[Archived] Disable Supporters Club Told To Stop Using Rovers Name

[perthblue02]

Surprised Savio hasn't been on to post this

http://m.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/13523606.Blackburn_Rovers_drop_disabled_fans__club/

[mustard]

"At the meeting were officer for the disabled Christine Peacock, finance director Mike Cheston and fans' liaison manager Linsey Talbot."

Fans' liaison manager???

[Paul]

Well this is very interesting.

"A Rovers spokesman confirmed the break in relations and said the club did not want other organisations using their brand."

My first thought is this is a very ill conceived idea. If we were members I'd be very disappointed and I feel it goes against the very good work done by the club on behalf of disabled fans. Perhaps the club should look at updating the web site

I'm wondering where it goes next and what the implications are:

BRAG - Blackburn Rovers Action Group

BRFCC - Blackburn Rovers Football Club Community

BRFCS - Blackburn Rovers Football Club Supporters

Rovers Trust

Each of these are, loosely speaking, organisations.

I'm also wondering about "protecting the brand" - could this be something to do with a potential sale and the club are cleaning up anything which a buyer might see as devaluing the brand?

[Mike Graham]

Weird.

The excuses given by the Club are weak and menial.

They will be telling BRFCC.COM that we cannot the BR in our title soon.

I guess I will be written to by the club to tell me I cannot refer to myself as Blackburn Rovers supporter. They will be happy to take my £$€ but that is it.

[jodrell]

Paul

Is there anything left worth protecting and can it be devalued much more? A very poor decision by the club as I am sure it will mean a lot to those supporters.

[Jock]

Paul

Is there anything left worth protecting and can it be devalued much more? A very poor decision by the club as I am sure it will mean a lot to those supporters.

Exactly right. What image is there left to protect. Their baby is turning blue. What did the useless sods do when Orr was mocking the Rovers badge?

All looks a bit schoolyard bully to me.

[T J Hooker]

Its pretty vaguely explained in the article but to me it seems one of the main reasons they wanted to have a the rovers name removed from the group was to remove any confusion of whom disabled supporters should contact 1st if they have a disability related issue at ewood.

Which would make it undetstable but they should have explained it better.

[RevidgeBlue]

I'm not up to date with the latest disability legislation but I think the overall idea of it is to treat people with disabilities exactly the same as able bodied people. So treating a certain section of fans differently, separately or as being in a different category due to their disability is not really consistent with the legislation and might be seen as patronising.

That's the only reasoning I can think of behind the decision. The Club also have a (well paid) disability officer in Christine Peacock so they probably think it's not necessary to have a separate association using the Club name as well.

Either way it seems a bit heavy handed and unnecessary. Mike Cheston has expressed himself particularly badly making it sound like all those bloody queries form those pesky disabled people is an absolute chore.

[Stuart]

I'm not up to date with the latest disability legislation but I think the overall idea of it is to treat people with disabilities exactly the same as able bodied people. So treating a certain section of fans differently, separately or as being in a different category due to their disability is not really consistent with the legislation and might be seen as patronising.

It seems a straightforward copyright issue. They aren't saying there cannot be a disabled supporters club, just that they can't affaire themselves - by name - to Blackburn Rovers (if I'm allowed to post the words).

Pretty pathetic move from the club but about par. It's like the club are actively trying to reduce fan morale - and numbers! Add this to Paul's previous posts about the club changing the rules about carer STs and it doesn't make for a happy, family, community friendly club.

[Gav]

Formed in 1992 wasn't it?

Why all of sudden isn't it acceptable to use the 'Brand'?

Wouldn't surprise me if its a religious thing, I don't say that lightly, maybe the owners are having a Glen Hoddle moment?

Can't work it out, so that's my best guess.....