[Archived] Fans Forum pre-meet

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Yeah, I guess I meant that at lest shebby turned up to represent the club.

Kean has done nothing to even hint at an apology to fans, yet they expect people to come and pay money to support him. Some of us can still remember Wigan last year.

I would see no point in Kean meeting up with supporters groups - an apology via the press for relegation and the part he played in it would be a start - but ultimately the only thing he could say that would placate the fans would be "I resign"

[AndyNeil]

.

[Ste B]

No i am not suggesting that, what i am seeking clarity on is why would an individual of the Fans Forum, use a Fans Forum meeting to try and encourage the club to stop/scale down dialogue with an active group representing supporters who are in dialogue with the club and making progress? His one and only contribution to these set of minutes, in my opinion are disruptive to what all groups are trying to achieve.

And what is the Fans Forum's collective stance on 1) the point raised and 2) the need for it to be raised in this meeting?

As i said we could all go in to meetings with the club, concentrating on putting down other groups, however some of us are more interested in uniting supporters!

As Glen said, what is the point in the meeting on Friday, if groups (the Fans Forum, or it's committee representation at least) are going to stake claims over others during meetings with the club?

But this is exactly what happened in that extract? so what is the fans forum opinion on this being allowed to happen during their meetings?

Personally I wouldnt have minuted it either, as I could see what would happen afterwards, BUT any member of the forum has the right to raise something for the agenda. As happened in the meeting (and not that clear from the minutes) the point was raised, but many in the meeting defended the rights of other groups. I've not got all the minutes to hand, but the end result is that the club will be speaking to all supporters / groups.

[AndyNeil]

No i am not suggesting that, what i am seeking clarity on is why would an individual of the Fans Forum, use a Fans Forum meeting to try and encourage the club to stop/scale down dialogue with an active group representing supporters who are in dialogue with the club and making progress? His one and only contribution to these set of minutes, in my opinion are disruptive to what all groups are trying to achieve.

And what is the Fans Forum's collective stance on 1) the point raised and 2) the need for it to be raised in this meeting?

As i said we could all go in to meetings with the club, concentrating on putting down other groups, however some of us are more interested in uniting supporters!

As Glen said, what is the point in the meeting on Friday, if groups (the Fans Forum, or it's committee representation at least) are going to stake claims over others during meetings with the club?

But this is exactly what happened in that extract? so what is the fans forum opinion on this being allowed to happen during their meetings?

In your opinion that is what happened... If somebody wishes to raise a subject with the club, should they not be allowed to do so? Questions and/or points which people feel they wish to add as part of a discussion aren't screened before they enter the room. If it hadn't been put on the minutes and had subsequently come out, we would have been accused of trying to hide it. A particular individual raised an issue, the rep from the club (Paul Agnew) responded, it was put in the minutes of the meeting. I'm not really sure what else I can add to the discussion...

[LDRover]

To my mind there should have been a response from the chair minuted along the lines of 'AB was concerned blah blah blah the chair responded that such concerns were not relevant to the meeting and should be addresed elsewhere'

AB gets to vent his spleen, no offence is caused but we all get a heads up on certain peoples' issues.

[Hasta]

My mate went on holiday last week and whilst he was away I went round to his house, slept with his partner, crashed his car, drunk his ale and rang up and abused his boss.

He was really miffed when he found out but I just said "there was no point in raking over past mistakes that could not be undone and that it was better to look forward"

Really Mr Agnew, really?

As for the supporters group issue, I don't see the relevance of the comment that was raised in the meeting other than individual jealousy of the person making the comment. Maybe that person craves the limelight that BRAG have been getting (or at least the platform to put across their views). I suppose being on the minutes just highlights this issue.

[Mattyblue]

It's a Fans Forum, fans that go can bring up anything they like.

Otherwise you may as well have one 'spokesman' who goes to the meeting and raises a load of pre determined questions. Not sure what the problem is.

GROUP WARS Part VIII

[rovers_rob]

AB expressed some concern that the club management were favouring

contact with other supporters’ groups rather than the well established

Forum.

I don't know anyone personally in the fans forum, BRAG, Ewood Blues etc.. (sorry if a failed to mention any other groups) so when I read this on the official BRFC website this morning I was confused.

Has meetings with the fans forum been turned down in favour of meetings with other groups or something ?

As far I am aware (from what I have read) the fans forum has been crying out for communication so this comment seems strange.

Are the fans forum (or the individual who raised this point) suggesting that communication should be limited to the fans forum and no one else ?

[perthblue02]

So there were no questions regarding the PR contract, the matchday programme contract, the contract process and conflict of interests, very disappointed !

This is an off field issue and within the remit of the fans forum isn't it? Surely this was an ideal time to raise considering Mr agnew wants to "build trust" and be as "transparent" as possible

[LDRover]

My mate went on holiday last week and whilst he was away I went round to his house, slept with his partner, crashed his car, drunk his ale and rang up and abused his boss.

He was really miffed when he found out but I just said "there was no point in raking over past mistakes that could not be undone and that it was better to look forward"

Really Mr Agnew, really?

As for the supporters group issue, I don't see the relevance of the comment that was raised in the meeting other than individual jealousy of the person making the comment. Maybe that person craves the limelight that BRAG have been getting (or at least the platform to put across their views). I suppose being on the minutes just highlights this issue.

Couldn't agree more.

[Ste B]

Are the fans forum (or the individual who raised this point) suggesting that communication should be limited to the fans forum and no one else ?

No, not at all, see my previous post.

I think it was also raised that as the fans forum meet only every 6 weeks or so that sometimes events overtake us and we need to perhaps have smaller groups meeting more often. A bit difficult for many of us due to day jobs etc.

[glen9mullan]

So there were no questions regarding the PR contract, the matchday programme contract, the contract process and conflict of interests, very disappointed !

This is an off field issue and within the remit of the fans forum isn't it? Surely this was an ideal time to raise considering Mr agnew wants to "build trust" and be as "transparent" as possible

All i know on this subject is Paul's son and assistant have now taken office at Ewood on club par role, from PAPR

[mark1875]

So let me ask Andy, Ste...

How would you feel if we released a set of meetings having met with the club that contained "MF asked why the fans forum are the only recognised group by the club, despite them having no members, only 2 supporters attending their agenda setting meetings, do very little market research, where was we have full community leaders backing and many members who attend our events"

Never in a million years would you read this in our minutes, but suppose for a minute you did, would you just say "oh well they are allowed to say it" or would you question the relevance to the point too?

As for the supporters group issue, I don't see the relevance of the comment that was raised in the meeting other than individual jealousy of the person making the comment. Maybe that person craves the limelight that BRAG have been getting (or at least the platform to put across their views). I suppose being on the minutes just highlights this issue.

I'd be inclined to +1 this post if the option was still here

[rovers_rob]

No, not at all, see my previous post.

I think it was also raised that as the fans forum meet only every 6 weeks or so that sometimes events overtake us and we need to perhaps have smaller groups meeting more often. A bit difficult for many of us due to day jobs etc.

Yep sorry, I missed your earlier post.

Overall I thought the topics covered by the fans forum were good and it was good to see that issues like the 3rd kit (pity about that), crap website and Bruno merchandise were on the agenda.

As well as the big issues I think its good that things like this are raised at meetings.

[BiggusLaddus]

All this again? Seriously?

[Exiled in Toronto]

FFS, if Mark and Glen hadn't, as usual gone on at balls-aching length about this it wouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

I have yet to see a FF-related thread not derailed by such pettiness. If it bothers you so much, go to the effing meetings!!

[LDRover]

FFS, if Mark and Glen hadn't, as usual gone on at balls-aching length about this it wouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

I have yet to see a FF-related thread not derailed by such pettiness. If it bothers you so much, go to the effing meetings!!

Surely the fact that they have though, John, means that there is an issue. It's not so much this thread being derailed but the FF meeting being derailed. Through pettiness as well.

[mark1875]

FFS, if Mark and Glen hadn't, as usual gone on at balls-aching length about this it wouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

I have yet to see a FF-related thread not derailed by such pettiness. If it bothers you so much, go to the effing meetings!!

Perhaps if one of the first points raised at this meeting was not to play down other groups, which they all would have been aware was going to happen considering they had a pre-meet last week, or what's the point of agenda-setting meetings?

Perhaps if they had talked about what they need to talk about, as oppose to putting down other groups, then Glen and myself would not need to object. This is not the point of a fans forum meeting after all is it?

If the meeting wasn't derailed by pettiness, then the aftermath would not need be either, one always follows the other, our threads seem to take a similar path too btw.

However the 'united (used loosely this morning) supporters meetings' are the place for these issues, and that's where i shall continue to seek clarification on the whole point behind this issue being raised.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Perhaps if one of the first points raised at this meeting was not to play down other groups, which they all would have been aware was going to happen considering they had a pre-meet last week, or what's the point of agenda-setting meetings?

Perhaps if they had talked about what they need to talk about, as oppose to putting down other groups, then Glen and myself would not need to object. This is not the point of a fans forum meeting after all is it?

If the meeting wasn't derailed by pettiness, then the aftermath would not need be either, one always follows the other, our threads seem to take a similar path too btw.

However the 'united (used loosely this morning) supporters meetings' are the place for these issues, and that's where i shall continue to seek clarification on the whole point behind this issue being raised.

It was 3 lines in 3 pages, hardly "derailed". Any Rovers fan of long-standing knows what AB is like and he is, IIRC, new to the FF so may not be fully up to speed with the protocols.

Senior BRAG committee members over-reacting to every slight, real or imagined, does you no favours imo. It looks petty and implies a focus on turf-wars. And, most importantly, has bog-all to do with getting Venky's out.

[mark1875]

It was 3 lines in 3 pages, hardly "derailed". Any Rovers fan of long-standing knows what AB is like and he is, IIRC, new to the FF so may not be fully up to speed with the protocols.

Senior BRAG committee members over-reacting to every slight, real or imagined, does you no favours imo. It looks petty and implies a focus on turf-wars. And, most importantly, has bog-all to do with getting Venky's out.

Turf-Wars? questioning why the point was even brought up, we could quite well go into the meeting with the club this week and do the same thing, but we won't because it is not about turf wars, its about what is the best for our supporters and taking about what needs talking about. If ever, a member of our committee went into a meeting and starting preaching "talk to us, why talk to other groups, we should be favoured" i would be absolutely ashamed. This is not about him or us having more right to be in that room, this is about Blackburn Rovers football club and its supporters and this fact seems lost on some people.

I simply asked what the point it being in there was and what good does it do, the explanation that is nothing to do with the fans forum is laughable, considering it came from a member and they have meetings to set agendas to determine whats going to be discussed. I am still unsure what the point in it was tbh, however it will be brought up in the relevant meeting on Friday as stated.

I can just imagine the reaction had we released minutes asking the club to concentrate on us more than other groups, suppose nobody would pass comment on that eh

[den]

An argument on a message board isn't the answer though. I'm sure this could have been discussed privately and agreement reached. No-one gains this way.

[mark1875]

An argument on a message board isn't the answer though. I'm sure this could have been discussed privately and agreement reached. No-one gains this way.

I agree Den, i simply asked clarification on the point, i am still no clearer so i will re-raise it at Fridays collaboration meeting, although i did believe the whole point of these were to prevent such things.

But the relevant discussions will now be taken there

[rovers_rob]

It was 3 lines in 3 pages, hardly "derailed". Any Rovers fan of long-standing knows what AB is like and he is, IIRC, new to the FF so may not be fully up to speed with the protocols.

Senior BRAG committee members over-reacting to every slight, real or imagined, does you no favours imo. It looks petty and implies a focus on turf-wars. And, most importantly, has bog-all to do with getting Venky's out.

I have been a season ticket holder for 25 years and I don't know who AB is (sorry if I should).

As I said in my earlier post (without knowing the individuals in question) I found this comment very strange especially as it was a member of the fans forum and to be honest without knowing all the politics I still don't really understand what the comment meant.

Anyway to me this seems like it should be a conversation between individuals and it has nothing to do with the fan base as a whole.

[AndyNeil]

Perhaps if one of the first points raised at this meeting was not to play down other groups, which they all would have been aware was going to happen considering they had a pre-meet last week, or what's the point of agenda-setting meetings?

Perhaps if they had talked about what they need to talk about, as oppose to putting down other groups, then Glen and myself would not need to object. This is not the point of a fans forum meeting after all is it?

If the meeting wasn't derailed by pettiness, then the aftermath would not need be either, one always follows the other, our threads seem to take a similar path too btw.

However the 'united (used loosely this morning) supporters meetings' are the place for these issues, and that's where i shall continue to seek clarification on the whole point behind this issue being raised.

I tell you what Mark, rather than acting like a drama queen on here why don't you just pick the phone up and ask the person in question who made the comment, instead of trying to score cheap points in a pathetic game of "most relevant supporters group"...would be a much more grown up way of dealing with the situation and would paint the BRFC Action Group in a much better light. Or is it just easier to sit behind your screen, bash away on your keyboard and try to paint the whole of the FF in a bad light because of the comments of one individual whose stance you don't agree with?

[mark1875]

I tell you what Mark, rather than acting like a drama queen on here why don't you just pick the phone up and ask the person in question who made the comment, instead of trying to score cheap points in a pathetic game of "most relevant supporters group"...would be a much more grown up way of dealing with the situation and would paint the BRFC Action Group in a much better light. Or is it just easier to sit behind your screen, bash away on your keyboard and try to paint the whole of the FF in a bad light because of the comments of one individual whose stance you don't agree with?

Right Andy, When you post minutes up, collectively from a fans forum then i have the right to ask a question in response to them, in order to understand what the point of the issue was, which i did! Or am i no longer allowed to make an observation or understand the fans forum minutes, as this appears to be what your telling me?

Pick up the phone and ring him? am i supposed to just expect his telephone number to magically appear into my mind?

me "trying to score cheap points in a pathetic game of "most relevant supporters group" hang on a minute, it was a set of fans forum minutes where a fans forum representative was saying the club have too much dialogue with other groups and then banged on about how the fans forum was more established, i don't recall us scoring these cheap points in meetings with the club, it was the ff and their minutes doing this which left me in the need to understand why they would? As i said you will never read minutes of ours where we are point scoring cheaply.

And i find it very rich that you take this tone, considering your constant hi-jacking of Action Group threads, which resulted in many posts being deleted on there with your constant questioning of the same points on every thread, rather than just emailing/phoning the committee to ask directly.

When we spend our spare time attending Sir Bill Taylors collaboration meeting (something our whole committee does) to try and resolve these issues and prevent petty point-scoring it pails into irrelevance when the point-scoring is directly made to the Operations Director of the football club.

If i have something which confuses me about your minutes, which affects the group i am elected to represent then i will ask for clarity on it and if the response "its not really a fans forum issue" is the best response you have, then i will tell you why it is one. "sit behind a screen and bash away at my keyboard" wow,

Like i said i will ask it at the collaboration meeting and leave it off here now as i am still no clearer! Maybe you'll make an appearance this week?

Regards