Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2016 7:42:22 GMT
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,269
|
Post by eppinggas on May 23, 2016 8:21:02 GMT
It's an interesting one. There are people who put in a lot of time and effort on a voluntary basis under the auspice of BRFC SC. This obviously has to be applauded. Excellent work, well done. However - does the SC engage with all fans and do they represent those views to the Board? NO. I've written to JC, no reply. I asked if I could join the SC a couple of months back and was told in the office I was "too late". (BSS said he would follow up for me, again no reply). The structure of the SC looks antiquated, over-complicated, and there are obviously still allegiances to the 'old Board' (remember them?). New owners look at businesses with a fresh pair of eyes. Here's what they ask: "Are you part of the problem - or are you part of the solution?" BRFC SC - for all it's good voluntary work looks part of the problem. The SC Chairman going to print, sniping at Wael Al-Qadi and alienating a large % of the support is plain stupid. We are not in "the official SC gang" (I cannot tell a lie - I drank cider in the Wellie and enjoyed the post-match celebrations. I really didn't think I was upsetting the SC. I am sooooooo sorry). Since the takeover I thought that inclusivity and togetherness would be the way forward. I am pretty sure that was what Wael Al-Qadi was promoting. I don't think the SC see it that way. So get rid of the 'old guard' and start again. The SC is not fit for purpose. It is outdated. A new constitution is required.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on May 23, 2016 8:31:45 GMT
It's an interesting one. There are people who put in a lot of time and effort on a voluntary basis under the auspice of BRFC SC. This obviously has to be applauded. Excellent work, well done. However - does the SC engage with all fans and do they represent those views to the Board? NO. I've written to JC, no reply. I asked if I could join the SC a couple of months back and was told in the office I was "too late". (BSS said he would follow up for me, again no reply). The structure of the SC looks antiquated, over-complicated, and there are obviously still allegiances to the 'old Board' (remember them?). New owners look at businesses with a fresh pair of eyes. Here's what they ask: "Are you part of the problem - or are you part of the solution?" BRFC SC - for all it's good voluntary work looks part of the problem. The SC Chairman going to print, sniping at Wael Al-Qadi and alienating a large % of the support is plain stupid. We are not in "the official SC gang" (I cannot tell a lie - I drank cider in the Wellie and enjoyed the post-match celebrations. I really didn't think I was upsetting the SC. I am sooooooo sorry). Since the takeover I thought that inclusivity and togetherness would be the way forward. I am pretty sure that was what Wael Al-Qadi was promoting. I don't think the SC see it that way. So get rid of the 'old guard' and start again. The SC is not fit for purpose. It is outdated. A new constitution is required. It's a view you and others are entitled to hold but if the only people willing to volunteer to run BRSC don't hold that view why would they change things? I don't get the feeling that any election of BRSC officers is a hotly contested affair. As to the new board reviewing the role and operation of the BRSC wasn't their always a lot of hostility when the old board tried to meddle in things ie closing the old official forum? Guess it's now one rule for some and a different rule for others. Would also be keen to know if the new board would be willing to pick up the cost of covering all the jobs done by BRSC. All the above is said as a non-member of BRSC, indeed the only season in 20 years I've been s member was the season before last (?) when I specifically joined so I could vote for Rod as supporters director.
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on May 23, 2016 8:39:41 GMT
Waiting for a bus after the York away game, I asked my mate (MCFC season-ticket holder), what effect the influx of new money into Manchester City had had on the Supporters Club and their volunteer efforts. (I assumed that, like at BRSC, there were volunteers at MCFC). Certainly, at the Etihad now, all aspects of the operation (catering, stewarding, etc) appear to be carried out by (paid) specialist service providers. Here's what it said on the MCFC Supporters Club site. mcfcsupportersclub.co.uk/the-purpose-of-mcfc-supporters-clubSky Blue through and through
The financial situation of [MCFC] and the new investments saw a rise of the tickets for MCFC’s home games and this had a negative impact on a lot of working class people from Manchester who can no longer afford to watch their beloved City every Saturday. That is the price of success, claim some, whereas others tend to think that if this situation goes further, the sense of community will be lost. We believe this is where the Supporters Club steps in. As an officially recognised MCFC Supporters Club our role is to protect the fans as a whole, to keep the communal spirit and sense of camaraderie between MCFC fans.After all, if there’s one thing that MCFC is known for in England is the club’s loyal, dedicated and passionate following and we wouldn’t change that for anything in the world. The Role of MCFC Supporters Club
Things could definitely be worse and we don’t think that there is a hostility between home and international fans, after all we do share one great passion. It shouldn’t matter where one is coming from as long as they share a genuine love for Manchester City and sing Blue Moon proudly. There are some objective reasons for disdain amongst the local diehard followers, but that will soon change hopefully. The new open ways of communication via the internet and especially social media will bring fans from all over the world together and the MCFC Supporters Club will fulfil their duty as an organisation that brings the fans and the club together.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2016 8:53:09 GMT
It's an interesting one. There are people who put in a lot of time and effort on a voluntary basis under the auspice of BRFC SC. This obviously has to be applauded. Excellent work, well done. However - does the SC engage with all fans and do they represent those views to the Board? NO. I've written to JC, no reply. I asked if I could join the SC a couple of months back and was told in the office I was "too late". (BSS said he would follow up for me, again no reply). The structure of the SC looks antiquated, over-complicated, and there are obviously still allegiances to the 'old Board' (remember them?). New owners look at businesses with a fresh pair of eyes. Here's what they ask: "Are you part of the problem - or are you part of the solution?" BRFC SC - for all it's good voluntary work looks part of the problem. The SC Chairman going to print, sniping at Wael Al-Qadi and alienating a large % of the support is plain stupid. We are not in "the official SC gang" (I cannot tell a lie - I drank cider in the Wellie and enjoyed the post-match celebrations. I really didn't think I was upsetting the SC. I am sooooooo sorry). Since the takeover I thought that inclusivity and togetherness would be the way forward. I am pretty sure that was what Wael Al-Qadi was promoting. I don't think the SC see it that way. So get rid of the 'old guard' and start again. The SC is not fit for purpose. It is outdated. A new constitution is required. It's a view you and others are entitled to hold but if the only people willing to volunteer to run BRSC don't hold that view why would they change things? I don't get the feeling that any election of BRSC officers is a hotly contested affair. As to the new board reviewing the role and operation of the BRSC wasn't their always a lot of hostility when the old board tried to meddle in things ie closing the old official forum? Guess it's now one rule for some and a different rule for others. Would also be keen to know if the new board would be willing to pick up the cost of covering all the jobs done by BRSC. All the above is said as a non-member of BRSC, indeed the only season in 20 years I've been s member was the season before last (?) when I specifically joined so I could vote for Rod as supporters director. I shouldn't think that the business relocation and continuity of service plan for the move to UWE will be contingent on volunteer labour. Having said that, I'm sure that people wishing to be involved on a voluntary basis will be welcomed and accommodated wherever possible, but there are going to be changes.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on May 23, 2016 8:59:48 GMT
It's a view you and others are entitled to hold but if the only people willing to volunteer to run BRSC don't hold that view why would they change things? I don't get the feeling that any election of BRSC officers is a hotly contested affair. As to the new board reviewing the role and operation of the BRSC wasn't their always a lot of hostility when the old board tried to meddle in things ie closing the old official forum? Guess it's now one rule for some and a different rule for others. Would also be keen to know if the new board would be willing to pick up the cost of covering all the jobs done by BRSC. All the above is said as a non-member of BRSC, indeed the only season in 20 years I've been s member was the season before last (?) when I specifically joined so I could vote for Rod as supporters director. I shouldn't think that the business relocation and continuity of service plan for the move to UWE will be contingent on volunteer labour. Having said that, I'm sure that people wishing to be involved on a voluntary basis will be welcomed and accommodated wherever possible, but there are going to be changes. I think it will be interesting going forward. If the club take back all or most of the functions that the SC provide that cannot be a bad thing easing the burden and the reliance on the SC to do things for the club. If that happens than The SC has to re-evaluate it’s position and what it intends to do/be. It can still choose to support the club, but the fashion in which it does so will have to change. SC events, fund raising can all remain an aspect, but what happens with any money will have to be decided. Presumably if this takeover is as real as it is seemed, handing over a few grand whenever will not be required if talk of Academies, Training facilities etc all come to fruition as money will be in place. Any pressures to raise X for the club and to bail it out must surely be welcome
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on May 23, 2016 9:11:27 GMT
Continuing my efforts to allow comparison with other (admittedly much larger) clubs supporters groups: My other "guest" at the York game was my mate who supports Sheffield Wednesday. Their Supporters Club went through turmoil in the years since 2001: Owls Trust set up...share ownership exceeds 10%...SWFC evicts Trust from offices...rebranded as "Wednesdayite"...shareholding grew amid legal concerns...takeovers rebuffed...danger of administration...Mandaric takes over. "In 2011, Wednesdayite changed their mission statement and shifted their emphasis from seeking positive change within the SWFC boardroom to seeking closer ties with the club in order to deliver a better matchday experience for fans, to mutually benefit both supporters and the club and to reach out to the wider community with the SWFC brand. Today, they continue "to grow and expand [their] successful Away Coach, Car Park and Matchday Lounge services, surf [their] Big Flag at home and away matches, put on popular events and do everything [they] can to support both the SWFC Community Programme and the SWFC Academy. With a popular and constantly-updated website and over 11,000 followers on Twitter (with over 6,000 on Facebook), [they] are a hub for fans from all over the world to come together and support the greatest team the world has ever seen!" Owls fans turbulent decadeIt's interesting to see how their Supporters Club went about consultation with fans. Here's a YouTube presentation that "aimed to start the conversation about what fans of Sheffield Wednesday want and need from a supporters' club". Wednesdayite: what SWFC fans want in a supporters club
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on May 23, 2016 9:36:01 GMT
It does seem a bit daft that we all(me included) seem to be bickering at a time when most things in the garden appear to be rosy.
Does anyone on here know Jim? Maybe they could get him to post on here and defend/review his statement, or even better, call an open BRSC meeting , where ALL Rovers fans (not just members) could attend , and explain what they want from a supporters club, you never know, it may well encourage a few to join.
After all, we are all supposed to be on the same side!
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on May 23, 2016 9:41:53 GMT
I shouldn't think that the business relocation and continuity of service plan for the move to UWE will be contingent on volunteer labour. Having said that, I'm sure that people wishing to be involved on a voluntary basis will be welcomed and accommodated wherever possible, but there are going to be changes. I think it will be interesting going forward. If the club take back all or most of the functions that the SC provide that cannot be a bad thing easing the burden and the reliance on the SC to do things for the club. If that happens than The SC has to re-evaluate it’s position and what it intends to do/be. It can still choose to support the club, but the fashion in which it does so will have to change. SC events, fund raising can all remain an aspect, but what happens with any money will have to be decided. Presumably if this takeover is as real as it is seemed, handing over a few grand whenever will not be required if talk of Academies, Training facilities etc all come to fruition as money will be in place. Any pressures to raise X for the club and to bail it out must surely be welcome That has to be right, the Supporters Club no longer has to donate money to the FC - there's no point. Instead, the SC has to refocus on the members of the SC, areas that the FC would not cover, i.e. fan experience, travel, fan events etc
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2016 10:03:54 GMT
That's as may be, but why are they meeting regularly with the old board? Well not formal meetings but they are fans so at the matches so hard to avoid them so why would they stop speaking to them just because they sold their shares ? Thanks for clarifying that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2016 10:29:08 GMT
It does seem a bit daft that we all(me included) seem to be bickering at a time when most things in the garden appear to be rosy. Does anyone on here know Jim? Maybe they could get him to post on here and defend/review his statement, or even better, call an open BRSC meeting , where ALL Rovers fans (not just members) could attend , and explain what they want from a supporters club, you never know, it may well encourage a few to join. After all, we are all supposed to be on the same side! Yes and no. Are we all bickering, or fundamentally are the vast majority just objecting to one person's comments? Those comments came 'at a time when most things in the garden appear to be rosy'. The boat was rocked (surprisingly and for what looked like petty reasons); most people disliked that and said so. That's widened into questioning the role and record of the SC, which is the platform for the dissenting comments. The suggestion the chairman should be asked to post here (the equivalent of a 'presidential' visit, perhaps) or someone else should convene a meeting to review what's wanted, kind of adds to the idea that the current set-up is out of touch. I think it adds to a definition of a problem: toys out of the pram and 'someone else do it then' isn't the solution. What should 'it' be? GasMacc1's input on what happens elsewhere, with less emphasis on the need for volunteers and more on the promotion of inclusivity is probably very relevant.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on May 23, 2016 10:49:40 GMT
It does seem a bit daft that we all(me included) seem to be bickering at a time when most things in the garden appear to be rosy. Does anyone on here know Jim? Maybe they could get him to post on here and defend/review his statement, or even better, call an open BRSC meeting , where ALL Rovers fans (not just members) could attend , and explain what they want from a supporters club, you never know, it may well encourage a few to join. After all, we are all supposed to be on the same side! Yes and no. Are we all bickering, or fundamentally are the vast majority just objecting to one person's comments? Those comments came 'at a time when most things in the garden appear to be rosy'. The boat was rocked (surprisingly and for what looked like petty reasons); most people disliked that and said so. That's widened into questioning the role and record of the SC, which is the platform for the dissenting comments. The suggestion the chairman should be asked to post here (the equivalent of a 'presidential' visit, perhaps) or someone else should convene a meeting to review what's wanted, kind of adds to the idea that the current set-up is out of touch. I think it adds to a definition of a problem: toys out of the pram and 'someone else do it then' isn't the solution. What should 'it' be? GasMacc1's input on what happens elsewhere, with less emphasis on the need for volunteers and more on the promotion of inclusivity is probably very relevant. That was the point. It does seem most people (on the forums anyway) don't rate the SC, but I'm sure most of us want anything connected to Rovers to be a success. I think what Jim Chappell wrote was- at best- misguided, and I certainly have been critical about his comments ,but if he wanted to put his side of the argument at a meeting, I would be more than happy to listen. The trouble with tapping words into a keyboard, is that it apart from the fact that things can be taken 'the wrong way', people do have a tendency to lash out in a way that they wouldn't do in person, and that builds barriers not bridges. Whatever peoples current individual views of the SC, I suspect most of us at some point or other have used or benefitted from their work. Maybe JC and the other volunteers are reeling under the sheer amount of work they take on, maybe there are more people who can help, even if in a small way. One thing is for sure, dividing the fans into 'SC supporters' and 'Gloucester Road drinkers' doesn't help anyone.
Mind you, the Gloucester Road Drinkers Association does have a ring to it
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2016 10:59:19 GMT
jim c needs to have a meeting either with the board or an open meeting with the fans to explain his views. for all the decades of work theyve done keeping our club going they have our utmost respect . but if theres something bugging them now it needs addressing
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on May 23, 2016 11:02:17 GMT
I think it will be interesting going forward. If the club take back all or most of the functions that the SC provide that cannot be a bad thing easing the burden and the reliance on the SC to do things for the club. If that happens than The SC has to re-evaluate it’s position and what it intends to do/be. It can still choose to support the club, but the fashion in which it does so will have to change. SC events, fund raising can all remain an aspect, but what happens with any money will have to be decided. Presumably if this takeover is as real as it is seemed, handing over a few grand whenever will not be required if talk of Academies, Training facilities etc all come to fruition as money will be in place. Any pressures to raise X for the club and to bail it out must surely be welcome That has to be right, the Supporters Club no longer has to donate money to the FC - there's no point. Instead, the SC has to refocus on the members of the SC, areas that the FC would not cover, i.e. fan experience, travel, fan events etc
Why is there no point? Have I missed the bit where the owners have said they will underwrite a loss making operation or that they don't (or won't) accept income from outside the football club? I'd be very interested if they have said the above if you could post a link to that effect. All I know is that they (or the chairman on their behalf) has spoken of looking for financial investors to fund the stadium which suggests they are financially astute enough not to look a gift horse in the mouth. But things have changed and I'd have thought it in the interests of both the owners and BRSC to clarify the role of brsc, I certainly if running BRSC at present would be unwilling to be told by the owners what that role was though.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on May 23, 2016 11:12:49 GMT
That has to be right, the Supporters Club no longer has to donate money to the FC - there's no point. Instead, the SC has to refocus on the members of the SC, areas that the FC would not cover, i.e. fan experience, travel, fan events etc
Why is there no point? Have I missed the bit where the owners have said they will underwrite a loss making operation or that they don't (or won't) accept income from outside the football club? I'd be very interested if they have said the above if you could post a link to that effect. All I know is that they (or the chairman on their behalf) has spoken of looking for financial investors to fund the stadium which suggests they are financially astute enough not to look a gift horse in the mouth. But things have changed and I'd have thought it in the interests of both the owners and BRSC to clarify the role of brsc, I certainly if running BRSC at present would be unwilling to be told by the owners what that role was though. well that is what needs clarifying and discussions between the board and The SC/SC directors. Maybe there have been initial communications or maybe not.
That's why I say If. The club have made noises about training facilities, academies etc which are going to cost money. A far sight more than what The SC could ever contribute.
At best you would hope even if the club wants The SCs money, it wont be on a club demand it, you supply it basis
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2016 11:26:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on May 23, 2016 11:29:51 GMT
Why is there no point? Have I missed the bit where the owners have said they will underwrite a loss making operation or that they don't (or won't) accept income from outside the football club? I'd be very interested if they have said the above if you could post a link to that effect. All I know is that they (or the chairman on their behalf) has spoken of looking for financial investors to fund the stadium which suggests they are financially astute enough not to look a gift horse in the mouth. But things have changed and I'd have thought it in the interests of both the owners and BRSC to clarify the role of brsc, I certainly if running BRSC at present would be unwilling to be told by the owners what that role was though. well that is what needs clarifying and discussions between the board and The SC/SC directors. Maybe there have been initial communications or maybe not.
That's why I say If. The club have made noises about training facilities, academies etc which are going to cost money. A far sight more than what The SC could ever contribute.
At best you would hope even if the club wants The SCs money, it wont be on a club demand it, you supply it basis
That will all cost more than the £300 my season ticket cost so on your logic they may as well let me in for free. It's like people really believe money grows on trees.
|
|
|
Post by Curly Wurly on May 23, 2016 11:33:17 GMT
Yes and no. Are we all bickering, or fundamentally are the vast majority just objecting to one person's comments? Those comments came 'at a time when most things in the garden appear to be rosy'. The boat was rocked (surprisingly and for what looked like petty reasons); most people disliked that and said so. That's widened into questioning the role and record of the SC, which is the platform for the dissenting comments. The suggestion the chairman should be asked to post here (the equivalent of a 'presidential' visit, perhaps) or someone else should convene a meeting to review what's wanted, kind of adds to the idea that the current set-up is out of touch. I think it adds to a definition of a problem: toys out of the pram and 'someone else do it then' isn't the solution. What should 'it' be? GasMacc1's input on what happens elsewhere, with less emphasis on the need for volunteers and more on the promotion of inclusivity is probably very relevant. I'd suggest our President and Chairman's maxim of evolution not revolution applies here. I think Jim's comments were ill judged and definitely do not reflect a broad swathe of SC membership, let alone the broader Rovers support base, but a debate about the future role of the SC can be a healthy one which benefits both SC and FC alike. If not already timetabled, a meeting between Steve Hamer and the SC executive is necessary in my view to help identify priorities moving forward. As a veteran of supporter group action at Swansea, I am sure that Steve Hamer is well versed in what positive contribution a supporters club can make.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on May 23, 2016 12:03:15 GMT
well that is what needs clarifying and discussions between the board and The SC/SC directors. Maybe there have been initial communications or maybe not.
That's why I say If. The club have made noises about training facilities, academies etc which are going to cost money. A far sight more than what The SC could ever contribute.
At best you would hope even if the club wants The SCs money, it wont be on a club demand it, you supply it basis
That will all cost more than the £300 my season ticket cost so on your logic they may as well let me in for free. It's like people really believe money grows on trees. because that's what I said isn't it. Hence my last sentence which has been known to happen Aren't the SC a loss making organisation it's self. So apart from the Share Scheme agreement which is separate what facility do BRSC have to give the club any money?
I think the SC only made money last year to the sale of 199
|
|
harrybuckle
Always look on the bright side
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5,432
|
Post by harrybuckle on May 23, 2016 12:03:17 GMT
The successful 50/50 draw brings in much needed funds for BRSC and this goes to Rovers Academy. Just recently had a letter from BRSC about my continued support of the much debated Share Scheme. New proposals are being prepared to enable fans to continue that support with a view of the BRSC obtaining more influence in our Club.
|
|