Is this the official direction that the trust is going to make now that they have digested the general meeting from a few weeks ago? Or are they planning something else?
http://www.castrust.org/2015/03/attempts-at-dialogue-to-continue/If this has been posted below the sorry
Comments
Roland must be quaking in his boots.
When these attempts get rebuffed, what then?
Very interested in what they will consider under the direct action banner.
Would be interesting to see how many people would turn up at a meeting that was scheduled for this week. Suspect 5 wins out of 6 would see a significant drop in numbers.
My view is that the majority of fans are happy while we are winning and discontent had been fuelled by the poor run we were on. Something which I believe the trust used to drum up support for the meeting.
Feel for them a bit. Backed into a corner. Criticised for not coming out with anything, criticised when they come out with something. Whilst we've all got different thoughts on the best way forward, never forget we are all fans.
Ask yourself if the form was flipped and we had lost five out the last six, and battling out the relegation spot with Millwall, what would the percentage be of those up in arms?
If the last month has proved anything, most football fans are very fickle and can be won over in just a few games. The more goodwill you buy, the longer when the tide turns does it take to lose people.
Who'd a thought.
I'm sure you're right that a meeting anytime now would be poorly attending, but I also think that a cinsiderable number are waiting with baited breath to see the owners next move.
Consolidate and build or cash-in on the best players?
We'll see how big the meetings get if it is the latter
I've no doubt a number did and will continue to ask (unanswered) questions, but my feeling has always been that the numbers were significantly swelled by the poor fare on the pitch.
Yes, if we had lost 5/6 there would be uproar. But ask yourself why? IMO the vast majority if they were totally honest would be pissed off by the results not a lack of communication or an apparently "flawed" appointment of a new manager. The owner and his methods are an easy scapegoat in those circumstances and I believe the situation was exploited by the trust. Do you think the timing was a coincidence? If as we have been told, events on the pitch are irrelevant why was the meeting not called much earlier? Why didn't it happen while Bob was still in his honeymoon period or when Riga was sent packing? Etc Etc
I see that Reams had an audience with Katrien on Saturday and has posted an interesting write up on ITTV. Appears she will talk to people in the right circumstances.
Ultimately I think the trust have rubbed her up the wrong way and I'll be surprised if she ever pays them anything more than lip service.
I might be way off the mark but some of the trust speak comes across as very arrogant and almost like they believe they are entitled to an audience with Roland "because thats how things used to be"
For some winning is enough but for others of us we want more which is a proper avenue of communication so that we can all assist in making the whole club, not just the team, a winner.
I agree that we would be unrealistic to expect to talk with RD but it should be with KM as it was previously with Richard Murray and Peter Varney.
It would also be interesting to see the results of the pre meeting survey
I find that there is an air of "all supporters are equal but some more equal than others" among the older guard of ,many of the trust . Many get credence for a legacy that appears to have been created from efforts 20 years ago which whilst commendable does not mean they are any more supporters of the club than the rest of us nor is their judgement and acumen any wiser than the rest of us in the modern game which is a world apart from when the Valley Party operated.
I also think, and maybe I am way off the mark, that it is to do with change. Under Richard Murray many prominent members of this forum and the trust were "well in" with the top table at the club whereas they are just viewed by subsequent management as ordinary fans of the club like the rest of us and being part of the masses is probably uncomfortable after perhaps enjoying such privilege.
Henners had the right idea .... saw that there was gonna be no scope for an "in" with future owners so set up his museum ;-) Genius and I bet many of our other celebrity fans must be gutted they didn't think of something like that!
;-)
Could be way off the mark but that's just how this bog standard average Charlton fan sees it from reading the forums and the trust publications and I think that as Clem points out had the meeting been scheduled after this great run we have enjoyed that we would not have seen the numbers at the meeting based on lack of dialogue.
One of the best things about that meeting was the small handful of people who recognise the above and turned up to put the pro-RD point of view forward despite knowing it wasn't the popular view at the time. Much more constructive than putting a few snide comments on here off the back of winning a few games.
This is why some people will see the meeting as being a recruitment drive.
And after today's statement, it would appear neither does the Trust.
Surely an open debate of these issues is healthy? If we don't ask difficult questions how will the Trust board know how we feel? why can't these question be asked without being labelled 'anti Trust'? How can we influence the Trust's direction unless we speak up?
The underlying uncertainties remain however.
What will people think if (when) Cousins, Gomez, Vetokele and Watt leave over the summer within or without the "network?"
Will they resignedly say oh well the Belgian Michael Gliksten is at it again or will they be annoyed and frustrated?
You decide.
The Trust guys and girls, whatever you think, are trying to do something and deserve credit for that not snide comments.
As for sales, every player had a value on his head, that's how football works in the real world. I've seen enough Charlton players depart over the years to realise that your favourite player may leave one day...
When the Woolwich meeting leaflets were being given out, one volunteer was making it very clear we can get rid of the Belgians as he handed the leaflets out.
And the Huddersfield game when I picked up a TNT again a distributor, not sure if it's the same person was clearly having a dig at the club at the rise in program price from £3 to £4 by making it clear it was "free of charge unlike the program that went up to £4".
Personally I think the Trust has good intentions and it's clear some good work has been done so far but I can't help but feel that when a volunteer is clearly giving his opinion of RD / the club when giving out leaflets or TNT it looks bad on behalf of the Trust which almost looks as though this volunteer's voice is the voice of the Trust and with that the tone and agenda is set in the leaflet / TNT before it's even been looked at.
I certainly don't wish to give the volunteers a reputation as they are great in giving up there own time and putting in the effort for a worthwhile cause but they should not be setting the tone as they distibute as it then leads to people taking a probably un-necessary anti-Trust stance. If they want to represent a majority of fans then let fans make up there own mind if they feel they need to join the Trust to be represented in the first place.
Sorry not at the game on Saturday, then perhaps you explain your concerns in person.
You choose to spend lot of time on here putting your own slant on what the Trust board thinks and does, and nothing I say in reply, be it public, or via private PMs makes any difference to your attitude; but when you had the chance to buttonhole me personally in the Oak in September, when I offered you a TNT, you just scowled. It wasn't a face that said "let's talk", so I moved on to give out the rest of the TNTs before the match started. I'm happy to give it another try when I'm over in April. Maybe AFKA could moderate. Face to face is the best way for people to understand each other's viewpoints, and especially get to know better the person behind the keyboard. @ken from bexley has made you the same offer, please take these offers up.
For me the reasons why I feel the club needs more meaningful engagement with supporters are entirely independent of results on the pitch. I do feel better about the football side, although they've kind of done what most of us have been telling them to do for a year and brought in players experienced in British football.
I don't feel better that KM continues to ignore a group who represent nigh on 3000 paid and unpaid members and those non members at the public meeting. Her reasons for staying away are getting harder to defend when the Supporters' Trust is being so damn patient and reasonable in their approach.
I've said elsewhere, maybe a 30 year culture does need to be changed a bit, but a big proportion of season ticket holders aren't coming to games any more and are unlikely, therefore, to renew. Their reason? They have been quickly cast aside by the club they helped to rescue, build and preserve. If we think a few good results will suddenly make them feel part of things, I respectfully disagree, as the spaces at the sold out Huddersfield game will testify.
Not one of them has expanded on their own statement.
Not one of then saw fit to post a link to their own statement but left that to CAFC999.
Not one of them have responded to CAFC999's original question.
Of course they can choose whether to expand on their own statement on CL or not but it is noteworthy IMHO
I'll be interested to see what happens in the close season. We've seen what happened at Standard Liege, where a successful (in domestic terms) side was dismantled and prized assets sold on. I can't help thinking, and this maybe me micro analysing things, that there is a sting in the tail somewhere along the line.
As you understood perfectly well.
But again you've not commented on your own statement or answered CAFC999's or Addickted's questions.
If fans vote with their feet by not renewing and attendances dwindle despite the efforts of the club then I suspect that KM and the club will be reluctantly brought to the table. However. Fans are as posted earlier ever so fickle and should things start to look bright on the pitch then 90% of them will pitch up without the slightest criticism or even thought of the clubs level of engagement with the fans.
It doesn't mean that CASTrust shouldn't continue to seek out dialogue wherever and whenever it can.