| Fans Parliament 17:29 - May 21 with 70160 views | TwelveAngryMen |
Are we looking at the start a Tangerine Spring ?
Or is it an attempt to curb the growing influence of fans groups ?
Applications appear on first read of the announcement to be subject to vetting by the Club
The statement seems to infer that anyone who doesn't renew their ST is unlikely to be considered so that's anyone taking a principled NAPM stance this season to the back of the queue ! That will undoubtedly influence the dynamics of representation
Who elects the Board Rep ? I suspect its within the cabal of hand-picked representatives in which case hardly democratic - more like a Fans Cabinet
Which Club officials will they meet ? It does say to be fair to include Club directors so in reality that's suggesting it will involve Karl or Owen
It will be interesting to see how this pans out
http://www.blackpoolfc.co.uk/news/article/club-announces-launch-of-fans-parliame [Post edited 21 May 2015 17:35]
| |
| |  |
| Fans Parliament on 10:07 - May 28 with 2186 views | Rusty2Stands |
It's like the attempts to enforce NAPM
I certainly haven't seen anyone doing any forcing.
There has to be scope for diversity even in such a toxic atmosphere as different people seek different ways to effect change.
I totally agree TT. However the dialogue way of effecting change ran its course a long time ago. How long did BSA bang their heads against a brick wall before finally giving up?
Engaging in dialogue with the Oystons is totally pointless. And I base that argument on a good deal of historical evidence.
This fans parliament is just KO trying to put together another human shield.
KO is obviously feeling the heat and feeling totally isolated. Just the fact he has come up with the ludicrous idea of a fans parliament proves that.
He hasn't come up with that idea because he's suddenly decided to care about his customers, that's for sure.
He's done it purely for selfish reasons. It's the act of an incompetent and increasingly desperate man.
If he cared one jot about his customers, he wouldn't have pursued some of the disgraceful actions we've seen recently.
Surely you can see that?
In my opinion, we're now in to the end game as far as the Oystons are concerned. It may be a long and drawn out end game. But to ensure it's as quick and painless as possible, the pressure needs to be cranked up even further.
Not give in to some stupid and pointless fans parliament idea.That just relieves the pressure on KO.
Starve them of oxygen, as Christine Seddon put it.
It's the only way. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 10:26 - May 28 with 2170 views | BFCx3 |
TT, you ask that question, like intimidation is actually something that is commonplace and in my experience nothing could be further from the truth.
It also depends what you mean by intimidation..
If you mean people standing at the turnstiles, handing out leaflets and actively encouraging people to consider not spending money, then I would say that isn't intimidation.
If you mean people making physical threats, physically trying to prevent people entering the ground or serious verbal abuse, then that is a different matter. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 10:56 - May 28 with 2159 views | terminallytangerine |
"In my opinion, we're now in to the end game as far as the Oystons are concerned. It may be a long and drawn out end game."
And if we're not we have another season or more of misery, of 'supporters' rejoicing at every set back and the only solution being more of the same? It seems that some are willing to sacrifice the long term future of the club (and not just the Os!) for a speculative possibility. For those of us LOPM because that is part of the pleasure of going to watch football the NAPM argument doesn't add up.
Happy to accept your definition BFC3 and glad to see your condemnation of the second of these.The condemnation of intimidation in all its forms is something that all supporters and supporters organisations should be happy to agree on.
Just to add that two prominent members of one of the supporters' organisations resigned last season and it wasn't because of anyone handing them a leaflet.
(-1 I'll start the ball rolling.) | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 11:18 - May 28 with 2153 views | Rusty2Stands |
part of the pleasure of going to watch football the NAPM argument doesn't add up.
You actually got pleasure watching that???
The NAPM argument DOES add up if you want the Oystons out.
Short term pain for long term gain.
Starve them of money and they will go, as money is their god and the only thing they're bothered about.
The cracks are starting to show in my opinion, that's no surprise as KO is now totally isolated and is showing what an astute businessman he really is. At every turn he digs himself deeper and deeper. It's one gaffe after another.
The bizarre statement issued by the 'company' yesterday is proof of the cracks.
Either that or it's the cracking up of KO's mental state.
It looks like it could have been written by a spoilt child, throwing his toys out as he couldn't get his own way. Totally bizarre, but then again nothing which comes out of the 'company' surprises me any more
Apart from that, as a matter of principle I couldn't give money to people who could possibly be using it to sue and extract money from my fellow fans.
Sorry but I just couldn't stomach that.
Even if giving that money meant I have the 'pleasure' of watching such entertaining football that's been on offer recently.
The dialogue route doesn't work, that's obvious.
In my opinion NAPM is the only way.
And yes I would settle for a few more relegations if it meant an end to the disgraceful way the club is being run.
Lower leagues with hope is far better than higher up with no hope.
Because without hope there is nothing.
And the Oystons have taken away all the hope. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 11:24 - May 28 with 2152 views | straightatthewall |
I'd reply to TT if I knew what LOPM meant. | |
| We got Bogdanovic, Oyston got very rich |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 11:42 - May 28 with 2147 views | BFCx3 |
Unfortunately TT, with the nature of football and football fans, people who put their heads above the parapet are sometimes going to get the odd verbal volley from time to time and especially when things go wrong.
I'm not saying for one minute, people should have to put up with serious intimidation, nobody should, but I'm afraid there is a requirement to be able to take a bit of stick on the chin in any position of responsibility.
I think it s fair to say that the BSA stance on the Oystons had progressively started to look increasingly removed from the common or garden fan (hence the eventual decision regards KO) and so there was almost an inevitability that fans frustrations with that stance would spill over at some point...Again I am not saying it is right, but rather just reflecting on the reality.
As for sacrificing the long term future...I'd put it another way.
Some fans are prepared to sacrifice short term enjoyment to effect a better long term future.
There is no possibility of a risk to the long term future as to be frank, it isn't possible to get any worse than the situation we have found ourselves in with the current owners. With owners who, by their actions, have demonstrated to us already that any moderate success will merely be seen as an opportunity for financial gain as opposed to re-investment for ongoing success, we have a future roadmap that ensures we can never realistically progress.
With that in mind, the ONLY way we can secure the long term and re-ignite the very important element of 'hope' which with KO in charge has been eradicated, is to bring about as swiftly as possible the conditions that will most likely influence the Oyston Family to sell up.
Like many fans, I would prefer that situation to be brought about by very quick and collectively strong action by the fans to restrict revenue. Unfortunately it seems that by contrast we are facing a slow lingering death, likely resulting in a continued downward league spiral, simply because we can't stand together and say enough is enough. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 12:11 - May 28 with 2126 views | terminallytangerine |
For someone who clearly believes intimidation is not right, BFC, you are doing a pretty good job of justifying it from what I can see: the misrepresentation yet again of one of the supporters groups is one way of doing that. Records show that all supporters groups have been highly critical of the owners over the last 18 months especially and people don't resign because of the odd verbal volley.
It comes down in the end to whether you believe the end - the removal of the Os, something we would all be happy to see if there was a serious alternative but which at the moment is at best a speculative possibility - justifies the means - the destruction of the football club, the intimidation of supporters who don't share the NAPM philosophy or who don't think that Huddersfield was our finest hour, and the refusal to contemplate any attempt at breaking the log-jam.
Some people clearly do but there should be no attempt at scapegoating those who don't. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 12:34 - May 28 with 2117 views | Rusty2Stands |
the destruction of the football club,
That's already happening, with or without protests, pitch invasions etc.
And if along the way somebody's feelings get a bit hurt, so what? I think it's called collateral damage TT. This IS a war of attrition for the very future of our club we're talking about.
And as for a fans parliament? A bunch of nodding dogs sat round a table trying to negotiate with a childish, bumbling oaf who has proved by previous actions, he isn't capable of negotiating. Total waste of time.
NAPM is totally justified for a number of reasons.
The main one for me is I couldn't stomach giving money which may be used to sue and extract money from a fellow supporter.
Secondly, it will remove that disgusting family from our football club.
The cracks are already beginning to show.
It would work even quicker if everybody united behind it. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 12:50 - May 28 with 2112 views | Lala |
Inevitable reaction BFC x3, like what? And tam stating anyone taking up the chalice would be brave,why?
Guys,you are beginning to sound like you think you are some superior footballing group and God forbid anyone who has an individual approach to this situation.
Wiz would have the backing of many many supporters,without any ridiculous reactions or repercussions,unless you're talking message board abuse,and on that note,I'm sure he will cope. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:07 - May 28 with 2097 views | basilrobbiereborn |
To be fair, I think x3 and TAM are pretty sane people and their "Warnings" - such as they are - are more meant as protective advice than anything else. Not everyone is like them though, unfortunately. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:07 - May 28 with 2094 views | Rusty2Stands |
Lala, I think what people are trying to say is there is no point in taking the liberal wet lettuce approach anymore. That's been tried and failed.
The aren't for negotiating with. That's backed up by years and years of BSA banging their collective heads against a brick wall.
To me, it was KO WHO took the gloves off first when they starting suing and extracting money out of supporters.
Agreed by taking a more militant and aggressive approach to ousting them, a few peoples' feelings may get hurt.
That's a damn sight more acceptable than threatening court action and taking huge sums of money off people and potentially ruining their lives. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 13:16 - May 28 with 2088 views | Lala |
I think it's more a case of,do as we say and do Robbie if I'm honest rather than a threat of violence. It feels like a constant attempt at getting everyone to tow their party line,with veiled threats,and quite frankly it's bloody annoying.
As a Blackpool fan I will support anybody who joins this parliament,if calling me stupid and possibly facing a reaction is how anyone wants to respond to that,then they aren't worth discussing it with as that isn't an adult and reasonable approach.
It's so easy for the good guys to start behaving like bad guys that the lines are getting blurred now. [Post edited 28 May 2015 13:21]
| |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:21 - May 28 with 2077 views | TwelveAngryMen |
TT which of the BST conditions do you think are unrealistic ?
For ease of reference they are
1) An interim Parliament of 12 should be appointed as soon as possible from among the applicants, with selection being made by a truly independent fans panel comprising the BSA Chairman, the BST Chairman and one non-aligned candidate chosen by these two Chairmen.
2) One member of this Fans Parliament will be elected by supporters to sit on the club board and will have the equivalent voting rights of someone owning 20% of BFC Limited shares.
3) The interim Parliament selected by the independent panel will be charged with ensuring that a full democratic election of all Blackpool supporters takes place by November 2015 with anyone, season ticket holder or not, able to put themselves forward for the fully elected Fans Parliament
4) The Fans Parliament will meet formally four times per year with the Chairman of the Club, directors, football and departmental staff.
5) Prior to these formal meetings, members of the Parliament will meet with delegations from BST, BSA and other fans groups to agree agenda items and topics for discussion. The Parliament will also hold four public meetings for all fans to attend where further agenda items and topics might be agreed.
6) The Fans’ Board representative will be delegated by the Parliament to engage with the Club’s Board on all matters concerning the club and its business. He/she will report back to the Parliament and, excepting for issues requiring confidentiality, the actions and decisions of the Board and the Parliament will be made public within five working days of meetings taking place.
In addition we insist on an armistice for those who invaded the pitch at the Huddersfield game. It should be agreed forthwith that Club and fans together take responsibility for the situation. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:23 - May 28 with 2075 views | terminallytangerine |
"Agreed by taking a more militant and aggressive approach to ousting them, a few peoples' feelings may get hurt."
A few people's football team might be destroyed to satisfy the single minded certainties of a few others.
Edit to add just read Tam's question. 3) for me - season ticket holders should have priority over those who haven't invested and the not bulleted point about an amnesty for pitch invaders. [Post edited 28 May 2015 13:41]
| | | |
| Fans Parliament on 13:24 - May 28 with 2073 views | basilrobbiereborn |
Lala
as you know, I've a tremendous amount of sympathy with all of this. Again, to be fair to x3 and TAM, I think they know that the genie is out of the bottle now and some people will be better at controlling their feelings than others. You're quite right though that some of the behaviour on BOTH sides of this argument leaves an awful lot to be desired. Which is why I've mentioned the moral high ground a lot lately ; I think it's important to take it if you can, and some of the more vocal element we have on the anti-O side seem intent on just throwing it away. Which would be galling for people like TAM, Christine, Kevin et al who worked so hard to take it in the first place. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:31 - May 28 with 2060 views | Rusty2Stands |
Lala, I just couldn't sit round the same table with or give money to people who are prepared to pursue actions which could potentially ruin lives. The fact those they have pursued are their own paying customers makes it even more disgusting.
I just couldn't stomach it.
The time for talking with them has long gone in my opinion.
It's no good trying to close the stable door now, the horse has bolted and is miles away.
KO hasn't put this fans parliament idea forward because he's suddenly started to care about what the fans think.
He's put it forward as a purely selfish act to form another human shield.
It's the act of an isolated, irrational and increasingly desperate man.
If it does mange to get off the ground, I'll give this fans parliament 12 months maximum.
It won't take long for the members to realise they're heading down the same route as BSA, banging their heads against a brick wall.
It also won't carry any credibility to the vast majority of the fans, the press or anyone else in the football world.
They're a busted flush. Just about everyone connected with football knows that now.
In my opinion, allowing this to go ahead would just give KO some breathing space.
And as Christine Seddon so eloquently put it, starve them of oxygen. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 13:33 - May 28 with 2060 views | Lala |
Moral high ground,I totally agree.I think that's lost now to all but a few Robbie. It's just dirty on all sides and its a shame it's come to this.
That's one of the reasons why I think a parliament has to be worth a go. The bad blood between the company owners and BST has gone to far for I think to bring about a constructive outcome. This parliament for me is clean slate time. | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:45 - May 28 with 2052 views | TwelveAngryMen |
Spot on that Robbie
Last thing I want to see is anyone ' hung out to dry '
My concern is some who have submitted applications maybe haven't thought that aspect of it through
To answer Lala surely you can see its toxic out there ? When I used the word ' brave ' what I meant was you wouldn't persuade me to stand on the owners terms whilst the toxicity levels remain as they are
As we all know the BSA committee took a lot of stick in the lead up to Xmas as I am sure TT will testify to Who wants to expose themselves to that ?
I see the BST conditions as a form of ' safeguarding ' for those who wish to participate in the FP which in ordinary circumstances would be welcomed without caveats
Regrettably these aren't ordinary circumstances as literally the day prior the Club issued what amounts to a ' letter before action ' to those who encroached on the pitch
How do you think issuing proceedings against perhaps 100+ fans is going to be received ?
No doubt that's why BST insist on the armistice as well as the ' democratic ' conditions of participation [Post edited 28 May 2015 13:48]
| |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 13:46 - May 28 with 2047 views | Rusty2Stands |
But would 12 people sat on a parliament be as representative as a supporters association with over 1,500 members?
BST has made it clear on a number of occasions it will speak to the Oystons.
OO said he wouldn't because of the ongoing legal situation with TAM and the fact he was the chairman of BST
That's now been sorted, but has he taken up the offer? NO
KO said he would only recognise or talk to them when they became a trust.
They are now a trust, but has he taken up the offer? NO
They haven't because it's all about control. Far easier to control 12 nodding dogs sat round a table than it is to control a legitimate supporters association representing more then 1,500 fans.
Quite frankly, how anyone can trust them after everything they've done, is beyond me.
The only slate the club needs is one which has been totally cleaned of all things Oyston | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 14:00 - May 28 with 2041 views | terminallytangerine |
O.K. my final one Tam as if I say any more I'll probably need a good lawyer.
I appreciate the fraternal concern and you may well be right which is why it would be better if the largest supporter's organisation had used their kudos to put a name forward in an effort to break the log-jam and detoxify the situation.
I think though having an open election from those who haven't invested in its future by buying tickets is stretching the word democratic a bit far. As for the issuing of banning orders surely many of those who invaded the pitch did so as much in hope as expectation of that very outcome.
The best prognosis would be a takeover and the worst a continuation of the holy war for no gain either in the short or long term. In the meantime we can only strive to effect change in the way that will minimise the damage to what is still our football club. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 14:10 - May 28 with 2004 views | TwelveAngryMen |
We aren't talking about banning orders though TT
As I understand it the Club are going to issue civil action against those they can identify to recover damages for the losses they suffer as a result of the encroachment
That's the statement that was issued last Wednesday and the cause of the concerns I have expressed Surely you can see what effect such action would have ? | |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 15:12 - May 28 with 1978 views | BFCx3 |
Sorry, been too busy to reply to the responses.
TT and Lala,
I'm not trying to condone intimidation, nor am I trying to blame people or even suggest that they have brought it on themselves at all and I'm absolutely sure that is not the case with TAM.
What I am doing, however, is accepting the reality and having and appreciation of why these things have actually occurred.
People have every right to hold an alternative viewpoint, they have every right to expect that they should not be intimidated or subjected to violence for having said viewpoint and those who would intimate or be violent are totally an utterly out of order....however... That does not mean it won't happen... The reality is that it certainly could happen (probably not to an extreme level, but it is a likely outcome)
So in taking the decision to express publicly your alternative viewpoint, you must be prepared to also accept the consequences... The fact the consequences are unacceptable makes no difference to the reality of them happening.
Just because a person ought to be able to walk home safely through a dimly lit park, doesn't prevent the possibility of them being attacked. That is just an unfortunate consequence of placing themselves in that position. | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 15:28 - May 28 with 1971 views | Lala |
BFC if I'm totally honest with you I think you over estimate the kind of reaction anybody who signs up to this parliament may expect,seriously.
They may get shite on a message board,but the likelihood is,most of the 12 won't even post on here,or the other site.
If they can make a difference then good luck to them I say,after all a difference is what we want isn't it.
And yes,I am prepared to accept any consequences attached to holding,and shock horror,voicing a different viewpoint bfc,bring it on! [Post edited 28 May 2015 15:33]
| |
| |
| Fans Parliament on 15:37 - May 28 with 1960 views | BFCx3 |
You may well be right LaLa and in fairness if it was something I genuinely believed in myself I'm sure I wouldn't let that concern stop me.
Incidentally I was kind of talking about stuff that we know had already happened and essentially trying to say that I know it isn't right and I know it shouldn't happen, but it did happen, the fact that it happened was predictable etc..
Having an appreciation of the reality does not mean you condone or agree with it. Understanding the reasons why something would happen does not mean you accept or agree with those reasons...
That's all | | | |
| Fans Parliament on 15:41 - May 28 with 1959 views | BringBackTheRedRoom |
TT
I really don't see your problem with this :-
3) The interim Parliament selected by the independent panel will be charged with ensuring that a full democratic election of all Blackpool supporters takes place by November 2015 with anyone, season ticket holder or not, able to put themselves forward for the fully elected Fans Parliament .
It's says to me BST wants ALL fans included. You seem to want to exclude chunks of the fan base.
Now I'll be the first to admit that time have changed since I started going to matches, but it took me about 7 seasons before I could afford my first ST, and when I was a POTG, I didn't miss a home match, and went to most away. If anyone had said to me I was some sort of 2nd class supporter at that time, because I wasn't a ST holder, think I would of exploded.
Now i know there are a lot less POTG (at the moment), and getting a ST is easier to do than in the 70s-80s, however your position to me seems one of alienating sections of supporters, which I really don't understand. | |
| ‘Where there is harmony, may we bring discord. Where there is truth, may we bring error. Where there is faith, may we bring doubt. And where there is hope, may we bring despair’ |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
