in a better position to discuss what is happening at the Club at the beginning of next season......Let us see if that materialises. As to what difference three months makes shall be interesting
Richard Murray has postponed his annual visit to Bromley Addicks, originally scheduled for 7 May
In light of the many changes at the Club recently Richard felt that he would be in a better position to discuss what is happening at the Club at the beginning of next season
Bromley Addicks will announce the date for the re-arranged meeting, to take place at Bromley Conservative Club, 27 Elmfield Rd, Bromley sometime in late August or early September, as soon as the 2014/5 fixtures have been announced.
In the meantime we are looking to find a suitable replacement guest or guests for the 7 May 2014 if at all possible.
All queries regarding Bromley Addicks meetings and membership should be directed to tony.warran@btinternet.com
I hope there is nothing more to it than meets the eye. I have to say, though, that even if the VOTV article was 100% accurate, and I have no reason to believe that Airman would print any lies, I would not be terribly surprised if Richard was to decide to stop going to these sort of events.
Ignoring the rights or wrongs of what had gone on before, publicly slating an individual is hardly the best way to endear them to come along to fan gatherings to 'share' stories and facts about the club.
As I say I'm not, necessarily, criticising the Voice article, but if it had been written about me I would have made an on the spot decision to turn down any more invites from Supporters' Clubs. I suspect it's only Henry's continued friendship with Richard that has made this an annual event. I just hope it doesn't stop permanently as I find these sort of events hugely entertaining and informative. I don't know of any other club official that is as open as Richard can be - both in his praise and his criticism. It would be a shame if he stopped providing this kind of access.
I hope there is nothing more to it than meets the eye. I have to say, though, that even if the VOTV article was 100% accurate, and I have no reason to believe that Airman would print any lies, I would not be terribly surprised if Richard was to decide to stop going to these sort of events.
Ignoring the rights or wrongs of what had gone on before, publicly slating an individual is hardly the best way to endear them to come along to fan gatherings to 'share' stories and facts about the club.
As I say I'm not, necessarily, criticising the Voice article, but if it had been written about me I would have made an on the spot decision to turn down any more invites from Supporters' Clubs. I suspect it's only Henry's continued friendship with Richard that has made this an annual event. I just hope it doesn't stop permanently as I find these sort of events hugely entertaining and informative. I don't know of any other club official that is as open as Richard can be - both in his praise and his criticism. It would be a shame if he stopped providing this kind of access.
I'm confident Richard Murray will continue to attend these events - so long as the new regime mandate him to speak on behalf of CAFC. I spoke with him yesterday on behalf of the Trust, and while we didnt discuss Bromley specifically, he made it clear that the new regime do not want any kind of contact with any supporters' groups until well into the close season. Their thinking is that by then they will have demonstrated to us more clearly that they have coherent and positive plans for CAFC, with close -season activity being the main evidence of that.
In my personal experience Richard Murray accepts better than most club directors that fans say things which are hurtful and damaging to those in charge, and nowadays they can do it instantly on the web, and this goes with the territory of club ownership. This is not to say that he is not hurt by it, he is; and by the same token this is not to say that he thinks he or any owner is above (reasonable) criticism. My point is that I believe he is still prepared to step into the fray and talk with fans directly. I worry about what will happen to constructive dialogue if he is no longer willing or able to play that role (if for example RD does not wish him to play that role)
Murray has always done these events, and has done two already this year. Why was it ok to do in January in the City, in March with the VIPs, but not May with a Supporters Group.
i know, but there's been a load of changes over the years, on and off the pitch, relegation years etc, but that's never stopped him doing these things.
Just a bit surprised to be honest, seems like there's a bit of a 'lockdown' in play at the moment.
I hope there is nothing more to it than meets the eye. I have to say, though, that even if the VOTV article was 100% accurate, and I have no reason to believe that Airman would print any lies, I would not be terribly surprised if Richard was to decide to stop going to these sort of events.
Ignoring the rights or wrongs of what had gone on before, publicly slating an individual is hardly the best way to endear them to come along to fan gatherings to 'share' stories and facts about the club.
As I say I'm not, necessarily, criticising the Voice article, but if it had been written about me I would have made an on the spot decision to turn down any more invites from Supporters' Clubs. I suspect it's only Henry's continued friendship with Richard that has made this an annual event. I just hope it doesn't stop permanently as I find these sort of events hugely entertaining and informative. I don't know of any other club official that is as open as Richard can be - both in his praise and his criticism. It would be a shame if he stopped providing this kind of access.
It must be clear to anyone who has read the article that it is not about Richard Murray per se and does not "publicly slate him", but is a direct and detailed response to some derogatory things he has repeatedly said, publicly and privately, about people who have left the club, including Peter Varney and Steve Kavanagh.
I don't suppose he likes being challenged with inconvenient facts, but why should Murray expect to "publicly slate" Varney, among others, without any rebuttal? I suggest that others may have made the same point.
if i'm honest, this fills me with excitement. New training facilities, wifi at the valley, low season ticket prices. Get some good investment on the pitch and I'll become a follower of the duchatelet
i know, but there's been a load of changes over the years, on and off the pitch, relegation years etc, but that's never stopped him doing these things.
Just a bit surprised to be honest, seems like there's a bit of a 'lockdown' in play at the moment.
you could always submit it as a question to the fans forum I believe Steve Bradshaw mooted an external email address for this purpose?
Murray has always done these events, and has done two already this year. Why was it ok to do in January in the City, in March with the VIPs, but not May with a Supporters Group.
So what has changed then ?
There is national propaganda (Daily Mail and Evening Standard) against the club together with many individual fans speculating about this and that plus of course a relegation dogfight starting tonight. Instead of reacting and coming out with tin hats on, it appears from Prague's comments that the club wish to deliver some activity first so there is something tangible and not just "more words". Apart from fixing the pitch there is the small matter of dealing with fifteen out of contract players... Ideally most of the top five will sign new deals with CAFC and the rebuild can start from there. So the club appear to want to deliver something first rather than just talk about it?
I hope there is nothing more to it than meets the eye. I have to say, though, that even if the VOTV article was 100% accurate, and I have no reason to believe that Airman would print any lies, I would not be terribly surprised if Richard was to decide to stop going to these sort of events.
Ignoring the rights or wrongs of what had gone on before, publicly slating an individual is hardly the best way to endear them to come along to fan gatherings to 'share' stories and facts about the club.
As I say I'm not, necessarily, criticising the Voice article, but if it had been written about me I would have made an on the spot decision to turn down any more invites from Supporters' Clubs. I suspect it's only Henry's continued friendship with Richard that has made this an annual event. I just hope it doesn't stop permanently as I find these sort of events hugely entertaining and informative. I don't know of any other club official that is as open as Richard can be - both in his praise and his criticism. It would be a shame if he stopped providing this kind of access.
It must be clear to anyone who has read the article that it is not about Richard Murray per se and does not "publicly slate him", but is a direct and detailed response to some derogatory things he has repeatedly said, publicly and privately, about people who have left the club, including Peter Varney and Steve Kavanagh.
I don't suppose he likes being challenged with inconvenient facts, but why should Murray expect to "publicly slate" Varney, among others, without any rebuttal? I suggest that others may have made the same point.
i know, but there's been a load of changes over the years, on and off the pitch, relegation years etc, but that's never stopped him doing these things.
Just a bit surprised to be honest, seems like there's a bit of a 'lockdown' in play at the moment.
Sure, but in those years the key difference was that he had equity in the business. Now he does not and that changes everything. To be blunt, he has to do what he is told at the end of the day. It is up to RD to define what his role as non-exec chairman actually is.
I think personally that lockdown is not a bad description, and I greatly regret it. I understand that someone is tasked with patrolling and reporting back on what the " web" says. That is in a sense understandable, but like any form of "market research" it should only be done by experienced well trained people. The trouble is of course that even if there was such a trained person, it would not stop individuals coming on here to have a look because it is so easy to do so.
I hope RD and KM will listen to Richard Murray relating how the era of greatest dialogue and fan participation coincided with the era of greatest on field success and a packed out Valley.
if i'm honest, this fills me with excitement. New training facilities, wifi at the valley, low season ticket prices. Get some good investment on the pitch and I'll become a follower of the duchatelet
Yes............ all in time for the game v Chesterfield.
RD sold our best striker for a pittance and now we can't score the goals we need to get out of trouble.
He is going to need more that free Wifi to win over this old moaner !
I'm confident Richard Murray will continue to attend these events - so long as the new regime mandate him to speak on behalf of CAFC. I spoke with him yesterday on behalf of the Trust, and while we didnt discuss Bromley specifically, he made it clear that the new regime do not want any kind of contact with any supporters' groups until well into the close season. Their thinking is that by then they will have demonstrated to us more clearly that they have coherent and positive plans for CAFC, with close -season activity being the main evidence of that.
In my personal experience Richard Murray accepts better than most club directors that fans say things which are hurtful and damaging to those in charge, and nowadays they can do it instantly on the web, and this goes with the territory of club ownership. This is not to say that he is not hurt by it, he is; and by the same token this is not to say that he thinks he or any owner is above (reasonable) criticism. My point is that I believe he is still prepared to step into the fray and talk with fans directly. I worry about what will happen to constructive dialogue if he is no longer willing or able to play that role (if for example RD does not wish him to play that role)
@PragueAddick Good to hear, thanks for sharing. I am sure even once left the board, Richard will have a lot to contribute to any fans meeting and be more then welcome.
I hope there is nothing more to it than meets the eye. I have to say, though, that even if the VOTV article was 100% accurate, and I have no reason to believe that Airman would print any lies, I would not be terribly surprised if Richard was to decide to stop going to these sort of events.
Ignoring the rights or wrongs of what had gone on before, publicly slating an individual is hardly the best way to endear them to come along to fan gatherings to 'share' stories and facts about the club.
As I say I'm not, necessarily, criticising the Voice article, but if it had been written about me I would have made an on the spot decision to turn down any more invites from Supporters' Clubs. I suspect it's only Henry's continued friendship with Richard that has made this an annual event. I just hope it doesn't stop permanently as I find these sort of events hugely entertaining and informative. I don't know of any other club official that is as open as Richard can be - both in his praise and his criticism. It would be a shame if he stopped providing this kind of access.
It must be clear to anyone who has read the article that it is not about Richard Murray per se and does not "publicly slate him", but is a direct and detailed response to some derogatory things he has repeatedly said, publicly and privately, about people who have left the club, including Peter Varney and Steve Kavanagh.
I don't suppose he likes being challenged with inconvenient facts, but why should Murray expect to "publicly slate" Varney, among others, without any rebuttal? I suggest that others may have made the same point.
1. What ever it is about it reads (maybe not all of it) like a response (rebuttal) to Richard's public meetings. Specifically I'm thinking of Bromley last year which was preceded with you offering Lifers some 'helpful questions' for us to ask him - questions that I thought at the time were, shall we say, a little argumentative. I thought at the time that his outburst and open conversation with Wendy Perfect was in direct response to your posts on here. I think that, somewhat, questions if he is the only one that wants to be able to respond to public statements.
2. publicly slate him? Well it was public (I'm assuming that VOTV is, by definition, public) and you did call him out on a number of things - I'm not saying you were incorrect or that it was wrong to do it, but from my first reading, and the one I've just done again now, that is the interpretation I have of the article.
3. At the risk of sounding like a patronising teacher or parent the phrase that, immediately, comes to me is "Well he started it!"
I have no interest in prolonging the spat that you have with the club and it's Directors etc. nor do I have any desire to take sides or offer an opinion on the rights and wrongs of what happened. However, my first thought when I read that he was 'postponing' the May meeting was that it would be a shame if he was tempted to stop attending these meetings if there was going to be someone 'monitoring' what he said to rebut it in print later on.
I am encouraged by the comments, especially those of Prague Addick, that he will not stop attending these events. I couldn't be happier to be proved wrong about the impact of the article, but I certainly didn't post on here to start a row about it.
Some people have a very different definition of 'public' to me.
Am I alone in not having read the VOTV article where Airman slates Richard, not being aware of any 'open' discussion between Wendy and Richard or know what Richard has 'repeatedly' said about Airman?
I do remember the questions Airman suggested on here for putting to Richard at the meeting although I have no idea if anyone did.
In my view I read this forum quite a bit, and probably more that the average Charlton fan, and therefore am probably better informed on Charlton 'gossip' than the average fan. I believe the average Charlton fan knows more about Charlton than the average member of the public.
And therefore I believe there are very very few members of the public who do know (or care about) this stuff and therefore question the repeated use of the word public when refering to these petty arguments.
Comments
More news when we get it.
LLL&BH
Ignoring the rights or wrongs of what had gone on before, publicly slating an individual is hardly the best way to endear them to come along to fan gatherings to 'share' stories and facts about the club.
As I say I'm not, necessarily, criticising the Voice article, but if it had been written about me I would have made an on the spot decision to turn down any more invites from Supporters' Clubs. I suspect it's only Henry's continued friendship with Richard that has made this an annual event. I just hope it doesn't stop permanently as I find these sort of events hugely entertaining and informative. I don't know of any other club official that is as open as Richard can be - both in his praise and his criticism. It would be a shame if he stopped providing this kind of access.
I'm confident Richard Murray will continue to attend these events - so long as the new regime mandate him to speak on behalf of CAFC. I spoke with him yesterday on behalf of the Trust, and while we didnt discuss Bromley specifically, he made it clear that the new regime do not want any kind of contact with any supporters' groups until well into the close season. Their thinking is that by then they will have demonstrated to us more clearly that they have coherent and positive plans for CAFC, with close -season activity being the main evidence of that.
In my personal experience Richard Murray accepts better than most club directors that fans say things which are hurtful and damaging to those in charge, and nowadays they can do it instantly on the web, and this goes with the territory of club ownership. This is not to say that he is not hurt by it, he is; and by the same token this is not to say that he thinks he or any owner is above (reasonable) criticism. My point is that I believe he is still prepared to step into the fray and talk with fans directly. I worry about what will happen to constructive dialogue if he is no longer willing or able to play that role (if for example RD does not wish him to play that role)
So what has changed then ?
Just a bit surprised to be honest, seems like there's a bit of a 'lockdown' in play at the moment.
I don't suppose he likes being challenged with inconvenient facts, but why should Murray expect to "publicly slate" Varney, among others, without any rebuttal? I suggest that others may have made the same point.
Instead of reacting and coming out with tin hats on, it appears from Prague's comments that the club wish to deliver some activity first so there is something tangible and not just "more words".
Apart from fixing the pitch there is the small matter of dealing with fifteen out of contract players... Ideally most of the top five will sign new deals with CAFC and the rebuild can start from there.
So the club appear to want to deliver something first rather than just talk about it?
I think personally that lockdown is not a bad description, and I greatly regret it. I understand that someone is tasked with patrolling and reporting back on what the " web" says. That is in a sense understandable, but like any form of "market research" it should only be done by experienced well trained people. The trouble is of course that even if there was such a trained person, it would not stop individuals coming on here to have a look because it is so easy to do so.
I hope RD and KM will listen to Richard Murray relating how the era of greatest dialogue and fan participation coincided with the era of greatest on field success and a packed out Valley.
RD sold our best striker for a pittance and now we can't score the goals we need to get out of trouble.
He is going to need more that free Wifi to win over this old moaner !
Am I alone in this?
2. publicly slate him? Well it was public (I'm assuming that VOTV is, by definition, public) and you did call him out on a number of things - I'm not saying you were incorrect or that it was wrong to do it, but from my first reading, and the one I've just done again now, that is the interpretation I have of the article.
3. At the risk of sounding like a patronising teacher or parent the phrase that, immediately, comes to me is "Well he started it!"
I have no interest in prolonging the spat that you have with the club and it's Directors etc. nor do I have any desire to take sides or offer an opinion on the rights and wrongs of what happened. However, my first thought when I read that he was 'postponing' the May meeting was that it would be a shame if he was tempted to stop attending these meetings if there was going to be someone 'monitoring' what he said to rebut it in print later on.
I am encouraged by the comments, especially those of Prague Addick, that he will not stop attending these events. I couldn't be happier to be proved wrong about the impact of the article, but I certainly didn't post on here to start a row about it.
Am I alone in not having read the VOTV article where Airman slates Richard, not being aware of any 'open' discussion between Wendy and Richard or know what Richard has 'repeatedly' said about Airman?
I do remember the questions Airman suggested on here for putting to Richard at the meeting although I have no idea if anyone did.
In my view I read this forum quite a bit, and probably more that the average Charlton fan, and therefore am probably better informed on Charlton 'gossip' than the average fan.
I believe the average Charlton fan knows more about Charlton than the average member of the public.
And therefore I believe there are very very few members of the public who do know (or care about) this stuff and therefore question the repeated use of the word public when refering to these petty arguments.