[Archived] Ask Your Questions To Shaw, Myers, Bowyer

[Stuart]

In your haste to keep this personal and to carry on driving a wedge between fellow fans Stuart, you have completely lost the plot and are now defaming people who you don't even know, and making statements which are entirely false.

I'll wait for your retraction and apology regarding the 20th anniversary event which was arranged by the Former Players Association.

And apologies to everyone else that this thread has been dragged off topic.

...

{Just to further set the record straight, here's the extract from the Fans Forum minutes regarding the Former Players event :}

http://www.rovers.co.uk/documents/ff-minutes-9-3-15195-2339972.pdf

1. YOU made this personal.

2. YOU are the one trying to create a wedge

3. Whichever group organised it (and I didn't say that the FF did - so no retraction is necessary) this was not publicised by the FF (a group supposed to represent the interests of the fans). A pompous statement implying that normal Rovers fans couldn't afford a ticket and therefore shouldn't be invited is hardly an invitation. If anything you've gone out of your way to prove how secret the event was and how the FF did not represent normal fans.

4. I'll apologise when you do.

[Stuart]

The only people who have been banned (all 2 of them, and only temporarily) are the ones who chose to discredit, undermine and insult the people who run the board, without whom it WOULD be roverstalk or roversmad.

A 6 month ban for overtly questioning a mod is excessive in the extreme. The posters make the board Mike, the admin create the platform. If people don't accept that then they are in the wrong game. Heavy-handed biased modding is what has made Roversmad and indeed the official board the one-eyed places they are.

Allowing everyone's point of view is what has made this consistently the best Rovers mb for years.

Sadly it looks like I'm the next one to feel the wrath of Tris. Perhaps I'll soon be the next one banned, eh Mike?

[K-Hod]

Mr k-hod - Removing the word 'peasants' from my post?

Context was pitchforks, peasants and revolution?

I object your honour.

I've sent you a PM.

[T J Hooker]

Despite the organisers twice posting that there will be no pre-submitted questions and the event is open to all, we still get posters bitching about it being carefully vetted etc. Blimey.

Sadly I can't get to it from Scotland but there are plenty of questions I would like to ask each of them:

Shaw: What is the current process and plan for removing an underperforming manager, including the names of the decision maker(s) please. (follow up question) Is this the way a normal football club is run?

Myers: Can you outline your action plan for improving, or indeed creating, the communication between the club's owners and its supporters.

Bowyer: How do you think your managerial performance has improved in the 2/3 years since you became the Rovers manager? In what ways has that manifested itself? Do you agree that the main performance target for the manager of this football club is to win football matches?

Some excellent well crafted questions there,

Maybe sombody from brfcc thats going would like to represent and ask these questions on behalf of fans like the above that live to far away to attend? Or whoever's charing the event could be given a list of these questions to fall back on when the room inevitably goes quiet and and gb et. Think theyre getting away lightly

[yoda]

I can't see anything which gets personal in my previous post Jisty, other than the observation that you label people you don't like and then attack them. You've just proved me correct with this unprovoked attack on the Fans Forum, as if it's an entity with a single voice and single purpose which can be shot down with a single bullet.

It isn't that now and it never has been. It remains what John Williams set up in the late 1990s - a diverse group of unrelated Blackburn Rovers fans which the club can ask for views (about leaks and pies for example), but which at the same time is able to bring questions from the fans to the club.

When John Williams set it up, the initial FF members mainly came from regional groups and individuals who had taken the trouble to write to him about any issue which might have concerned them.

JW would welcome any fan into his office to discuss any sensible gripe - as many people on here have testified over the years. Setting up the FF was his way of making this process more formal and more organized, although to the best of my knowledge he never turned anyone away if they preferred a private conversation.

The composition of the current Fans Forum has remained true to what John Williams started (ie diverse), and I for one am determined that it will survive through these bad times as it did through the previous better times - ironically it's from those better times that the jibes about leaks and pies originate because there wasn't much else to discuss!

You are correct on one thing - we do have a direct line into the club to ask questions. Every couple of months we do just that, it's all minuted, published and available to be read. Before each meeting cycle, there is a well published open invitation to submit questions, gripes, problems, moans, groans and wants, and an open invitation to attend our pre-meets.

This has been publicized through the LET, big screen, match programmes, this forum, other forums, Twitter, Facebook and for all I know Snapchat Tinder Myspace and LinkedIn. That's how the FF has always approached the club and will continue to be - it's not the FF remit to organize public meetings and never will be - however we'll always welcome anyone and everyone to our pre-meets.

We take each and every contribution from any fan into our meetings with the club - usually represented by Alan Myers, Derek Shaw and Lynsey Talbot.

Sadly, the reaction we get to our modus operandi is mainly similar to how you have reacted to this Action Group initiative. I already made it clear in my earlier post that I'm full of admiration to Mark, Paul and co for organizing this, so I'm not sure why you're trying to create a division where there isn't any appetite for one.

You've labelled this as a "sycophants tea party". Most of the time you criticize those on this MB who in your view sit on their hands. Now it's you sitting on your hands because someone has given you the platform your online ranting craves, but you don't seem to want the platform any more.

The bit highlighted is not 100% true though, the minutes often do not reflect fully what has been discussed with some items missing completely. Would it not be better for pre release minutes to be drafted and approved by the attendees before being published ?

[Walney Blue]

Fan v fan again ? It's now detracting from what this is all about, there's more chance of it kicking off on the night between people in the seats than getting the questions across to those who should answer. Remember divide and ....

Correct squire.

[Billy McBalcony]

.

[Stuart]

Good.

But I think you need to learn to read before you post again.

Please, please stop trying to defend anything about the secret club do. It was deliberately kept to only a small clique of people and those who frequent the right social clubs.

[JBiz]

I've sent you a PM.

What was wrong with the initial post?

[Mike E]

A 6 month ban for overtly questioning a mod is excessive in the extreme. The posters make the board Mike, the admin create the platform. If people don't accept that then they are in the wrong game. Heavy-handed biased modding is what has made Roversmad and indeed the official board the one-eyed places they are.

Allowing everyone's point of view is what has made this consistently the best Rovers mb for years.

Sadly it looks like I'm the next one to feel the wrath of Tris. Perhaps I'll soon be the next one banned, eh Mike?

Just to clarify, the 6 month ban is for the accumulation of warning points. It just happened to be repeatedly asking the same (answered) question that got him over that line. His own fault. The guidelines are there for a reason and he'd actually been given a lot of leeway for it as we were reluctant to issue the ban.

Neither heavy-handed nor biased (esp as the other banned poster was Jim for showing nothing but contempt via PM towards me just because I'd been made a mod).

As much as I miss their valued footballing opinions, I think the board is having something of a pick up in atmosphere again. Less arguing and more joking and being friendly and inclusive (Preview thread and skous's game).

[Paul]

The bit highlighted is not 100% true though, the minutes often do not reflect fully what has been discussed with some items missing completely. Would it not be better for pre release minutes to be drafted and approved by the attendees before being published ?

That may be the case, I don't know, but I suspect you,I and many others on here have enough life experience to know this is nothing unusual. Most committee minutes reflect what is to be recorded not everything that is discussed. Often private opinions are expressed, things said in the heat of the moment or confidences given which are not for public record.

I was present at several meetings with John Williams and/or Tom Finn when it was made quite clear certain remarks or statements were not to be repeated outside of the meeting. Often this was part of the club gaining confidence in and giving confidence to the individuals present.

More recently I've been at fans groups meetings when the minutes did not include certain points if discussion

[yoda]

That may be the case, I don't know, but I suspect you,I and many others on here have enough life experience to know this is nothing unusual. Most committee minutes reflect what is to be recorded not everything that is discussed. Often private opinions are expressed, things said in the heat of the moment or confidences given which are not for public record.

I was present at several meetings with John Williams and/or Tom Finn when it was made quite clear certain remarks or statements were not to be repeated outside of the meeting. Often this was part of the club gaining confidence in and giving confidence to the individuals present.

More recently I've been at fans groups meetings when the minutes did not include certain points if discussion

That is the reason I suggested for pre release minutes so that attendees can see if anything they consider important has been missed. When in industry that was always the format, get the minutes approved by the attendees then release/publish them

[Mr. E]

What are they going to say we haven't heard before? This is more of a chance for them to portray themselves as honest hard workering men with the clubs best interest at heart, who are just dealing under tough times.

Venkys should be answering these questions, not their yes men.

[Paul]

That is the reason I suggested for pre release minutes so that attendees can see if anything they consider important has been missed. When in industry that was always the format, get the minutes approved by the attendees then release/publish them

I thought, and you may be, I'm not sure, you were implying information was deliberately being withheld which some think should be in the public domain? If that is the case then the minutes shouldn't be accepted as a true record at the following meeting.

[yoda]

I thought, and you may be, I'm not sure, you were implying information was deliberately being withheld which some think should be in the public domain? If that is the case then the minutes shouldn't be accepted as a true record at the following meeting.

I do know a couple of items that have been left out that an FF member thought should be in there. As for being deliberate, not sure

[J*B]

Derek, you are a proven liar in a court of law and have had the role of Managing Director of this football club under its biggest decline in recent times. Why should anyone here believe a word that you are saying?

[1arC]

When Venky's took over the club, they promised they would move the club forward and promised they were aiming for Champions league football. Can Mr Shaw please contact them to out a statement to explain, to the fans why the said that. If they really meant it, then can they also explain to the fans, what in their opinion went wrong and how they intend to rectify the situation?

[speeeeeeedie]

Derek, you are a proven liar in a court of law and have had the role of Managing Director of this football club under its biggest decline in recent times. Why should anyone here believe a word that you are saying?

That is a really good question. Hopefully somebody will ask it.

Did the owners say in the Berg case filings that he was an MD "gone rogue" who they could not control? I'll look for the actual quote. It's listed in court documents so it's irrefutable.

How is he still in a job after that? He cost Venkys millions on that deal alone.

[Boz]

Watch out for the daughter.

[Jimmy612]

Just to clarify, the 6 month ban is for the accumulation of warning points. It just happened to be repeatedly asking the same (answered) question that got him over that line. His own fault. The guidelines are there for a reason and he'd actually been given a lot of leeway for it as we were reluctant to issue the ban.

Neither heavy-handed nor biased (esp as the other banned poster was Jim for showing nothing but contempt via PM towards me just because I'd been made a mod).

As much as I miss their valued footballing opinions, I think the board is having something of a pick up in atmosphere again. Less arguing and more joking and being friendly and inclusive (Preview thread and skous's game).

Who are we on about? Abbey?

[only2garners]

I do know a couple of items that have been left out that an FF member thought should be in there. As for being deliberate, not sure

I have kept out of this latest spat as Tris has been eloquently representing the Fans Forum but as the secretary I think I need to respond to this comment. I write the minutes and they are seen by the Chair and by the club before they are agreed and published. I could send them out to everyone on the Forum for comment but it might then take me until the next meeting to get them all agreed.

Of course I do not put everything that is said in the published minutes - I'm not sure any organisation would do that and if they did they would be a very dreary read. They are a distillation of what has been said. In the particular instance of the FF there are regularly statements made in the meeting that we are asked not be minuted. I have been on the Forum since 2007 and that has been the case all the time - in fact it was considerably more prevalent in the John Williams/Tom Finn era. When John came there were times when I struggled to be able to minute anything. The most common statement he made was along the lines "One thing I do want to say, and John I'd be grateful if you don't minute this, is....". Tom was always quite conservative and the final minutes were often the result of a quite lengthy discussion. These days I get some occasional requests for re-wording but nothing that changed the essential discussions.

I'm fascinated to hear that a member of the Forum has felt that the minutes have missed out items that s/he thought should be in. If that's the case then the person has never brought these concerns to me, which would seem to be the logical first step.

[yoda]

Who are we on about? Abbey?

ABBEY hasn't been banned as far as I am aware

I have kept out of this latest spat as Tris has been eloquently representing the Fans Forum but as the secretary I think I need to respond to this comment. I write the minutes and they are seen by the Chair and by the club before they are agreed and published. I could send them out to everyone on the Forum for comment but it might then take me until the next meeting to get them all agreed.

Of course I do not put everything that is said in the published minutes - I'm not sure any organisation would do that and if they did they would be a very dreary read. They are a distillation of what has been said. In the particular instance of the FF there are regularly statements made in the meeting that we are asked not be minuted. I have been on the Forum since 2007 and that has been the case all the time - in fact it was considerably more prevalent in the John Williams/Tom Finn era. When John came there were times when I struggled to be able to minute anything. The most common statement he made was along the lines "One thing I do want to say, and John I'd be grateful if you don't minute this, is....". Tom was always quite conservative and the final minutes were often the result of a quite lengthy discussion. These days I get some occasional requests for re-wording but nothing that changed the essential discussions.

I'm fascinated to hear that a member of the Forum has felt that the minutes have missed out items that s/he thought should be in. If that's the case then the person has never brought these concerns to me, which would seem to be the logical first step.

I think they will be doing shortly

[K-Hod]

Who are we on about? Abbey?

Nope, thenodrog.

[Walney Blue]

Bellyaching and bickering, divide and conquer, that's the spirit.

Head above parapet, purchase ticket, vent the spleen.

23 pages on Bowyer

14 pages on Shaw

40 pages on Protest

Event still not sold out - Why?

[martonrover]

Bellyaching and bickering, divide and conquer, that's the spirit.

Head above parapet, purchase ticket, vent the spleen.

23 pages on Bowyer

14 pages on Shaw

40 pages on Protest

Event still not sold out - Why?

Because it was an evening with the monkeys, not the organ grinders.