Group of older fans who meet to talk about Charlton past and present.
Do you know if she meets with them regularly Henners or is it another tick in the box?
They meet at the Valley every week (Thursday afternoon's in Bartrams IIRC) but don't think KM has ever been to one of their meetings before. But I'm not a member so can't say. Been going for a long and centuries of Charlton support between them so I wouldn't like them being attacked for speaking to her.
As it is a meeting that happens at the Valley anyway she doesn't have to put herself out too much to attend and they don't have to go out of their way either.
I read the Sam Bartram biogarphy recently and the overwhelming thought that come over me was how brilliant it would have been to see the great man play. He was a great keeper for his time, but an entertainer too! To many people he is just a statue, but he was a true legend for our club. I'd love to hear people who saw him play talk about him.
What a lot of people probably don't know is that he loved to get the ball and dribble up the pitch, even into the opponent's half. Sometimes it didn't come off and he had to run back - sometimes still stopping the goal sometimes not. But fans forgave him because he was such a great keeper and this only made him more special, although i'd wager it probably was the reason he didn't get the England caps he deserved. I'd love to see his sports shop outside the ground restored. A vanity project requiring a fair bit of money that probably willnever happen, but wouldn't it be special!
Converted left half was Sam, I believe, so would have been comfortable with the ball at his feet. My father said he would have played for England had it not been for Bert Williams and Frank Swift in front of him.
Group of older fans who meet to talk about Charlton past and present.
Do you know if she meets with them regularly Henners or is it another tick in the box?
They meet at the Valley every week (Thursday afternoon's in Bartrams IIRC) but don't think KM has ever been to one of their meetings before. But I'm not a member so can't say. Been going for a long and centuries of Charlton support between them so I wouldn't like them being attacked for speaking to her.
As it is a meeting that happens at the Valley anyway she doesn't have to put herself out too much to attend and they don't have to go out of their way either.
Interesting Tweet from some obscure Twitter account;
@se9addick nothing interesting or cryptic, just my poor attempt at humour in suggesting that the group that reminisces about the good times at Charlton was the 11/12 league winning squad that this regime carved up
16. CB asked why it was that Fans Forum had no apostrophe after the 's'. KM explained that before very long it's expected that the club may only have one fan left and it would be expensive to change the position of the apostrophe on all the paperwork.
That's disappointing - I was hoping you were going to tell us the reminiscence group invited her down to Bartrams and then, once she was cornered, called her out on her nonsense !
"The tosh about the training ground is a good example. The club published a bullshit article so no further questions are asked about it at the FF, whereas I believe Bromley put them under pressure to explain the contradictions. But that doesn't expose them publicly because it's behind closed doors at the club's insistence."
Covered End and Henry Irving provided quite detailed reports on here of what was said and as far as I can tell there was no attempt to persuade people attending not to publicise what was said (which would have been futile and stupid anyway). So how was it behind closed doors ?
Henry reported their confused and evasive answers about the training ground so doesn't that expose them publicly ?
There's a big difference between third party accounts and an agreed record or a recording. Plenty of people would argue that such accounts on here are partial and selective, whether that's true or not.
Indeed, where on here is there any published account of the Maidstone meeting, which preceded Bromley, and where people were also critical of the club? I understood that the club was very clear in advance that the Bromley meeting was not to be recorded.
Why is Meire apparently so frightened of going on the record unmediated, for example on the Charlton Live radio programme, in a forum where she can be asked questions by people who have the knowledge to be able to challenge her version?
Shouldn't a chief executive be capable of answering such questions in a place where the public can reach its own judgement about the quality of her response?
There's a rationale for different kinds of engagement, but it was she who unilaterally decided and announced publicly that the FF should be recorded, after all. That lasted one meeting.
If she won't go on a national radio show without assurances she won't have to speak to any Charlton fans, does anyone really think she is going to go on record at any of these meetings? Her/Charlton's PR consultants know she cannot be trusted to tell the truth let alone not to put her foot in it.
"The tosh about the training ground is a good example. The club published a bullshit article so no further questions are asked about it at the FF, whereas I believe Bromley put them under pressure to explain the contradictions. But that doesn't expose them publicly because it's behind closed doors at the club's insistence."
Covered End and Henry Irving provided quite detailed reports on here of what was said and as far as I can tell there was no attempt to persuade people attending not to publicise what was said (which would have been futile and stupid anyway). So how was it behind closed doors ?
Henry reported their confused and evasive answers about the training ground so doesn't that expose them publicly ?
There's a big difference between third party accounts and an agreed record or a recording. Plenty of people would argue that such accounts on here are partial and selective, whether that's true or not.
Indeed, where on here is there any published account of the Maidstone meeting, which preceded Bromley, and where people were also critical of the club? I understood that the club was very clear in advance that the Bromley meeting was not to be recorded.
Why is Meire apparently so frightened of going on the record unmediated, for example on the Charlton Live radio programme, in a forum where she can be asked questions by people who have the knowledge to be able to challenge her version?
Shouldn't a chief executive be capable of answering such questions in a place where the public can reach its own judgement about the quality of her response?
There's a rationale for different kinds of engagement, but it was she who unilaterally decided and announced publicly that the FF should be recorded, after all. That lasted one meeting.
If she won't go on a national radio show without assurances she won't have to speak to any Charlton fans, does anyone really think she is going to go on record at any of these meetings? Her/Charlton's PR consultants know she cannot be trusted to tell the truth let alone not to put her foot in it.
Such a shame as the squirrel is 5 star entertainment when she opens her gob.
Comments
As it is a meeting that happens at the Valley anyway she doesn't have to put herself out too much to attend and they don't have to go out of their way either.