Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
ARGOS do Black & White Scarfs for £4.65 - Free P&P or Collect from local store. 8 ordered by me for the family and friend who sit together in the North Upper........
Got a link?
Via Ebay - just search from Black & White Football Scarfs, and scroll for £4.65 pricing....
ARGOS do Black & White Scarfs for £4.65 - Free P&P or Collect from local store. 8 ordered by me for the family and friend who sit together in the North Upper........
Got a link?
Via Ebay - just search from Black & White Football Scarfs, and scroll for £4.65 pricing....
I wore all black on Saturday and looked like an over aged Ultra for Palace. when the 3rd goal went in i got my white hankie out ? To wipe my eyes With. I'm Drowning not Waving.
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
Not as yet, I don't think.
However, I have been invited to "introduce" the campaign on Thursday to the trust officially.
I'm sure they will take the action they think is correct from there.
With some luck, they will be fully on board with this campaign and we can work together.
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
The Trust is a representative body. It's stance should effectively be taken as a mandate by its members consensus. I suspect this will emerge on Thursday, and through the results of their current survey
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
Not as yet, I don't think.
However, I have been invited to "introduce" the campaign on Thursday to the trust officially.
I'm sure they will take the action they think is correct from there.
With some luck, they will be fully on board with this campaign and we can work together.
Again, we need to be careful it's not associated with a specific fan group. Easy get-out for Katrien.
I can't make the Trust AGM on Thursday due to now living 250 miles away but I would urge every one who can go to go.
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
The Trust is a representative body. It's stance should effectively be taken as a mandate by its members consensus. I suspect this will emerge on Thursday, and through the results of their current survey
The survey was open to non-members so won't necessarily reflect the Trust membership.
I just wonder how they will form their 'decision' and stance aside from it being the committee's decision. It's all fairly irrelevant though as the club has no recognition of the Trust from what I can tell, the value might be that it is a conduit to the press but do the press care ?
People are highlighting the effectiveness of the Bayern protest but that was BM vs Arsenal being played out to a global audience. Similarly the scarves worn by Man Utd - still not sue what they wanted or if they got it.
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
Not as yet, I don't think.
However, I have been invited to "introduce" the campaign on Thursday to the trust officially.
I'm sure they will take the action they think is correct from there.
With some luck, they will be fully on board with this campaign and we can work together.
Again, we need to be careful it's not associated with a specific fan group. Easy get-out for Katrien.
I can't make the Trust AGM on Thursday due to now living 250 miles away but I would urge every one who can go to go.
I completely agree.
However, if the trust are on board, with their reach to many Charlton fans, making more people aware, then that can only be a good thing.
Judging by Twitter, the campaign for change seems to have gathered much more weight. We seem to have a much less divided fan base with regards to the owners. More people also seem willing to do something about this, and act upon it, rather that just moan.
This really seems to be gathering momentum, the trust meeting has come at a good time.
You can filter results from the survey members / non-members.
Pretty sure whatever they do there will be people that will criticise because that's the personal nature of it all. I'm just guessing, but I suspect that any form of feeling will be judged by shows of hands at the AGM on certain points so if you or anyone else wants to have even the most minor influence, come along and use your hand.
What this also does is highlight the need for people who are not a trust member but want action to get signed up ASAP.
The more people that are members it will be harder for pinocchio to come out and deny it is a majority of fans and not just a few members of the trust with an axe to grind.
I'll be buying a black and white scarf off that chap the day of the Wednesday game if he's selling them. I think now is the time to ramp up visual signs of discontent. Anything, however how small is a good thing
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
The Trust is a representative body. It's stance should effectively be taken as a mandate by its members consensus. I suspect this will emerge on Thursday, and through the results of their current survey
The survey was open to non-members so won't necessarily reflect the Trust membership.
I just wonder how they will form their 'decision' and stance aside from it being the committee's decision. It's all fairly irrelevant though as the club has no recognition of the Trust from what I can tell, the value might be that it is a conduit to the press but do the press care ?
People are highlighting the effectiveness of the Bayern protest but that was BM vs Arsenal being played out to a global audience. Similarly the scarves worn by Man Utd - still not sue what they wanted or if they got it.
It petered out because they were getting nowhere in the end. There was a stage where it did look like picking up some steam. A bunch of millionaire United fans tried to buy the club from the Glazers but apparently they wanted stupid money for the club and the consortium had to admit defeat. I also read somewhere that a number of the main protagonists actually went to support a local Manchester side and after that the appetite from the regular fans waned.
I think a catering boycott is something that will have more impact. It will definitely put the club in a very uncomfortable position, particularly as the contractor are already putting pressure on the club.
Surely this is where the trust need to get involved and really communicate these campaigns with fans? They have the biggest reach, so if this/boycotts/protests behind the West stand are going to actually happen they've got to help get them going
So far, some members of the trust board (individually, not the Trust as a whole), have been very supportive.
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
Dos the Trust have an official stance on all of this, I don't mean wearing a black and white scarf.
The Trust is a representative body. It's stance should effectively be taken as a mandate by its members consensus. I suspect this will emerge on Thursday, and through the results of their current survey
The survey was open to non-members so won't necessarily reflect the Trust membership.
I just wonder how they will form their 'decision' and stance aside from it being the committee's decision. It's all fairly irrelevant though as the club has no recognition of the Trust from what I can tell, the value might be that it is a conduit to the press but do the press care ?
People are highlighting the effectiveness of the Bayern protest but that was BM vs Arsenal being played out to a global audience. Similarly the scarves worn by Man Utd - still not sue what they wanted or if they got it.
It petered out because they were getting nowhere in the end. There was a stage where it did look like picking up some steam. A bunch of millionaire United fans tried to buy the club from the Glazers but apparently they wanted stupid money for the club and the consortium had to admit defeat. I also read somewhere that a number of the main protagonists actually went to support a local Manchester side and after that the appetite from the regular fans waned.
I think a catering boycott is something that will have more impact. It will definitely put the club in a very uncomfortable position, particularly as the contractor are already putting pressure on the club.
There was also the embarrassing sight of Man United fans wearing green and yellow scarves (denoting their non-acceptance of everything Glazer) and that season's Man United shirt (the revenue for which went straight into serving United's debts to the Glazers).
In a reprinted extract from a programme dating back to the 1980/81 season Leroy Ambrose was referred to as "our coloured striker".
I think it should be printed . Even if to show how times have changed in 35 years.
I agree.
It reads very strangely now as why would you comment on a players ethnicity but that was then, this is now.
Have to say I think even in 1980 black was the word I would have used but i was a right on rock against racism AFA kid even then : - )
I disagree, it should be left in the past where it belongs, presumably it was reprinted as some sort of nostalgic reminiscence for the old boys.
Seriously? Have you seen it? Have you seen any of the programmes this season?
The programmes this year all have about four pages reprinted from a programme of yesteryear - normally the front page, the team line up and a couple of pages of news, etc.
Today's reprint was a programme from back in 1980. It mentions Leroy Ambrose as "our coloured striker". Seems a bit old fashioned now, to say the least, but I guess back then - rightly or wrongly - it WAS unusual to have a black player. But back in those days it was probably no different to calling Tony Watt our "Scottish striker" today.
Yes, we probably wouldn't all be comfortable with that term of reference or the context now, but to start throwing accusations of "casual racism" about is a fucking joke - in my opinion, of course.
(PS. And so is the insinuation that it was printed as some sort of "nostalgic reminiscence for the boys", but I'm assuming that you haven't actually seen it to be thinking that.)
Not sure if you're trying to dig me out or not, but as a moderately intelligent man I assume you can tell the difference between referring to someone as "Scottish" and "Coloured" in this day and age. I'm not sure the relevance of it being a reprint of some nonsense piece from days gone by means much - if it's wrong now (which "Coloured" is, btw) then it's wrong, why on earth do we need to revisit it when we must have literally thousands of pages of programmes we could reproduce if we have to without any contentious references.
I guess I'm in the minority, just seems mad to reproduce anything from years ago that includes language that is completely unnecessary.
Wasn't it Josef Stalin who rewrote history?
I personally consider it more worrying that there are suggestions to rewrite historical features than reproducing actual use of language that subsequently became PC.
I have the late Conrad Hunte's* autobiography, Playing To Win, at home within which there are numerous references to 'coloured' cricketers.
Would the PC obsessed ban that book even though it reflects its time?
* Conrad Hunte was a distinguished black West Indian batsman of the fifties and sixties.
United was a special case as fans had already set up FC United off the back of it, and unfortunately MUFC's true fans are vastly outnumbered by global consumers of Modern Football. But it lingers on - you can still find LOVE UNITED, HATE GLAZER stickers in most European cities.
In a reprinted extract from a programme dating back to the 1980/81 season Leroy Ambrose was referred to as "our coloured striker".
I think it should be printed . Even if to show how times have changed in 35 years.
I agree.
It reads very strangely now as why would you comment on a players ethnicity but that was then, this is now.
Have to say I think even in 1980 black was the word I would have used but i was a right on rock against racism AFA kid even then : - )
I disagree, it should be left in the past where it belongs, presumably it was reprinted as some sort of nostalgic reminiscence for the old boys.
Seriously? Have you seen it? Have you seen any of the programmes this season?
The programmes this year all have about four pages reprinted from a programme of yesteryear - normally the front page, the team line up and a couple of pages of news, etc.
Today's reprint was a programme from back in 1980. It mentions Leroy Ambrose as "our coloured striker". Seems a bit old fashioned now, to say the least, but I guess back then - rightly or wrongly - it WAS unusual to have a black player. But back in those days it was probably no different to calling Tony Watt our "Scottish striker" today.
Yes, we probably wouldn't all be comfortable with that term of reference or the context now, but to start throwing accusations of "casual racism" about is a fucking joke - in my opinion, of course.
(PS. And so is the insinuation that it was printed as some sort of "nostalgic reminiscence for the boys", but I'm assuming that you haven't actually seen it to be thinking that.)
Not sure if you're trying to dig me out or not, but as a moderately intelligent man I assume you can tell the difference between referring to someone as "Scottish" and "Coloured" in this day and age. I'm not sure the relevance of it being a reprint of some nonsense piece from days gone by means much - if it's wrong now (which "Coloured" is, btw) then it's wrong, why on earth do we need to revisit it when we must have literally thousands of pages of programmes we could reproduce if we have to without any contentious references.
I guess I'm in the minority, just seems mad to reproduce anything from years ago that includes language that is completely unnecessary.
Wasn't it Josef Stalin who rewrote history?
I personally consider it more worrying that there are suggestions to rewrite historical features than reproducing actual use of language that subsequently became PC.
I have the late Conrad Hunte's* autobiography, Playing To Win, at home within which there are numerous references to 'coloured' cricketers.
Would the PC obsessed ban that book even though it reflects its time?
* Conrad Hunte was a distinguished black West Indian batsman of the fifties and sixties.
Good for them, but bailing out to support another team isn't exactly a course of action I want to take.
What if the situation is an FC Wimbledon one? Or if Charlton fold?
Athletic Charlton FC Charlton Addicks FC
If the club disappears completely it will leave an empty void in many people's lives, which will probably need to be filled somehow. But we aren't at that stage yet, and hopefully we never will be. I don't even want to think about that scenario right now.
Good for them, but bailing out to support another team isn't exactly a course of action I want to take.
Really, you don't know the story?
They set up a new Man U, from scratch. FC United of Manchester. Built and run by and for proper fans. They raised £6m to build their new stadium which opened in summer with a friendly against Benfica. Andy Walsh, the CEO of the club was keynote speaker at the Supporters Summit. He'd previously been part of the supporters group that prevented United from being taken over by Sky. But he said that one day his son and his father both came home and said, that's it, I'm through with it. Just like many people on here are saying.
FC United are a force for good in the game. For that FA cup game they turned down a BBC request to mess around with the timing and heaven knows what else, for its silly new Mobile Experience. I meant to,post a link to that.
FCUM tells us that there comes a point where fans say enough is enough. And they can start again, and build something better, something where the fansthatnactually turn up are at the heart of the club.
That's great and you can only admire what they have done, but as I said, it's not a course of action I'd want to be a part of here. I grew up supporting THIS club, it wouldn't be the same following a different club, regardless of the fan power and goodwill that was used to create it. Maybe there will come a time when my opinion on it would change, but I can't see it, but never say never I guess, Roland and Co. are driving me nuts at the moment!
That's great and you can only admire what they have done, but as I said, it's not a course of action I'd want to be a part of here. I grew up supporting THIS club, it wouldn't be the same following a different club, regardless of the fan power and goodwill that was used to create it. Maybe there will come a time when my opinion on it would change, but I can't see it, but never say never I guess, Roland and Co. are driving me nuts at the moment!
The FCUM thing is a different answer to a different question.
You can filter results from the survey members / non-members.
Pretty sure whatever they do there will be people that will criticise because that's the personal nature of it all. I'm just guessing, but I suspect that any form of feeling will be judged by shows of hands at the AGM on certain points so if you or anyone else wants to have even the most minor influence, come along and use your hand.
I think you are right on the conduit stuff
The AGM will be a good time to hear ideas and gauge opinion on a variety of matters but it isn't a decision making forum - not least because a lot of Trust members live miles away and can't be there. The Trust board is keen to hear from all members and would encourage those who can't attend to e mail secretary@castrust.org
Comments
The AGM is on Thursday, this campaign will be discussed.
when the 3rd goal went in i got my white hankie out ?
To wipe my eyes With.
I'm Drowning not Waving.
However, I have been invited to "introduce" the campaign on Thursday to the trust officially.
I'm sure they will take the action they think is correct from there.
With some luck, they will be fully on board with this campaign and we can work together.
I can't make the Trust AGM on Thursday due to now living 250 miles away but I would urge every one who can go to go.
I just wonder how they will form their 'decision' and stance aside from it being the committee's decision. It's all fairly irrelevant though as the club has no recognition of the Trust from what I can tell, the value might be that it is a conduit to the press but do the press care ?
People are highlighting the effectiveness of the Bayern protest but that was BM vs Arsenal being played out to a global audience. Similarly the scarves worn by Man Utd - still not sue what they wanted or if they got it.
However, if the trust are on board, with their reach to many Charlton fans, making more people aware, then that can only be a good thing.
Judging by Twitter, the campaign for change seems to have gathered much more weight. We seem to have a much less divided fan base with regards to the owners. More people also seem willing to do something about this, and act upon it, rather that just moan.
This really seems to be gathering momentum, the trust meeting has come at a good time.
Pretty sure whatever they do there will be people that will criticise because that's the personal nature of it all. I'm just guessing, but I suspect that any form of feeling will be judged by shows of hands at the AGM on certain points so if you or anyone else wants to have even the most minor influence, come along and use your hand.
I think you are right on the conduit stuff
The more people that are members it will be harder for pinocchio to come out and deny it is a majority of fans and not just a few members of the trust with an axe to grind.
I think a catering boycott is something that will have more impact. It will definitely put the club in a very uncomfortable position, particularly as the contractor are already putting pressure on the club.
If you're going to do it, do it properly!
I personally consider it more worrying that there are suggestions to rewrite historical features than reproducing actual use of language that subsequently became PC.
I have the late Conrad Hunte's* autobiography, Playing To Win, at home within which there are numerous references to 'coloured' cricketers.
Would the PC obsessed ban that book even though it reflects its time?
* Conrad Hunte was a distinguished black West Indian batsman of the fifties and sixties.
Athletic Charlton FC
Charlton Addicks FC
They set up a new Man U, from scratch. FC United of Manchester. Built and run by and for proper fans. They raised £6m to build their new stadium which opened in summer with a friendly against Benfica. Andy Walsh, the CEO of the club was keynote speaker at the Supporters Summit. He'd previously been part of the supporters group that prevented United from being taken over by Sky. But he said that one day his son and his father both came home and said, that's it, I'm through with it. Just like many people on here are saying.
FC United are a force for good in the game. For that FA cup game they turned down a BBC request to mess around with the timing and heaven knows what else, for its silly new Mobile Experience. I meant to,post a link to that.
FCUM tells us that there comes a point where fans say enough is enough. And they can start again, and build something better, something where the fansthatnactually turn up are at the heart of the club.
The AGM will be a good time to hear ideas and gauge opinion on a variety of matters but it isn't a decision making forum - not least because a lot of Trust members live miles away and can't be there. The Trust board is keen to hear from all members and would encourage those who can't attend to e mail secretary@castrust.org