To answer Jan's point, if we seem spread a little thin, we certainly hadn't planned for events to work out the way they have done. Start of the season our focus was finishing off consultation work on ground redevelopment proposals, fund-raising and membership drive/profile raising for the Trust, and obviously trying to hold some collection days/auctions etc for the Red Army Fund.
But the turn of recent events has focused attention on the very core of what the Trust is all about - fans getting involved in the issues over how their club is run and if necessary taking an active role to ensure the club is well run. We could hardly have said "Oooh, I don't know, you know. It's an important issue and all, but we're a bit tight at the moment" (and when I've quite finished being a smartypants, I do know you didn't mean that). So, yes, potentially we run the risk of being spread bit thin. Or we would were it not for the fact that so many people have stepped up to the plate over this issue - the likes of Fred et al mean we're going to be able to run with this at full tilt and that's been sorely needed for a while now, tbh.
As to the issue as to whether we lose focus/confuse people, I certainly hope not. I think it's probably true to say that for the near future, the Red Army Fund may get pushed out of the picture a little. But the issue of the ground redevlopment proposals and the non-football management side of the club as I see it are just two different aspects of the same thing - a safe and stable future for our club. And coincidentally the continued failure of the current regime to even vaguely engage with the council and the likelihood that they will continue to screw things up is one of the main reasons a fan-backed consortium is so necessary - if we let Dunwoody stay in charge we run the real risk of never getting a chance at redeveloping the CG. They've screwed up 2 shots at redevelopment already, and if they're allowed to screw up a 3rd we may not get another chance for a decade or more.
And FWIW, although it might have gone quiet in public on the ground redev, we've been working very hard behind the scenes to consult with council and councillors/local politicos, local residents, community groups, club etc to formulate a framework that everyone will find acceptable.
So, while I take your point, I hope we can manage both - argue the case to the fans that we need a change in direction in the non-football management of the club; while arguing to the town as a whole that the football club (like the council) is an ongoing institution, irrespective of who is in charge, that it is a part of the fabric of our community and that a strongly community focused redevelopment around the County Ground (as opposed to, say, building a load of houses on public space for private profit) is something that will be of benefit to the whole town and should proceed, with suitable safeguards, irrespective of who is in charge of the football club.
Granted, it's a bit of a tough ask, but we've never been shy of a bit of a challenge
Who else is up for it?
Seriously, they're reasonable questions and I hope I've answered them. If anyone got this far
