[Archived] Has BRAG served its purpose?

[Fife Rover]

He was talking life and stuff and people get in touch with him and a fife rover was mentioned . Thought it may have been you ha . Wasn't anything bad .

Phew! That's a relief. Having said that though, it is a fact that when you get to my age you do tend to develop more than just a passing interest in "life and stuff" so perhaps I should tune-in.

[Al]

In your view then Savio, how does that differ from the FF?

Probably not much but it has absolutely as much right as a representative body as the FF. Neither can claim to represent the fan base as a whole but both have got off their bums and done something.

[Pedro]

I don't get how people lay claim that BRAG helped rid the club of Kean. Shebby (who was brought in by the owners) was the main reason for his job being untenable. Our owners are stubborn and only do what they want to do, my personal feelings are that telling them what to do is more likely to have the opposite effect and they will dig their heels in.

I just want us to be Blackburn Rovers supporters and don't want the board members, advisors and owners to have as much limelight as they do or have these numerous factions of supporters.

[den]

I don't get how people lay claim that BRAG helped rid the club of Kean. Shebby (who was brought in by the owners) was the main reason for his job being untenable. Our owners are stubborn and only do what they want to do, my personal feelings are that telling them what to do is more likely to have the opposite effect and they will dig their heels in.

I just want us to be Blackburn Rovers supporters and don't want the board members, advisors and owners to have as much limelight as they do or have these numerous factions of supporters.

and Shebby was brought in - why? Because the owners were coming under increasing pressure from protests and from gates dwindling. If you don't want accept anything other than absolute facts, Kean resigned for no known reason.

[Pedro]

and Shebby was brought in - why? Because the owners were coming under increasing pressure from protests and from gates dwindling. If you don't want accept anything other than absolute facts, Kean resigned for no known reason.

Give over den!

Who was the original Venky board? The Hunts and an Asian midget...did Brag rid us of those too? Singh is a buddy appointment and as out of his depth as Vinnie was, just more vocal. The owners weren't under increasing pressure from protests, the protests had quickly become a sideshow of the matchday experience and white noise, by the time Kean went they'd pretty much ebbed away and were far from intense.

[matt83]

To my knowledge:

BRAG - defunct former protest group - technically no longer exist except that people continue to use the term for...

BRFC Action Group - pressure group withits own member base

Ewood Blues - traditional supporters group who arrange travel to away matches

Fans Forum / FF - a group of people who regularly meeting with people from the club to discuss non-football related matters, such as the temperature of the beer to the stewarding arragements and everything in between.

Rovers Trust - an amalgamation of the former BRIST and BRST - a group of fans who are working to try to achieve whole or part ownership of the club (at best a Swansea type arrangement - at worst, our knights in shining armour should the worst happen).

BRFCS - largest internet based supporter "group" - but not really a group as such - sometimes asked to endorse support statements

Other supporter internet-based message board groups - various - again sometimes asked to endorse support statements

Blackburn United - a pseudo-organisation designed to bring together all of the groups under one umbrella and facilitated by Sir Bill Taylor.

Hopefully I've not missed anyone!

All of the groups are supporters of the club. The problem is they don't share common goals - possibly necessarily.

Cheers for that. Had no idea we had so many subsidiary groups under the umbrella of Blackburn Rovers fc.

Although I'm still none the wiser as to what everyone wants to achieve (other than a well run community centric club) and how they actually the want to achieve it.

I only look at this message board but maybe there's another rival board out there where its posters would willingly slit the throat of anyone who posts on brfcs!! Never know the way things are maybe need to go to games "tooled up" for fears of reprisals from rival forums. We're defo this monty python sketch:

[SouthAussieRover]

Could people stop quoting 47er please.

I've no desire to read his constant drivel so I've put him on ignore.Quoting him means I have to ignore more balanced posts.

[47er]

Care to explain why my post, the first reply in the thread isn't balanced?

There is a difference between having an opinion which I even noted shouldn't be taken as having any weight and having a pop.

I do agree that a lot of the time people will and have been having digs but I also think there is an element that any criticism is dismissed by some whether warranted or not

I agree with all you've written there Tom. But why have we 3 threads which, however they start, always turn into the same old arguements? You don' have a pop. Most do and we could both name them!

Could people stop quoting 47er please.

I've no desire to read his constant drivel so I've put him on ignore.Quoting him means I have to ignore more balanced posts.

Bless!

[SouthAussieRover]

I agree with all you've written there Tom. But why have we 3 threads which, however they start, always turn into the same old arguements? You don' have a pop. Most do and we could both name them!

Bless!

Woof woof.

[Tom]

I agree with all you've written there Tom. But why have we 3 threads which, however they start, always turn into the same old arguements? You don' have a pop. Most do and we could both name them!

The reason I left this open mainly is because the opening post from Stuart was well reasoned, well thought out and I thought worthy of discussion, I hoped people could weigh in with opinions and it not end up just the same people projecting the same opinion we have seen on the other threads

It's a hot topic again this week due to the back the badge campaign so there seems to be a lot of discussion around the group

[Stuart]

I agree with all you've written there Tom. But why have we 3 threads which, however they start, always turn into the same old arguements? You don' have a pop. Most do and we could both name them!

Why let them turn? Don't get sucked into a slanging match. To be fair, this thread has been pretty civil so far. Bit disappoints that none of the Action Group committee have commented but there have been some good, well thought-through posts.

[47er]

Woof woof.

Priceless! Pretends he's got me on ignore but can't resist stalking me. What an absolute buffoon!

[T.J.Newton]

Why let them turn? Don't get sucked into a slanging match. To be fair, this thread has been pretty civil so far. Bit disappoints that none of the Action Group committee have commented but there have been some good, well thought-through posts.

That is bizarre isn't 5000+ members and yet only seemingly 2-4 posters on this entire forum(and none that I no personally), its not even funny! just stone cold proof of what a sham they truly are as a 'group/organisation'(there barely even a clique).

[47er]

Why let them turn? Don't get sucked into a slanging match. To be fair, this thread has been pretty civil so far. Bit disappoints that none of the Action Group committee have commented but there have been some good, well thought-through posts.

It's the nature of the topic I'm afraid. Some hate BRAG with a passion and that determines the content of their post whatever the title of the thread.I'm actually pleased that BRAG people haven't responded much, every time they do the temperature just ratchets up.

In the end it's their organisation and they'll decide what they'll do. If you think we should offer our opinions about them on here, fair enough but you couldn't blame them for taking no notice given the nature of many comments over the last few months.

[den]

In answer to the original question, if Brag want to remain long term, then they need to get away from their action group foundations. For me, there is a need for an independent supporters association, but this needs a very different approach to how Brag currently operate. I doubt very much that BRAG have the personnel aboard [no offence intended] to enable it to change to this kind of body, but they can become part of it. An independent supporters association needs people who understand the average, every day rovers fan, know what they want and expect from the club - and are prepared to represent their views in a vocal, but as reasonable a way as possible.

So I guess that falls in with quite a few folk on here who think some kind of coming together of the various fan groups would be a good thing. I do though, get the feeling that personal agenda's across the groups will make this very difficult to achieve. So there's the test for all you supporters groups, Can you put those differences to one side in order to serve the every day, regular supporters the way they would want you to?

[ABBEY]

Priceless! Pretends he's got me on ignore but can't resist stalking me. What an absolute buffoon!

[Bundesburn]

If you've heard of the SLA and Patty Hearst, humour me as I weave a tenuously-linked analogy based upon two of my favourite things: Rovers and the '70s.

Now, the SLA were a radical militant group based in the USA, who kidnapped an heiress to a global media empire, turned her onto their way of thinking and led the American media on a merry dance for about 2 years.

At the core of their raison d'être was the emergence of the "counterculture" in the States. Protests against leaders that had alienated, disenfranchised and upset them with their actions. Their message was clear; empower the masses. Their ransom demands for the kidnapping included a food program in California for the poor inhabitants of major metropolitan areas. The Hearst family blew $2million on it. It was a game-changer. A tiny band of radicals had the elite asking, "How high?"

What transpired from this relative giant-slaying was a bank robbery, violence, more and more absurd demands and proclamations, murder and a cat-and-mouse game with the police. By the end, the SLA was fighting the police and, it all ended in a literal blaze of not so much glory. They burned to death whilst under siege and engaging in a firefight with the LAPD. Now, despite having been global headlines and inciting the largest private volunteer movement the United States had ever seen, most people don't have a clue who they were. Why? Because they didn't know when they'd won and what to do next.

It's probably patently obvious how these two groups link together. Plucky underdogs and all that. But, you see, it's the fundamental problem with most (granted, not all) grass-roots organisations and movements. They're ill-prepared and they're very prone to losing focus. The SLA wanted a voice and to be a voice of the oppressed. The day of their firefight with the LAPD, they had pretty much every major news network in the States broadcasting live from the scene. They had their ultimate platform, waiting for them. The microphone was live, the cameras were waiting. Instead, they went for glory and pursued their own personal vendetta and agenda. They lost sight of why they even existed in the first place.

BRAG have had a winning moment so far. Kean left. It doesn't matter how they go in, they all count and that was definitely a goal for BRAG and the fanbase as a whole. Instead of reassessing their position and taking stock of their options, it seemed they just needed to find a reason to be. So, building links with the club has been - perhaps unfairly, perhaps correctly - perceived as digging their claws in.

The fact is, people won't agree on this because it's the very nature of "resistance." Resistance is standing up for what you believe is right. That doesn't necessarily make that which you believe in right in itself. With resistance, comes the desire for change. But, unless you have a real, coherent and practical alternative, then you leave yourself wide open for criticism and, personally, stepping outside the confines of context for a moment, I think that criticism is fair, just and imperative.

So, what I'd say is, be sceptical, challenge others' views, make them prove they're worthwhile investing in, but remember why you're interested, too. Remember that there is always a constructive path to take.

And, finally, the argument posed by some based around the adage "it's better than nothing," is inherently flawed. Doing nothing maintains a relative status-quo, the terms and parameters of which are understood and accepted. Action for the sake of action is as likely to change for the better as it is to change for the worse. Accepting your limitations will do wonders for your ability to make sure you don't do any harm.

[SouthAussieRover]

Priceless! Pretends he's got me on ignore but can't resist stalking me. What an absolute buffoon!

Did the rabid dog post that?

[Stuart]

Great post Bundesburn!

[CrazyIvan]

Great post Bundesburn!

I'll second that. Brilliantly put.

[Mike E]

If you've heard of the SLA and Patty Hearst, humour me as I weave a tenuously-linked analogy based upon two of my favourite things: Rovers and the '70s.

Now, the SLA were a radical militant group based in the USA, who kidnapped an heiress to a global media empire, turned her onto their way of thinking and led the American media on a merry dance for about 2 years.

At the core of their raison d'être was the emergence of the "counterculture" in the States. Protests against leaders that had alienated, disenfranchised and upset them with their actions. Their message was clear; empower the masses. Their ransom demands for the kidnapping included a food program in California for the poor inhabitants of major metropolitan areas. The Hearst family blew $2million on it. It was a game-changer. A tiny band of radicals had the elite asking, "How high?"

What transpired from this relative giant-slaying was a bank robbery, violence, more and more absurd demands and proclamations, murder and a cat-and-mouse game with the police. By the end, the SLA was fighting the police and, it all ended in a literal blaze of not so much glory. They burned to death whilst under siege and engaging in a firefight with the LAPD. Now, despite having been global headlines and inciting the largest private volunteer movement the United States had ever seen, most people don't have a clue who they were. Why? Because they didn't know when they'd won and what to do next.

It's probably patently obvious how these two groups link together. Plucky underdogs and all that. But, you see, it's the fundamental problem with most (granted, not all) grass-roots organisations and movements. They're ill-prepared and they're very prone to losing focus. The SLA wanted a voice and to be a voice of the oppressed. The day of their firefight with the LAPD, they had pretty much every major news network in the States broadcasting live from the scene. They had their ultimate platform, waiting for them. The microphone was live, the cameras were waiting. Instead, they went for glory and pursued their own personal vendetta and agenda. They lost sight of why they even existed in the first place.

BRAG have had a winning moment so far. Kean left. It doesn't matter how they go in, they all count and that was definitely a goal for BRAG and the fanbase as a whole. Instead of reassessing their position and taking stock of their options, it seemed they just needed to find a reason to be. So, building links with the club has been - perhaps unfairly, perhaps correctly - perceived as digging their claws in.

The fact is, people won't agree on this because it's the very nature of "resistance." Resistance is standing up for what you believe is right. That doesn't necessarily make that which you believe in right in itself. With resistance, comes the desire for change. But, unless you have a real, coherent and practical alternative, then you leave yourself wide open for criticism and, personally, stepping outside the confines of context for a moment, I think that criticism is fair, just and imperative.

So, what I'd say is, be sceptical, challenge others' views, make them prove they're worthwhile investing in, but remember why you're interested, too. Remember that there is always a constructive path to take.

And, finally, the argument posed by some based around the adage "it's better than nothing," is inherently flawed. Doing nothing maintains a relative status-quo, the terms and parameters of which are understood and accepted. Action for the sake of action is as likely to change for the better as it is to change for the worse. Accepting your limitations will do wonders for your ability to make sure you don't do any harm.

So eloquently describes my feelings. You saved me plenty of typing there. Cracking post.

[Bundesburn]

Aw, shucks, guys. You've given me the warm and fuzzies.

[Andy]

You might want to get that checked out.

Good post though

[Mike E]

Aw, shucks, guys. You've given me the warm and fuzzies.

I gave you a round of applause, not the clap

[Bundesburn]

I gave you a round of applause, not the clap

Yikes! My naïveté showing through there! I thought it was something much different!