Yes, a critical opinion. Anyway, life's too short, especially in light of this week's tragic events.
Sorry i did not realise one could only post if it was a positive opinion.
The site does have rules and if the moderaters decide to insert into them rules that you are only allowd to post positive opinions i shall delete my account. Until that rule is put into place i shall carry on as i am.
Deary me. Did I say you can only post positive opinions ? No, I didn't.
I said you posted critical opinions, which you have, for 3 days.
You're perfectly entitled to say whatever you want, but when I've proved that much of your opinion is based on erroneous guesswork, then it might be a good idea to stop digging the hole. I doubt that you will.
Yes, a critical opinion. Anyway, life's too short, especially in light of this week's tragic events.
Sorry i did not realise one could only post if it was a positive opinion.
The site does have rules and if the moderaters decide to insert into them rules that you are only allowd to post positive opinions i shall delete my account. Until that rule is put into place i shall carry on as i am.
Deary me. Did I say you can only post positive opinions ? No, I didn't.
I said you posted critical opinions, which you have, for 3 days.
You're perfectly entitled to say whatever you want, but when I've proved that much of your opinion is based on erroneous guesswork, then it might be a good idea to stop digging the hole. I doubt that you will.
1. My opinion was based on the published letter authored by WAR 2. Ive not actually repeated the opinion only defended it. If someone asks me a question or qoutes something i said that indicates to me they wish me to reply. 3. Thank you for confirming i am entitled to express an opinion. 4. Hows that for digging ?
Yes, a critical opinion. Anyway, life's too short, especially in light of this week's tragic events.
Sorry i did not realise one could only post if it was a positive opinion.
The site does have rules and if the moderaters decide to insert into them rules that you are only allowd to post positive opinions i shall delete my account. Until that rule is put into place i shall carry on as i am.
Deary me. Did I say you can only post positive opinions ? No, I didn't.
I said you posted critical opinions, which you have, for 3 days.
You're perfectly entitled to say whatever you want, but when I've proved that much of your opinion is based on erroneous guesswork, then it might be a good idea to stop digging the hole. I doubt that you will.
1. My opinion was based on the published letter authored by WAR 2. Ive not actually repeated the opinion only defended it. If someone asks me a question or qoutes something i said that indicates to me they wish me to reply. 3. Thank you for confirming i am entitled to express an opinion. 4. Hows that for digging ?
Yes, a critical opinion. Anyway, life's too short, especially in light of this week's tragic events.
Sorry i did not realise one could only post if it was a positive opinion.
The site does have rules and if the moderaters decide to insert into them rules that you are only allowd to post positive opinions i shall delete my account. Until that rule is put into place i shall carry on as i am.
Deary me. Did I say you can only post positive opinions ? No, I didn't.
I said you posted critical opinions, which you have, for 3 days.
You're perfectly entitled to say whatever you want, but when I've proved that much of your opinion is based on erroneous guesswork, then it might be a good idea to stop digging the hole. I doubt that you will.
1. My opinion was based on the published letter authored by WAR 2. Ive not actually repeated the opinion only defended it. If someone asks me a question or qoutes something i said that indicates to me they wish me to reply. 3. Thank you for confirming i am entitled to express an opinion. 4. Hows that for digging ?
This requires of national governing bodies:- Organisations shall recruit and engage people with appropriate diversity, independence, skills, experience and knowledge to take effective decisions that further the organisation’s goals. Why is this important? Diverse, skilled and experienced decision making bodies which contain independent voice and engage in constructive, open debate enable good decision-making.
Which is superficially good, but of course the devil is always in the detail – in this case HOW the FA will ensure it recruits and engages “people with appropriate diversity, independence, skills, experience and knowledge” was not divulged. The diversity is to a degree being forced upon them by the reforms, but the “appropriate…skills, experience and knowledge? Hmm – that could be open to a wide range of interpretation and rigor of application. A bit like the “Fit & Proper Persons Test”?
Needless to say, WAR will be watching developments with interest.
It's this bit that baffles me and engage in constructive, open debate
Why would anyone look at that and immediately think "I know who'd fit that bill. Katrien Meire"?
I'm sure Katrien's CV is careful to point out how many meetings she has had with fans this past season, even if it is necessarily silent on the substantive changes which have resulted from these "constructive, open debates". She certainly wins on quantity - I'll leave it to those who attended to comment on the quality.
A couple of Northstandpieeaters points have been put to bed quite succinctly. The handing of a leaflet to Meire's parents, which to my knowledge was never a strategy put forward by CARD or any other umbrella organisation, despite NSPE's attempts to paint it as such. It was the action of an individual, and if the circumstances are as explained by the leafleter, and NSPE finds that confrontational, then you must have lead a sheltered life. If even your boss thinks you are a c**t, then that's pretty doubtful.
Also - WAR's right to comment was explained perfectly in charltonbob's response to Kings Hill Addick on page one of this thread - in case you really did miss it, rather than chose to ignore it because it didn't suit your agenda, here's the quote: "Wasn't it a case of rd accusing protesters of giving Pinocchio stick simply because she was a woman & WAR was formed mainly to dispel those lies ?".
If you want people to respect your differing opinion, you should be willing to acknowledge where your opinion may have been misguided when someone takes the trouble to explain why that is. It gains a lot more respect from those opposing you.
A couple of Northstandpieeaters points have been put to bed quite succinctly. The handing of a leaflet to Meire's parents, which to my knowledge was never a strategy put forward by CARD or any other umbrella organisation, despite NSPE's attempts to paint it as such. It was the action of an individual, and if the circumstances are as explained by the leafleter, and NSPE finds that confrontational, then you must have lead a sheltered life. If even your boss thinks you are a c**t, then that's pretty doubtful.
Also - WAR's right to comment was explained perfectly in charltonbob's response to Kings Hill Addick on page one of this thread - in case you really did miss it, rather than chose to ignore it because it didn't suit your agenda, here's the quote: "Wasn't it a case of rd accusing protesters of giving Pinocchio stick simply because she was a woman & WAR was formed mainly to dispel those lies ?".
If you want people to respect your differing opinion, you should be willing to acknowledge where your opinion may have been misguided when someone takes the trouble to explain why that is. It gains a lot more respect from those opposing you.
Hello point of clarification.
1. i have never once indicated that the leaflet debacle was put forward by CARD. The leadleting according to the original thread was an idwa put forward and iniaated by 20 charlton fans who became known as the b20. This 'group' provides photographic evidenxe that they targeted KMs parents according to the very first post on the subject.This is according to the original thread on the matter.
2. I do not have an agenda.
3. Please do tell what do you think my agenda is im genuinly interested ?
4. Differing opinions is what life is about.
5. How about you give me your real name so i can track down you parents and knock on their door. I simply wish to hand them a leaflet. I will also wish totake their picture just to keep mt actions in line with the B20. i wonder if you would find my actions non confrontational if i take this course of action.
6. I am not the only one who found the visit to the parents inappropriate. Please take a look at the original thread and you will fins a great many people expressed dismay at it. That entire thread i think i commented once. Other people commented many more times then that.
7. I have never once said 'WAR' did not have the right to send the letter.
1) I have never once indicated that you said it was put forward by CARD, please try and read what is written.
2) You do
3) You wish to discredit WAR contacting the FA in the manner they did.
4) It is, and when your opinion is proved wrong by facts, you should hold your hands up.
5) My real name is Perry Bartlett. Good luck with that... PS - If I had behaved like she has, I would have no problem with someone peacefully handing my parents a leaflet. If I could justify the actions that lead to it, why should I be concerned?
6) I have not claimed you were, please try and read what is written.
7) No, you are right, I stand corrected. I will address what I was getting at in a more accurate manner.
You wrote: "It would be very hard to define WAR as being any more 'key' then any other fan that pays for a ticket." for the reasons given by charltonbob, you are wrong.
I really can't believe people are still banging on about a leaflet handed over to Katie's Dad, must have been 2 years ago now. Open your eyes to to the systematic destruction of the club on every level.
1) I have never once indicated that you said it was put forward by CARD, please try and read what is written.
2) You do
3) You wish to discredit WAR contacting the FA in the manner they did.
4) It is, and when your opinion is proved wrong by facts, you should hold your hands up.
5) My real name is Perry Bartlett. Good luck with that... PS - If I had behaved like she has, I would have no problem with someone peacefully handing my parents a leaflet. If I could justify the actions that lead to it, why should I be concerned?
6) I have not claimed you were, please try and read what is written.
7) No, you are right, I stand corrected. I will address what I was getting at in a more accurate manner.
You wrote: "It would be very hard to define WAR as being any more 'key' then any other fan that pays for a ticket." for the reasons given by charltonbob, you are wrong.
Thank you for the feeback. Thanls for letting me know my Agenda. Im trying to dsoredit WAR. Not sure why I hold this agenda tbh did not know i did until you educated me on the matter. Ill have a good long think about why I am trying to discredit them because I dont know any of them personally and agree witb the aim of seeking new owners but I will ppnder the riddle know you have educated me as to my agenda.
Thanks for the name and confirmation tou dont mind me looking up and taking a photo with your parents. i will not do it becausei feel that would be a step to far in any debate.
In tems of tour new point about WAR being more key then some supporters i believe that all people are equal. The only group of charlton fans i could see as being more key then others i the trust who are democratically elected to represent its members.
In terms of my opiion being wrong thats the whole point of an opinion it is not fact and an opinion can be both right and wrong depwnding on the point of view.
On the other points i apologise if i have misunderstood your original points.
Going to have a read have a read of the original KM parent thread. Id be most interested to see your view. You have expresed a majority view here quite strongly here so it will be interesting to me to read your strongly expressed view in a situation where you were in the minorory.over to the the original bwlgoum 20 thread it is
Potentially a Northstandpieeater friendly version of the letter. Would this have satisfied his criteria I wonder?
As an all-female group of football fans, WAR would like to express our delight that the proposed changes to the FA Board to include a minimum of 3 women has been adopted, as we favour equality of opportunity for well-qualified people in all fields of endeavour, regardless of age, gender and other differences. WAR are confident that the inclusion of able women with relevant experience of management in business or sport can only enhance decision making and strategic planning at board level in the FA.
However, we cannot find anywhere any mentions of the proofs of competence, relevant qualifications, and proven track record of success we would expect to be prerequisites for the appointment of any FA Board member, male or female. WAR therefore has concerns that the appointments of the 3 women might become a box-ticking exercise, thereby fatally damaging their credibility as full board members equal to their male colleagues.
WAR realises it would be inappropriate for the FA to comment on individuals, but would appreciate some feedback with respect to the criteria which will be used to appoint the new FA Board in general, and the 3 female members in particular, especially since for the latter we recognise the FA will inevitably be fishing in a smaller pool, and may need to look outside of football to wider sporting or business communities for candidates of suitable calibre. Will board candidates be sought by invitation, by application, or both? We realise such details may not yet have been decided, but hope they will be published in due course, and WAR would appreciate notification when this happens.
Just in case you were thinking of doing so, and speaking entirely hypothetically with no particular person working in south east London in mind, we urge you not to employ a poor role model for women in a senior position. Someone, for example, whose inexperienced leadership has lead to debt at a football club rocketing and where season ticket sales have plummeted to an unprecedented degree. Where mismanagement and constant churn of personnel have brought fan unrest and a toxic atmosphere to the club. Imagine somewhere where the latest of 8 managers employed in 3½ seasons tenure sought to excuse the problems in February 2017 by explaining to The Times that someone might be “learning on the job”. Since the same mistakes are constantly being repeated, WAR can only surmise, should such a person exist, that she would be a slow learner with limited self-appraisal skills. She apparently would appear incapable of accurately identifying her errors and rectifying them without making new ones.
Such an appointment would truly only be a box-ticking exercise, and would not benefit the national game. Nor would it enhance the public perception of women in executive roles. WAR therefore seek reassurance that selection criteria for the new FA Board will be such that only men and women of the highest proven ability will be considered.
Potentially a Northstandpieeater friendly version of the letter. Would this have satisfied his criteria a wonder?
As an all-female group of football fans, WAR would like to express our delight that the proposed changes to the FA Board to include a minimum of 3 women has been adopted, as we favour equality of opportunity for well-qualified people in all fields of endeavour, regardless of age, gender and other differences. WAR are confident that the inclusion of able women with relevant experience of management in business or sport can only enhance decision making and strategic planning at board level in the FA.
However, we cannot find anywhere any mentions of the proofs of competence, relevant qualifications, and proven track record of success we would expect to be prerequisites for the appointment of any FA Board member, male or female. WAR therefore has concerns that the appointments of the 3 women might become a box-ticking exercise, thereby fatally damaging their credibility as full board members equal to their male colleagues.
WAR realises it would be inappropriate for the FA to comment on individuals, but would appreciate some feedback with respect to the criteria which will be used to appoint the new FA Board in general, and the 3 female members in particular, especially since for the latter we recognise the FA will inevitably be fishing in a smaller pool, and may need to look outside of football to wider sporting or business communities for candidates of suitable calibre. Will board candidates be sought by invitation, by application, or both? We realise such details may not yet have been decided, but hope they will be published in due course, and WAR would appreciate notification when this happens.
Just in case you were thinking of doing so, and speaking entirely hypothetically with no particular person working in south east London in mind, we urge you not to employ a poor role model for women in a senior position. Someone, for example, whose inexperienced leadership has lead to debt at a football club rocketing and where season ticket sales have plummeted to an unprecedented degree. Where mismanagement and constant churn of personnel have brought fan unrest and a toxic atmosphere to the club. Imagine somewhere where the latest of 8 managers employed in 3½ seasons tenure sought to excuse the problems in February 2017 by explaining to The Times that someone might be “learning on the job”. Since the same mistakes are constantly being repeated, WAR can only surmise she would be a slow learner with limited self-appraisal skills. She apparently would appear incapable of accurately identifying her errors and rectifying them without making new ones.
Such an appointment would truly only be a box-ticking exercise, and would not benefit the national game. Nor would it enhance the public perception of women in executive roles. WAR therefore seek reassurance that selection criteria for the new FA Board will be such that only men and women of the highest proven ability will be considered.
Yours sincerely, WAR
No disrespect ive given my opinion amd recieved abuse for it,not direct abuse mind my fellows supporterss chose to take a qoute by myself and repeat it. For me direct abuse is preferable.
Ive rather amusinly been told I have an agenda to discredit other supporters so feel any reply I know give will be used as evidence of my 'agenda'.
My opinion has been given and it is in the mi ority but Im not the sort of person to sit onthe fence just because my view is the minority.That being said I do not wish to provide any fuel to my imagined agenda so wont be commenting further on the WAR letter.
Potentially a Northstandpieeater friendly version of the letter. Would this have satisfied his criteria a wonder?
As an all-female group of football fans, WAR would like to express our delight that the proposed changes to the FA Board to include a minimum of 3 women has been adopted, as we favour equality of opportunity for well-qualified people in all fields of endeavour, regardless of age, gender and other differences. WAR are confident that the inclusion of able women with relevant experience of management in business or sport can only enhance decision making and strategic planning at board level in the FA.
However, we cannot find anywhere any mentions of the proofs of competence, relevant qualifications, and proven track record of success we would expect to be prerequisites for the appointment of any FA Board member, male or female. WAR therefore has concerns that the appointments of the 3 women might become a box-ticking exercise, thereby fatally damaging their credibility as full board members equal to their male colleagues.
WAR realises it would be inappropriate for the FA to comment on individuals, but would appreciate some feedback with respect to the criteria which will be used to appoint the new FA Board in general, and the 3 female members in particular, especially since for the latter we recognise the FA will inevitably be fishing in a smaller pool, and may need to look outside of football to wider sporting or business communities for candidates of suitable calibre. Will board candidates be sought by invitation, by application, or both? We realise such details may not yet have been decided, but hope they will be published in due course, and WAR would appreciate notification when this happens.
Just in case you were thinking of doing so, and speaking entirely hypothetically with no particular person working in south east London in mind, we urge you not to employ a poor role model for women in a senior position. Someone, for example, whose inexperienced leadership has lead to debt at a football club rocketing and where season ticket sales have plummeted to an unprecedented degree. Where mismanagement and constant churn of personnel have brought fan unrest and a toxic atmosphere to the club. Imagine somewhere where the latest of 8 managers employed in 3½ seasons tenure sought to excuse the problems in February 2017 by explaining to The Times that someone might be “learning on the job”. Since the same mistakes are constantly being repeated, WAR can only surmise she would be a slow learner with limited self-appraisal skills. She apparently would appear incapable of accurately identifying her errors and rectifying them without making new ones.
Such an appointment would truly only be a box-ticking exercise, and would not benefit the national game. Nor would it enhance the public perception of women in executive roles. WAR therefore seek reassurance that selection criteria for the new FA Board will be such that only men and women of the highest proven ability will be considered.
Yours sincerely, WAR
No disrespect ive given my opinion amd recieved abuse for it,not direct abuse mind my fellows supporterss chose to take a qoute by myself and repeat it. For me direct abuse is preferable.
Ive rather amusinly been told I have an agenda to discredit other supporters so feel any reply I know give will be used as evidence of my 'agenda'.
My opinion has been given and it is in the mi ority but Im not the sort of person to sit onthe fence just because my view is the minority.That being said I do not wish to provide any fuel to my imagined agenda so wont be commenting further on the WAR letter.
OH PLEASE LET THE LAST BIT BE TRUE!!!!! I'm loosing the will to live here
1) I have never once indicated that you said it was put forward by CARD, please try and read what is written.
2) You do
3) You wish to discredit WAR contacting the FA in the manner they did.
4) It is, and when your opinion is proved wrong by facts, you should hold your hands up.
5) My real name is Perry Bartlett. Good luck with that... PS - If I had behaved like she has, I would have no problem with someone peacefully handing my parents a leaflet. If I could justify the actions that lead to it, why should I be concerned?
6) I have not claimed you were, please try and read what is written.
7) No, you are right, I stand corrected. I will address what I was getting at in a more accurate manner.
You wrote: "It would be very hard to define WAR as being any more 'key' then any other fan that pays for a ticket." for the reasons given by charltonbob, you are wrong.
Thank you for the feeback. Thanls for letting me know my Agenda. Im trying to dsoredit WAR. Not sure why I hold this agenda tbh did not know i did until you educated me on the matter. Ill have a good long think about why I am trying to discredit them because I dont know any of them personally and agree witb the aim of seeking new owners but I will ppnder the riddle know you have educated me as to my agenda.
Thanks for the name and confirmation tou dont mind me looking up and taking a photo with your parents. i will not do it becausei feel that would be a step to far in any debate.
In tems of tour new point about WAR being more key then some supporters i believe that all people are equal. The only group of charlton fans i could see as being more key then others i the trust who are democratically elected to represent its members.
In terms of my opiion being wrong thats the whole point of an opinion it is not fact and an opinion can be both right and wrong depwnding on the point of view.
On the other points i apologise if i have misunderstood your original points.
Going to have a read have a read of the original KM parent thread. Id be most interested to see your view. You have expresed a majority view here quite strongly here so it will be interesting to me to read your strongly expressed view in a situation where you were in the minorory.over to the the original bwlgoum 20 thread it is
Were photos taken of KM's parents? Where did you hear this?
1) I have never once indicated that you said it was put forward by CARD, please try and read what is written.
2) You do
3) You wish to discredit WAR contacting the FA in the manner they did.
4) It is, and when your opinion is proved wrong by facts, you should hold your hands up.
5) My real name is Perry Bartlett. Good luck with that... PS - If I had behaved like she has, I would have no problem with someone peacefully handing my parents a leaflet. If I could justify the actions that lead to it, why should I be concerned?
6) I have not claimed you were, please try and read what is written.
7) No, you are right, I stand corrected. I will address what I was getting at in a more accurate manner.
You wrote: "It would be very hard to define WAR as being any more 'key' then any other fan that pays for a ticket." for the reasons given by charltonbob, you are wrong.
Thank you for the feeback. Thanls for letting me know my Agenda. Im trying to dsoredit WAR. Not sure why I hold this agenda tbh did not know i did until you educated me on the matter. Ill have a good long think about why I am trying to discredit them because I dont know any of them personally and agree witb the aim of seeking new owners but I will ppnder the riddle know you have educated me as to my agenda.
Thanks for the name and confirmation tou dont mind me looking up and taking a photo with your parents. i will not do it becausei feel that would be a step to far in any debate.
In tems of tour new point about WAR being more key then some supporters i believe that all people are equal. The only group of charlton fans i could see as being more key then others i the trust who are democratically elected to represent its members.
In terms of my opiion being wrong thats the whole point of an opinion it is not fact and an opinion can be both right and wrong depwnding on the point of view.
On the other points i apologise if i have misunderstood your original points.
Going to have a read have a read of the original KM parent thread. Id be most interested to see your view. You have expresed a majority view here quite strongly here so it will be interesting to me to read your strongly expressed view in a situation where you were in the minorory.over to the the original bwlgoum 20 thread it is
Were photos taken of KM's parents? Where did you hear this?
Have a look at the original thread the very 1st post by the threads author. It cites 'photographic' evidence.
1) I have never once indicated that you said it was put forward by CARD, please try and read what is written.
2) You do
3) You wish to discredit WAR contacting the FA in the manner they did.
4) It is, and when your opinion is proved wrong by facts, you should hold your hands up.
5) My real name is Perry Bartlett. Good luck with that... PS - If I had behaved like she has, I would have no problem with someone peacefully handing my parents a leaflet. If I could justify the actions that lead to it, why should I be concerned?
6) I have not claimed you were, please try and read what is written.
7) No, you are right, I stand corrected. I will address what I was getting at in a more accurate manner.
You wrote: "It would be very hard to define WAR as being any more 'key' then any other fan that pays for a ticket." for the reasons given by charltonbob, you are wrong.
Thank you for the feeback. Thanls for letting me know my Agenda. Im trying to dsoredit WAR. Not sure why I hold this agenda tbh did not know i did until you educated me on the matter. Ill have a good long think about why I am trying to discredit them because I dont know any of them personally and agree witb the aim of seeking new owners but I will ppnder the riddle know you have educated me as to my agenda.
Thanks for the name and confirmation tou dont mind me looking up and taking a photo with your parents. i will not do it becausei feel that would be a step to far in any debate.
In tems of tour new point about WAR being more key then some supporters i believe that all people are equal. The only group of charlton fans i could see as being more key then others i the trust who are democratically elected to represent its members.
In terms of my opiion being wrong thats the whole point of an opinion it is not fact and an opinion can be both right and wrong depwnding on the point of view.
On the other points i apologise if i have misunderstood your original points.
Going to have a read have a read of the original KM parent thread. Id be most interested to see your view. You have expresed a majority view here quite strongly here so it will be interesting to me to read your strongly expressed view in a situation where you were in the minorory.over to the the original bwlgoum 20 thread it is
Were photos taken of KM's parents? Where did you hear this?
Have a look at the original thread the very 1st post by the threads author. It cites 'photographic' evidence.
Just had a look, - it says that photographic evidence confirmed the address was that of Mr & Mrs Meire, but I cant see where it says photos were taken of KM's parents.
My reading off that is that a photo was taken. If im wrong it wont be the first time and i apologise
No apology needed, I was just curious, since it's the first time I'd seen any suggestion anywhere of photos being taken of KM's parents.
I don't believe this was the case and so I thought it needed clarification, otherwise your assertions could mislead and distort opinions regarding the nature of the encounter.
Comments
I said you posted critical opinions, which you have, for 3 days.
You're perfectly entitled to say whatever you want, but when I've proved that much of your opinion is based on erroneous guesswork, then it might be a good idea to stop digging the hole. I doubt that you will.
2. Ive not actually repeated the opinion only defended it. If someone asks me a question or qoutes something i said that indicates to me they wish me to reply.
3. Thank you for confirming i am entitled to express an opinion.
4. Hows that for digging ?
WAR has received a reply from James MacDougall, Head of Public Affairs at the FA, acknowledging the concerns WAR expressed re the lack of mention of proofs of competence for Board members.
He sent us a link https://www.sportengland.org/about-us/governance/a-code-for-sports-governance/ to the Sport England website and directed us to a phrase within the Code of Sports Governance, to which they intend to adhere. See p.11 https://www.sportengland.org/media/11193/a_code_for_sports_governance.pdf
This requires of national governing bodies:-
Organisations shall recruit and engage people with appropriate diversity, independence, skills, experience and knowledge to take effective decisions that further the organisation’s goals.
Why is this important?
Diverse, skilled and experienced decision making bodies which contain independent voice and engage in constructive, open debate enable good decision-making.
Which is superficially good, but of course the devil is always in the detail – in this case HOW the FA will ensure it recruits and engages “people with appropriate diversity, independence, skills, experience and knowledge” was not divulged. The diversity is to a degree being forced upon them by the reforms, but the “appropriate…skills, experience and knowledge? Hmm – that could be open to a wide range of interpretation and rigor of application. A bit like the “Fit & Proper Persons Test”?
Needless to say, WAR will be watching developments with interest.
- Reply received from FA
Thank you
Box ticking without any other consideration?
and engage in constructive, open debate
Why would anyone look at that and immediately think "I know who'd fit that bill. Katrien Meire"?
Also - WAR's right to comment was explained perfectly in charltonbob's response to Kings Hill Addick on page one of this thread - in case you really did miss it, rather than chose to ignore it because it didn't suit your agenda, here's the quote: "Wasn't it a case of rd accusing protesters of giving Pinocchio stick simply because she was a woman & WAR was formed mainly to dispel those lies ?".
If you want people to respect your differing opinion, you should be willing to acknowledge where your opinion may have been misguided when someone takes the trouble to explain why that is. It gains a lot more respect from those opposing you.
1. i have never once indicated that the leaflet debacle was put forward by CARD. The leadleting according to the original thread was an idwa put forward and iniaated by 20 charlton fans who became known as the b20. This 'group' provides photographic evidenxe that they targeted KMs parents according to the very first post on the subject.This is according to the original thread on the matter.
2. I do not have an agenda.
3. Please do tell what do you think my agenda is im genuinly interested ?
4. Differing opinions is what life is about.
5. How about you give me your real name so i can track down you parents and knock on their door. I simply wish to hand them a leaflet. I will also wish totake their picture just to keep mt actions in line with the B20. i wonder if you would find my actions non confrontational if i take this course of action.
6. I am not the only one who found the visit to the parents inappropriate. Please take a look at the original thread and you will fins a great many people expressed dismay at it. That entire thread i think i commented once. Other people commented many more times then that.
7. I have never once said 'WAR' did not have the right to send the letter.
2) You do
3) You wish to discredit WAR contacting the FA in the manner they did.
4) It is, and when your opinion is proved wrong by facts, you should hold your hands up.
5) My real name is Perry Bartlett. Good luck with that... PS - If I had behaved like she has, I would have no problem with someone peacefully handing my parents a leaflet. If I could justify the actions that lead to it, why should I be concerned?
6) I have not claimed you were, please try and read what is written.
7) No, you are right, I stand corrected. I will address what I was getting at in a more accurate manner.
You wrote: "It would be very hard to define WAR as being any more 'key' then any other fan that pays for a ticket." for the reasons given by charltonbob, you are wrong.
Thanks for the name and confirmation tou dont mind me looking up and taking a photo with your parents. i will not do it becausei feel that would be a step to far in any debate.
In tems of tour new point about WAR being more key then some supporters i believe that all people are equal. The only group of charlton fans i could see as being more key then others i the trust who are democratically elected to represent its members.
In terms of my opiion being wrong thats the whole point of an opinion it is not fact and an opinion can be both right and wrong depwnding on the point of view.
On the other points i apologise if i have misunderstood your original points.
Going to have a read have a read of the original KM parent thread. Id be most interested to see your view. You have expresed a majority view here quite strongly here so it will be interesting to me to read your strongly expressed view in a situation where you were in the minorory.over to the the original bwlgoum 20 thread it is
As an all-female group of football fans, WAR would like to express our delight that the proposed changes to the FA Board to include a minimum of 3 women has been adopted, as we favour equality of opportunity for well-qualified people in all fields of endeavour, regardless of age, gender and other differences. WAR are confident that the inclusion of able women with relevant experience of management in business or sport can only enhance decision making and strategic planning at board level in the FA.
However, we cannot find anywhere any mentions of the proofs of competence, relevant qualifications, and proven track record of success we would expect to be prerequisites for the appointment of any FA Board member, male or female. WAR therefore has concerns that the appointments of the 3 women might become a box-ticking exercise, thereby fatally damaging their credibility as full board members equal to their male colleagues.
WAR realises it would be inappropriate for the FA to comment on individuals, but would appreciate some feedback with respect to the criteria which will be used to appoint the new FA Board in general, and the 3 female members in particular, especially since for the latter we recognise the FA will inevitably be fishing in a smaller pool, and may need to look outside of football to wider sporting or business communities for candidates of suitable calibre. Will board candidates be sought by invitation, by application, or both? We realise such details may not yet have been decided, but hope they will be published in due course, and WAR would appreciate notification when this happens.
Just in case you were thinking of doing so, and speaking entirely hypothetically with no particular person working in south east London in mind, we urge you not to employ a poor role model for women in a senior position. Someone, for example, whose inexperienced leadership has lead to debt at a football club rocketing and where season ticket sales have plummeted to an unprecedented degree. Where mismanagement and constant churn of personnel have brought fan unrest and a toxic atmosphere to the club. Imagine somewhere where the latest of 8 managers employed in 3½ seasons tenure sought to excuse the problems in February 2017 by explaining to The Times that someone might be “learning on the job”. Since the same mistakes are constantly being repeated, WAR can only surmise, should such a person exist, that she would be a slow learner with limited self-appraisal skills. She apparently would appear incapable of accurately identifying her errors and rectifying them without making new ones.
Such an appointment would truly only be a box-ticking exercise, and would not benefit the national game. Nor would it enhance the public perception of women in executive roles. WAR therefore seek reassurance that selection criteria for the new FA Board will be such that only men and women of the highest proven ability will be considered.
Yours sincerely,
WAR
Ive rather amusinly been told I have an agenda to discredit other supporters so feel any reply I know give will be used as evidence of my 'agenda'.
My opinion has been given and it is in the mi ority but Im not the sort of person to sit onthe fence just because my view is the minority.That being said I do not wish to provide any fuel to my imagined agenda so wont be commenting further on the WAR letter.
I'm loosing the will to live here
I don't believe this was the case and so I thought it needed clarification, otherwise your assertions could mislead and distort opinions regarding the nature of the encounter.