Without knowing the specifics of what this fella has said, I'm going to hold back on the outrage. We do have freedom of speech in this country but there are certain levels of decency we are expected to uphold, some of which can be enforced by law.
No one wants football grounds to be totally sanitised, but there is a line and if the fella has been overly abusive, then a quiet word to warn him about his contract, while unusual, is not necessarily the wrong thing to do from the club. From the Guardian article it sounds like the fella has accepted he has not exactly been a saint, although there is no suggestion his actions have crossed into criminality.
That said, quite where the club thinks it has the right to start using contracts to dictate how people behave I'm not sure. It's pretty laughable, too, that they think anyone is so attached to watching the steaming piles of doo-dah they have served up on the pitch for 2.5 years that the threat of no longer being able to do so would be enough to scare him into line. Fans are leaving in their droves voluntarily and many who are left are probably there out of habit, or a misplaced sense of duty or loyalty. I should think a few fans would be glad of the excuse not to go anymore.
It does, also, rather add weight to idea of the club viewing the fans as a commodity that will just put up with anything the club does because football fans are all too blindly loyal and that can be taken advantage of.
And the idea that the matter was settled "amicably" is clearly fanciful.
The club backed off. Probably because someone with more than a single bran cell worked out that they were on a hiding to nothing.
The fan "apologised" because he wanted his ST.
He clearly feels picked on, bullied, pressurised, blackmailed - call it what you will.
But it's far from amicable, quite clearly.
Is that more or less amicable than getting the police involved?
They cannot get the police involved because there is no offence, or if there is, it's so petty the police have better things to do with their time. As I and others have also stated, as an isolated incident it isn't a massive deal, coupled with the other gales of shit pouring our way from The Valley, on and off the pitch, it deserves all the coverage that we, non-lifers, fans of other clubs, twitter, online blogs, national newspapers, international news agencies, UK national radio and regional TV stations are giving it. Sorry Col, even along with Al you are less than 2%...
In the light of all the other developments and comments from the club about the protests I can't see it personally as anything other than the beginnings of a concerted campaign instigated from the top to try and target and reduce opposition on social media by intimidation.
This guy being a new hire and a senior a copper (why is he no longer in the force?) might make one think they are upping the anti.
People swear to a very offensive, thoughtless and unnecessary degree on Twitter, I think its wrong but that's Twitter. What could this kind of action possibly achieve, other than a vain attempt to control negativity on social media, to try and protect the brand, and send a message to intimidate others?
I recall a conversation with a 'club insider' around the time of the Woolwich meeting where it was divulged to me that the owner believed he could quite easily 'lose' (by protest) 300-400 season ticket holders, naively believing this was the extent of the dissent, and of course its now in the thousands. This shows some of the mentality behind these sort of decisions, and poor old Mick in the middle of it.
Perhaps they are doing the same now on a larger scale, or punishing those who dissent in the only way they can. Fortunately the management seem so incompetent they can't even be good at being bad.
Hopefully its been dealt with now and some sense has been applied, I guess we'll see if any more notices go out. Picked on the wrong fans..
In the light of all the other developments and comments from the club about the protests I can't see it personally as anything other than the beginnings of a concerted campaign instigated from the top to try and target and reduce opposition on social media by intimidation.
This guy being a new hire and a senior a copper (why is he no longer in the force?) might make one think they are upping the anti.
People swear to a very offensive, thoughtless and unnecessary degree on Twitter, I think its wrong but that's Twitter. What could this kind of action possibly achieve, other than a vain attempt to control negativity on social media, to try and protect the brand, and send a message to intimidate others?
I recall a conversation with a 'club insider' around the time of the Woolwich meeting where it was divulged to me that the owner believed he could quite easily 'lose' (by protest) 300-400 season ticket holders, naively believing this was the extent of the dissent, and of course its now in the thousands. This shows some of the mentality behind these sort of decisions, and poor old Mick in the middle of it.
Perhaps they are doing the same now on a larger scale, or punishing those who dissent in the only way they can. Fortunately the management seem so incompetent they can't even be good at being bad.
Hopefully its been dealt with now and some sense has been applied, I guess we'll see if any more notices go out. Picked on the wrong fans..
And the idea that the matter was settled "amicably" is clearly fanciful.
The club backed off. Probably because someone with more than a single bran cell worked out that they were on a hiding to nothing.
The fan "apologised" because he wanted his ST.
He clearly feels picked on, bullied, pressurised, blackmailed - call it what you will.
But it's far from amicable, quite clearly.
Is that more or less amicable than getting the police involved?
They cannot get the police involved because there is no offence, or if there is, it's so petty the police have better things to do with their time. As I and others have also stated, as an isolated incident it isn't a massive deal, coupled with the other gales of shit pouring our way from The Valley, on and off the pitch, it deserves all the coverage that we, non-lifers, fans of other clubs, twitter, online blogs, national newspapers, international news agencies, UK national radio and regional TV stations are giving it. Sorry Col, even along with Al you are less than 2%...
Not sure how you can confidently state there is no offence, afaik we don't know exactly what was tweeted and said. And yes the police do have better things to do with their time that's why these things were introduced as per the statement.
If people want to be offended by what the club have done and use this as something else to bash them with that's fine, I'm not saying they can't. As I keep referring to my initial point was that people shouldn't be throwing around the free speech line unless they know for certain what was said. My own personal opinion is that what the club did wasn't that bad but should have been handled better.
And I hope by your final line you aren't inferring that I am in favour of the current ownership. Just because I won't lose my shit about every single thing the club does does not make me pro Roland.
Katriens not too bothered by it as she's just walked past me on Tavistock Street enjoying an evening out with a Belgian aquaintance. I let you all down though as I chose to smile knowingly at the great day she's had and walk past.
I didn't confidently state, hence the words "if there is". But what has been stated elsewhere on this thread is that Talksport saw the tweets, and saw no offence there.
No I wasn't suggesting that you are one of the club apologists Col, I am well aware you are not. But in this case your opinion reflects those of about, well, three or four other people. You are entitled to it, and the rest of the country are entitled to say you are wrong, in my case for the reason I gave. It's just another example of the idiotic crap we have had to endure for months, and the media are all over it, which can only further our cause. The more so if we are all singing from the same hymn sheet (or staying away from the church on this one occasion, if we don't like the song...).
As always, you try to take a balanced view, and I invariably end up convinced by your viewpoints. So that said, i would really urge you to give the Talksport clips a listen. You will hear the anchor guy saying he has been through the tweets and really not finding anything out of the ordinary, given the overall mood of the fan base. (Separately, one of the Trust Board also went through his Twitter before he deleted, and came to the same conclusion).Then the "culprit" himself comes on, live. He is articulate, calm, and measured. He does himself and us credit with that appearance. Afterwards the Talksport team say that before someone comes on, they often wonder how the person will sound and turn out, and their conclusion was that "Quentin" didn't sound as they expected (in a positive way)
So I come to the conclusion, and maybe you will too, that Quentin is far from the worst offender in terms of behaviour, who wants to buy a season ticket. The conclusion then is that this is a clear case of bullying. It seems that they got hold of him because he was previously known to the club - for doing voluntary work. He also says in the clip that he surprised them by turning up to the meeting with @PIco, who is now the Trust chair, and another friend. He says they were a bit taken aback by that. Clearly Mr Cliff expected to get Quentin on his own and come over all plod on him.
Even so, Quentin felt intimidated enough to delete all his tweets, which do not seem to be so bad as to warrant that. Up to a point, then, bullying works. Or at least, it did, until the media shit hit the fan.
I hadn't realised earlier that this Cliff bloke is an ex-copper. I start to ask myself about his title "Safety Officer". I am starting to ask myself whose safety exactly he is primarily responsible for.
As we discussed within the Trust gang this afternoon, we are left with two contrasting emotions. On the one hand, the media shitstorm has gone a long way to waking up the nation to what is happening to us. Owen Gibson tweeted from Rio for heaven's sake. On the other hand there is this deep sense of shame that we now 'support a club' that has brought in an ex-copper whose first major act is to seek to bully and intimidate a largely innocent fan who has been a fan for 15 years. That's why I'm outraged, and if you give the Talksport stuff a listen, you may be too.
In the light of all the other developments and comments from the club about the protests I can't see it personally as anything other than the beginnings of a concerted campaign instigated from the top to try and target and reduce opposition on social media by intimidation.
This guy being a new hire and a senior a copper (why is he no longer in the force?) might make one think they are upping the anti.
People swear to a very offensive, thoughtless and unnecessary degree on Twitter, I think its wrong but that's Twitter. What could this kind of action possibly achieve, other than a vain attempt to control negativity on social media, to try and protect the brand, and send a message to intimidate others?
I recall a conversation with a 'club insider' around the time of the Woolwich meeting where it was divulged to me that the owner believed he could quite easily 'lose' (by protest) 300-400 season ticket holders, naively believing this was the extent of the dissent, and of course its now in the thousands. This shows some of the mentality behind these sort of decisions, and poor old Mick in the middle of it.
Perhaps they are doing the same now on a larger scale, or punishing those who dissent in the only way they can. Fortunately the management seem so incompetent they can't even be good at being bad.
Hopefully its been dealt with now and some sense has been applied, I guess we'll see if any more notices go out. Picked on the wrong fans..
He's done 35 years. Probably got out before the new NPA of 60 come in. He'll just have retired with a view to topping up his pension with a cushy little number in the private sector. (Because the salary isn't the be all and end all for them, retired plod are a nice cheap option. While his salary might be undisclosed, it will be tiny.)
OK, leads with the club's side, but overall pretty balanced, including quotes from @davo55.
To be honest, I'm disappointed that the BBC led with the club's argument. Of a 15 minute interview I gave them, they've picked out some pretty inane stuff to quote. Maybe my fault (I did say that stuff, but there was better material too) but I get a feeling the BBC have a bit of an "agenda". Has KM got a buddy there?
As always, you try to take a balanced view, and I invariably end up convinced by your viewpoints. So that said, i would really urge you to give the Talksport clips a listen. You will hear the anchor guy saying he has been through the tweets and really not finding anything out of the ordinary, given the overall mood of the fan base. (Separately, one of the Trust Board also went through his Twitter before he deleted, and came to the same conclusion).Then the "culprit" himself comes on, live. He is articulate, calm, and measured. He does himself and us credit with that appearance. Afterwards the Talksport team say that before someone comes on, they often wonder how the person will sound and turn out, and their conclusion was that "Quentin" didn't sound as they expected (in a positive way)
So I come to the conclusion, and maybe you will too, that Quentin is far from the worst offender in terms of behaviour, who wants to buy a season ticket. The conclusion then is that this is a clear case of bullying. It seems that they got hold of him because he was previously known to the club - for doing voluntary work. He also says in the clip that he surprised them by turning up to the meeting with @PIco, who is now the Trust chair, and another friend. He says they were a bit taken aback by that. Clearly Mr Cliff expected to get Quentin on his own and come over all plod on him.
Even so, Quentin felt intimidated enough to delete all his tweets, which do not seem to be so bad as to warrant that. Up to a point, then, bullying works. Or at least, it did, until the media shit hit the fan.
I hadn't realised earlier that this Cliff bloke is an ex-copper. I start to ask myself about his title "Safety Officer". I am starting to ask myself whose safety exactly he is primarily responsible for.
As we discussed within the Trust gang this afternoon, we are left with two contrasting emotions. On the one hand, the media shitstorm has gone a long way to waking up the nation to what is happening to us. Owen Gibson tweeted from Rio for heaven's sake. On the other hand there is this deep sense of shame that we now 'support a club' that has brought in an ex-copper whose first major act is to seek to bully and intimidate a largely innocent fan who has been a fan for 15 years. That's why I'm outraged, and if you give the Talksport stuff a listen, you may be too.
My initial reaction to this whole thing has been a bit of "yeah, it's bad, but they've done worse." To me, it's another in the long line of things they handled poorly and petulantly, and that's kind of my permanent reaction to this regime, nothing really surprises me anymore.
But Prague, the way you frame it, if true, is pretty despicable and disgusting. Due to regional issues, I can't hear the TalkSport interview, but the notion that he was targeted because he was known to them through doing volunteer work is beyond pathetic for me, it's heart breaking. No good deed, eh?
@Davo55 the BBC may have buried your quote a bit, but the line "The club that hates their fans" feels very true today.
As always, you try to take a balanced view, and I invariably end up convinced by your viewpoints. So that said, i would really urge you to give the Talksport clips a listen. You will hear the anchor guy saying he has been through the tweets and really not finding anything out of the ordinary, given the overall mood of the fan base. (Separately, one of the Trust Board also went through his Twitter before he deleted, and came to the same conclusion).Then the "culprit" himself comes on, live. He is articulate, calm, and measured. He does himself and us credit with that appearance. Afterwards the Talksport team say that before someone comes on, they often wonder how the person will sound and turn out, and their conclusion was that "Quentin" didn't sound as they expected (in a positive way)
I know I'll be in the minority here but I don't think the club have done that much wrong here.
And for those banging on about free speech, you may want to brush up on that definition before you throw it about in regards to this instance.
Why?
Why what? Elaborate please Stu.
Why would anyone need to brush up on their definition of free speech? Have you read Art. 10 of The Human Rights Act?
I am aware of it but I'm also aware of this caveat that we have incorporated as a part of it
"including threatening, abusive or insulting words or behavior intending or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress or cause a breach of the peace"
If he has been using foul and abusive language towards people at the club (both online and at the ground) then I have little sympathy. Yes, the club could have handled this better but if you are going to be abusive 1. that's no way to try and protest and 2. you have to suffer any sort of repercussions that come along with it.
Double standards if the players can use foul and abusive language to the fans though.
If your happy with all that's going on at our once proud club good luck to you but you are in a very small minority.
As always, you try to take a balanced view, and I invariably end up convinced by your viewpoints. So that said, i would really urge you to give the Talksport clips a listen. You will hear the anchor guy saying he has been through the tweets and really not finding anything out of the ordinary, given the overall mood of the fan base. (Separately, one of the Trust Board also went through his Twitter before he deleted, and came to the same conclusion).Then the "culprit" himself comes on, live. He is articulate, calm, and measured. He does himself and us credit with that appearance. Afterwards the Talksport team say that before someone comes on, they often wonder how the person will sound and turn out, and their conclusion was that "Quentin" didn't sound as they expected (in a positive way)
So I come to the conclusion, and maybe you will too, that Quentin is far from the worst offender in terms of behaviour, who wants to buy a season ticket. The conclusion then is that this is a clear case of bullying. It seems that they got hold of him because he was previously known to the club - for doing voluntary work. He also says in the clip that he surprised them by turning up to the meeting with @PIco, who is now the Trust chair, and another friend. He says they were a bit taken aback by that. Clearly Mr Cliff expected to get Quentin on his own and come over all plod on him.
Even so, Quentin felt intimidated enough to delete all his tweets, which do not seem to be so bad as to warrant that. Up to a point, then, bullying works. Or at least, it did, until the media shit hit the fan.
I hadn't realised earlier that this Cliff bloke is an ex-copper. I start to ask myself about his title "Safety Officer". I am starting to ask myself whose safety exactly he is primarily responsible for.
As we discussed within the Trust gang this afternoon, we are left with two contrasting emotions. On the one hand, the media shitstorm has gone a long way to waking up the nation to what is happening to us. Owen Gibson tweeted from Rio for heaven's sake. On the other hand there is this deep sense of shame that we now 'support a club' that has brought in an ex-copper whose first major act is to seek to bully and intimidate a largely innocent fan who has been a fan for 15 years. That's why I'm outraged, and if you give the Talksport stuff a listen, you may be too.
Haven't had a chance to listen to those yet Prague, I will try and do so in my lunch break.
You are much closer to the action, so to speak, than I am and have also always seemed like a more reasoned poster on here, so I respect your view that something more Machiavellian may be going on here.
I'm sure I come across as overly defensive if the regime to some people on here. I'm certainly no fan of the way the club has been run in the last couple of years, but often with these things, as outsiders, our human nature is to jump to the worst conclusion, especially with the backdrop of everything else going on at the club. I tend to take the view that, more often than not, there are reasons for things like this behind the scenes that we may not fully appreciate, especially when the news first breaks (it's a modern disease, in general, to report 'news' first and worry about truthing out the reports later).
Without doubt though, this lot continue to do themselves few favours.
Friends at work saw this. They (plastic Chelski/manure/arse types) actually saw something Charlton related without me sending it to them. That's how big this was. Absolutely mental that this has happened...
Also surely if they are filming the protests (we know they are) and then storing this on a database. Referencing this against your name and what you post on social media.
A) that will take a lot of time and effort and be really expensive. What a waste of our clubs money.....
surely there is some kind of FOI/data protection issue here. In fact I just asked the guy on my team at work who deals with all our FOIs and the like and apparently if it is stored digitally and in our name we have a right to know exactly what they are storing against our name.
Comments
No one wants football grounds to be totally sanitised, but there is a line and if the fella has been overly abusive, then a quiet word to warn him about his contract, while unusual, is not necessarily the wrong thing to do from the club. From the Guardian article it sounds like the fella has accepted he has not exactly been a saint, although there is no suggestion his actions have crossed into criminality.
That said, quite where the club thinks it has the right to start using contracts to dictate how people behave I'm not sure. It's pretty laughable, too, that they think anyone is so attached to watching the steaming piles of doo-dah they have served up on the pitch for 2.5 years that the threat of no longer being able to do so would be enough to scare him into line. Fans are leaving in their droves voluntarily and many who are left are probably there out of habit, or a misplaced sense of duty or loyalty. I should think a few fans would be glad of the excuse not to go anymore.
It does, also, rather add weight to idea of the club viewing the fans as a commodity that will just put up with anything the club does because football fans are all too blindly loyal and that can be taken advantage of.
This guy being a new hire and a senior a copper (why is he no longer in the force?) might make one think they are upping the anti.
People swear to a very offensive, thoughtless and unnecessary degree on Twitter, I think its wrong but that's Twitter. What could this kind of action possibly achieve, other than a vain attempt to control negativity on social media, to try and protect the brand, and send a message to intimidate others?
I recall a conversation with a 'club insider' around the time of the Woolwich meeting where it was divulged to me that the owner believed he could quite easily 'lose' (by protest) 300-400 season ticket holders, naively believing this was the extent of the dissent, and of course its now in the thousands. This shows some of the mentality behind these sort of decisions, and poor old Mick in the middle of it.
Perhaps they are doing the same now on a larger scale, or punishing those who dissent in the only way they can. Fortunately the management seem so incompetent they can't even be good at being bad.
Hopefully its been dealt with now and some sense has been applied, I guess we'll see if any more notices go out. Picked on the wrong fans..
If people want to be offended by what the club have done and use this as something else to bash them with that's fine, I'm not saying they can't. As I keep referring to my initial point was that people shouldn't be throwing around the free speech line unless they know for certain what was said. My own personal opinion is that what the club did wasn't that bad but should have been handled better.
And I hope by your final line you aren't inferring that I am in favour of the current ownership. Just because I won't lose my shit about every single thing the club does does not make me pro Roland.
Just admit it.... They already got you to sign your ABC didn't they?
No I wasn't suggesting that you are one of the club apologists Col, I am well aware you are not. But in this case your opinion reflects those of about, well, three or four other people. You are entitled to it, and the rest of the country are entitled to say you are wrong, in my case for the reason I gave. It's just another example of the idiotic crap we have had to endure for months, and the media are all over it, which can only further our cause. The more so if we are all singing from the same hymn sheet (or staying away from the church on this one occasion, if we don't like the song...).
Could learn to use a comma. Rules of pedantry and all that.
No issue with stopping "threatening or defamatory" ...them's the laws of this good nation.
"Derogatory"? You are having a laugh.
Orwellian...Merie has the same grasp of reality as Emmanuel Goldstein. PWOPAGANDA
As always, you try to take a balanced view, and I invariably end up convinced by your viewpoints. So that said, i would really urge you to give the Talksport clips a listen. You will hear the anchor guy saying he has been through the tweets and really not finding anything out of the ordinary, given the overall mood of the fan base. (Separately, one of the Trust Board also went through his Twitter before he deleted, and came to the same conclusion).Then the "culprit" himself comes on, live. He is articulate, calm, and measured. He does himself and us credit with that appearance. Afterwards the Talksport team say that before someone comes on, they often wonder how the person will sound and turn out, and their conclusion was that "Quentin" didn't sound as they expected (in a positive way)
So I come to the conclusion, and maybe you will too, that Quentin is far from the worst offender in terms of behaviour, who wants to buy a season ticket. The conclusion then is that this is a clear case of bullying. It seems that they got hold of him because he was previously known to the club - for doing voluntary work. He also says in the clip that he surprised them by turning up to the meeting with @PIco, who is now the Trust chair, and another friend. He says they were a bit taken aback by that. Clearly Mr Cliff expected to get Quentin on his own and come over all plod on him.
Even so, Quentin felt intimidated enough to delete all his tweets, which do not seem to be so bad as to warrant that. Up to a point, then, bullying works. Or at least, it did, until the media shit hit the fan.
I hadn't realised earlier that this Cliff bloke is an ex-copper. I start to ask myself about his title "Safety Officer". I am starting to ask myself whose safety exactly he is primarily responsible for.
As we discussed within the Trust gang this afternoon, we are left with two contrasting emotions. On the one hand, the media shitstorm has gone a long way to waking up the nation to what is happening to us. Owen Gibson tweeted from Rio for heaven's sake. On the other hand there is this deep sense of shame that we now 'support a club' that has brought in an ex-copper whose first major act is to seek to bully and intimidate a largely innocent fan who has been a fan for 15 years. That's why I'm outraged, and if you give the Talksport stuff a listen, you may be too.
(Because the salary isn't the be all and end all for them, retired plod are a nice cheap option. While his salary might be undisclosed, it will be tiny.)
But Prague, the way you frame it, if true, is pretty despicable and disgusting. Due to regional issues, I can't hear the TalkSport interview, but the notion that he was targeted because he was known to them through doing volunteer work is beyond pathetic for me, it's heart breaking. No good deed, eh?
@Davo55 the BBC may have buried your quote a bit, but the line "The club that hates their fans" feels very true today.
Is there a link to this please? Thanks.
If your happy with all that's going on at our once proud club good luck to you but you are in a very small minority.
You are much closer to the action, so to speak, than I am and have also always seemed like a more reasoned poster on here, so I respect your view that something more Machiavellian may be going on here.
I'm sure I come across as overly defensive if the regime to some people on here. I'm certainly no fan of the way the club has been run in the last couple of years, but often with these things, as outsiders, our human nature is to jump to the worst conclusion, especially with the backdrop of everything else going on at the club. I tend to take the view that, more often than not, there are reasons for things like this behind the scenes that we may not fully appreciate, especially when the news first breaks (it's a modern disease, in general, to report 'news' first and worry about truthing out the reports later).
Without doubt though, this lot continue to do themselves few favours.
Also surely if they are filming the protests (we know they are) and then storing this on a database. Referencing this against your name and what you post on social media.
A) that will take a lot of time and effort and be really expensive. What a waste of our clubs money.....