Surprised how certain people who have never been to a BA meeting are experts on what happens at them.
There are no filtered or pre-submitted questions and never have been.
You stick your hand up and ask.
And no one is "unwelcome" as much as their victim playing makes them pretend they are.
It's a Q & A, it's not perfect, some questions are soft, some silly, some tough but I find those that claim beforehand that they will ask really hard questions either wither when away from their keyboards or just don't pitch up.
But it is a chance to question and hear from a senior exec and an investor, who is also a fan, direct.
As with all such events maintaining a degree of scepticism regarding what is said is no bad thing but at least your are hearing it from the horse's mouth. You can then decide to believe as much or as little as you choose.
And before anyone asks, no we're not streaming or recording it or allowing anyone else to. We don't have the time, money, tech or knowledge to do that and it would take away from the flow of the meetings.
See you there.
PS if you are coming bring cash for the whip round to pay for the hall hire
My questions would be, why do we need both Rodwell and Scott on the football side and what do Warrick and Elliot actually do? Is this set-up providing value for money?
Good question, come along and ask it
If I lived in London or nearby, I just might. However, the 140 mile return journey is sufficient to preclude that.
Reading this thread there is no evidence whatsoever that anybody at all who has not been to a Bromley meeting is framing themselves as experts as to how a Bromley meeting happens.
If people are expected to stick their hand up and ask there are gatekeeping issues attached to that. Possibly for understandable reasons.
Whoever acts as the gatekeeper gets the power to control the meeting. Presumably such a person is a democratically elected official from the Bromley group.
Yes, the committee are all elected including Ian Wallis who chairs the meeting.
Your attempts to frame Bromley Addicks as some form of dictatorship are as pathetic as they are wrong but that is to be expected.
When someone sticks their hand up Ian has no idea what the person is going to ask so your "gatekeeping" fantasy, that you have now moved on to having been shown your "pre-submitted questions" theory was wrong, fails.
Have another go at making something up based on nothing at all.
Reading this thread there is no evidence whatsoever that anybody at all who has not been to a Bromley meeting is framing themselves as experts as to how a Bromley meeting happens.
If people are expected to stick their hand up and ask there are gatekeeping issues attached to that. Possibly for understandable reasons.
Whoever acts as the gatekeeper gets the power to control the meeting. Presumably such a person is a democratically elected official from the Bromley group.
@seth plum I don't think there's any evidence to suggest this level of control-freakery goes on at BA meetings. And generally it is very hard to run these meetings (not just Charlton and not just football, because most people are not particularly good at asking sharp pertinent questions, because, in turn, they have never been trained to do so, or studied the techniques of those who have.
There is a slightly tedious tribalism in the way the BA meetings are promoted on here, which would stop me going even if I still lived in Eltham, but I'm quite sure from what I have heard that it is one of the better-run such meetings.
Reading this thread there is no evidence whatsoever that anybody at all who has not been to a Bromley meeting is framing themselves as experts as to how a Bromley meeting happens.
If people are expected to stick their hand up and ask there are gatekeeping issues attached to that. Possibly for understandable reasons.
Whoever acts as the gatekeeper gets the power to control the meeting. Presumably such a person is a democratically elected official from the Bromley group.
@seth plum I don't think there's any evidence to suggest this level of control-freakery goes on at BA meetings. And generally it is very hard to run these meetings (not just Charlton and not just football, because most people are not particularly good at asking sharp pertinent questions, because, in turn, they have never been trained to do so, or studied the techniques of those who have.
There is a slightly tedious tribalism in the way the BA meetings are promoted on here, which would stop me going even if I still lived in Eltham, but I'm quite sure from what I have heard that it is one of the better-run such meetings.
Would love to know what the realistic plans for The Valley is going forward. Would love to know why no one in any kind of position identified the glaring lack of creativity and whether this is an urgent priority to be addressed.
Can see Methven really using as much PR skills as possible though without really giving a clear answer to some questions.
I did bring this up with him prior to kick off at the Blackpool game. His response was, that the most important thing was to start by building a solid foundation, then the rest would follow. He agreed with me that the return of Leaburn could be the catalyst for better football and more goals. However, less than an hour later, Jones had dropped Mitchell, and we've since conceded 3 goals, lost two games, and even the "foundation" doesn't seem that solid anymore.
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
Isn’t the issue that in these types of meetings people usually have to submit questions through a ‘top table’ of the organisers who filter things, rather than direct two way conversations happening? Question and answer sessions can mean attendees have a very passive role, where a ding dong debate might be more revealing.
Probably why the questions get "filtered", because some people go to these things intent of having a ding dong, regardless if it's called for or not. Reckon this would also make it hard to find people from the club to appear at these types of events, if they are just run as a free for all.
Can you recall the various meetings over the years that have descended into ding dongs? People who attend might be reluctant to agree to do so if it is a free for all, does that mean that prior to such meetings the organisers communicate with the guests asking what their wishes and red lines are, and reassure them that their wishes will be obeyed and red lines not crossed?
I've never been to one of these things, just offering up a suggestion as to why.
Reading this thread there is no evidence whatsoever that anybody at all who has not been to a Bromley meeting is framing themselves as experts as to how a Bromley meeting happens.
If people are expected to stick their hand up and ask there are gatekeeping issues attached to that. Possibly for understandable reasons.
Whoever acts as the gatekeeper gets the power to control the meeting. Presumably such a person is a democratically elected official from the Bromley group.
@seth plum I don't think there's any evidence to suggest this level of control-freakery goes on at BA meetings. And generally it is very hard to run these meetings (not just Charlton and not just football, because most people are not particularly good at asking sharp pertinent questions, because, in turn, they have never been trained to do so, or studied the techniques of those who have.
There is a slightly tedious tribalism in the way the BA meetings are promoted on here, which would stop me going even if I still lived in Eltham, but I'm quite sure from what I have heard that it is one of the better-run such meetings.
I’ve been to many Bromley meetings over the years and have always found them informative and very well run. I don’t recognise this tribalism of which you speak. I think it’s to their credit that they can draw such good guests, nowadays it’s only them and NWK Addicks who run such meetings, more is the pity. City Addicks used to be great because it was a lot more informal (in my opinion) because it wasn’t a supporters group as such just people meeting down the pub and chatting. I’ve learnt though to take with a large pinch of salt what people say. I mean Richard Murray told us Parky was going to be sacked but he wasn’t.
As an aside, what has happened to the Fans Forum, anyone know?
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
Isn’t the issue that in these types of meetings people usually have to submit questions through a ‘top table’ of the organisers who filter things, rather than direct two way conversations happening? Question and answer sessions can mean attendees have a very passive role, where a ding dong debate might be more revealing.
That is not what occurs at Bromley meetings, has happened at previous club organised events
That is why I said ‘usually’. I have never been to a Bromley meeting, I certainly wouldn’t be welcome there for a very specific reason, and I wouldn’t attend for a very specific reason. If people like going to a Bromley meeting then good for them.
You could easily come and put your points across, rather than just trolling for attention on here.
Reading this thread there is no evidence whatsoever that anybody at all who has not been to a Bromley meeting is framing themselves as experts as to how a Bromley meeting happens.
If people are expected to stick their hand up and ask there are gatekeeping issues attached to that. Possibly for understandable reasons.
Whoever acts as the gatekeeper gets the power to control the meeting. Presumably such a person is a democratically elected official from the Bromley group.
@seth plum I don't think there's any evidence to suggest this level of control-freakery goes on at BA meetings. And generally it is very hard to run these meetings (not just Charlton and not just football, because most people are not particularly good at asking sharp pertinent questions, because, in turn, they have never been trained to do so, or studied the techniques of those who have.
There is a slightly tedious tribalism in the way the BA meetings are promoted on here, which would stop me going even if I still lived in Eltham, but I'm quite sure from what I have heard that it is one of the better-run such meetings.
I’ve been to many Bromley meetings over the years and have always found them informative and very well run. I don’t recognise this tribalism of which you speak. I think it’s to their credit that they can draw such good guests, nowadays it’s only them and NWK Addicks who run such meetings, more is the pity. City Addicks used to be great because it was a lot more informal (in my opinion) because it wasn’t a supporters group as such just people meeting down the pub and chatting. I’ve learnt though to take with a large pinch of salt what people say. I mean Richard Murray told us Parky was going to be sacked but he wasn’t.
As an aside, what has happened to the Fans Forum, anyone know?
A question to be asked, and about the Shadow Board, on the night by me if no one else asks it
I had thought about that too Henry. Know from experience what it's like facilitating these events and you genuinely don't know what's coming, mutual respect to anyone prepared to put their head above the parapet and hold the mike, it's certainly not easy.
I think the problem is closer to this: I get asked questions by other councillors at our council meetings, some of them politically hostile. As leader I am immersed in what goes on to a far greater extent than any of the people asking questions. I know a lot more than they do by virtue of being leader. I have a team of people working under me. They don’t. Other things being equal I am always in a strong position to reply.
Does being leader qualify you for free suits and hospitality tickets at The Valley? Pr does that sort of "perk" not filter down to Council level?
I've been to a few of these over the years, although not for a while. Some have been with players, one was with Karl Robinson and Lee Bowyer (During the session they face timed Johny Jackson who was at the Emirates and took the piss out of him wearing skinny jeans) also Phil Parkinson and Chris Powell and finally ............ Katrien Miere!
Sessions were started of by Ian Wallis who asks a few questions to get the ball rolling and then questions from the floor which are not filtered, even in Mieres case.
There are usually quite a few from CL, but don't worry you can easily avoid them . All food is vegan, given that there isn't any.
Sometimes they raffle off one of Henry's cardigans, 2nd prize is 2 of them.
Certainly my experience is they are good nights out with no clique, tribalism or managed questions, unlike the club forums.
My questions would be, why do we need both Rodwell and Scott on the football side and what do Warrick and Elliot actually do? Is this set-up providing value for money?
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
I went to a meeting once when somebody asked a question and one of the organisers stopped the question being answered as being inappropriate to the meeting.
Was that the meeting at The Valley when someone decided it appropriate to ask Pardew about our hamburgers (or similar)? Pardew replied rudely and the "compere" said the question inappropriate.
I agreed with the compere and was not wholly surprised that Pardew was a £$%^. But jeez what sort of plum asks the manager about hamburgers?
Would love to know what the realistic plans for The Valley is going forward. Would love to know why no one in any kind of position identified the glaring lack of creativity and whether this is an urgent priority to be addressed.
Can see Methven really using as much PR skills as possible though without really giving a clear answer to some questions.
To be fair to him, he's consistently said he's not the football man and he's left that side of it to people who know best. What we really need is Andy Scott In attendance to explain the successive process of god awful transfer windows. Suppose you could ask Methven why the blokes still here?
I asked Scott about our dire signings at a previous Bromley meeting with Scott & Rodwell. Scott gave a "clever" answer labeling me as negative and he bet I'd be great fun down the training ground.
He got a few cheap laughs at my expense (his aim) and of course managed to deflect from answering the question, other than disagreeing with me.
I "let him off the hook" as I didn't want the meeting to turn nasty and it was clear to me he wasn't going to give an honest answer, as he had already side stepped the question. (I do understand of course that he can't start criticising individual players)
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
I went to a meeting once when somebody asked a question and one of the organisers stopped the question being answered as being inappropriate to the meeting.
Was that the meeting at The Valley when someone decided it appropriate to ask Pardew about our hamburgers (or similar)? Pardew replied rudely and the "compere" said the question inappropriate.
I agreed with the compere and was not wholly surprised that Pardew was a £$%^. But jeez what sort of plum asks the manager about hamburgers?
sadly not, I would have loved to have been to that one.
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
I went to a meeting once when somebody asked a question and one of the organisers stopped the question being answered as being inappropriate to the meeting.
Was that the meeting at The Valley when someone decided it appropriate to ask Pardew about our hamburgers (or similar)? Pardew replied rudely and the "compere" said the question inappropriate.
I agreed with the compere and was not wholly surprised that Pardew was a £$%^. But jeez what sort of plum asks the manager about hamburgers?
Vaguely remember being at City Addicks and some one, not Henry Irving, asking about knitwear in the club shop.
Would love to know what the realistic plans for The Valley is going forward. Would love to know why no one in any kind of position identified the glaring lack of creativity and whether this is an urgent priority to be addressed.
Can see Methven really using as much PR skills as possible though without really giving a clear answer to some questions.
To be fair to him, he's consistently said he's not the football man and he's left that side of it to people who know best. What we really need is Andy Scott In attendance to explain the successive process of god awful transfer windows. Suppose you could ask Methven why the blokes still here?
I asked Scott about our dire signings at a previous Bromley meeting with Scott & Rodwell. Scott gave a "clever" answer labeling me as negative and he bet I'd be great fun down the training ground.
He got a few cheap laughs at my expense (his aim) and of course managed to deflect from answering the question, other than disagreeing with me.
I "let him off the hook" as I didn't want the meeting to turn nasty and it was clear to me he wasn't going to give an honest answer, as he had already side stepped the question. (I do understand of course that he can't start criticising individual players)
Poor form from somebody in his position, you obviously hit a nerve.
The rule at BA when Richard Murray guested was that he'd take questions on anything other than player wages, which was fair enough.
There was a meeting, I think it was for 10 year season ticket holders, at the Valley in the months just after we were relegated from the Prem for the 2nd time where the first question was about the pot holes in the car park.
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
I went to a meeting once when somebody asked a question and one of the organisers stopped the question being answered as being inappropriate to the meeting.
Was that the meeting at The Valley when someone decided it appropriate to ask Pardew about our hamburgers (or similar)? Pardew replied rudely and the "compere" said the question inappropriate.
I agreed with the compere and was not wholly surprised that Pardew was a £$%^. But jeez what sort of plum asks the manager about hamburgers?
Is there any example of people coming out of these meetings and not saying how impressed / reassured / encouraged they are? I suppose KM’s expanded fans’ forum in 2015, but she was probably a special case.
I’m not blaming fans because it’s rarely appropriate or possible to ask and follow up hard questions when people are “giving up their time” (presumably unlike supporters), but I think they are easy meat for directors etc.
Then there are the actual outcomes on the pitch and in the stands.
I went to a meeting once when somebody asked a question and one of the organisers stopped the question being answered as being inappropriate to the meeting.
Was that the meeting at The Valley when someone decided it appropriate to ask Pardew about our hamburgers (or similar)? Pardew replied rudely and the "compere" said the question inappropriate.
I agreed with the compere and was not wholly surprised that Pardew was a £$%^. But jeez what sort of plum asks the manager about hamburgers?
Would love to know what the realistic plans for The Valley is going forward. Would love to know why no one in any kind of position identified the glaring lack of creativity and whether this is an urgent priority to be addressed.
Can see Methven really using as much PR skills as possible though without really giving a clear answer to some questions.
To be fair to him, he's consistently said he's not the football man and he's left that side of it to people who know best. What we really need is Andy Scott In attendance to explain the successive process of god awful transfer windows. Suppose you could ask Methven why the blokes still here?
I asked Scott about our dire signings at a previous Bromley meeting with Scott & Rodwell. Scott gave a "clever" answer labeling me as negative and he bet I'd be great fun down the training ground.
He got a few cheap laughs at my expense (his aim) and of course managed to deflect from answering the question, other than disagreeing with me.
I "let him off the hook" as I didn't want the meeting to turn nasty and it was clear to me he wasn't going to give an honest answer, as he had already side stepped the question. (I do understand of course that he can't start criticising individual players)
If it was how many Jimmy Floyd had been consuming to warrant an arse that size then it would have perfectly valid!
Well, unless win v Rovers on Tuesday I can see Thursday night at Bromley Addicks with Charlie Methven and Gavin Carter being interesting.
Charlie might have to wear brown trousers instead of his usual red or yellow ones.
I couldn’t give a toss what colour trousers he wears…..why does it bother you Beds?
It was a joke . You do know what one of those is right ?
Erm…..it has been a source of ridicule regarding his clothing for a few months now, not just yourself have used it……I just find it strange that people would think it’s in some way funny.
As for knowing what a joke is I reckon I come out as one of the posters on here who crack more amusing comments than most.🤔
Comments
Presumably such a person is a democratically elected official from the Bromley group.
Your attempts to frame Bromley Addicks as some form of dictatorship are as pathetic as they are wrong but that is to be expected.
When someone sticks their hand up Ian has no idea what the person is going to ask so your "gatekeeping" fantasy, that you have now moved on to having been shown your "pre-submitted questions" theory was wrong, fails.
Have another go at making something up based on nothing at all.
There is a slightly tedious tribalism in the way the BA meetings are promoted on here, which would stop me going even if I still lived in Eltham, but I'm quite sure from what I have heard that it is one of the better-run such meetings.
His response was, that the most important thing was to start by building a solid foundation, then the rest would follow.
He agreed with me that the return of Leaburn could be the catalyst for better football and more goals.
However, less than an hour later, Jones had dropped Mitchell, and we've since conceded 3 goals, lost two games, and even the "foundation" doesn't seem that solid anymore.
As an aside, what has happened to the Fans Forum, anyone know?
Fig 1- arrive at venue...
Fig 2 Hygiene protocol for those who have travelled from outside of Gods' own borough, Bromley. (Twice for Bexley borough dewellers)
Fig 3
Awkward questions and potentially troublesome guests filtered out
Fig. 4
The hosts welcome the guests
Fig 5 15 minutes of hate about heaters not working in male khazis
Fig 6 Tea and biscuits
Fig 7 Punters 'encouraged' to leave
Fig 8 Minutes published 90 days later
Sessions were started of by Ian Wallis who asks a few questions to get the ball rolling and then questions from the floor which are not filtered, even in Mieres case.
There are usually quite a few from CL, but don't worry you can easily avoid them
Sometimes they raffle off one of Henry's cardigans, 2nd prize is 2 of them.
Certainly my experience is they are good nights out with no clique, tribalism or managed questions, unlike the club forums.
Pardew replied rudely and the "compere" said the question inappropriate.
I agreed with the compere and was not wholly surprised that Pardew was a £$%^.
But jeez what sort of plum asks the manager about hamburgers?
Scott gave a "clever" answer labeling me as negative and he bet I'd be great fun down the training ground.
He got a few cheap laughs at my expense (his aim) and of course managed to deflect from answering the question, other than disagreeing with me.
I "let him off the hook" as I didn't want the meeting to turn nasty and it was clear to me he wasn't going to give an honest answer, as he had already side stepped the question.
(I do understand of course that he can't start criticising individual players)
sadly not, I would have loved to have been to that one.
Think we all closed that down!
Poor form from somebody in his position, you obviously hit a nerve.
There was a meeting, I think it was for 10 year season ticket holders, at the Valley in the months just after we were relegated from the Prem for the 2nd time where the first question was about the pot holes in the car park.
To be fair, they still haven't been fixed.