This all sounds very credible to the uninitiated but, surely, you are not suggesting that RD has made his money from being financially naive or stupid! I would assume he is aware of the problems he has encountered this year and has made allowances in his business plan. With regard to the programme sellers Katrien did explain the situation at the VIP meeting and what actions are being taken to address this. I would add that I am not a great fan of RD - I don't have sufficient knowledge of his intentions to form an opinion - but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
... but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
But equally your quite happy to stir up discontent against many longstanding supporters who have offered their time and expertise free to the club?
Btw Tommy = 6 comments in almost a year on here, all of them in the last two days? There's been plenty of opportunities to support the status quo over numerous threads but you've only chosen now to start..?
Never felt as strongly before and it is certainly not my intention to stir up discontent. I am entitled to my opinion and ultimately to help those anti network fans, who I feel are slightly misguided, to consider the positives.
Which are? I see positives but you are doing yourself no favours because you haven't actually stated any.
I went and spoke last night and I obviously came across as pro-network which was not my intention. I think some one shouted rubbish at something I said but not really heard by me. I thought it was really well organised and well done to all those who not only attended but more importantly organised the whole thing and as I said this single gesture will have started a debate as to how to connect with the club and also how the club should connect with the fans. What surely came across to a shy Katrien is that we really are harmless non-aggressive people who really care about Charlton and she will see that a dialogue with various representatives will be just that and she has nothing to fear. So well done all. Looking forward to tomorrows trip to wigan on the back of last Saturday. Yes indeed.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
I think it was productive, although for a while it felt like regurgitated opinions from online. I realise that not all there spend time on message boards.
400 is a great turn out. Although Roland does not really bow to pressure, he did sack Luzon after Liege fans rioted. There is therefore some precedent.
Most people want more dialogue with the club but I’m in the camp that thinks that’ll be useless. We’d only get more lies.
In terms of actions I think it would be good to discuss ideas with Ujpest, Liege, etc. A Chris Powell chant in the third minute against Huddersfield would also go directly at Meire. I (rather feebly) mentioned the Trust contacting club sponsors, those with boxes and ad boards. Many of them will be Charlton fans – if they’re fed up then they’ll remove their thousands of pounds of backing and that will send a message.
Well done to everybody who attended last night, especially the trust organizers. Think 400 is a great turnout, the meeting was conducted in an excellent spirit- could have degenerated into a bunfight, imagine millwall supporters in that situation.
Trouble is I'm still not sure how far I want to take any protest as ' be careful what you wish for' is IMO good advice. Perhaps wearing a protest T-shirt or scarf ? Like the idea of contacting the sponsors.
Hopefully I'll still be at the Valley next season with my season ticket.
Bromley john: glad you said that someone (a woman actually) shouted 'rubbish' at you as I stated that on here earlier and was called a liar. It did happen. Not important in the great scheme of things but no-one likes being called a liar, do they? She was the only example of disrespectful outburst all nigh.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
I am not particularly 'happy' about the way the owners have gone about things and been far from impressed with some of the football. However, when I look at the bigger picture I do think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing! For the first time in many a year I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. I find it difficult to comprehend why so many can be blind to positive possibilities.
We are financially stable, the owner is in it for the long term, investing in youth etc, improving squad, blah blah, blah (but you know all this).
Both the positive view and the negative view are well known, but both sides apply different meaning. Both sides repeat the same counter argument and we go round in circles, much like the repeated questioning of Katrien.
I recognise, the right of the disgruntled to express their dissatisfaction and fully approve of well mannered attempts to improve communication. Equally those disenchanted supporters and in particular the Trust must understand they do not represent the view of all supporters. I hope the protests are sensibly restrained and we have no repeat of the recent Poisonous atmosphere we have had at the valley either before, after or during the game.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
the club told us they had nothing to add, then immediately went out when we organised this meeting and did a PR stunt with a 15 year old lad.
The point of the meeting was as has been stated, earlier on. I understand people being realistic, but why not go to the meeting rather than slating it?
The very least of it is to show that there are a lot of genuinely concerned fans who see that that something is going badly wrong including the quite public falling away of some of our long term supporters. Personally I think that is reason enough. People last night braved the cold to go to a public meeting, with no players, no club reps, and packed out a hall.
There weren't 25 or a hundred there were over 400 and I think thats a big deal personally. It was a positive act by people who want to do something rather than just bitch about it on message boards. I take it pretty seriously as it hasn't happened for nearly a generation at this club.
What comes next is important I agree, we'll see what happens over coming weeks, I think reasonably last night achieved all it was going to, not an easy thing to do in itself. How much further it goes will depend how deep the feeling runs among fans.
To answer Marks point from Twitter, 'we' did have public meetings during the TJ era, we formed a supporters' trust if you recall, and we did it through a lot of hard work, from the first 100 members to now 1100 who give up their fivers for very few benefits if any, other than supporting the Trust. We built it by standing in the rain talking to real fans, and giving out TNT.
Razil in defensive response shocker......
Who's slating the meeting? I've said all along "good luck to you, but I don't think you'll achieve anything"
I'm still struggling. You got 400 people in a room. Some of them expressed concerns about the ownership, 100s of people have been doing the same thing on the internet for months. Why is this any different?
I imagine there were considerably more there last night than at the inauguration of the Supporters' Trust, and at the start of the Back to the Valley campaign (although happy to be corrected). Even so, 400 people is quite something for a meeting that won't achieve anything.
I can tell you how many were at the first Back to the Valley meet, the one after the planning meeting, where we had first declared we would stand for election.
9.
Not 900, or 90, but nine.
None of us dared dream that four months later the Valley Party would have collected 14,800 votes, more than double the average gate at the time.
If you were one of those nine, you know that nothing is impossible.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
If the Trust was doing any such thing I really doubt that Richard Murray would waste his time talking to us and advising us in the way that he has done more or less continuously for the last year.
Do you think it would be useful to split the non-network signings between in and outside the emergency load window since we cannot sign from the network in those periods ?
the club told us they had nothing to add, then immediately went out when we organised this meeting and did a PR stunt with a 15 year old lad.
The point of the meeting was as has been stated, earlier on. I understand people being realistic, but why not go to the meeting rather than slating it?
The very least of it is to show that there are a lot of genuinely concerned fans who see that that something is going badly wrong including the quite public falling away of some of our long term supporters. Personally I think that is reason enough. People last night braved the cold to go to a public meeting, with no players, no club reps, and packed out a hall.
There weren't 25 or a hundred there were over 400 and I think thats a big deal personally. It was a positive act by people who want to do something rather than just bitch about it on message boards. I take it pretty seriously as it hasn't happened for nearly a generation at this club.
What comes next is important I agree, we'll see what happens over coming weeks, I think reasonably last night achieved all it was going to, not an easy thing to do in itself. How much further it goes will depend how deep the feeling runs among fans.
To answer Marks point from Twitter, 'we' did have public meetings during the TJ era, we formed a supporters' trust if you recall, and we did it through a lot of hard work, from the first 100 members to now 1100 who give up their fivers for very few benefits if any, other than supporting the Trust. We built it by standing in the rain talking to real fans, and giving out TNT.
Razil in defensive response shocker......
Who's slating the meeting? I've said all along "good luck to you, but I don't think you'll achieve anything"
I'm still struggling. You got 400 people in a room. Some of them expressed concerns about the ownership, 100s of people have been doing the same thing on the internet for months. Why is this any different?
I imagine there were considerably more there last night than at the inauguration of the Supporters' Trust, and at the start of the Back to the Valley campaign (although happy to be corrected). Even so, 400 people is quite something for a meeting that won't achieve anything.
I can tell you how many were at the first Back to the Valley meet, the one after the planning meeting, where we had first declared we would stand for election.
9.
Not 900, or 90, but nine.
None of us dared dream that four months later the Valley Party would have collected 14,800 votes, more than double the average gate at the time.
If you were one of those nine, you know that nothing is impossible.
Because it was so long ago i can't remember if the Woolwich 9 were found guilty or not guilty ?
They should be awarded the VC.
The Valley Clip.
Which they should wear with pride as they were in at the conception of the dream.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
If the Trust was doing any such thing I really doubt that Richard Murray would waste his time talking to us and advising us in the way that he has done more or less continuously for the last year.
Your right the Trust is doing no such thing and long may it continue. What I was trying to get across, was that the Trust has a duty of care to ensure it represents all fans, not just does with the loudest voice. If protests threaten that position, please make sure you are not party to them and even step back from the frontline if need be.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
I am not particularly 'happy' about the way the owners have gone about things and been far from impressed with some of the football. However, when I look at the bigger picture I do think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing! For the first time in many a year I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. I find it difficult to comprehend why so many can be blind to positive possibilities.
We are financially stable, the owner is in it for the long term, investing in youth etc, improving squad, blah blah, blah (but you know all this).
Both the positive view and the negative view are well known, but both sides apply different meaning. Both sides repeat the same counter argument and we go round in circles, much like the repeated questioning of Katrien.
I recognise, the right of the disgruntled to express their dissatisfaction and fully approve of well mannered attempts to improve communication. Equally those disenchanted supporters and in particular the Trust must understand they do not represent the view of all supporters. I hope the protests are sensibly restrained and we have no repeat of the recent Poisonous atmosphere we have had at the valley either before, after or during the game.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
Good answer mate - sincerely. The issue I'm struggling with is that the Trust has been seeking proper engagement with/from the club for quite a while now. If anything, judging from the more recent statements from Katrien, their position on this has hardened.
I fully support the approach that seeks proper dialogue and respect for supporters' views but I just think that continuing to meekly ask for it is simply going to continue to be rebuffed. I am not in the Roland out at all costs camp, at least not yet, but I do think we need to come up with ways of "encouraging" him to take us seriously. Personally, I don't favour a Trust led season ticket boycott/strike or attacks on the club's revenue streams because I don't think that would make much difference to him. That's why my ideas were more geared to persuading Roland of the business benefit of fan engagement, but backed up with a campaign amongst fans and in the media to put him and his approach more in the spotlight. My thoughts on seeing if there was a possible way of challenging the network model via FA/UEFA/FIFA was more of a contingency plan if dialogue fails to occur or to improve things.
Your final point is well made. The answer is maybe that those of us in the Trust who do want some form of action actually see this AS safeguarding the future of the club, NOT attacking it. That's where I am.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
If the Trust was doing any such thing I really doubt that Richard Murray would waste his time talking to us and advising us in the way that he has done more or less continuously for the last year.
Your right the Trust is doing no such thing and long may it continue. What I was trying to get across, was that the Trust has a duty of care to ensure it represents all fans, not just does with the loudest voice. If protests threaten that position, please make sure you are not party to them and even step back from the frontline if need be.
There' s a problem, isn't there? We cannot possibly claim to represent all fans, because were we to do that, someone inside the club or perhaps on here, will loudly proclaim that we have only xxxx members. We do our best to gauge what the spectrum of fan opinion is through the regular use of surveys, and indeed organizing meetings such as last night. The continuation of the debate here is the result of the meeting.
I'm not sure "duty of care" is the right phrase in the context of a volunteer organisation. If it had a mandatory membership e.g. Included in the price of a season ticket, then maybe. For now the best way to influence the direction of the Trust is to join, and get involved. After all, the biggest influence on the Trust ought to be the opinions of its own members.
Maybe it is just me, but rather than protests or anything negative, would it not be more in the fans' interests to prove their value to the club?
Whether it is the Fans Forum, or Trust, or whoever is the umbrella group for the maximum possible number of fans, might, for example, set a game where they will ask their members to encourage their friends and family to attend. Get everyone to sign up their names of who they have brought along (sort of like a petition, but a really positive one) and then give that to KM? Obviously let her know all the way what is happening.
That way, the fans essentially prove why the club has to talk to them - because they can be an asset! But they do it in a really positive way, which hopefully will lead to a bettering of relations.
It is all too easy to want to 'stick it to the man' (and it is all too easy for 'the man' to adopt a bunker mentality) but we all want the club to succeed and protests will not help that happen, in my view.
(By the way - just because I am nosey - I have not properly understood what crime KM has been said to have committed in regards to not talking to the fans? It seems - but I am totally uncertain - that she has said she would prefer to talk through the Fans Forum as an umbrella group, rather than to the Trust and any other fan groups individually? Plus somebody went to her with a really good idea to get more fans and she sent them an email saying that was her Marketing Director's job, so they should talk to them? I have obviously got both of these completely wrong because they both sound very sensible to me and exactly what I would expect a CEO to say. If anyone knows the facts, message me, because I clearly not understanding something.)
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
If the Trust was doing any such thing I really doubt that Richard Murray would waste his time talking to us and advising us in the way that he has done more or less continuously for the last year.
What I was trying to get across, was that the Trust has a duty of care to ensure it represents all fans, not just does with the loudest voice..
It doesn't though Soul man. The Trust can only really speak for those who subscribe to it as a member, and if you are a member and feel the Trust board is acting in a way that you don't feel comfortable is representative of your stance, you retain the right to cancel your membership at any stage.
As for in that case who represents your view? Well that's down to you then if you feel strongly about it to do something proactive about it.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
I am not particularly 'happy' about the way the owners have gone about things and been far from impressed with some of the football. However, when I look at the bigger picture I do think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing! For the first time in many a year I can see the light at the end of the tunnel. I find it difficult to comprehend why so many can be blind to positive possibilities.
We are financially stable, the owner is in it for the long term, investing in youth etc, improving squad, blah blah, blah (but you know all this).
Both the positive view and the negative view are well known, but both sides apply different meaning. Both sides repeat the same counter argument and we go round in circles, much like the repeated questioning of Katrien.
I recognise, the right of the disgruntled to express their dissatisfaction and fully approve of well mannered attempts to improve communication. Equally those disenchanted supporters and in particular the Trust must understand they do not represent the view of all supporters. I hope the protests are sensibly restrained and we have no repeat of the recent Poisonous atmosphere we have had at the valley either before, after or during the game.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
Good answer mate - sincerely. The issue I'm struggling with is that the Trust has been seeking proper engagement with/from the club for quite a while now. If anything, judging from the more recent statements from Katrien, their position on this has hardened.
I fully support the approach that seeks proper dialogue and respect for supporters' views but I just think that continuing to meekly ask for it is simply going to continue to be rebuffed. I am not in the Roland out at all costs camp, at least not yet, but I do think we need to come up with ways of "encouraging" him to take us seriously. Personally, I don't favour a Trust led season ticket boycott/strike or attacks on the club's revenue streams because I don't think that would make much difference to him. That's why my ideas were more geared to persuading Roland of the business benefit of fan engagement, but backed up with a campaign amongst fans and in the media to put him and his approach more in the spotlight. My thoughts on seeing if there was a possible way of challenging the network model via FA/UEFA/FIFA was more of a contingency plan if dialogue fails to occur or to improve things.
Your final point is well made. The answer is maybe that those of us in the Trust who do want some form of action actually see this AS safeguarding the future of the club, NOT attacking it. That's where I am.
Re your last point, I totally get that is your view, hence acceptance of your need to have your voice heard via protests. What I don't get is how you can't see that despite many negatives Duchâtelet could be very good for us, potentially very, very good for us. I don't want to see that chance destroyed.
I am all for better dialogue and improved relationships, but I can't really see any substantial progress being made until one or other set of supporters has been proved right.
My views, and your views may be politely expressed but ultimately we see things different and both will keep repeating the same arguments. I think the club is in the same position. There is dialogue, but neither side understand or accept the others position. From the clubs perspective I expect they are probably better off avoiding the same conversations with the same faces, leading to the same accusations and increase of tensions.
As suggested by @razil, I have emailed the CAST secretary with further thoughts. Thought I would post on here for wider information and/or debate:
So, what are the next steps as a result of last night's meeting?
There were some interesting thoughts put forward but I'm sure that many present will have thoughts to add. Nor was there the time or indeed the necessary process to debate and evaluate options.
My thoughts are as follows. Some of them were mentioned by others last night:
1. Vocalise dissatisfaction with the regime - before and after the game, but NOT during it, when we should get behind the team like never before. The contrast would be very clear.
2. Start a media campaign - which must make very clear what we are dissatisfied about and what we actually want to happen.
3. Visual protest - the young guy who had the banner saying "Made in Charlton, Destroyed in Belgium" confiscated has, I believe been threatened with a stadium ban. Get T shirts made with that slogan on, and sell them, and reveal them at a game. They can't ban that many people.
4. Prepare a business case for supporter engagement and inclusion - which says, in hard business as well as emotional terms why RD should engage with us. Include a specific proposal for a different type of Fans Forum where regular meetings are held with representatives of supporters groups on jointly proposed agenda items.
5. Liaise with other network clubs supporters groups - for sharing of best practice, shared learning, mutual support and co-ordinated protests.
6. Explore the possibility of challenging RD's network model through the FA, UEFA and FIFA - looking specifically at the issues associated with intra-network loans and transfers (fairness and financial transparency), shared resources, impact on the competitiveness of individual network components (clubs).
7. Engage with Richard Murray - to potentially act as an initial means of approaching RD and as a facilitator.
8. Communicate with fans - to explain what is being done and why, seek to assure those who are concerned at protests/actions. It is important to avoid personal insults and denigrating comments about RD, KM and GL, which will only alienate those who are positive about the regime.
I would take objection to many of these proposed protests. If protests follow a path that supporters (other supporters) feel may be dangerously damaging to the club then you may find that the silent majority/minority are forced into action with protests of their own against their own.
Fair enough mate. You're welcome to your opinion. Might be a bit more useful to say what you would suggest instead though. Unless you think everything is rosy and nothing needs doing.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
If the Trust was doing any such thing I really doubt that Richard Murray would waste his time talking to us and advising us in the way that he has done more or less continuously for the last year.
What I was trying to get across, was that the Trust has a duty of care to ensure it represents all fans, not just does with the loudest voice..
It doesn't though Soul man. The Trust can only really speak for those who subscribe to it as a member, and if you are a member and feel the Trust board is acting in a way that you don't feel comfortable is representative of your stance, you retain the right to cancel your membership at any stage.
As for in that case who represents your view? Well that's down to you then if you feel strongly about it to do something proactive about it.
Hmmmm didn't realise that. I honestly thought the Trust was formed to be representative of all Charlton supporters and not just its members. A worrying development.
If the club wants to proactively manage the comms agenda it needs to engage. What precisely is it afraid of? The fans who helped put the club back on the map? Or that the strategy and execution will be exposed?
It is obviously afraid that the strategy and execution will be exposed. When you are losing an argument, you often say no comment or go on the attack & resort to abuse.
The club use the no comment route, or they give a less than fulsome response and won't entertain a debate, because they know the more they debate, the more their strategy and execution will be exposed.
Well you learn something every day. I was under the same impression as, I think, were many others.
There's one thing I seem to be getting from all of your posts Tommy, and it's that you seem to know a lot more about how others feel and the reasons for their actions than they do themselves!
This all sounds very credible to the uninitiated but, surely, you are not suggesting that RD has made his money from being financially naive or stupid! I would assume he is aware of the problems he has encountered this year and has made allowances in his business plan. With regard to the programme sellers Katrien did explain the situation at the VIP meeting and what actions are being taken to address this. I would add that I am not a great fan of RD - I don't have sufficient knowledge of his intentions to form an opinion - but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
... but I am opposed to anyone stirring up discontent against the man who, so far, appears to be sufficiently interested to invest in the stadium and the team - surely such progress should be welcomed not denigrated.
But equally your quite happy to stir up discontent against many longstanding supporters who have offered their time and expertise free to the club?
Btw Tommy = 6 comments in almost a year on here, all of them in the last two days? There's been plenty of opportunities to support the status quo over numerous threads but you've only chosen now to start..?
Never felt as strongly before and it is certainly not my intention to stir up discontent. I am entitled to my opinion and ultimately to help those anti network fans, who I feel are slightly misguided, to consider the positives.
I wouldn't say that but I am concerned about the get Roland out brigade and some of the comments e.g. "would rather see Charlton in Div 2 than part of a network" - I certainly wouldn't and It's frustrating when an investor, with the potential to make the Club successful again, and so far has made a positive start, is being vilified on a daily basis.
Anyone connected to CAFC should feel indebted to those who fought so hard to get us back to the Valley but that was then and this is now. Then our existence was hanging in the balance and our protests and campaigning had something tangible to obtain..... The Valley. Now what are the protests for? More commmunication? Hardly the stuff worthy of campaigns past IMO As I've said before, i share the concern re our dwindling support but in my experience many pals who regularly attended in the past have stopped going but this has happened over the past 3 years. not since RD arrived. There seems to be a lethargy/apathy towards CAFC that has been growing since our fall from the PL. My preference would be to let RD continue running the club how he sees fit and the Trust focus their efforts on retaining/improving our support base as has been done in the past (target 10k)
If Katrien thought out of the box, she might employ Rick as a consultant to submit to the Club proposals and costings on how Charlton gain regain credibility amongst its fans. Whether Rick would want to do this is another matter, but in one stroke Katrien would have a well known face and someone who knows a lot about the club inside the tent rather than outside. Rick has his supporters and opponents but there is little doubt that he and some friends know a lot about how to relate to the fans.
There are obvious things to be addressed including the programmes, coaches, shop, staff issues, etc. and of course communication. If they paid him as a consultant for a month and he gave his report whether finished or not at that time, Katrien would have gained goodwill and stopped Rick from speaking against the club for at least that time. Hopefully during that month some professional courtesies would develop with an easing of tension resulting.
Maybe it is just me, but rather than protests or anything negative, would it not be more in the fans' interests to prove their value to the club?
Whether it is the Fans Forum, or Trust, or whoever is the umbrella group for the maximum possible number of fans, might, for example, set a game where they will ask their members to encourage their friends and family to attend. Get everyone to sign up their names of who they have brought along (sort of like a petition, but a really positive one) and then give that to KM? Obviously let her know all the way what is happening.
That way, the fans essentially prove why the club has to talk to them - because they can be an asset! But they do it in a really positive way, which hopefully will lead to a bettering of relations.
It is all too easy to want to 'stick it to the man' (and it is all too easy for 'the man' to adopt a bunker mentality) but we all want the club to succeed and protests will not help that happen, in my view.
(By the way - just because I am nosey - I have not properly understood what crime KM has been said to have committed in regards to not talking to the fans? It seems - but I am totally uncertain - that she has said she would prefer to talk through the Fans Forum as an umbrella group, rather than to the Trust and any other fan groups individually? Plus somebody went to her with a really good idea to get more fans and she sent them an email saying that was her Marketing Director's job, so they should talk to them? I have obviously got both of these completely wrong because they both sound very sensible to me and exactly what I would expect a CEO to say. If anyone knows the facts, message me, because I clearly not understanding something.)
The Supporters' Trust does what it can to present the views of all supporters. That is why we conduct surveys which are open to all fans, not just Trust members. Furthermore, when we analyse survey results, we don't usually find a great deal of difference between the views of members and non-members (ie Trust members are pretty typical supporters, albeit they might have, shall we say, been to a few more games....)
But, if you pay a subscription to join an organisation because you want your view to be given a formal voice within a structured body, you are not going to be too pleased if that body ignores the views of its members and promotes the views of non-members. So, ultimately, of course the Supporters Trust answers to its members and therefore must seek to promote their view. This isn't a worrying development. It is common sense and has always been the case.
But it is actually a non-issue. Firstly because, within the Trust membership (even within the Trust board) there is often a variety of opinion. Secondly, as I say, it is not as if there is a great yawning gap between the views of members and non members.
Comments
Late posting on here, but I've only just defrosted.
Trouble is I'm still not sure how far I want to take any protest as ' be careful what you wish for' is IMO good advice.
Perhaps wearing a protest T-shirt or scarf ? Like the idea of contacting the sponsors.
Hopefully I'll still be at the Valley next season with my season ticket.
We are financially stable, the owner is in it for the long term, investing in youth etc, improving squad, blah blah, blah (but you know all this).
Both the positive view and the negative view are well known, but both sides apply different meaning. Both sides repeat the same counter argument and we go round in circles, much like the repeated questioning of Katrien.
I recognise, the right of the disgruntled to express their dissatisfaction and fully approve of well mannered attempts to improve communication. Equally those disenchanted supporters and in particular the Trust must understand they do not represent the view of all supporters. I hope the protests are sensibly restrained and we have no repeat of the recent Poisonous atmosphere we have had at the valley either before, after or during the game.
The Trust is there to provide a voice to the supporter and safeguard the future of the Club. Who do I go to when/if the Trust itself is leading the charge against my club?
9.
Not 900, or 90, but nine.
None of us dared dream that four months later the Valley Party would have collected 14,800 votes, more than double the average gate at the time.
If you were one of those nine, you know that nothing is impossible.
Well said souladdick - voicing the thoughts of many of us.
Do you think it would be useful to split the non-network signings between in and outside the emergency load window since we cannot sign from the network in those periods ?
They should be awarded the VC.
The Valley Clip.
Which they should wear with pride as they were in at the conception of the dream.
I fully support the approach that seeks proper dialogue and respect for supporters' views but I just think that continuing to meekly ask for it is simply going to continue to be rebuffed. I am not in the Roland out at all costs camp, at least not yet, but I do think we need to come up with ways of "encouraging" him to take us seriously. Personally, I don't favour a Trust led season ticket boycott/strike or attacks on the club's revenue streams because I don't think that would make much difference to him. That's why my ideas were more geared to persuading Roland of the business benefit of fan engagement, but backed up with a campaign amongst fans and in the media to put him and his approach more in the spotlight. My thoughts on seeing if there was a possible way of challenging the network model via FA/UEFA/FIFA was more of a contingency plan if dialogue fails to occur or to improve things.
Your final point is well made. The answer is maybe that those of us in the Trust who do want some form of action actually see this AS safeguarding the future of the club, NOT attacking it. That's where I am.
I'm not sure "duty of care" is the right phrase in the context of a volunteer organisation. If it had a mandatory membership e.g. Included in the price of a season ticket, then maybe. For now the best way to influence the direction of the Trust is to join, and get involved. After all, the biggest influence on the Trust ought to be the opinions of its own members.
Whether it is the Fans Forum, or Trust, or whoever is the umbrella group for the maximum possible number of fans, might, for example, set a game where they will ask their members to encourage their friends and family to attend. Get everyone to sign up their names of who they have brought along (sort of like a petition, but a really positive one) and then give that to KM? Obviously let her know all the way what is happening.
That way, the fans essentially prove why the club has to talk to them - because they can be an asset! But they do it in a really positive way, which hopefully will lead to a bettering of relations.
It is all too easy to want to 'stick it to the man' (and it is all too easy for 'the man' to adopt a bunker mentality) but we all want the club to succeed and protests will not help that happen, in my view.
(By the way - just because I am nosey - I have not properly understood what crime KM has been said to have committed in regards to not talking to the fans? It seems - but I am totally uncertain - that she has said she would prefer to talk through the Fans Forum as an umbrella group, rather than to the Trust and any other fan groups individually? Plus somebody went to her with a really good idea to get more fans and she sent them an email saying that was her Marketing Director's job, so they should talk to them? I have obviously got both of these completely wrong because they both sound very sensible to me and exactly what I would expect a CEO to say. If anyone knows the facts, message me, because I clearly not understanding something.)
As for in that case who represents your view? Well that's down to you then if you feel strongly about it to do something proactive about it.
I am all for better dialogue and improved relationships, but I can't really see any substantial progress being made until one or other set of supporters has been proved right.
My views, and your views may be politely expressed but ultimately we see things different and both will keep repeating the same arguments. I think the club is in the same position. There is dialogue, but neither side understand or accept the others position. From the clubs perspective I expect they are probably better off avoiding the same conversations with the same faces, leading to the same accusations and increase of tensions.
The club use the no comment route, or they give a less than fulsome response and won't entertain a debate, because they know the more they debate, the more their strategy and execution will be exposed.
As I've said before, i share the concern re our dwindling support but in my experience many pals who regularly attended in the past have stopped going but this has happened over the past 3 years. not since RD arrived. There seems to be a lethargy/apathy towards CAFC that has been growing since our fall from the PL.
My preference would be to let RD continue running the club how he sees fit and the Trust focus their efforts on retaining/improving our support base as has been done in the past (target 10k)
There are obvious things to be addressed including the programmes, coaches, shop, staff issues, etc. and of course communication. If they paid him as a consultant for a month and he gave his report whether finished or not at that time, Katrien would have gained goodwill and stopped Rick from speaking against the club for at least that time. Hopefully during that month some professional courtesies would develop with an easing of tension resulting.
But, if you pay a subscription to join an organisation because you want your view to be given a formal voice within a structured body, you are not going to be too pleased if that body ignores the views of its members and promotes the views of non-members. So, ultimately, of course the Supporters Trust answers to its members and therefore must seek to promote their view. This isn't a worrying development. It is common sense and has always been the case.
But it is actually a non-issue. Firstly because, within the Trust membership (even within the Trust board) there is often a variety of opinion. Secondly, as I say, it is not as if there is a great yawning gap between the views of members and non members.