Look I'm sorry. This is not crass it's a statement from history that does have certain similarities to our situation and series of events. Of course it's far too dramatic but has similarities none the less.
If I was the owner of a football club, wanting to be handed a reason to ignore message boards and interaction with fans in general, that piece of tasteless nonsense - the poorly-judged spoof of Martin Niemoller - would be like a gift from the gods.
I'm sure the idiot who wrote it thought it was clever, and impassioned, and he'd get a great response, but it's not. It's just tasteless and very, very stupid.
If I was the owner of a football club, wanting to be handed a reason to ignore message boards and interaction with fans in general, that piece of tasteless nonsense - the poorly-judged spoof of Martin Niemoller - would be like a gift from the gods.
I'm sure the idiot who wrote it thought it was clever, and impassioned, and he'd get a great response, but it's not. It's just tasteless and very, very stupid.
Are you using some of the rubbish posted on this forum as an excuse for the club to ignore the Supporters Trust?
If I was the owner of a football club, wanting to be handed a reason to ignore message boards and interaction with fans in general, that piece of tasteless nonsense - the poorly-judged spoof of Martin Niemoller - would be like a gift from the gods.
I'm sure the idiot who wrote it thought it was clever, and impassioned, and he'd get a great response, but it's not. It's just tasteless and very, very stupid.
Are you using some of the rubbish posted on this forum as an excuse for the club to ignore the Supporters Trust?
Not at all, obviously. Like it or not, the wider perception of message boards is of being peopled by obsessives and loons. That's just a fact of life in the wider world. Lots of 'members' sometimes, perhaps, but usually a hardcore of people who actually use the boards on a regular basis, who aren't truly representative of, in football terms, the entire fanbase.
I think the whole Trust thing is interesting and an idea for people to discuss, but this discussion has shown how message boards walk on a tightrope - one slip, and they will be ignored, because of the perception about "obsessives and loons".
This subject has already attracted a bizarre, 1000 word "as told to me by a mate of a sister of a bloke I once bought a dog from" piece, written in the persona of Tony Jiminez, and now that absurd and offensive Niemoller parody. That's two of those 'slips' that would allow people to consign the whole debate to the bin.
I'm not saying that they should use it as an excuse to ignore it, but I can see that they might.
Mick Collins As a well respected supporter of our club what is your view of the recent departures? Most of us are really bemused particularly with Rick being sacked and no recognition being given to the big part he played in our move forward from the bad old days.
If I was the owner of a football club, wanting to be handed a reason to ignore message boards and interaction with fans in general, that piece of tasteless nonsense - the poorly-judged spoof of Martin Niemoller - would be like a gift from the gods.
I'm sure the idiot who wrote it thought it was clever, and impassioned, and he'd get a great response, but it's not. It's just tasteless and very, very stupid.
Are you using some of the rubbish posted on this forum as an excuse for the club to ignore the Supporters Trust?
This subject has already attracted a bizarre, 1000 word "as told to me by a mate of a sister of a bloke I once bought a dog from" piece, written in the persona of Tony Jiminez, and now that absurd and offensive Niemoller parody. That's two of those 'slips' that would allow people to consign the whole debate to the bin.
I'm not saying that they should use it as an excuse to ignore it, but I can see that they might.
Mick
We know each other, right, even though we have never met in person ?
Therefore had you taken a few moments to drop me a private message about my post, to which you refer in such disparaging terms, I might have felt able to demonstrate to you why it would not be treated as a 'slip.'
Not everyone here knows each other, by any stretch, but I naively expect those who do, and who have demonstrated that in the past they are ready to go the extra mile in support of CAFC, might actually refrain from sniping at each other, even if they disagree over their perception of the current situation. Even better, they might talk to each other, share knowledge and build up a clearer picture of what is happening, and what the options are.
In your position as a journalist you are held in some esteem by some Charlton fans. They hope you might be able to investigate and shed light on what is going on. Instead you decide that your only contribution is to slag off other posters, one of whom is also, ironically, a journalist.
It isn't necessary to be reciprocally offensive to Prague and American Addick to make the point that neither of their posts are appropriate, which as it happens is my view too.
It isn't necessary to be reciprocally offensive to Prague and American Addick to make the point that neither of their posts are appropriate, which as it happens is my view too.
Not that I particularly mind his offensive tone, more the fact that he could easily have found out how wide of the mark he was. He is a journalist, after all.
I think there are some people on CL who are starting to lose their heads. Do some people think they are bigger than the club because that is the impression I get sometimes. Trusts and the like are good as long as the reasons for the their existence is a positve one and not a negative one. I'm not sure if this is the case with what I am reading in various threads on here. All this animosity which seems to be building against the Board is not good and will only hurt our club. I think people should stop and think what their motives are.
Firstly, the notion that, if I think Richard Hunt has written something nonsensical, I should "drop him a private message" to ascertain whether it was actually part of a grand plan, rather than just point out that I think it's nonsensical. It seems rather arrogant to request such a thing.
Secondly, the notion that, because Doug Chapman is a journalist, it's "ironic" that I think his posting was offensive. The only irony I can see is that the least suitable and fitting posting on this entire subject so far, came from a journalist. If he can't exercise enough judgment to see that prose written in the wake of genocide, shouldn't be corrupted to attempt to describe events surrounding the management of a second tier football club, then nothing I can say is going to help him.
Thirdly, that I was being "reciprocally offensive". I wasn't. I was observing that, the way the wider world views message boards is such that they are allowed few 'slips' before being consigned to a bin marked "loons and obsessives". That's not the same as saying that I think people who use them necessarily fall into that category, it's just a reflection of, as I say, the way the wider world sees them. You can like it or lump it, but it's a fact. I didn't expect to receive a terribly warm welcome for expressing that view on a message board, but if you've serious aspirations about a Trust, that's the world you need to work in.
Fourthly, while it wasn't meant, and it's just a buttering-up exercise, I don't think I should be held in any sort of "esteem". I don't think any journalist should seek such a thing - it gets in the way of what they're trying to do. I also think it leads to attaching undue weight to things people say, and to not study them as closely as you might otherwise, and that's a bad idea.
Finally, I think this whole debate is, currently, stalled. The club say Rick was sacked for "gross misconduct", and have, one presumes, taken legal advice to confirm they can justify that position. Rick, in turn, appears to be suggesting some form of appeal, or indeed legal action against the club. Similarly, one presumes he thinks he can justify that.
Until such time as it happens though, neither side is going to be able to say very much.
Firstly, the notion that, if I think Richard Hunt has written something nonsensical, I should "drop him a private message" to ascertain whether it was actually part of a grand plan, rather than just point out that I think it's nonsensical. It seems rather arrogant to request such a thing.
Secondly, the notion that, because Doug Chapman is a journalist, it's "ironic" that I think his posting was offensive. The only irony I can see is that the least suitable and fitting posting on this entire subject so far, came from a journalist. If he can't exercise enough judgment to see that prose written in the wake of genocide, shouldn't be corrupted to attempt to describe events surrounding the management of a second tier football club, then nothing I can say is going to help him.
Thirdly, that I was being "reciprocally offensive". I wasn't. I was observing that, the way the wider world views message boards is such that they are allowed few 'slips' before being consigned to a bin marked "loons and obsessives". That's not the same as saying that I think people who use them necessarily fall into that category, it's just a reflection of, as I say, the way the wider world sees them. You can like it or lump it, but it's a fact. I didn't expect to receive a terribly warm welcome for expressing that view on a message board, but if you've serious aspirations about a Trust, that's the world you need to work in.
Fourthly, while it wasn't meant, and it's just a buttering-up exercise, I don't think I should be held in any sort of "esteem". I don't think any journalist should seek such a thing - it gets in the way of what they're trying to do. I also think it leads to attaching undue weight to things people say, and to not study them as closely as you might otherwise, and that's a bad idea.
Finally, I think this whole debate is, currently, stalled. The club say Rick was sacked for "gross misconduct", and have, one presumes, taken legal advice to confirm they can justify that position. Rick, in turn, appears to be suggesting some form of appeal, or indeed legal action against the club. Similarly, one presumes he thinks he can justify that.
Until such time as it happens though, neither side is going to be able to say very much.
I think that the nascent Supporters Trust is fully aware of the world of message boards, and as far as I know has taken great pains so far (within their fledgeling human resources) to try to communicate in a land beyond messageboards, whilst attempting to be as positive and wide ranging as possible in the world of the internet.
Charlton Life and the Trust overlap like a venn diagram, but are not the same thing.
I think there are some people on CL who are starting to lose their heads. Do some people think they are bigger than the club because that is the impression I get sometimes. Trusts and the like are good as long as the reasons for the their existence is a positve one and not a negative one. I'm not sure if this is the case with what I am reading in various threads on here. All this animosity which seems to be building against the Board is not good and will only hurt our club. I think people should stop and think what their motives are.
I don't know who you think the trust is but currently we the interim steering group who can be seen on the website www.castrust.org have no other policy other than aiming to form the trust and engage positively with the club. Until we reach an agm and hopefully beyond that, that will remain the case.
Individuals who support the trust may have views about its role or purpose but the above is the official position.
I don't mind if you think it's nonsensical. My issue is that you described it as: "as told to me by a mate of a sister of a bloke I once bought a dog from" piece, and that as a result 'we', whoever you define 'we' to be will lose credibility in the boardroom because of what you called a 'slip' And that this somehow affects the formation of a successful Trust.
The two points I am trying to make to you are:
1. I am not a part of the Trust team. I simply strongly support the idea of setting one up. I don't know American Addick's attitude to the Trust, but for sure he isn't part of the Trust team either. The clue is in the Forum names we use. 2. There are very good reasons why I believe the current Board's attitude to a Trust is likely to be exactly as suggested in my spoof piece; and therefore we who support the Trust ought to address what our position is before we come across such an attitude in real life, so we don't just walk away with our tails between our legs.
In the past you've written various pieces here which people (including me) found very helpful in understanding what might be going on behind the scenes. You too have lost a position at CAFC which a lot of people regretted and found puzzling at the time - there was no bigger fan than me of your match reports for the CAFC website. I simply hoped your instinct might have been for collaboration in understanding the situation rather than simply denigration, but if that is not what you feel like offering, then there is nothing I can do about that.
If people like Mick done their job and found out what was going on at the club for all the fans on this board the whole thing would either be out in the open or put to bed
If someone who worked for and supported the club doesn't find it strange that a prominent member of staff resigned and is now being suggested was fired
Then another one the CEO leaves unexpectedly reportedly not of his choosing
Another senior member of staff is dismissed after a 12 week investigation
There have been reports of non payment to local businesses
Players due to sign that don't offers on table removed
Surely any journalist with the club involved at heart would want to dig using the sources that they must have
Instead they read here ignore the obvious calls for facts to be laid out infrint of those who care the most the fans
I find it very ironic that they then use this forum to score points instead of going away doing the work and making it public
As I envisage it the trusts primary function is to represent the fans, and try work with the Board for the bettermenet of the club, if we can achieve mass membership and legitimacy amongst the fanbase perhaps we can demonstrate business benefits of leveraging the support of fans.
In my view however the Trust will continue to operate in whatever environment exists in as a positive a way as possible, with the current board, and the next, and even the one after that.
So the news here is there is no news, not to me at least.
Comments
If I was the owner of a football club, wanting to be handed a reason to ignore message boards and interaction with fans in general, that piece of tasteless nonsense - the poorly-judged spoof of Martin Niemoller - would be like a gift from the gods.
I'm sure the idiot who wrote it thought it was clever, and impassioned, and he'd get a great response, but it's not. It's just tasteless and very, very stupid.
Not at all, obviously. Like it or not, the wider perception of message boards is of being peopled by obsessives and loons. That's just a fact of life in the wider world. Lots of 'members' sometimes, perhaps, but usually a hardcore of people who actually use the boards on a regular basis, who aren't truly representative of, in football terms, the entire fanbase.
I think the whole Trust thing is interesting and an idea for people to discuss, but this discussion has shown how message boards walk on a tightrope - one slip, and they will be ignored, because of the perception about "obsessives and loons".
This subject has already attracted a bizarre, 1000 word "as told to me by a mate of a sister of a bloke I once bought a dog from" piece, written in the persona of Tony Jiminez, and now that absurd and offensive Niemoller parody. That's two of those 'slips' that would allow people to consign the whole debate to the bin.
I'm not saying that they should use it as an excuse to ignore it, but I can see that they might.
As a well respected supporter of our club what is your view of the recent departures?
Most of us are really bemused particularly with Rick being sacked and no recognition being given to the big part he played in our move forward from the bad old days.
We know each other, right, even though we have never met in person ?
Therefore had you taken a few moments to drop me a private message about my post, to which you refer in such disparaging terms, I might have felt able to demonstrate to you why it would not be treated as a 'slip.'
Not everyone here knows each other, by any stretch, but I naively expect those who do, and who have demonstrated that in the past they are ready to go the extra mile in support of CAFC, might actually refrain from sniping at each other, even if they disagree over their perception of the current situation. Even better, they might talk to each other, share knowledge and build up a clearer picture of what is happening, and what the options are.
In your position as a journalist you are held in some esteem by some Charlton fans. They hope you might be able to investigate and shed light on what is going on. Instead you decide that your only contribution is to slag off other posters, one of whom is also, ironically, a journalist.
Firstly, the notion that, if I think Richard Hunt has written something nonsensical, I should "drop him a private message" to ascertain whether it was actually part of a grand plan, rather than just point out that I think it's nonsensical. It seems rather arrogant to request such a thing.
Secondly, the notion that, because Doug Chapman is a journalist, it's "ironic" that I think his posting was offensive. The only irony I can see is that the least suitable and fitting posting on this entire subject so far, came from a journalist. If he can't exercise enough judgment to see that prose written in the wake of genocide, shouldn't be corrupted to attempt to describe events surrounding the management of a second tier football club, then nothing I can say is going to help him.
Thirdly, that I was being "reciprocally offensive". I wasn't. I was observing that, the way the wider world views message boards is such that they are allowed few 'slips' before being consigned to a bin marked "loons and obsessives". That's not the same as saying that I think people who use them necessarily fall into that category, it's just a reflection of, as I say, the way the wider world sees them. You can like it or lump it, but it's a fact. I didn't expect to receive a terribly warm welcome for expressing that view on a message board, but if you've serious aspirations about a Trust, that's the world you need to work in.
Fourthly, while it wasn't meant, and it's just a buttering-up exercise, I don't think I should be held in any sort of "esteem". I don't think any journalist should seek such a thing - it gets in the way of what they're trying to do. I also think it leads to attaching undue weight to things people say, and to not study them as closely as you might otherwise, and that's a bad idea.
Finally, I think this whole debate is, currently, stalled. The club say Rick was sacked for "gross misconduct", and have, one presumes, taken legal advice to confirm they can justify that position. Rick, in turn, appears to be suggesting some form of appeal, or indeed legal action against the club. Similarly, one presumes he thinks he can justify that.
Until such time as it happens though, neither side is going to be able to say very much.
Though you may not like it, my esteem for you has risen once again.
I hope people climb off their pedestal and listen to what you are saying.
Charlton Life and the Trust overlap like a venn diagram, but are not the same thing.
I don't know who you think the trust is but currently we the interim steering group who can be seen on the website www.castrust.org have no other policy other than aiming to form the trust and engage positively with the club. Until we reach an agm and hopefully beyond that, that will remain the case.
Individuals who support the trust may have views about its role or purpose but the above is the official position.
BR
I don't mind if you think it's nonsensical. My issue is that you described it as:
"as told to me by a mate of a sister of a bloke I once bought a dog from" piece,
and that as a result 'we', whoever you define 'we' to be will lose credibility in the boardroom because of what you called a 'slip'
And that this somehow affects the formation of a successful Trust.
The two points I am trying to make to you are:
1. I am not a part of the Trust team. I simply strongly support the idea of setting one up. I don't know American Addick's attitude to the Trust, but for sure he isn't part of the Trust team either. The clue is in the Forum names we use.
2. There are very good reasons why I believe the current Board's attitude to a Trust is likely to be exactly as suggested in my spoof piece; and therefore we who support the Trust ought to address what our position is before we come across such an attitude in real life, so we don't just walk away with our tails between our legs.
In the past you've written various pieces here which people (including me) found very helpful in understanding what might be going on behind the scenes. You too have lost a position at CAFC which a lot of people regretted and found puzzling at the time - there was no bigger fan than me of your match reports for the CAFC website. I simply hoped your instinct might have been for collaboration in understanding the situation rather than simply denigration, but if that is not what you feel like offering, then there is nothing I can do about that.
If people like Mick done their job and found out what was going on at the club for all the fans on this board the whole thing would either be out in the open or put to bed
If someone who worked for and supported the club doesn't find it strange that a prominent member of staff resigned and is now being suggested was fired
Then another one the CEO leaves unexpectedly reportedly not of his choosing
Another senior member of staff is dismissed after a 12 week investigation
There have been reports of non payment to local businesses
Players due to sign that don't offers on table removed
Surely any journalist with the club involved at heart would want to dig using the sources that they must have
Instead they read here ignore the obvious calls for facts to be laid out infrint of those who care the most the fans
I find it very ironic that they then use this forum to score points instead of going away doing the work and making it public
Very strange behaviour
In my view however the Trust will continue to operate in whatever environment exists in as a positive a way as possible, with the current board, and the next, and even the one after that.
So the news here is there is no news, not to me at least.