New beginnings - 25% Truth, 80% Bollocks

[singingiiiffy]

I meant the heavies would be there to control any rowdiness not for anything physical.

Surely, surely they wouldn't step in and control the crowd in that respect. That really would be the end of everything full stop

[Jimmy HaveHave]

Surely, surely they wouldn't step in and control the crowd in that respect. That really would be the end of everything full stop

You would hope it wouldn’t ever come to that but who knows what surprises Clem has got left which may cause more than a little unrest within our passionate fanbase!

[Formerly Drummer Boy]

hi all this is my first post and I am an older fan so please be gentle with me.. I waned to talk about the fact there has been a great deal of talk over the supporters trust and there ability to represent fans recently. I was discussing this with a mate at he weekend and was tempted to apply for a board position in the agm next month myself. I have financial experience and thought i could help them, but after hearing about the current situation at the trust i have decided i don't want to be part of it. My mate said that one of the current board who was secretary (neil hutchinson) quit the role last month and really threw the trust into complete disaray he was the guy responsible apparently for pushing the car crash of the financial review, but he resigned as secretary just before christmas to avoid having to arrange and run the agm for the trust and left the rest of them to pick up the pieces but remains on the board letting everyone else pick up the role he should be doing. My mate says he has been telling everyone that he will be the new trust chairman come the agm. How can someone have the arrogance and behaves in that way have the belief he can actually be the chairman. In my view if this is a representation of how things are with the trust then i dont want to be part of it, my mate also thought he might stand for the board as he has experience of digital media but given the situation with them at the moment and what he described he also felt he didnt want to be associated with that too.  I actually thought i could help them but i dont want to be involved if characters like the ex secretary are the sort of people i would be working with. Has anyone here applied and do they think i should change my mind and apply or have i done the right thing. Welcome opinions.

Would love to know who your mate was.  

Writing negatively about people or facts you don’t know for yourself, and making decisions based on such might make yourself look silly..

[theakston2k]

Would love to know who your mate was.  

Writing negatively about people or facts you don’t know for yourself, and making decisions based on such might make yourself look silly..

No idea if any of it is true or not but what it does suggest is that there is a fair bit of mud slinging going on between Trust board members. It’s been obvious for a while there’s been a massive divide within the board that has been and is a massive problem.

You, yourself went on a Twitter liking rampage of anyone that was critical of the Trust which kind of confirmed it isn’t exactly a harmonious group.

[Nemo]

I don't think anyone think it's a harmonious group!

I think (from the outside!) there's a "ruling faction" if you will represented by the Chair and vice Chairs, all of whom are standing down, who are the closest to Clem (and the longest serving on the Trust, the two things not being unrelated!) and then the rest of the board are either a bit more sceptical of Clem or just "go with the flow" types.

Will hopefully be clear from the statements accompanying re-election campaigns where individuals sit within that, so members at least know what they're voting for. Obviously with the Chair, Treasurer and both Vice-Chairs standing down at once, that's a big hit to the "continuity" faction, but I imagine they won't want the Trust to lurch the other way entirely and will have some succession planning in place.

The challenge for the "Change" faction, for want of a better name, is that many of the members who would vote for them have ragequit the Trust over the last few months.

That's my 2p of Trust Laura Kuenssberging.

[tans]

Just listened to the Lower League Look from last night and they said they have been informed that no questions re debt and the trust will be permitted at the fans forum.

If true, then what is the bloody point??

[Batch]

Just listened to the Lower League Look from last night and they said they have been informed that no questions re debt and the trust will be permitted at the fans forum.

If true, then what is the bloody point??

That's ludicrous, IF that is true.

[Bob's Orange]

Just listened to the Lower League Look from last night and they said they have been informed that no questions re debt and the trust will be permitted at the fans forum.

If true, then what is the bloody point??

I'm curious to know where they are getting this information from.

I see Andrew Hawes is going to do some digging to find out of this is the case.

[Nemo]

They definitely have contacts at or around the club, as annoying as they are, they've got more than a few things right at this point.

[Bob's Orange]

They definitely have contacts at or around the club, as annoying as they are, they've got more than a few things right at this point.

Yeah I'm 99% sure they do as well. The 'i know something you don't know' is irritating, but I do believe they know a lot of what is going on at the club, whether fans like that or not.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Just listened to the Lower League Look from last night and they said they have been informed that no questions re debt and the trust will be permitted at the fans forum.

If true, then what is the bloody point??

Can’t help themselves can they. So they don’t think this won’t raise a few red flags? Are any questions allowed that haven’t been pre screened? Just cos they don’t want to answer them doesn’t stop them being asked.

Need someone to just bellow out the concerns before getting ‘Adam Hart-ed’

[Posh Red]

Are any questions allowed that haven’t been pre screened? Just cos they don’t want to answer them doesn’t stop them being asked.

It was originally stated that there would be questions from the floor.

I still believe that either it will be postponed (at the last minute) for unexpected reasons or if it does go ahead they will say that there isn't time for any questions as they are running behind schedule & it's important that we give over enough time to discuss the women's team.

I'm curious to know where they are getting this information from.

I see Andrew Hawes is going to do some digging to find out of this is the case.

I'm sure they will tell Andrew Hawes that there will be no censoring of the questions, whilst they bin any questions they don't like.

[tans]

Wonder if the floor questions will be written down on the night and asked by the MC to stop people writing one thing and asking another?

[Bob's Orange]

It was originally stated that there would be questions from the floor.

I still believe that either it will be postponed (at the last minute) for unexpected reasons or if it does go ahead they will say that there isn't time for any questions as they are running behind schedule & it's important that we give over enough time to discuss the women's team.

I'm sure they will tell Andrew Hawes that there will be no censoring of the questions, whilst they bin any questions they don't like.

Oh absolutely, I'm totally not expecting it to be like an Ian Hislop level of grilling, but I would hope there may be some amount of push back on things that come out.

They probably also cross referenced the names of people who had applied against who spoke positively for Clem via the Facebook group.

[Batch]

They probably also cross referenced the names of people who had applied against who spoke positively for Clem via the Facebook group.

That's very cynical Bob.

Or is it. We await Andrew's response.