I am a subscriber of the trust and think they have a reason for being but seems more based round diplomacy and with out wishing to offend anyone, on the current important issue of the clubs identity and aspirations 'pussying around'.
However the statement from the splinter group or whatever you want to call them have made a direct statement of intent and will mobilise quicker and act rather than going through rafts of not wanting to upset people or feeling they can't go ahead unless they have 100% consensus.
The Trust will be there for all issues small and big over time for the good of fans but the group are making a stand on an immediate issue, much in the Valley issue of 85. Ideally both will play its part.
I accept this might not be the case with regard to the trust it is just how I'm seeing it from the outside.
I don't see the issue as CP has gone but, why he has gone being a part of the overall issue, the clubs identity and ambition aspirations.
Unfortunately too many of our fans are in fighting a battle about the former manager in the same way as Parky, for or against the person. It is clouding the real issue.
The Trust will be there for all issues small and big over time for the good of fans but the group are making a stand on an immediate issue, much in the Valley issue of 85.
But this is one of my problems - what 'issue'?
I am not clear at all on their aims - clarity is one of the problems we had with the last board ... we shouldn't have it with a supporter group!
What I don't get is that there is greater communication now than there was under TJ et al. I still don't see what RD has done wrong yet. Sold Yann and Stephens? We have always been a selling Club. RD got offers he thought were too good to refuse for players left on short contracts likely to leave for nothing in the summer. Yann was offered a new deal but turned it down. He is committed to spending 600k plus on the pitch, something even RM says should have been done sooner under his watch. Talk of our players heading for Leige is pie in the sky for me cause I can't see any players agreeing. He has hardly been here five minutes and deserves more time in my opinion. Jacko had now signed a new deal, who knows more may follow. He had a plan, it may work, it may not, but at least he has one. Did TJ et al? Did they ever communicate it with us?
Oh, nearly forgot, he sacked Chris Powell. Some support that some don't. He won't be the first manager we sack, won't be the last. We are bottom of the table, six wins all season, lowest scorers out of 92. New owner comes in, sacks under-performing Manager. Surprised?
I am not surprised some fans are concerned with some of these events but it's too early for me to start going all Wolfie Smith.
Agree with this.
Absolutely gutted Chris Powell and Kermo, have gone. IMHO two very wrong decisions. I suspected the new players 'thrust' upon us was done in good faith and deemed good enough to make an immediate difference, another mistake. We have new owners, jumping in with two big feet and throwing their weight around as they try to shake everything up and put the world to rights with their new ideas and plans for the future.
They have a lot to learn! luckily they seem to be here for the long term and with deep enough pockets to recover from these early mishaps (understatement).
Having said all that I am not blind to the possibility, that I am simply being naive and one day I will awake from my rose-tinted, optimist in me induced slumber and realise RD is in fact an evil man with evil intentions. I agree with the Trusts initial response to events, and am more than a little concerned with 'big brother' stepping in to 'sort the situation'.
Just to add, we had thread after thread many months ago telling us why we had to have a Trust, giving examples of other clubs where trusts have worked in taking action to save clubs and grounds.
The new group gives the impression that our Trust is not up to this and they have to do it themselves .. so why have a Trust in the first place?
Obviously I am missing a nuance here .. clarity is needed.
I think, frankly, that a lot of the confusion comes about because of what this new Group is assumed to be all about - that is to say "I am angry and concerned, therefore I want to 'do something' about it". Any talk of 'asking questions' is perceived to be a red herring because some have assumed that it is a foregone conclusion that they will not like any answers that the club will give, so they will then be perfectly justified in taking some form of action. And they are assuming that the leaders of the Group feel the same way and any nice words around 'asking questions' first is just a smokescreen.
Hence all the talk of the Trust having to be kept clean, or this being a splinter group - why should the Trust be kept clean from asking questions of the club? This is exactly what it should be doing and what it is doing!
I have so much less history of support of the club than many people on here, so I do not know the personalities involved myself, but I, personally, believe that this is not the case and that this Group is being perfectly honest in that all they want is answers to respectful and reasonable questions, and this is not just an excuse to take some form of action.
It is no secret that I am a big fan (although, not, hopefully, a blinkered one) of what RD is doing - he seems to be getting more right than wrong for me. But, equally, I do realise that there is a boil that needs lancing because a lot of true fans are angry and worried.
So there is an opportunity to take advantage of this released energy (as well as the general time of change at the club) to push for more representation and a more active discussion - a fan board member perhaps?
But I do think that if the Group are being honest that all they want is to ask legitimate questions - and I quite believe that they are - it would be nice if they would just make this extra clear. And anyway, I feel that their energy and passion would come much better being channeled through the Trust and, indeed, this could be a very necessary step and one that is positive for the future.
I have slept on it and I am more convinced now than last night that this is not good for the trust and is potrntially damagaing
I have re read posts and the OP and I maybe out of line or tottally wrong but to me this new group is one that doesn't want to have to ask if certain action or wording can be used
It wants in fact to not be led or governed by anyone other than those in the group
So it is a militant action an action of those who deem themselves to be more aware than anyone else of the under belly of issues that may occur in the future
I as a member of the trust will state out right your group and actions I don't welcome and I hope RD tells you to jog on and I don't want the trust to be seen to be associated with you
Self elected on the quiet.....self indulgent. Considering one of the names was advocating a season ticket boycott to bring the owner to the table says it all to me. May as well disband the Trust now as you're basically being undermined....same with the Fans Forum, as this new faction obviously feel they are superior.
Nothing that has been said has suggested the supporters initiative 'feels they are superior'. You are perfectly at liberty to interpret it that way of course, but I can't find the evidence myself.
So tell me.....did this new group exhaust every avenue to have whatever questions they may have answered via the two recognized organizations i.e. The Fans Forum and The Trust?
I am pretty sure that the group contains Trust officers and (at least one) VIP Member, and (at least one) Fans Forum member. I don't know if that is what is meant by exhaust every avenue. The group first came together two days ago.
Flower it up however you like Seth, but you haven't answered the question. So, whatever the concerns are, and I assume your activity here is based upon your favorite topic of us being the feeder club for Standard Liege......have the questions first and most importantly been aked by the two collectives that are formerly recognized by the football club? Simple question.....have they put forward the views of this new collective and have those questions fallen upon deaf ears? Or have the new collective formed up.....(and I assume they all just happened to be in the Lib or some other pub on Wednesday by pure coincidence), and decided that they ought to be, and I coin a phrase, the new Voice of the Valley? I would guess.....the answer is no and they have bypassed the recognized channels because they think they can do better.
Well you have the questions published here that were asked by the Trust, and the supporters group are seeking a meeting in order to ask questions too.
A very few have opined that there is no point asking anything because Roland can do what he wants, the debate on here does not seem to be about the sense of asking questions, but who is doing the asking.
Isn't the real issue the answers?
Today my favourite topic is not to what degree Charlton Athletic will be the Standard Liege reserve team, but whether Jose Riga and Karel deliver us a very encouraging win at Millwall, an unconvincing draw, or a disastrous defeat.
Self elected on the quiet.....self indulgent. Considering one of the names was advocating a season ticket boycott to bring the owner to the table says it all to me. May as well disband the Trust now as you're basically being undermined....same with the Fans Forum, as this new faction obviously feel they are superior.
Nothing that has been said has suggested the supporters initiative 'feels they are superior'. You are perfectly at liberty to interpret it that way of course, but I can't find the evidence myself.
So tell me.....did this new group exhaust every avenue to have whatever questions they may have answered via the two recognized organizations i.e. The Fans Forum and The Trust?
I am pretty sure that the group contains Trust officers and (at least one) VIP Member, and (at least one) Fans Forum member. I don't know if that is what is meant by exhaust every avenue. The group first came together two days ago.
Flower it up however you like Seth, but you haven't answered the question. So, whatever the concerns are, and I assume your activity here is based upon your favorite topic of us being the feeder club for Standard Liege......have the questions first and most importantly been aked by the two collectives that are formerly recognized by the football club? Simple question.....have they put forward the views of this new collective and have those questions fallen upon deaf ears? Or have the new collective formed up.....(and I assume they all just happened to be in the Lib or some other pub on Wednesday by pure coincidence), and decided that they ought to be, and I coin a phrase, the new Voice of the Valley? I would guess.....the answer is no and they have bypassed the recognized channels because they think they can do better.
Well you have the questions published here that were asked by the Trust, and the supporters group are seeking a meeting in order to ask questions too.
A very few have opined that there is no point asking anything because Roland can do what he wants, the debate on here does not seem to be about the sense of asking questions, but who is doing the asking.
Isn't the real issue the answers?
Today my favourite topic is not to what degree Charlton Athletic will be the Standard Liege reserve team, but whether Jose Riga and Karel deliver us a very encouraging win at Millwall, an unconvincing draw, or a disastrous defeat.
So, for clarity, what were the questions? Were they put forward by The Trust and or the Fans Forum and secondly when was this? And did they get an answer?
I have slept on it and I am more convinced now than last night that this is not good for the trust and is potrntially damagaing
I have re read posts and the OP and I maybe out of line or tottally wrong but to me this new group is one that doesn't want to have to ask if certain action or wording can be used
It wants in fact to not be led or governed by anyone other than those in the group
So it is a militant action an action of those who deem themselves to be more aware than anyone else of the under belly of issues that may occur in the future
I as a member of the trust will state out right your group and actions I don't welcome and I hope RD tells you to jog on and I don't want the trust to be seen to be associated with you
Seth the trust and only the trust at this time should be the voice of cafc fans at this time
If the trust wants to be taken seriously
I fully understand, and also think the Trust is already being the voice of the fans given the questions already lodged.
However I don't know if you agree that people ought to have freedom to act as they see fit. It does not mean they oppose other supporters.
For example people as individuals have the freedom to write to the club, as many have done. Those people may think that because they have asked as individuals, then there is no need for any group to do so. They may also think that they have written in personally, but they also support the actions of groups too, it isn't mutually exclusive.
NLA, I don't believe for a minute you would stop any individual from asking stuff, and say they shouldn't do it, it is the job of the trust. I don't believe you would want to restrict the freedom of an individual to act.
Why restrict the group from having the same freedom?
Because they should ask the questions via the trust not don't ask them at all but don't try to impose in the situation just because you don't want to be governed and held to account
I hope RD says do one to them and answers any questions the trust asks
I have no problems with searching questions being put to RD, infact I welcome them.
However, the trust is already doing this.
There is no desperate rush to try and get this sorted immediately is there ?
Let the trust proceed and let members of the new group support the trust.
There are only 2 reasons that I can see why another group has been formed.
1 It doesn't believe the trust will be effective.
2 The new group want immediate action, as already muted, such as encouraging fans to not renew their S/T applications.
Yes, this will damage RD, but it will damage Charlton a whole lot more.
RD says, he expects us to manage ourselves & try to stand on our own 2 feet. If this proceeds, we may find ourselves dropping from number 2 in the hierachy.
Let the trust proceed. If you want them to add futher questions, then submit them to the trust to be asked.
If the trust appear to be "unsuccessful" and the fans are not happy with the outcome, then and only then, perhaps the srategy needs to be rethought.
Finally, I should like to add that I am extremely grateful to both the trust and the supporters group, who are both willing to put themselves forward, for the betterment of Charlton.
I thank both parties, but believe we should proceed as stated.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip, which is exactly why it needed to be so broad. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
Certainly not saying mind your own business. As I stated previously, I am obviously missing a nuance ... I need clarity ... what are your aims?
It may well be that I fully agree with you but at the moment I am in the dark. I still do not see your objectives.
Self elected on the quiet.....self indulgent. Considering one of the names was advocating a season ticket boycott to bring the owner to the table says it all to me. May as well disband the Trust now as you're basically being undermined....same with the Fans Forum, as this new faction obviously feel they are superior.
Nothing that has been said has suggested the supporters initiative 'feels they are superior'. You are perfectly at liberty to interpret it that way of course, but I can't find the evidence myself.
So tell me.....did this new group exhaust every avenue to have whatever questions they may have answered via the two recognized organizations i.e. The Fans Forum and The Trust?
I am pretty sure that the group contains Trust officers and (at least one) VIP Member, and (at least one) Fans Forum member. I don't know if that is what is meant by exhaust every avenue. The group first came together two days ago.
Flower it up however you like Seth, but you haven't answered the question. So, whatever the concerns are, and I assume your activity here is based upon your favorite topic of us being the feeder club for Standard Liege......have the questions first and most importantly been aked by the two collectives that are formerly recognized by the football club? Simple question.....have they put forward the views of this new collective and have those questions fallen upon deaf ears? Or have the new collective formed up.....(and I assume they all just happened to be in the Lib or some other pub on Wednesday by pure coincidence), and decided that they ought to be, and I coin a phrase, the new Voice of the Valley? I would guess.....the answer is no and they have bypassed the recognized channels because they think they can do better.
Well you have the questions published here that were asked by the Trust, and the supporters group are seeking a meeting in order to ask questions too.
A very few have opined that there is no point asking anything because Roland can do what he wants, the debate on here does not seem to be about the sense of asking questions, but who is doing the asking.
Isn't the real issue the answers?
Today my favourite topic is not to what degree Charlton Athletic will be the Standard Liege reserve team, but whether Jose Riga and Karel deliver us a very encouraging win at Millwall, an unconvincing draw, or a disastrous defeat.
So, for clarity, what were the questions? Were they put forward by The Trust and or the Fans Forum and secondly when was this? And did they get an answer?
The questions asked by the Trust are published on this thread. Asked earlier this week I believe, and I am not aware of any answers as yet.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
Certainly not saying mind your own business. As I stated previously, I am obviously missing a nuance ... I need clarity ... what are your aims?
It may well be that I fully agree with you but at the moment I am in the dark. I still do not see your objectives.
We believe that some action may be necessary and that this would give the trust difficulty, but as reasonable people we want to hear what the club has to say first and to base any decisions on that intelligence. In short, we want to be confident that the primary objective of the club remains to win football matches.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip, which is exactly why it needed to be so broad. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
I agree with your first paragraph.
I don't agree with the second. I am saying hold your fire & wait to see if the trust get the answers to the questions, we all want.
I broadly agree with your third paragraph. The people listed are all likely, excellent candidates for achieving action & I don't think it's to do with grudges. I don't dismiss their concerns at all. I agree with their concerns. I know all but 3 of the parties I believe.
I'm just saying we have a set up in place and the trust should not be sidelined, without giving them the opportunity, to achieve what we all want.
If the trust cannot get the answers, then step forward.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
Certainly not saying mind your own business. As I stated previously, I am obviously missing a nuance ... I need clarity ... what are your aims?
It may well be that I fully agree with you but at the moment I am in the dark. I still do not see your objectives.
We believe that some action may be necessary and that this would give the trust difficulty, but as reasonable people we want to hear what the club has to say first and to base any decisions on that intelligence. In short, we want to be confident that the primary objective of the club remains to win football matches.
Thanks, that is what I needed ... key point being 'may be necessary'. We all agree that we do not know at this stage. I agree with the primary objective obviously.
Why would the club management want to talk to a new group when they would, I assume, expect the trust to handle such communication issues? Not being contentious, it is a genuine question.
Nonsense AB if this group feels questions need asking and action needs taking then the evidence as to why needs laying before the trust after all they are the body that we as fans have rallied behind and are trying to grow and establish
And then the trust take your questions and put them to the club.
Just because who is in your group and their relationship with cafc and its history is no reason for RD to recognise any of you other than the trust members in your group
But what you are actually doing is letting RD know we are splintered in thought and strngth and weaken the postition of the trust and that is unacceptable behaviour and not friendly nor warrented
If this group feels that the wider fan base is not understanding the true and real facts of why RD is the anti christ and yet TJ and MS were bastions of virtue and they mustve been becuse this group didn't feel the need to come together then and speak up
I remember even stating on a thread where are our journo friends and why are they not putting in the public domain much of what you and others were drip feeding from within
You then wonder why people like me would be cynical to such a display of peacocking and treading over the trust in such a fashion
Because they should ask the questions via the trust not don't ask them at all but don't try to impose in the situation just because you don't want to be governed and held to account
I hope RD says do one to them and answers any questions the trust asks
That may well be what Roland does.
Then there would be a call for a public meeting, and if nobody is interested it will melt away won't it?
There is no more an imposition from the group than there is from an individual.
As for governed, well so far it is an organic group as far as I can tell, not governed. In terms of held to account well the statement is there, people are putting their real names to it, I fully expect anything that happens to be out in the open and communicated certainly via Forums, and anything else will be out in the open too. if that behaviour does not sit well with people they will vote with their feet won't they?
The real interest for me is the answers to questions however those answers may emerge.
One of the main drivers of the Trust was that if we faced a situation like Portsmouth it would be too late to form something to help the club.
The quick formation of this group proves that we don't need the Trust waiting in the background to step up in times of crises.
I have nothing against those that set up the trust, and I have no desire to have it shut down but what the formation of this group has done, in my view, is show that there was, quite possibly, no need for a Trust then, there is, almost certainly, no need for one now, and probably no need for one in the future.
I don't think the new group members are responsible for this, they haven't created the revelation, just made people aware of it.
I questioned the Fans Forum when it was formed, and I had my doubts about the Trust. Like I say, I don't have a problem with people doing those things if they so desire, but it is becoming more apparent, in my opinion, that these organisations do little more than provide indulgence for those that are involve in them.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip, which is exactly why it needed to be so broad. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
Who exactly are you representing because this Charlton fan of fifty two years is happy with Roland. Why was this particular committee not formed when the last owners were in Power? There was no information coming out of the Club then. I also think it seriously undermines the Supporters Trust.
I think after Powell was sacked, it has all got a bit hysterical. There is no sign that we are going to be a feeder club for Standard Liege. If you believe some people Roland taking us over has saved us from Administration. He is spending a lot of money on the pitch, and is bringing down the debt in the Club, all good so far.
I didn't agree with selling two of our best players in Kermy and Stephens and I would have given Powell until the end of the season. But I can see why he did what he did.
I am going to give Roland and his regime some time to see what unfolds in the next year or two.
The reality is if this group had gone through the trust structure and the same names were attached, many people on here would now be saying that the group had taken control of the trust and the criticism would be just the same, the existing trust board has been undermined.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip, which is exactly why it needed to be so broad. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
Who exactly are you representing because this Charlton fan of fifty two years is happy with Roland. Why was this particular committee not formed when the last owners were in Power? There was no information coming out of the Club then. I also think it seriously undermines the Supporters Trust.
I think after Powell was sacked, it has all got a bit hysterical. There is no sign that we are going to be a feeder club for Standard Liege. If you believe some people Roland taking us over has saved us from Administration. He is spending a lot of money on the pitch, and is bringing down the debt in the Club, all good so far.
I didn't agree with selling two of our best players in Kermy and Stephens and I would have given Powell until the end of the season. But I can see why he did what he did.
I am going to give Roland and his regime some time to see what unfolds in the next year or two.
Comments
However the statement from the splinter group or whatever you want to call them have made a direct statement of intent and will mobilise quicker and act rather than going through rafts of not wanting to upset people or feeling they can't go ahead unless they have 100% consensus.
The Trust will be there for all issues small and big over time for the good of fans but the group are making a stand on an immediate issue, much in the Valley issue of 85. Ideally both will play its part.
I accept this might not be the case with regard to the trust it is just how I'm seeing it from the outside.
I don't see the issue as CP has gone but, why he has gone being a part of the overall issue, the clubs identity and ambition aspirations.
Unfortunately too many of our fans are in fighting a battle about the former manager in the same way as Parky, for or against the person. It is clouding the real issue.
I am not clear at all on their aims - clarity is one of the problems we had with the last board ... we shouldn't have it with a supporter group!
Absolutely gutted Chris Powell and Kermo, have gone. IMHO two very wrong decisions. I suspected the new players 'thrust' upon us was done in good faith and deemed good enough to make an immediate difference, another mistake. We have new owners, jumping in with two big feet and throwing their weight around as they try to shake everything up and put the world to rights with their new ideas and plans for the future.
They have a lot to learn! luckily they seem to be here for the long term and with deep enough pockets to recover from these early mishaps (understatement).
Having said all that I am not blind to the possibility, that I am simply being naive and one day I will awake from my rose-tinted, optimist in me induced slumber and realise RD is in fact an evil man with evil intentions. I agree with the Trusts initial response to events, and am more than a little concerned with 'big brother' stepping in to 'sort the situation'.
The new group gives the impression that our Trust is not up to this and they have to do it themselves .. so why have a Trust in the first place?
Obviously I am missing a nuance here .. clarity is needed.
Hence all the talk of the Trust having to be kept clean, or this being a splinter group - why should the Trust be kept clean from asking questions of the club? This is exactly what it should be doing and what it is doing!
I have so much less history of support of the club than many people on here, so I do not know the personalities involved myself, but I, personally, believe that this is not the case and that this Group is being perfectly honest in that all they want is answers to respectful and reasonable questions, and this is not just an excuse to take some form of action.
It is no secret that I am a big fan (although, not, hopefully, a blinkered one) of what RD is doing - he seems to be getting more right than wrong for me. But, equally, I do realise that there is a boil that needs lancing because a lot of true fans are angry and worried.
So there is an opportunity to take advantage of this released energy (as well as the general time of change at the club) to push for more representation and a more active discussion - a fan board member perhaps?
But I do think that if the Group are being honest that all they want is to ask legitimate questions - and I quite believe that they are - it would be nice if they would just make this extra clear. And anyway, I feel that their energy and passion would come much better being channeled through the Trust and, indeed, this could be a very necessary step and one that is positive for the future.
I have re read posts and the OP and I maybe out of line or tottally wrong but to me this new group is one that doesn't want to have to ask if certain action or wording can be used
It wants in fact to not be led or governed by anyone other than those in the group
So it is a militant action an action of those who deem themselves to be more aware than anyone else of the under belly of issues that may occur in the future
I as a member of the trust will state out right your group and actions I don't welcome and I hope RD tells you to jog on and I don't want the trust to be seen to be associated with you
A very few have opined that there is no point asking anything because Roland can do what he wants, the debate on here does not seem to be about the sense of asking questions, but who is doing the asking.
Isn't the real issue the answers?
Today my favourite topic is not to what degree Charlton Athletic will be the Standard Liege reserve team, but whether Jose Riga and Karel deliver us a very encouraging win at Millwall, an unconvincing draw, or a disastrous defeat.
If the trust wants to be taken seriously
Any replies to the posts on here?
Any response to the questions raised - particularly with regard to the relationship with the Trust?
Or are they back in a smoke filled room discussing tactics?
However I don't know if you agree that people ought to have freedom to act as they see fit. It does not mean they oppose other supporters.
For example people as individuals have the freedom to write to the club, as many have done. Those people may think that because they have asked as individuals, then there is no need for any group to do so. They may also think that they have written in personally, but they also support the actions of groups too, it isn't mutually exclusive.
NLA, I don't believe for a minute you would stop any individual from asking stuff, and say they shouldn't do it, it is the job of the trust. I don't believe you would want to restrict the freedom of an individual to act.
Why restrict the group from having the same freedom?
I hope RD says do one to them and answers any questions the trust asks
I have no problems with searching questions being put to RD, infact I welcome them.
However, the trust is already doing this.
There is no desperate rush to try and get this sorted immediately is there ?
Let the trust proceed and let members of the new group support the trust.
There are only 2 reasons that I can see why another group has been formed.
1 It doesn't believe the trust will be effective.
2 The new group want immediate action, as already muted, such as encouraging fans to not renew their S/T applications.
Yes, this will damage RD, but it will damage Charlton a whole lot more.
RD says, he expects us to manage ourselves & try to stand on our own 2 feet. If this proceeds, we may find ourselves dropping from number 2 in the hierachy.
Let the trust proceed. If you want them to add futher questions, then submit them to the trust to be asked.
If the trust appear to be "unsuccessful" and the fans are not happy with the outcome, then and only then, perhaps the srategy needs to be rethought.
Finally, I should like to add that I am extremely grateful to both the trust and the supporters group, who are both willing to put themselves forward, for the betterment of Charlton.
I thank both parties, but believe we should proceed as stated.
What you are really saying then is mind your own business, this is for the trust not you. But as Charlton supporters it is our business.
The group includes four former directors, as well as Kevin Nolan - someone who has reported virtually every match for the last 30 years. It is far too broad to sustain the criticism that it comprises people harbouring a grudge or on some kind of ego trip, which is exactly why it needed to be so broad. It may also be worth considering the extent of the personal connections these people have collectively across the club before dismissing their concern that something is wrong.
It may well be that I fully agree with you but at the moment I am in the dark. I still do not see your objectives.
I don't agree with the second. I am saying hold your fire & wait to see if the trust get the answers to the questions, we all want.
I broadly agree with your third paragraph. The people listed are all likely, excellent candidates for achieving action & I don't think it's to do with grudges. I don't dismiss their concerns at all. I agree with their concerns. I know all but 3 of the parties I believe.
I'm just saying we have a set up in place and the trust should not be sidelined, without giving them the opportunity, to achieve what we all want.
If the trust cannot get the answers, then step forward.
I am on both/ all of our sides.
Why would the club management want to talk to a new group when they would, I assume, expect the trust to handle such communication issues? Not being contentious, it is a genuine question.
And then the trust take your questions and put them to the club.
Just because who is in your group and their relationship with cafc and its history is no reason for RD to recognise any of you other than the trust members in your group
But what you are actually doing is letting RD know we are splintered in thought and strngth and weaken the postition of the trust and that is unacceptable behaviour and not friendly nor warrented
If this group feels that the wider fan base is not understanding the true and real facts of why RD is the anti christ and yet TJ and MS were bastions of virtue and they mustve been becuse this group didn't feel the need to come together then and speak up
I remember even stating on a thread where are our journo friends and why are they not putting in the public domain much of what you and others were drip feeding from within
You then wonder why people like me would be cynical to such a display of peacocking and treading over the trust in such a fashion
Then there would be a call for a public meeting, and if nobody is interested it will melt away won't it?
There is no more an imposition from the group than there is from an individual.
As for governed, well so far it is an organic group as far as I can tell, not governed. In terms of held to account well the statement is there, people are putting their real names to it, I fully expect anything that happens to be out in the open and communicated certainly via Forums, and anything else will be out in the open too. if that behaviour does not sit well with people they will vote with their feet won't they?
The real interest for me is the answers to questions however those answers may emerge.
The quick formation of this group proves that we don't need the Trust waiting in the background to step up in times of crises.
I have nothing against those that set up the trust, and I have no desire to have it shut down but what the formation of this group has done, in my view, is show that there was, quite possibly, no need for a Trust then, there is, almost certainly, no need for one now, and probably no need for one in the future.
I don't think the new group members are responsible for this, they haven't created the revelation, just made people aware of it.
I questioned the Fans Forum when it was formed, and I had my doubts about the Trust. Like I say, I don't have a problem with people doing those things if they so desire, but it is becoming more apparent, in my opinion, that these organisations do little more than provide indulgence for those that are involve in them.
I think after Powell was sacked, it has all got a bit hysterical. There is no sign that we are going to be a feeder club for Standard Liege. If you believe some people Roland taking us over has saved us from Administration. He is spending a lot of money on the pitch, and is bringing down the debt in the Club, all good so far.
I didn't agree with selling two of our best players in Kermy and Stephens and I would have given Powell until the end of the season. But I can see why he did what he did.
I am going to give Roland and his regime some time to see what unfolds in the next year or two.