This isn't netaddicks? What's that supposed to mean? Cheap shot B
And I thought it was a justified response considering the tone Tel had taken with him on the blog and his pathetic attempts to embarrass him, despite Ben having been initially apologetic in trying to explain he hadn't received any emails.
That's my opinion, if that's OK with you.
I'm leaving it there cos I don't want to get in an argument with you.
I have always seen the fans director role as one of giving the board a fans view of things to factor into the mix, not specifically to deal directly with each an every issues that our fans might have. The club employee people (although I daresay there are a lot less of those people this season)to deal with those issues in most cases. The fans director should be directing issues to those people and only become directly involved as a last resort ortherwise you end up with the kind of 'discussion' that has been going on in this thread.
How times change.When I lived in Australia 15 years ago I had to wait until Tuesday (UK weekly papers) or Wednesday (British Soccer Weekly-is that still going?) to see how we got on the previous weekend.No text, e-mail or internet then, or if there was I didnt know about it.They did have telephones though, I must have been too tight to waste my VB and Peter Stuyvesant tokens on that.
I see this as a bit of a long running tit for tat that spilled out in to the public realm. It's not helpful really, but as with all frustrations, it's bound to flair up from time to time in the future. It's unfortunate that some others latch on to these frustrations in an attempt to stoke the fires and only cause more frustrations (that's you Gump).
My own views on streaming commentary, being an oversees Addick, is also one of frustration. But I see it as a problem of corporate rights and just another example of how the game has moved away from its roots and become a cash cow for the few. If the Club could provide it to everyone, they would. They have done in the past. The very last thing I would want from the Club is to sell out rights to the PremiumTV bastards. So I just lump it and try to fill my needs elsewhere, on here for example.
[cite]Posted By: kigelia[/cite]I have always seen the fans director role as one of giving the board a fans view of things to factor into the mix, not specifically to deal directly with each an every issues that our fans might have. The club employee people (although I daresay there are a lot less of those people this season)to deal with those issues in most cases. The fans director should be directing issues to those people and only become directly involved as a last resort ortherwise you end up with the kind of 'discussion' that has been going on in this thread.
That's a good point.
There was an article in the programme from Steve Sutherland and Steve responded to a lot of e-mails on the subject. When I cam back from holiday there were some e-mails and copies of respones from Steve.
The board had been sent a document outlining three options with pros and cons for each. They decided on the one we have.
As it was obviously a topic that people were discussing on here and elsewhere and as not everyone reads the programme I did an article on it as they reach a wider, but not bigger, audience via the net.
Terry and Lee have already had responses from Steve Sutherland. I was criticised for giving a similar arguement to him in my article by Lee.
[cite]Posted By: Curb_It[/cite]I didnt see any comments on any blog? so apologies if there had been previous to this thread already.
There ware comments after my SD articles which, hands up, I missed as I don't normally look after a day or two and there's not an alert, as we have with whispers, to tell you a new comment has been made.
This thread would be absolutely fine if everyone would stop using offensive terms to describe someone who disagrees with them.
If I was SD I would have to figure what is a valid representation of Charlton fan's concerns which might be difficult as too many requests/comments might get me ignored. How much influence the position actually holds is questionable. It (hopefully) gives us a voice on the board, but I doubt that apart from taking these views into consideration from time to time that it really changes fully the decisions that the business people that run Charlton as a business make.
In the specific case of losing overseas broadcasts, I think that in the immediate term the club has done the right thing. I doubt we'd get enough subscribers to make it financially sensible. It does seem a shame given the luxuries of information the internet has brought over the past decade, but there are more factors at play here than just Charlton dropping a service that fans had got used to.
PS: Off_it, if you are starting to sound like me as curb_it suggests, you have my sympathies.
As an irregular poster that does not actually know any of you I would like to say I have emailed the much maligned supporters director and as others have stated was impressed by his quick initial response and by the fact that he then followed up on my query with more information when he had got it from the relevant persons.
I cannot comment on the arguement other than to say I get about 200 hundred emails a day and some get lost in my stringent junk filters and I have been known to delete the odd thing I should not have. In the past people said the sd was unaccessible to the rank and file supporter, if this is what happens when you provide a contact email then the next incumbent will not follow suit.
I have never met our SD but in the time he's been doing the job he has been far more open and visible to all our supporters than all the previous SD's put together - for that I applaud him and say thank you.
As for match coverage it is not only the overseas but also affects those of us in the UK who live far away and can't afford to travel to the Valley, but we can't expect the SD to solve this but he can, and has, put our views to the board.
So give the guy a break and as Suzie says it should only be for one season.
just read. Completely missed all that. tho i didnt think it was that bad to be honest.
It is a thankless task being the SD.
We know that directors read this board so they have a good idea of what the fans think daily so will we get another when Ben's time is up? Who would want to do it really? a poisoned chalice.
[cite]Posted By: lancashire lad[/cite]I have never met our SD but in the time he's been doing the job he has been far more open and visible to all our supporters than all the previous SD's put together - for that I applaud him and say thank you.
As for match coverage it is not only the overseas but also affects those of us in the UK who live far away and can't afford to travel to the Valley, but we can't expect the SD to solve this but he can, and has, put our views to the board.
So give the guy a break and as Suzie says it should only be for one season.
It probably takes a good part of a season to get up and running in such a unique position, it is probably two years so the other directors are not constantly showing someone the ropes.
[cite]Posted By: Curb_It[/cite]just read. Completely missed all that. tho i didnt think it was that bad to be honest.
It is a thankless task being the SD.
We know that directors read this board so they have a good idea of what the fans think daily so will we get another when Ben's time is up? Who would want to do it really? a poisoned chalice.
I agree it wasnt that bad in itself but some was very hostile IMHO because it wasn't saying what they want to hear.
The other directors will have their views on should the Supporters' Director continue or not and they will have the final say but what do you all think.
I think part of the problem is that the role is not defined. Is it to communicate, to be a sort of omsbundmand (sp?), to be a voice on the board, to be a voice of the board or something else entirely
I think there is a certain amount of postive publicity from being able to say "we're open and listen so much we have a fan elected on to the board" but there is also an arguement to say that it has had it's time and why should the board risk getting someone who isn't as wonderful as the previous incumbents. That's a joke but would the board want just anyone there? Does there need to be a more thorough selection process and a "job" description.
My time is up at the end of this season and I don't want to continue as I don't think it's good for one person to stay too long and because I was elected for two years only. I do think there is an arguement that 2 years is not enough and maybe it should be three for future SDs
I can feel another article coming on but what do people think. Take the personalities out of it and whether I've done a good or crap job. Is there a role for a SD in the future and if so what should it be?
[cite]Posted By: Curb_It[/cite]We know that directors read this board
Comments
and to top it all soemeone even called someone a tosser! scandalous.
you sound like Sco.
think i shall head home early to the pub.
That's the best comment yet!
*hic*
And I thought it was a justified response considering the tone Tel had taken with him on the blog and his pathetic attempts to embarrass him, despite Ben having been initially apologetic in trying to explain he hadn't received any emails.
That's my opinion, if that's OK with you.
I'm leaving it there cos I don't want to get in an argument with you.
That's a first Dan...LOL
Sorry mate could not resist, say hello to you Dad for me mate.
if only i had my magical sinking wand
if only i had my magical sinking wand[/quote]
Is that what the girls call it!!
I see this as a bit of a long running tit for tat that spilled out in to the public realm. It's not helpful really, but as with all frustrations, it's bound to flair up from time to time in the future. It's unfortunate that some others latch on to these frustrations in an attempt to stoke the fires and only cause more frustrations (that's you Gump).
My own views on streaming commentary, being an oversees Addick, is also one of frustration. But I see it as a problem of corporate rights and just another example of how the game has moved away from its roots and become a cash cow for the few. If the Club could provide it to everyone, they would. They have done in the past. The very last thing I would want from the Club is to sell out rights to the PremiumTV bastards. So I just lump it and try to fill my needs elsewhere, on here for example.
LOL!
That's a good point.
There was an article in the programme from Steve Sutherland and Steve responded to a lot of e-mails on the subject. When I cam back from holiday there were some e-mails and copies of respones from Steve.
The board had been sent a document outlining three options with pros and cons for each. They decided on the one we have.
As it was obviously a topic that people were discussing on here and elsewhere and as not everyone reads the programme I did an article on it as they reach a wider, but not bigger, audience via the net.
Terry and Lee have already had responses from Steve Sutherland. I was criticised for giving a similar arguement to him in my article by Lee.
There ware comments after my SD articles which, hands up, I missed as I don't normally look after a day or two and there's not an alert, as we have with whispers, to tell you a new comment has been made.
So basically it's all Lookies fault. ; - )
If I was SD I would have to figure what is a valid representation of Charlton fan's concerns which might be difficult as too many requests/comments might get me ignored. How much influence the position actually holds is questionable. It (hopefully) gives us a voice on the board, but I doubt that apart from taking these views into consideration from time to time that it really changes fully the decisions that the business people that run Charlton as a business make.
In the specific case of losing overseas broadcasts, I think that in the immediate term the club has done the right thing. I doubt we'd get enough subscribers to make it financially sensible. It does seem a shame given the luxuries of information the internet has brought over the past decade, but there are more factors at play here than just Charlton dropping a service that fans had got used to.
PS: Off_it, if you are starting to sound like me as curb_it suggests, you have my sympathies.
I cannot comment on the arguement other than to say I get about 200 hundred emails a day and some get lost in my stringent junk filters and I have been known to delete the odd thing I should not have. In the past people said the sd was unaccessible to the rank and file supporter, if this is what happens when you provide a contact email then the next incumbent will not follow suit.
No probs :-) Its on the bottom of the blog if you want to have a look
As for match coverage it is not only the overseas but also affects those of us in the UK who live far away and can't afford to travel to the Valley, but we can't expect the SD to solve this but he can, and has, put our views to the board.
So give the guy a break and as Suzie says it should only be for one season.
It is a thankless task being the SD.
We know that directors read this board so they have a good idea of what the fans think daily so will we get another when Ben's time is up? Who would want to do it really? a poisoned chalice.
It probably takes a good part of a season to get up and running in such a unique position, it is probably two years so the other directors are not constantly showing someone the ropes.
I didn't expect to start the row of the year.
For the record I was only joking. Oops and I did do a :-)
Its all your fault!!
STONE HIM
I agree it wasnt that bad in itself but some was very hostile IMHO because it wasn't saying what they want to hear.
The other directors will have their views on should the Supporters' Director continue or not and they will have the final say but what do you all think.
I think part of the problem is that the role is not defined. Is it to communicate, to be a sort of omsbundmand (sp?), to be a voice on the board, to be a voice of the board or something else entirely
I think there is a certain amount of postive publicity from being able to say "we're open and listen so much we have a fan elected on to the board" but there is also an arguement to say that it has had it's time and why should the board risk getting someone who isn't as wonderful as the previous incumbents. That's a joke but would the board want just anyone there? Does there need to be a more thorough selection process and a "job" description.
My time is up at the end of this season and I don't want to continue as I don't think it's good for one person to stay too long and because I was elected for two years only. I do think there is an arguement that 2 years is not enough and maybe it should be three for future SDs
I can feel another article coming on but what do people think. Take the personalities out of it and whether I've done a good or crap job. Is there a role for a SD in the future and if so what should it be?
Yeah but not any important ones : - )