Why will CAFC be better off with CARDS patronage? Who amongst CARD will represent them? If it has no leadership? Who is qualified enough to sit on the directors board? Or talk with Roland? Given the previous spats on here - and a lot of you don't get on. how will this be decided?
Support the team not the regime - really? How many posts on the Birmingham thread above are saying the protests are more fun than the game?
Why do CARD not promote on other cafc Internet forums? Even a cursory look at into the valley suggest CARDs methods are thought to be a bizarre. If you want unity then show me you have support from the MAJORITY of fans.
The TV walk out was not demonstrative of a majority support including those wearing b/w scarves.
Just because you can protest does not mean that you should. Has it occurred to anyone that the protest so far have achieved nothing? Except the dumping of a few pasties and paying a few coppers overtime.
Who approaches Katrien? Is it the messenger more than the message that failes to engage?
Yes I get you don't like Roland but you didn't like Slater either. Maybe some boats don't need rocking. In hindsight and learning from that mistake, isn't it better to stay with Roland than be sold to say another Mark Hulyer or someone with less money? And following on from that - is the new owner only accepted if he gets CARDs blessing? It does seem nobody is to good for CARD now Murray got rumbled.
We are going down because of the board? I accept that, how would CARD have prevented that.
All I'm looking for is answers to simple questions - the paranoia I can do without.
There's no way you are an ordinary fan. A club employee, maybe? Or more likely, a Douchbag stooge.
Why will CAFC be better off with CARDS patronage? Who amongst CARD will represent them? If it has no leadership? Who is qualified enough to sit on the directors board? Or talk with Roland? Given the previous spats on here - and a lot of you don't get on. how will this be decided?
Support the team not the regime - really? How many posts on the Birmingham thread above are saying the protests are more fun than the game?
Why do CARD not promote on other cafc Internet forums? Even a cursory look at into the valley suggest CARDs methods are thought to be a bizarre. If you want unity then show me you have support from the MAJORITY of fans.
The TV walk out was not demonstrative of a majority support including those wearing b/w scarves.
Just because you can protest does not mean that you should. Has it occurred to anyone that the protest so far have achieved nothing? Except the dumping of a few pasties and paying a few coppers overtime.
Who approaches Katrien? Is it the messenger more than the message that failes to engage?
Yes I get you don't like Roland but you didn't like Slater either. Maybe some boats don't need rocking. In hindsight and learning from that mistake, isn't it better to stay with Roland than be sold to say another Mark Hulyer or someone with less money? And following on from that - is the new owner only accepted if he gets CARDs blessing? It does seem nobody is to good for CARD now Murray got rumbled.
We are going down because of the board? I accept that, how would CARD have prevented that.
All I'm looking for is answers to simple questions - the paranoia I can do without.
Are you going to bother actually replying and discussing your views with other posters?
I see a lot of people taking time out to reply to you, most with far more patience than I possess, and despite their best attempts at conveying their own opinions - all I see is you repeating the same points which have previously been disputed. This means that either you're wasting your time and you're purposefully provoking some sort of reaction, or you're so far set in your ways that you're unable to debate. Whichever one it is, I think it would be more healthy for you if you took some time out and went somewhere else.
I think Narnia might be the type of destination you're looking for; you can believe whatever you want there without anyone challenging your view point.
Why will CAFC be better off with CARDS patronage? Who amongst CARD will represent them? If it has no leadership? Who is qualified enough to sit on the directors board? Or talk with Roland? Given the previous spats on here - and a lot of you don't get on. how will this be decided?
Support the team not the regime - really? How many posts on the Birmingham thread above are saying the protests are more fun than the game?
Why do CARD not promote on other cafc Internet forums? Even a cursory look at into the valley suggest CARDs methods are thought to be a bizarre. If you want unity then show me you have support from the MAJORITY of fans.
The TV walk out was not demonstrative of a majority support including those wearing b/w scarves.
Just because you can protest does not mean that you should. Has it occurred to anyone that the protest so far have achieved nothing? Except the dumping of a few pasties and paying a few coppers overtime.
Who approaches Katrien? Is it the messenger more than the message that failes to engage?
Yes I get you don't like Roland but you didn't like Slater either. Maybe some boats don't need rocking. In hindsight and learning from that mistake, isn't it better to stay with Roland than be sold to say another Mark Hulyer or someone with less money? And following on from that - is the new owner only accepted if he gets CARDs blessing? It does seem nobody is to good for CARD now Murray got rumbled.
We are going down because of the board? I accept that, how would CARD have prevented that.
All I'm looking for is answers to simple questions - the paranoia I can do without.
Here are some questions for you then. What are the "qualifications" for sitting on the board (although I don't think this is a CARD aspiration anyway) or even speaking to a mad Belgian businessman. Did previous directors all meet them? How about six who were elected to sit on the board on behalf of the fans? Does Katrien Meire meet them? Is RD "qualified" to speak to Charlton fans? Evidently not, to judge from his ridiculous statement.
Who approaches Katrien? That would have been Steve Clarke, elected chair of CAST, but who gave up before Christmas because after many months of procrastination she then reneged on what she'd agreed. Or it would be Rikofold, on here, who sits on the VG committee with her and whose approach can be judged from the videos of FF meetings. In any event, it's been her who insists on dictating who represents fans in any public situation and has then surrounded herself with a wall of staff, Johnnie Jackson and CACT.
How many people use ITTV (or any other forum) but not Charlton Life, Twitter or Facebook (all used by CARD)? If such people exist, do they not read or follow the SLP, Shopper, VOTV or blogsites that report on CARD activities? What is the traffic level on these other forums compared to Charlton Life? In other words, why do they matter in terms of messaging? The hard to reach people are not those that exclusively read one Charlton forum, IMO, but those who don't read any, either because they don't use the internet much or aren't interested.
Ultimately Slater never owned or controlled the club, although the FL and fans were told that he did. More importantly he took no interest and played no part in its day to day running, whereas Roland wants to interfere in team selection and thinks that's sensible. Very different creatures. Meanwhile, Murray did pretty well for a long time before he decided to hire Dowie and fell out with just about every other director, then ran out of money, including theirs. So maybe better things are possible after all. Hulyer was a very long while ago. You forgot to account for 1984-2006, which actually was the club's most successful period in modern times.
Why will CAFC be better off with CARDS patronage? Who amongst CARD will represent them? If it has no leadership? Who is qualified enough to sit on the directors board? Or talk with Roland? Given the previous spats on here - and a lot of you don't get on. how will this be decided?
Support the team not the regime - really? How many posts on the Birmingham thread above are saying the protests are more fun than the game?
Why do CARD not promote on other cafc Internet forums? Even a cursory look at into the valley suggest CARDs methods are thought to be a bizarre. If you want unity then show me you have support from the MAJORITY of fans.
The TV walk out was not demonstrative of a majority support including those wearing b/w scarves.
Just because you can protest does not mean that you should. Has it occurred to anyone that the protest so far have achieved nothing? Except the dumping of a few pasties and paying a few coppers overtime.
Who approaches Katrien? Is it the messenger more than the message that failes to engage?
Yes I get you don't like Roland but you didn't like Slater either. Maybe some boats don't need rocking. In hindsight and learning from that mistake, isn't it better to stay with Roland than be sold to say another Mark Hulyer or someone with less money? And following on from that - is the new owner only accepted if he gets CARDs blessing? It does seem nobody is to good for CARD now Murray got rumbled.
We are going down because of the board? I accept that, how would CARD have prevented that.
All I'm looking for is answers to simple questions - the paranoia I can do without.
How about insults? why don't you just F**ck Off you fraud!
Who is qualified enough to sit on the directors board?
One can protest against the current ownership while not being "qualified!" to sit on the board. Can't one?
Otherwise, to extend your line of thought, one would have to be "qualified" to replace a player if you want to criticise him. Sometimes Johnnie Jackson doesn't play well. I am perfectly within my right to say so, even if I am totally incapable of replacing him.
I think you're missing the point here. Possibly deliberately. No-one really wants to "talk" to him. CARD want to oust him. Although, if he's as much a fan as he claims to be, I am sure some would be happy to chat to him in the Rose of Denmark after a game. So long as it's after he's sold the club.
He's proven to be incapable of discussing. Therefore there is nothing to be gained in talking. He needs to understand that the best thing he can do is to go away.
How many posts on the Birmingham thread above are saying the protests are more fun than the game?
I haven't counted. But that's not really your point is it? What you're trying to suggest is that no-one should be allowed to enjoy the way in which the vast majority of fans are making Charlton unmanageable for Roland Duchatelet. Well, I think you're wrong. Because the way in which CARD has garnered support, commitment and passion from a very disparate group of fans is incredible and inspiring. Incredible in that it's astonishing t see how much a group of people can have such involvement in the ownership structure of a football club. Inspiring in that it's a reminder of what Charlton Athletic was at its best; and will be again, when Duchatelet is gone.
Even a cursory look at into the valley suggest CARDs methods are thought to be a bizarre. If you want unity then show me you have support from the MAJORITY of fans.
The TV walk out was not demonstrative of a majority support including those wearing b/w scarves.
Just because you can protest does not mean that you should. Has it occurred to anyone that the protest so far have achieved nothing?
You may be right, in that the protests have achieved nothing. Other than interest and coverage from newspapers, websites, tv stations, radio broadcasters in the UK as well as Continental Europe and South America; action from the owner in the form of (massively ill-judged) communication; and a hardening of support around CARD and its stated aims.
But weighed against a sofa, some new grass and some shiny plastic seats, it's a damn sight more than the current owners have achieved.
Is it the messenger more than the message that failes to engage?
If, by "messenger" you mean the CEO; and if by "failes to engage" you mean "has a complete, fundamental and total lack of understanding how to run the football club", I think the answer is yes.
Yes I get you don't like Roland but you didn't like Slater either. Maybe some boats don't need rocking. In hindsight and learning from that mistake, isn't it better to stay with Roland than be sold to say another Mark Hulyer or someone with less money?
Charlton have had a few less-than-ideal owners in the past. This one's proving to be the worst. So, no, it's very much *not* better to "stay with Roland".
And following on from that - is the new owner only accepted if he gets CARDs blessing?
CARD stands for the Coalition Against Roland Duchatalet; it does not stand to promote someone else. CARD wants this awful owner removed from our club. In the incredibly unlikely event that Charlton gets sold to an even worse owners (I can't believe I am even considering this to be possible, but anyway...) then the fight to have *that* owner replaced might have to be re-engaged.
I will try to respond to all the 'simple questions you raise.
CAFC would be better off with CARD's patronage, because without the approach of this current regime and with the aspirations of CARD in place, attendances would improve.
CARD is not a membership organization so does not need a representative.
There are a broad range of skills amongst the Charlton Athletic fanbase, very many people who would be qualified enough to be a director even if not rich enough.
When the power point November meeting was set up, there were enough co-ordinating skills within the collection of fans attending to figure out a way of talking to the representatives of the regime. Such a thing would be possible again in any meeting with Roland, and I reckon the good offices of the CARD protest fund could run to employing the services of an English/Flemish interpreter.
If you count the post match contributions after the Birmingham game (post match thread) you will find the majority of posts discuss the football not the protests.
I am pretty sure other internet forums are aware of CARD's presence including ITTV, I have seen mention on many forums of supporters of other clubs.
If for the validation of protest it needs to be demonstrated that there is a move from Katriens 2% to your new benchmark of 51%, then phenomenological evidence (no not scientific, or proved with a survey) suggests that your 51% benchmark is passed. May I say though, that if I was a contented fan, and even 20% of fans around me were protesting so much, I would be curious as to why. I would be unlikely to dismiss it as either insignificant, a small group rabble- roused by a handful of people, or without reasons that ought to be heeded.
Your analysis of the TV walk out numbers has the same phenomenological basis as my analysis of protestors in the paragraph above.
CARD is by definition a coalition, and members of that coalition in the form of CAST have tried approaching Roland and been rebuffed, you ask who will talk to Roland, but now ask who will approach Katrien. Both individuals have resisted any meaningful approaches throughout this regime's tenure.
It is not better to stay with Roland under all circumstances when there are interested parties out there (which Katrien herself told us about in the last fans forum meeting), especially when interested parties are given no access because they might be billboard salespeople.
There is an alternative out there, Katrien has intimated as much herself.
How might CARD have prevented relegation? As a named group CARD came about too late to influence anything football related. However many individual Charlton Supporters, now involved in CARD's activities have tried to point out to this regime that they're heading over the edge, one glaring example is the Phil Chapple situation commented on by many at the time.
There you go Belgiumbun. My effort at a polite response to you from a fan who supports a 'bizarre' CARD campaign.
I'm not sure whether Belgiam is saying he's unhappy with Roland as owner, or unhappy with the way Card are going about trying to get him out. Which is it, Bun?
BB - the 40m is indeed a give-away, but you don't make it clear whether that is £ or €. Please clarify. It's important.
As for CARD, the clue is in the name. It's a coalition, which means that folks of varying persuasions put aside their differences to join together to seek empowerment in an over-riding common cause. Belgian politics will have shown you all you need to know.
Btw, I was firmly pro-network until the smoke began to clear and the mirrors started to crack, exposing an edifice about as solid as a Hollywood back-lot. You folks have deceived and saddened an awful lot of people who had genuinely wished you well, their goodwill now sacrificed on the altar of Mr D's inscrutable principles. Yes, and there many of us now getting very angry indeed - there's quite a difference between being fooled and being cheated. Well, we've truly met a master from the land of tromp-l'oeil.
It would be nice to discuss this further - come and say hello at the Kit Sponsors' dinner on the 21st.
The challenge I have with all of these posts, this is the 3rd or 4th in recent days, is the poster asks for coherent and sensible debate but not one can offer a coherent argument/ defence to the performance and values this regime brings to the club.
Supporters organisations have sought dialogue with this regime for 27 months.
They simply refuse to engage unless they can control the remit and process of any debate
The only "clarity" such posters can offer is; - we have been worse in the past - this owner is the only option - a demand to know details of any prospective suitors and their planned appointments - this discontent is just about the results
All of these issues have been repeatedly covered.
Such contributors despite their challenges to the protest campaign cannot point to a single positive activity undertaken by this regime which will deliver to this business.
They impose there own subjective values in terms of the nature of the protest and argue the campaign does not match up to such values.
In terms of other media channels the condemnation of industry professionals is there for all to see. Reference to other message boards is perverse in that based on my infrequent viewing of certainly one site their primary complaint is the protests are not sufficiently aggressive.
The only message on offer appears as "be grateful for what you have". It is a barren argument.
Any assertion "they believe" the protests will not work is supposition upon supposition. Where is the substance behind such assertions? Each and every protest has generated a response from a hitherto unresponsive administration. One was so badly constructed it caused the resignation of the Head Of Communications.
I am not aware the Coaltion against Roland Duchatelet has placed any timeline on achieving its goal for the removal of this regime. Indeed in its last public statement CARD made clear they have every intention of taking the campaign into the close season.
If someone genuinely does not understand why almost anyone of any professional standing would be preferable to this regime then they have simply not read the threads posted on this board.
I thank you for your communication but it offers nothing new to the debate.
If people are genuinely interested in understanding the concerns of so many I recommend time concocting a questionable critique of the CARD protest campaign would be better spend researching the archives of this forum whereon they will find all of the answers they seek.
I'm not sure whether Belgiam is saying he's unhappy with Roland as owner, or unhappy with the way Card are going about trying to get him out. Which is it, Bun?
Well?
BB demands answers from CARD but refuses to answer basic and very limited questions in return. WUM who is fed up that he/she has been sussed from the off, that is why I couldn't be arsed to be civil in my first response.
Why is it every time you read a statement from CARD you think, "yes, fair play, makes complete sense, respect for what you say", but when you read a statement from the club you think WTF?
BB, do you believe that the current regime are doing a good job? Can you think of any good ideas or innovations that Katrien has brought to the table or implemented? Do you think that, as a club, we are heading in the right direction and that the regime have actually taken us there?
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
Hey BelgianBun, takes two to engage in a dialogue buddy. You've had several people provide very concise, logical responses to your questions now, howsabout you actually respond in kind instead of just repeating ad hominems and refusing to actually engage in the conversation you claim to want?
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
How long did you spend studying the the recent history of CAFC?
You are, or are part,of the regime and I claim my 10 euros
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
Murray has no shares and really doesn't matter. His importance is only in his head now. Even what he is owed - about £2.6m, from recollection - is small change in the bigger picture. A buyer can simply pay him.
The idea that Slater left because of critiicism from fans, if I understand you, is as novel as it is fantastic. He left because the person he represented was unwilling or unable to fund the club any further. That had nothing to do with supporters.
Belgiumbun your latest post, may i say, seems to me a little more ...errmm...'florid' than your earlier ones. It could be argued that a new regime will attract massive goodwill rather than be attacked by a 'rabid dog'. You might be referring to the rabid dog pitch invader yesterday I, don't know. Isn't it ironic that you mention 'white slave trader' when Roland is buying and selling, and moving around the network human beings at his whim, the difference is they're paid and only slaves to their contracts. In seeing them as contracted price-laden assets to be sold on, (to the premier league as Katrien said), Roland shares that meat market view of people that slave traders had. it might be wise to pause for thought at this stage of the evening, maybe even have a cup of tea or coffee.
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
Varney - as you point out - has confirmed he has an offer available. There is no clearer evidence of "people are prepared to buy the club" than actually having someone confirmed as prepared to buy the club.
What's Murray got to do with "selling at a loss"? His money is tied up - and legally safe - in the debenture that gets paid upon promotion to the premier league; it has no tie to his presence on the board. This is well known, and I went as far as to post a credit report for the club that stated this. In fact, it;s safe to say that the likelihood of him receiving his money under Roland is very much zero.
Murray is arguably the smallest player in this whole situation. In fact, it's been rumoured that Murray himself was trying to get his own investors involved.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
It's got nothing to do with being more marketable, but providing an means of encouraging a sale. There are buyers available but the current regime seems to be under the illusion that running the club with their current attitudes is sustainable: it is not.
As mentioned before, nothing has to be paid to Murray upon sale. Legally this only happens upon entry to the Premier League. Please stop spreading misinformation and presenting straw-man arguments.
However, as a matter of opinion, I believe CARD has done a great job of marketing the club and demonstrating that it not only has a very loyal fanbase - but it has a very imaginative one which can do a better job of PR than some professionals who have worked for the likes of the Premier League. In fact, as a voluntary initiative, it's been very successful - and if a new regime wanted to take advantage of those fans - then they could.
Can you imagine if the likes of Target20K had the same sentiment as CARD? I think it 20K would be relatively easy to achieve if that was the case.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
No one gave CARD this responsibility, that's the beauty of it - people have used their own free will to weigh up the current situation and make their own judgements. It would appear, rather overwhelmingly, that free will has sided with CARD.
Based upon your own arguments, it would appear that those who have sided with CARD have also educated themselves about the various nuances of our current situation to a greater degree than some of those who currently oppose CARD. I think that is perhaps the most telling part of this thread and the recent influx of anti-CARD posts.
I have no connection to the CARD folk, but this is how I see it:
If you don't agree with CARD or the protests - that's OK. All that is being asked of you is to endure 3-4 minutes of disruption early in a home game.
If you are saying that you want everyone to "support the team" , that's OK too, but nobody has the right to sit next to a person who 100% supports the team. Let's face it - we all have our likes and dislikes in the squad, and that's what makes football such a great sport.
As I understand it, CARD do not expect to make CAFC a better club but are trying to disrupt a regime which is destroying a good club through appalling board level decisions in every aspect of the football business.
Decisions which, they would rather not discuss or reveal to the supporters, and in some cases have not been 100% truthful about.
Yes you can sit back and see what happens - but what if you are handed a flyer next month that says we are playing our home games in Woking from next season?
Or that Under 18's will not be admitted ?
Or that the club colours will be pink, the club crest changed to a waffle, and our nickname to the Smurfs ?
My guess is that many who share the "see what happens" approach will just walk away, while true Charlton supporters will weather the storm and continue to protest until we return the daily running of our club to safe hands.
These are dark days, because we have no idea of the RD plan for the future, and even if he was to explain it in full - how could we be sure it was the truth ?
Jiminez/Slater were unfortunate that the money supply stopped and they were left stranded - but Slater never hid the fact that he was a Man City ST holder, and at least he attended the our matches.
As I understand it, CARD aims to make the club "unworkable" for the current regime by placing hurdles at every opportunity, and CARD will prevail eventually.
I ask you to reflect on the Valley Party candidates of times gone by - could a handful of amateurs really hope to influence the decision making process of a Local Government Authority ?
Belgiumbun - what is the alternative to CARD's action? What do you suggest...? Surely you must admit the current regime are ruining the club...? Maybe you should try answering a few questions...!?!?
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
Superb use of the English language. Makes Roland's recent statement look Churchillian.
So to recap - some of you want to engage with Roland while other want to oust him to an as yet unknown 'buyer' mentioned only in meetings. Nothing has been seen of the new buyer (Varney seems to be interested but hates Murray) or agreed just a rumour. CARD have taken it upon themselves without election, notification or consultation to lead a compiagn against Roland. So if you are successful Out goes Roland where does that leave Murray? There are separate entities and have no legal relationship and can see independent of each other as I understand it? Does he go too? I assume so. He is not gonna sell at a loss and you now it.
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
The bit about Murray and he won't leave with a loss: Murray doesn't own the club in any capacity as far as I know. Also his deal is he gets his money back if we get back to the prem + interest. I would presume any new owner would have to honor this deal.
Anyway I don't think any of what has been said on this thread, or any other thread, or what Twitter and Facebook have stated or what has been said by many in public in and out the ground and in all forms of media by many respectable journalist and pundits will change your mind so maybe it's best to stick to keeping your head firmly beneath the sand.
Comments
Which is it?
I see a lot of people taking time out to reply to you, most with far more patience than I possess, and despite their best attempts at conveying their own opinions - all I see is you repeating the same points which have previously been disputed. This means that either you're wasting your time and you're purposefully provoking some sort of reaction, or you're so far set in your ways that you're unable to debate. Whichever one it is, I think it would be more healthy for you if you took some time out and went somewhere else.
I think Narnia might be the type of destination you're looking for; you can believe whatever you want there without anyone challenging your view point.
Who approaches Katrien? That would have been Steve Clarke, elected chair of CAST, but who gave up before Christmas because after many months of procrastination she then reneged on what she'd agreed. Or it would be Rikofold, on here, who sits on the VG committee with her and whose approach can be judged from the videos of FF meetings. In any event, it's been her who insists on dictating who represents fans in any public situation and has then surrounded herself with a wall of staff, Johnnie Jackson and CACT.
How many people use ITTV (or any other forum) but not Charlton Life, Twitter or Facebook (all used by CARD)? If such people exist, do they not read or follow the SLP, Shopper, VOTV or blogsites that report on CARD activities? What is the traffic level on these other forums compared to Charlton Life? In other words, why do they matter in terms of messaging? The hard to reach people are not those that exclusively read one Charlton forum, IMO, but those who don't read any, either because they don't use the internet much or aren't interested.
Ultimately Slater never owned or controlled the club, although the FL and fans were told that he did. More importantly he took no interest and played no part in its day to day running, whereas Roland wants to interfere in team selection and thinks that's sensible. Very different creatures. Meanwhile, Murray did pretty well for a long time before he decided to hire Dowie and fell out with just about every other director, then ran out of money, including theirs. So maybe better things are possible after all. Hulyer was a very long while ago. You forgot to account for 1984-2006, which actually was the club's most successful period in modern times.
Otherwise, to extend your line of thought, one would have to be "qualified" to replace a player if you want to criticise him. Sometimes Johnnie Jackson doesn't play well. I am perfectly within my right to say so, even if I am totally incapable of replacing him. I think you're missing the point here. Possibly deliberately. No-one really wants to "talk" to him. CARD want to oust him. Although, if he's as much a fan as he claims to be, I am sure some would be happy to chat to him in the Rose of Denmark after a game. So long as it's after he's sold the club.
He's proven to be incapable of discussing. Therefore there is nothing to be gained in talking. He needs to understand that the best thing he can do is to go away. There's nothing to be decided. Except for one thing: Roland Duchatalet to sell his stake in the club. Yes, really. Very few people could have missed the support when Charlton scored the winner yesterday. I haven't counted. But that's not really your point is it? What you're trying to suggest is that no-one should be allowed to enjoy the way in which the vast majority of fans are making Charlton unmanageable for Roland Duchatelet. Well, I think you're wrong. Because the way in which CARD has garnered support, commitment and passion from a very disparate group of fans is incredible and inspiring. Incredible in that it's astonishing t see how much a group of people can have such involvement in the ownership structure of a football club. Inspiring in that it's a reminder of what Charlton Athletic was at its best; and will be again, when Duchatelet is gone.
Odd question! I don't look at many others. Why doesn't Roland Duchatelet explain himself on this one? You may be right, in that the protests have achieved nothing. Other than interest and coverage from newspapers, websites, tv stations, radio broadcasters in the UK as well as Continental Europe and South America; action from the owner in the form of (massively ill-judged) communication; and a hardening of support around CARD and its stated aims.
But weighed against a sofa, some new grass and some shiny plastic seats, it's a damn sight more than the current owners have achieved. Who care? It's not about the CEO it's about the owner. Hopefully, the CEO will be removed, either before, or at the same time as the owner.
No-one "approaches" her. But then again, she's not demonstrated a huge willingness to engage with fans, has she? (What a unique question). If, by "messenger" you mean the CEO; and if by "failes to engage" you mean "has a complete, fundamental and total lack of understanding how to run the football club", I think the answer is yes. Charlton have had a few less-than-ideal owners in the past. This one's proving to be the worst. So, no, it's very much *not* better to "stay with Roland". CARD stands for the Coalition Against Roland Duchatalet; it does not stand to promote someone else. CARD wants this awful owner removed from our club. In the incredibly unlikely event that Charlton gets sold to an even worse owners (I can't believe I am even considering this to be possible, but anyway...) then the fight to have *that* owner replaced might have to be re-engaged.
Yes. Hope that clears everything up for you.
By the way, don't worry too much about your paranoia. I'm sure you'll get over it. (Although a lot of people are very, very worried about you).
I will try to respond to all the 'simple questions you raise.
CAFC would be better off with CARD's patronage, because without the approach of this current regime and with the aspirations of CARD in place, attendances would improve.
CARD is not a membership organization so does not need a representative.
There are a broad range of skills amongst the Charlton Athletic fanbase, very many people who would be qualified enough to be a director even if not rich enough.
When the power point November meeting was set up, there were enough co-ordinating skills within the collection of fans attending to figure out a way of talking to the representatives of the regime. Such a thing would be possible again in any meeting with Roland, and I reckon the good offices of the CARD protest fund could run to employing the services of an English/Flemish interpreter.
If you count the post match contributions after the Birmingham game (post match thread) you will find the majority of posts discuss the football not the protests.
I am pretty sure other internet forums are aware of CARD's presence including ITTV, I have seen mention on many forums of supporters of other clubs.
If for the validation of protest it needs to be demonstrated that there is a move from Katriens 2% to your new benchmark of 51%, then phenomenological evidence (no not scientific, or proved with a survey) suggests that your 51% benchmark is passed.
May I say though, that if I was a contented fan, and even 20% of fans around me were protesting so much, I would be curious as to why. I would be unlikely to dismiss it as either insignificant, a small group rabble- roused by a handful of people, or without reasons that ought to be heeded.
Your analysis of the TV walk out numbers has the same phenomenological basis as my analysis of protestors in the paragraph above.
CARD is by definition a coalition, and members of that coalition in the form of CAST have tried approaching Roland and been rebuffed, you ask who will talk to Roland, but now ask who will approach Katrien. Both individuals have resisted any meaningful approaches throughout this regime's tenure.
It is not better to stay with Roland under all circumstances when there are interested parties out there (which Katrien herself told us about in the last fans forum meeting), especially when interested parties are given no access because they might be billboard salespeople.
There is an alternative out there, Katrien has intimated as much herself.
How might CARD have prevented relegation? As a named group CARD came about too late to influence anything football related. However many individual Charlton Supporters, now involved in CARD's activities have tried to point out to this regime that they're heading over the edge, one glaring example is the Phil Chapple situation commented on by many at the time.
There you go Belgiumbun. My effort at a polite response to you from a fan who supports a 'bizarre' CARD campaign.
As for CARD, the clue is in the name. It's a coalition, which means that folks of varying persuasions put aside their differences to join together to seek empowerment in an over-riding common cause. Belgian politics will have shown you all you need to know.
Btw, I was firmly pro-network until the smoke began to clear and the mirrors started to crack, exposing an edifice about as solid as a Hollywood back-lot. You folks have deceived and saddened an awful lot of people who had genuinely wished you well, their goodwill now sacrificed on the altar of Mr D's inscrutable principles. Yes, and there many of us now getting very angry indeed - there's quite a difference between being fooled and being cheated. Well, we've truly met a master from the land of tromp-l'oeil.
It would be nice to discuss this further - come and say hello at the Kit Sponsors' dinner on the 21st.
Supporters organisations have sought dialogue with this regime for 27 months.
They simply refuse to engage unless they can control the remit and process of any debate
The only "clarity" such posters can offer is;
- we have been worse in the past
- this owner is the only option
- a demand to know details of any prospective suitors and their planned appointments
- this discontent is just about the results
All of these issues have been repeatedly covered.
Such contributors despite their challenges to the protest campaign cannot point to a single positive activity undertaken by this regime which will deliver to this business.
They impose there own subjective values in terms of the nature of the protest and argue the campaign does not match up to such values.
In terms of other media channels the condemnation of industry professionals is there for all to see. Reference to other message boards is perverse in that based on my infrequent viewing of certainly one site their primary complaint is the protests are not sufficiently aggressive.
The only message on offer appears as "be grateful for what you have". It is a barren argument.
Any assertion "they believe" the protests will not work is supposition upon supposition. Where is the substance behind such assertions? Each and every protest has generated a response from a hitherto unresponsive administration. One was so badly constructed it caused the resignation of the Head Of Communications.
I am not aware the Coaltion against Roland Duchatelet has placed any timeline on achieving its goal for the removal of this regime. Indeed in its last public statement CARD made clear they have every intention of taking the campaign into the close season.
If someone genuinely does not understand why almost anyone of any professional standing would be preferable to this regime then they have simply not read the threads posted on this board.
I thank you for your communication but it offers nothing new to the debate.
If people are genuinely interested in understanding the concerns of so many I recommend time concocting a questionable critique of the CARD protest campaign would be better spend researching the archives of this forum whereon they will find all of the answers they seek.
Why is it every time you read a statement from CARD you think, "yes, fair play, makes complete sense, respect for what you say", but when you read a statement from the club you think WTF?
Look forward to your reply
So CAFC become more marketable if the fans protest?it that the rationale of CARD? , I bet the potential buyers are just queuing up to buy a club with a clause in its contract that x has to be paid up to Murray and hostile fans that will, unless they get their own way will turn on you like a rabid dog. This is what happened to Slater? He sods off And we got Roland. Does this not ring Alarm bells that due diligence may be overlooked here and we could be sold to some white slave trader ten times worse and skinter than Roland.
We great power not only comes great electric bills but great responsibility. Who gave CARD this responsibility ? Frying pan may become the fire. Again.
ps
whats with this 'we great power' quote?? Sounds like a statement that I read recently
Are you a club employee or a Douchbag stooge?
You are, or are part,of the regime and I claim my 10 euros
The idea that Slater left because of critiicism from fans, if I understand you, is as novel as it is fantastic. He left because the person he represented was unwilling or unable to fund the club any further. That had nothing to do with supporters.
It could be argued that a new regime will attract massive goodwill rather than be attacked by a 'rabid dog'. You might be referring to the rabid dog pitch invader yesterday I, don't know.
Isn't it ironic that you mention 'white slave trader' when Roland is buying and selling, and moving around the network human beings at his whim, the difference is they're paid and only slaves to their contracts. In seeing them as contracted price-laden assets to be sold on, (to the premier league as Katrien said), Roland shares that meat market view of people that slave traders had.
it might be wise to pause for thought at this stage of the evening, maybe even have a cup of tea or coffee.
What's Murray got to do with "selling at a loss"? His money is tied up - and legally safe - in the debenture that gets paid upon promotion to the premier league; it has no tie to his presence on the board. This is well known, and I went as far as to post a credit report for the club that stated this. In fact, it;s safe to say that the likelihood of him receiving his money under Roland is very much zero.
Murray is arguably the smallest player in this whole situation. In fact, it's been rumoured that Murray himself was trying to get his own investors involved. It's got nothing to do with being more marketable, but providing an means of encouraging a sale. There are buyers available but the current regime seems to be under the illusion that running the club with their current attitudes is sustainable: it is not.
As mentioned before, nothing has to be paid to Murray upon sale. Legally this only happens upon entry to the Premier League. Please stop spreading misinformation and presenting straw-man arguments.
However, as a matter of opinion, I believe CARD has done a great job of marketing the club and demonstrating that it not only has a very loyal fanbase - but it has a very imaginative one which can do a better job of PR than some professionals who have worked for the likes of the Premier League. In fact, as a voluntary initiative, it's been very successful - and if a new regime wanted to take advantage of those fans - then they could.
Can you imagine if the likes of Target20K had the same sentiment as CARD? I think it 20K would be relatively easy to achieve if that was the case. No one gave CARD this responsibility, that's the beauty of it - people have used their own free will to weigh up the current situation and make their own judgements. It would appear, rather overwhelmingly, that free will has sided with CARD.
Based upon your own arguments, it would appear that those who have sided with CARD have also educated themselves about the various nuances of our current situation to a greater degree than some of those who currently oppose CARD. I think that is perhaps the most telling part of this thread and the recent influx of anti-CARD posts.
If you don't agree with CARD or the protests - that's OK.
All that is being asked of you is to endure 3-4 minutes of disruption early in a home game.
If you are saying that you want everyone to "support the team" , that's OK too, but nobody has the right to sit next to a person who 100% supports the team. Let's face it - we all have our likes and dislikes in the squad, and that's what makes football such a great sport.
As I understand it, CARD do not expect to make CAFC a better club but are trying to disrupt a regime which is destroying a good club through appalling board level decisions in every aspect of the football business.
Decisions which, they would rather not discuss or reveal to the supporters, and in some cases have not been 100% truthful about.
Yes you can sit back and see what happens - but what if you are handed a flyer next month that says we are playing our home games in Woking from next season?
Or that Under 18's will not be admitted ?
Or that the club colours will be pink, the club crest changed to a waffle, and our nickname to the Smurfs ?
My guess is that many who share the "see what happens" approach will just walk away, while true Charlton supporters will weather the storm and continue to protest until we return the daily running of our club to safe hands.
These are dark days, because we have no idea of the RD plan for the future, and even if he was to explain it in full - how could we be sure it was the truth ?
Jiminez/Slater were unfortunate that the money supply stopped and they were left stranded - but Slater never hid the fact that he was a Man City ST holder, and at least he attended the our matches.
As I understand it, CARD aims to make the club "unworkable" for the current regime by placing hurdles at every opportunity, and CARD will prevail eventually.
I ask you to reflect on the Valley Party candidates of times gone by - could a handful of amateurs really hope to influence the decision making process of a Local Government Authority ?
The answer = 8719 said YES !
The fight goes on to the end - BELGIANS OUT.
Murray doesn't own the club in any capacity as far as I know. Also his deal is he gets his money back if we get back to the prem + interest. I would presume any new owner would have to honor this deal.
Anyway I don't think any of what has been said on this thread, or any other thread, or what Twitter and Facebook have stated or what has been said by many in public in and out the ground and in all forms of media by many respectable journalist and pundits will change your mind so maybe it's best to stick to keeping your head firmly beneath the sand.