 | Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 16:27 29 May 2015
TAM
No problem. I do support BST in what they do. It's just the hypocricy of people that I have a problem with. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 15:55 29 May 2015
I accept that TAM.
But when was that mandate agreed? Maybe a lot of things have happened since. Maybe that needs to be put out to the members again. Because as I will continue to say , there is hypocricy on AVFTT on what BSA should or shouldn't do compared to what some think is acceptable for BST to do. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 15:21 29 May 2015
rusty
Going back to the start of your 13:06 post, I agree with what you say.
But this is my point. I apply that to BST as well. Yet people are perfectly happy for them to sit round the negotiating table when as you say history has proven that nothing changes. People are perfectly happy for BST to do that yet slate BSA for doing the same. In fact Christine has issued a statement in the gazette about getting rid of the Oystons and she said the same on TV last night. Yet BST's last official statement suggested they were prepared to talk. Complete contradiction.
No one should be prepared to talk to the Oystons. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 12:41 29 May 2015
rusty
But you're not willing to see TT's pov either!
I'm totally opposed to a FP. It won't achieve a thing of value. But I do take on board TT's point that for some it's far more about the Oystons now. That is their priority - so it can't be putting football first. Putting "football first" is for some not wanting us to slide down the league tables into obscurity.
That is the point TT is making. Putting "football first"isn't about those with the view that they wished we'd never made the PL. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 23:24 28 May 2015
yep, rusty.
I know it gets mentioned but it needs highlighting again. People who agree to sit on this FP are doing so with a man who has sued his own fans. That is reason enough not to entertain this idea. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 21:54 28 May 2015
sorry straiters, I missed your 20:51 post.
Whilst we share the same view that there should not be a FP, I am intrIgued by this statement.
"For those that are suggesting that the BST is seeking dialogue. Wrong. They are seeking dialogue ON THEIR TERMS"
On what basis do you see BST as being able to impose anything "on their terms"? Let's be blunt, BST aren't in a position to be able to dictate that so adding "on their terms" has no relevance whatsoever. What do you think that BST could take to the table that would mean their terms would be met?
That's not a dig at BST, it's simply recognizing that the Oystons own BFC. And the problems we as fans have because of that. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 21:03 28 May 2015
Yes you did and I recognise that. But what I will add is that intimidation can be done un-noticed by others so of course people will never know the specifics.
Anyway I'm off to watch Madam Secretary. A good series on Sky Living. Catch up later. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 20:54 28 May 2015
Of course rusty, no other club comes remotely close to being as badly run as ours. But my point remains, when it comes to board room decisions fans have little or no influence. Yet people castigate BSA and suggest BST should try. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 20:48 28 May 2015
Any view on my point about other clubs and fans having no influence?
Look, I understand the need for BST to go through the process but in view of the amount of criticism bsa came under from the likes of yourself and many others with regards to them having dialogue then I can't help but feel that to comtemplate in engaging with the Oystons is hypocritical to say the least.
But it would be interesting to see the result if a proposal was put to it's members as to whether they should attempt to engage in dialogue.
Sorry, I've gone a bit of topic. I'll repeat the FP should be a non-starter. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 20:32 28 May 2015
bfc3
Again I think you are deliberately being provocatively unfair with your comments. BSA achieved many good things. And let's be blunt on this. How many clubs can you name where the fans do have any influence? BFC like the vast majority of clubs have rich owners who simply run the clubs as they see fit. The fans of those clubs have little or no influence when it comes to how the club is run. You may not care to admit to that but I see it pretty much as a fact. |
| Forum
Reply | Fans Parliament
at 19:34 28 May 2015
right, first time I've seen this thread and it's took a while to read.
Some points
Fact is, BSA Committee members including female ones have been abused many times. Yes, bfc3 I know you say it's wrong but I find a distinct lack of condemnation in your views on it. Sorry, just saying it's wrong doesn't cut it for me.
Secondly, BST and it's members have consistently critcised/abused BSA for having dialogue for so long with the Oystons. For BST to now want to step into BSA's shoes by having talks is totally hypocritical. BST could achieve no more than BSA did. In fact because of KO's aversion to them, they'd achieve less imo.
The same also applies to the FP. TAM talks of BST's pre-set conditions being realistic but that's not really the point. They may well be realistic to BST but it really isn't rocket science to know that they won't be considered as realistic to the Oystons. And unfortunately as owners of 80% of the business it's their opinions that count.
And the fans paliament is a non-starter for me as well. For a variety of reasons. Firstly, if BSA couldn't achieve a change in policy then certainly a FP won't. So what other purpose could a FP achieve. At least BSA achieved many other things such as the various fundraising functions and Hall of Fame - all of which needed co-operation from the club.
The time for talking has gone. We want the Oystons to go, nothing less than that is acceptable. And the fans groups BST/TK's need to build up the external pressure on them to do that. [Post edited 28 May 2015 19:48]
|
| Forum
Reply | some belated thoughts
at 14:57 1 Mar 2015
I do think Aldred looks a prospect. From what I've heard from Accy they think he's more than capable of stepping up a division, First half he was excellent yesterday.
First half yesterday was pretty much a non event. It deserved to be 0-0 at half time because what we were watching was garbage from both teams. As the o/p says we had enough opportunities to prevent that first goal. Players in acres of space just outside our box should not be allowed to happen. And having seen it again, I think Lewis could have done better all round.
Second half - well I'd really like to see the 'penalty' incident again. For me the keeper never got near the ball, but did McMahon deliberately go down. What frustrated me though was that neither the ref nor the lino looked totally sure either way. It seemed to take an age for them to decide.
MOTM - Aldred or O'Dea.
And a special mention for McMahon - that first half he put a tackle in as clean as a whistle and came away with the ball. I had to ask to make certain it was him. |
| Forum
Reply | pretty dispiriting really
at 12:34 25 Feb 2015
Little point in commenting on anything about us.
So all I'll say is regards to Robbies report. I was very impressed with Brentford at BR. Probably in the best two or three teams who've been to BR this season - maybe only behind Bournemouth. Their energy and high tempo matched with no little skill makes them a very decent team. |
| Forum
Reply | Steel yourselves
at 16:02 11 Feb 2015
shed
not sure it matters who is in charge. If there is no reasonable investment -an there won't be - then yes I'm with you, I think this time next season we'll be heading to L2.r |
| Forum
Reply | The Premier League say they aren't a charity
at 14:53 11 Feb 2015
nothing new in the fact about the inequalities over pay in jobs. That's the way of the world.
However as much as I like the PL I do find some of Scudamore's comments pretty reprehensible. |
| Forum
Reply | Boro
at 13:56 11 Feb 2015
Our performance deserved a point but at a time when I thought that one goal would win it i thought they had that extra bit of quality to create something. As Wiz says, two poor goals conceded for various reasons and we never really looked like scoring ourselves but on the whole I thought it was one of our better performances this season. |
| Forum
Reply | just got back (no, not really)
at 13:27 1 Feb 2015
I think you are being way too kind to Brighton if you think they deserve to be fourth bottom. On that performance they are every bit as bad as us. So in my view they too should be cut adrift at the bottom of the league. Very poor team. |
| Forum
Reply | Clark out!
at 14:37 28 Jan 2015
Wiz is spot on.
When Riga was here it was KO's but now we've Clark it's his fault.
Hypocricy alive and well.
The answer is it's all KO's fault. |
| | 20togo
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 11 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 11 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
