesty I'd have posted sooner if I could. Shit happens sometimes.

[pauld]

Oh, and lighten up on Fred and Rob - there's been a lot of crap flying about over the past few weeks and I don't think either have tried to pull the "I know more than you do" card so much as being keenly aware of the very difficult balance between wanting to share information with fans but not either fan the flames of rumour or post stuff they're not 100% confident of. A lot of people have had that dilemma over the past couple of weeks and few, if any (including me), have got the balance right.

If you're going to have a go at Rob, tho, you could do worse than start with asking some very tough questions about his "chicken drumstick 'n' sandwiches" habit  

[santini]

To some extent, this post in itself could be viewed as being a "breaking of ranks" on the joint statement - I hope not. I've tried to give a decent overview of the tone of the meeting and keep fans informed without treading on anyone's toes.

Thanks for that pauld. No need for us to guess now.

As for "breaking of ranks", surely there wasn't an agreement to say nothing more than the first statement?!

                  Save money, sack the PR advisers

[Whits]

Still upset the tef didn't get a call up  

[Iffy's Onion Bhaji]

so what did that statement actually tell us?

[fatbury]

sod all .. as most of the fans still want the current board out ...

[red macca]

sod all .. as most of the fans still want the current board out ...

if that was the case ALOT more people would of attended the trust meeting regarding this

[Reg Smeeton]

sod all .. as most of the fans still want the current board out ...

if that was the case ALOT more people would of attended the trust meeting regarding this

 There was a 100 at the meeting Macca.....if you've ever been involved in anything of a "political" nature you'd know that was a high turnout.

 I've been at open meetings with the club about stuff like ground redevelopment etc when there's been maybe 20.   I think its fair to say most fans want the Board out, but not at the expense of destabilising the club.

[yeo]

Fair enough I suppose though what you have said is just a puffed up version of the original statement. Fred and Rob are guilty of what I said they would have been better off saying nothing at all rather than "less is more" and winking each other in a "I know more than you" way and its still annoying me now and im no longer pissed.

[sonic youth]

Fair enough I suppose though what you have said is just a puffed up version of the original statement. Fred and Rob are guilty of what I said they would have been better off saying nothing at all rather than "less is more" and winking each other in a "I know more than you" way and its still annoying me now and im no longer pissed.

agreed

[pauld]

Fair enough I suppose though what you have said is just a puffed up version of the original statement.

Well, without going into a line-by-line "he said this, she said that" (which I wouldn't remember all of it anyway), that is a pretty fair summary of what happened. And who you calling puffed-up?

[pauld]

sod all .. as most of the fans still want the current board out ...

if that was the case ALOT more people would of attended the trust meeting regarding this

 There was a 100 at the meeting Macca.....if you've ever been involved in anything of a "political" nature you'd know that was a high turnout.

 I've been at open meetings with the club about stuff like ground redevelopment etc when there's been maybe 20.

Exactly so Reg - especially given most people had already travelled to the Wycombe game the night before which means two nights out in a row creates problems for those of us with families who have to get "passes", a lot of out-of-towners sent apologies etc. Pretty decent turnout in the circumstances.

[spacey]

Fair enough I suppose though what you have said is just a puffed up version of the original statement. Fred and Rob are guilty of what I said they would have been better off saying nothing at all rather than "less is more" and winking each other in a "I know more than you" way and its still annoying me now and im no longer pissed.

I'm sure Fred will PM you his response.

Don't worry though I have formed a splinter group called Silent but Violent. We keep schtum and then go for a bundle in the car park, all you have to do is send me a tenner and I'll drink some lager on your behalf.

[red macca]

sod all .. as most of the fans still want the current board out ...

if that was the case ALOT more people would of attended the trust meeting regarding this

 There was a 100 at the meeting Macca.....if you've ever been involved in anything of a "political" nature you'd know that was a high turnout.

 I've been at open meetings with the club about stuff like ground redevelopment etc when there's been maybe 20.   I think its fair to say most fans want the Board out, but not at the expense of destabilising the club.

ok thats a fair shout.im just saying i dont think the amount of fans want the board out that fatbury suggests