[Archived] Where Are BRAG?

[glen9mullan]

In which case I think it should be made clear, as many Trust members read this site, that the Trust did not "request BRAG to set up a meeting with the club"Broadly speaking the Trust supports the FSF initiative and our Secretary, Simon Barnes, attended the recent FSF meeting in Manchester at which I understand, BRAG, perhaps yourself, were present. Simon attended as an individual, not on behalf of the Trust. Simon is very interested in the campaign and discussed it with our Steering Group. The group concluded we support the initiative but it is not within our remit and secondly we are fully committed with our current objectives. From what I hear this was an excellent and cordial meeting. I'm informed the action point was for both the Fans Forum and BRAG to request further support for the campaign and to see if the club could provide statistics but this was as part of their normal engagement and not a special meeting. The Trust enjoys its own communication routes with the club. We would prefer BRAG did not infer or suggest RT has asked it to represent our position on any matter. This is especially important when the Trust is not involved 20's Plenty campaign. Obviously we cannot speak for other groups in relation to this. Thanks

This is completely untrue !!!

I was contacted by one of the roverstrust chairmen a few weeks ago requesting us to get involved with the twenty campaign . I was asked if we could meet with simon and I made arrangements for our communication officer to liaise with Simon .

Following discussions a number of supporter groups were invited by Simon to attend a meeting , were the result was those in attendance asked the AG to ask the club to back the proposal .

There is also an FSF mandate regarding this which the trust as an associate and the BRFCAG as an affiliate are following .

I really do wish you guys would communicate rather than make random false statements .

[pk1875]

In which case I think it should be made clear, as many Trust members read this site, that the Trust did not "request BRAG to set up a meeting with the club" Broadly speaking the Trust supports the FSF initiative and our Secretary, Simon Barnes, attended the recent FSF meeting in Manchester at which I understand, BRAG, perhaps yourself, were present. Simon attended as an individual, not on behalf of the Trust. Simon is very interested in the campaign and discussed it with our Steering Group. The group concluded we support the initiative but it is not within our remit and secondly we are fully committed with our current objectives. From what I hear this was an excellent and cordial meeting. I'm informed the action point was for both the Fans Forum and BRAG to request further support for the campaign and to see if the club could provide statistics but this was as part of their normal engagement and not a special meeting. The Trust enjoys its own communication routes with the club. We would prefer BRAG did not infer or suggest RT has asked it to represent our position on any matter. This is especially important when the Trust is not involved 20's Plenty campaign. Obviously we cannot speak for other groups in relation to this. Thanks

I was going off the minutes Simon sent me saying Simon Barnes (Rovers Trust / Fans Forum) each attendee present had their name and group in brackets. So I presume that is who he represents given that is what he wrote in the minutes.

The question was asked can the Action Group speak to the club regarding this and we did.

Just to make it clear, at the meeting The Action Group where asked to talk with the club about the FSF campaign and not any of the other things that we consequently discussed.

[Paul]

It's quite correct Wayne contacted you initially regarding the FSF meeting. I forget all the detail but it was discussed at some length in a conference call. I think this was because Simon wanted to get things moving and it was felt better use the existing contact between yourself and Wayne. It's quite correct Simon is involved with and may, I don't know, have set up the meeting(s).

It is not however anything to do with the Trust and the Trust did not request BRAG set up a meeting with the club. Our view is we broadly support the initiative but have no time to be involved.

GIen I would prefer it if you did not effectively accuse me if being untruthful.

I cannot be any clearer than this.

[AggyBlue]

The Trust are looking more comical with every passing day, talk about the left hand not knowing what the right is doing.

[Paul]

Aggy this is nothing to do with the Trust, that is the whole point.

[glen9mullan]

It's quite correct Wayne contacted you initially. It's quite correct Simon is involved with and may, I don't know, have set up the meeting(s).It is not however anything to do with the Trust and the Trust did not request BRAG set up a meeting with the club. Our view is we broadly support the initiative but have no time to be involved. I cannot be any clearer than this.

The FSF meeting was for affiliates and associates . The mandate by the FSF was distributed to those in attendance representing those groups , Simon was there on Rovers Trust business.

Those present at the supporters meeting , a representative from each group made this request , I have just read the minutes .

Simon Chaired the meeting as secretary of the Rovers trust as confirmed by the minutes .

I'm not too sure why you are getting so touchy on this matter , you have got your facts wrong and as I'm a member of both the Trust and the AG its rather embarrassing tbh

[T.J.Newton]

You plssed or something?

You don't "criticise in the slightest"Braddock, you go full on every time Brag is mentioned.

When they don't post you ask "where are they?".

When they do you get stuck in.

Badge of Honour to be put on ignore by you.

I only mentioned brag once in what must have been over 2 months and that was only out of curiosity, asking if they where still active!

glad you find my posts so memorable(oddbod)

who's braddock(what does that sentence even mean(o forget, say hello to rge others in the dungeon,ttfeffs!)

Don't think its that straightforward. I think there are several camps, the boardis obviously dysfunctional and appears to be divided and then there's the Singh camp which obviously some supporters belong to and I would hazard a guess that even the Venky clown owners are divided amongst themselves. Outside of this are the majority mainstream Rovers supporters who just want all the warring factions to shut the hell up and get out of the club whilst fervently hoping for some miracle takeover by responsible sane people.

all board members and owners are in the same bag, put a knot in it, sling it over the bridge behind riverside into river Darwen.

[forumquizmaster]

Jesus Christ, the club is going down the pan and all you lot can do is engage in amateur politicking.

[Paul]

Glen, Paul stated earlier the Trust requested BRAG set up a meeting with the club

We did not. That is the point. Nothing else. We are not involved.

[T.J.Newton]

The Trust are the only ones left in this all charade that still have some dignity a relative professionalism about them,

Their scheme may be quite fanciful(though BIG ambitions are what create all the greatest things), there intentions are genuine & transparent, Both Mr.Grabko and Mr. Wild seem like very bright, likeable down to earth blokes.

[mark1875]

I have also seen the minutes of both the original FSF meeting in Manchester, these minutes (written by the FSF) confirm that Simon was a representative of Rovers Trust at that meeting, and not "as an individual" as you claim Paul.

The minutes of the supporters meeting called by Simon, clearly state that Simon chaired the meeting and was there representing the Fans Forum and Rovers Trust, he even wrote the minutes himself. It also clearly states that in ongoing action, the BRFC Action Group and the Fans Forum will speak to the club regarding this matter, it was raised and passed by the Chair as usual format.

If you are questioning the accuracy of these official minutes and denying facts which are in them then it is a strange move, i would suggest you are really misinformed on this subject Paul. Whilst i wasn't present at the meetings, the group always shares its minutes around and ensures that all committee members are up to speed on the outcome of any meeting we are involved in, so i am aware of all progress.

I suggest you go back and speak to Simon here Paul, and learn more about the content of dialogue.

[glen9mullan]

Jesus Christ, the club is going down the pan and all you lot can do is engage in amateur politicking.

Not at all , if something is said which is not true , then of course we will try and clear it up .

For those wondering what the clubs response was , it was that they fully support the initiative which was without hesitation.

I think ticket prices around the country certainly do need addressing in today's climate

[pk1875]

In which case I think it should be made clear, as many Trust members read this site, that the Trust did not "request BRAG to set up a meeting with the club" Broadly speaking the Trust supports the FSF initiative and our Secretary, Simon Barnes, attended the recent FSF meeting in Manchester at which I understand, BRAG, perhaps yourself, were present. Simon attended as an individual, not on behalf of the Trust. Simon is very interested in the campaign and discussed it with our Steering Group. The group concluded we support the initiative but it is not within our remit and secondly we are fully committed with our current objectives. From what I hear this was an excellent and cordial meeting. I'm informed the action point was for both the Fans Forum and BRAG to request further support for the campaign and to see if the club could provide statistics but this was as part of their normal engagement and not a special meeting. The Trust enjoys its own communication routes with the club. We would prefer BRAG did not infer or suggest RT has asked it to represent our position on any matter. This is especially important when the Trust is not involved 20's Plenty campaign. Obviously we cannot speak for other groups in relation to this. Thanks

PauI I do not understand why you have chose to embarrass everyone with your reaction to this, the meeting was held in a good nature and attended by separate fans groups, for once working together for a common good.

I have spent a good part of today talking To Daniel regarding a few questions I had about the trust, he answered them all politely and professionally and we did all this by private message, so as not to bore people reading it over and it wasn't seen as point scoring or mud slinging, I was in fact weighing up the option of joining the Trust, but your aggressive and public cock waving on this subject has pretty much convinced me to give it a miss.

[forumquizmaster]

Not at all , if something is said which is not true , then of course we will try and clear it up .

For those wondering what the clubs response was , it was that they fully support the initiative which was without hesitation.

I think ticket prices around the country certainly do need addressing in today's climate

Re the first sentence - you're like a bunch of children, the lot of you. I'm talking about all the different factions. Haven't you heard of divide and conquer?

Totally agree re ticket prices but that's a nationwide thing, I think we have more pressing matters tbh.

[RoverInverness]

Although I know that the possibility is pretty unlikely, particularly due to the fact that John has a new job at the FA lined up, but I like the idea.

It'd be good for something positive to come from a fans campaign - ie rather than 'sack the board' or whatever, asking to bring back somebody who knows how to run this club.

Thanks for your thoughts Andy, but I should have known better than to try and start a discussion on a thread with 'brag' in the title.

Not that brag members are solely to blame for the childish and divisive handbags that are being displayed at this time. Rovers are in by far their most dangerous predicament I can remember (20+yrs), but who cares when there are insults and bitchy comments to be made about fellow supporters?

Kean the club, kean Shabbyshagspew, kean relegation to division three, kean the chuckle brothers, kean 6 managerial reigns in one keaning season (?!!?!!?), kean the most spinless collection of over-pampered dross to ever wear the blue and white halves, kean only one goal in kean knows how many keaning hours of football, there's some guy needing due a put down on the brfcs messageboard.

I really do not understand the mentality of some of the serial bitchy comment makers on this board.

And by the way - don't keaning tell me to calm down!

[Paul]

From RT Conference Call minutes 15-02-13:

9) AOB

a. SB updated on FSF action for Twenty’s Plenty – This is an Away Fans Initiative and although supported by is NOT a Rovers Trust initiative. WW to gauge reaction from Glen Mullen.

I don't know how or where the confusion has arisen but the above is the minute from our meeting

I have simply clarified the Trust is not involved in 20's Plenty and that we did not ask BRAG to set up a meeting. It's very clear, that is all.

That's it I have to sleep!!

[T.J.Newton]

Thanks for your thoughts Andy, but I should have known better than to try and start a discussion on a thread with 'brag' in the title.

Not that brag members are solely to blame for the childish and divisive handbags that are being displayed at this time. Rovers are in by far their most dangerous predicament I can remember (20+yrs), but who cares when there are insults and bitchy comments to be made about fellow supporters?

Kean the club, kean Shabbyshagspew, kean relegation to division three, kean the chuckle brothers, kean 6 managerial reigns in one keaning season (?!!?!!?), kean the most spinless collection of over-pampered dross to ever wear the blue and white halves, kean only one goal in kean knows how many keaning hours of football, there's some guy needing due a put down on the brfcs messageboard.

I really do not understand the mentality of some of the serial bitchy comment makers on this board.

And by the way - don't keaning tell me to calm down!

[mark1875]

Glen, Paul stated earlier the Trust requested BRAG set up a meeting with the club We did not. That is the point. Nothing else. We are not involved.

He never said the Trust asked us, he stated that

"We set up a meeting with the club following a request from a delegation of other supporters groups including Fans Forum, Rovers Trust, Ewood Blues, Darwen Blues, Havelock Blues etc."

This is accurate, all of these groups were present at the meeting, which was minuted and the group was 'actioned' to talk to the club regarding this issue, in those minutes.

I fail to see what your issue is here Paul

[Tom]

How on earth is what Paul said cock waving in any way shape or form?

I don't know the ins and outs of it nor do I care one bit if I'm honest but its certainly not cock waving, misinformed at worst and at best just clarifying something

Move on people does it really matter? Expected the comb wars to start again but not over something so trivial

[perthblue02]

kean Shabbyshagspew,

Love that name Shabby Shagspew, would make an ideal evil cartoon character part rat, part snake , part shelf

[T.J.Newton]

and I thought the silly squabbles I get into on here where petty

[pk1875]

I will not comment further on this on here it must make terrible reading and paints both groups in a dim light, Daniel has my full respect and had me ready to sign up today, Paul has convinced me otherwise.

[darrenrover]

He never said the Trust asked us, he stated that

"We set up a meeting with the club following a request from a delegation of other supporters groups including Fans Forum, Rovers Trust, Ewood Blues, Darwen Blues, Havelock Blues etc."

This is accurate, all of these groups were present at the meeting, which was minuted and the group was 'actioned' to talk to the club regarding this issue, in those minutes.

I fail to see what your issue is here Paul

Bigger and more important fish to fry. no pun intended.

[T.J.Newton]

typical chilli peppers fan

[mark1875]

Surely you can give a brief outline of the meeting with the fine detail left for the minutes...

We sought clarity on a number of issues concerning our members, primarily the clubs current Board Structure, Management, assurances over the clubs financial stability ahead of a further season out the top flight, as well as some other minor issues surrounding various aspects of the club. Ian Sylvester the club secretary was also present for part of the meeting as the group wished to discuss the transfer of its shares.

The full minutes will hopefully be issued via the usual channels later this week.

"Shall this appointment be made the BRFC Action Group will end all communication with the clubs board of directors and step up its campaign for Venkateshwara Hatcheries to sell the club as we seek responsible owners for Blackburn Rovers” - BRAG Statement, Lancashire Telegraph 10th January 2013

So what changed your minds?

In the main, we are a group which acts on directive of its membership base. We have had issues brought to us from supporters both via the walk in centre and online communications which needed to be addressed with the club, in addition to this we also needed to speak with the club on other issues, such as the charity football match the group is leading on which will take place at Ewood Park in May and arrangements for this need dialogue, the partnership in place with Derian House which has various events that also need progressing and of course the campaign involving many supporter groups for the FSF which we had been actioned to speak with the club in relation too.

It was due to a combination of these things, that i requested the meeting with Derek and he obliged immediately.