[Archived] Fans Unite Under ‘We Are Rovers’ Banner

[47er]

Ignore it Abbey, I couldn't give a t0ss what anyone in the Ewood Blues thinks about anything to be honest.

All that matters is that they're on the same protesting hymn sheet as the rest of us.

Peacefully and with respect!That'll be a new hymn sheet for you then Gav!

[Mike Graham]

In war you have to make allies and alliances in order to progress.

Unfortunately it appears that WAR have failed to recognise this fully to date.

[mark1875]

If WAR's only job is to co-ordinate protests and get a wider amount of people participating then it is a good thing.

From the experience of a few years ago the impression is that if the Action Group organised something, then the other groups would not participate just because they hadn't organised it.

This was clear when the BRFC Action Group launched the "back the badge" campaign in February 2013, it was well received among other groups and the group launched it with the expectation others would support it. Then silence, only the group promoted it and it was a complete flop.

I'm sure we have been guilty too of not supporting other groups initiatives, although we have done many times.

The idea was not to form a new group, but to bring existing groups together, to work together for the good of the club. I don't believe for a minute people would prefer us to not be supporting each other.

[Amo]

Is this like one of the movies, where the cop gets kicked off the force but he's really sent undercover?

Also, that logo blows. I hope no one was paid to design that.

[K-Hod]

I just can't possibly understand how we took such giant strides forward as a fan base, now within a matter of days, there appears to be more division than ever. We've outdone ourselves this time!

[Mike Graham]

Mark, you are doing the right thing. The WAR grouping is sensible and a step forward. You do however risk failing to gain the support of a wider group of fans by exclusion of the very person who has got Venkys ownership back on the agenda. We all know Glen is passionate and perhaps shoots first and asks questions afterwards.....but would I rather have him on the inside, the answer is yes.

[JBiz]

Shall we forget about this Glen fiasco. He has, they have. Move on. We have bigger fish to fry.

Judging by the latest verbal diarrhoea to splurt out of the great opinion column printed in the Accy Obs it is only falling into both the hands of the owners and the hands of the "been there through worst" brigade to be arguing over such trivialities. Let's focus our energies elsewhere.

And jbizzle I value you as a poster but it pains me to see you say you agree with the dross in that blog. It's clear for all to see that he spouts such controversial hogwash to boost readership. He's become single handedly one of the most divisive figures in the BRFC fan base and, for the large part, seems more than happy to be doing so. Let's not allow your discontent to allow you to fall into the category of morbid apathetic do-gooders that he's trying to create. If there's any man that has done more for division over the past three weeks than Mike Cheston it is the (weary) 'Blue-eyed Boy' and his terrible blog.

Do you know what Dreams, it's bloody great to disagree with someone here without the average reaction! Good on you sir. Now that is patronising!

Point is though, fair enough. Of many fans I've spoken to, Jim or whatever he is called comes across well. He certainly isn't the only one with those views, and whilst I agree on some of the aspects of his wording - I don't think you can blame him for the division.

The division is caused by people putting different priorities in front of what the overall goal is. We all want the same.

I can understand some of the frustration throw at the lads at the top, but I (and anyone else) can be of the opinion that this is going to completely undermine any attempt at unity.

It's bloody frustrating to read for me, and looking at a few other posts - I'm not alone. That's exactly what that blog shows - a frustration that the fans (as a whole) seem incapable of seeing a bigger picture.

The goal is simple - sort the club out. Worrying about who "speaks for us" is irrelevant. I've never met Ste - but I don't see why it is important that I voted for him? The only thing of importance is the time and effort put in to achieve the set goal.

[47er]

I just can't possibly understand how we took such giant strides forward as a fan base, now within a matter of days, there appears to be more division than ever. We've outdone ourselves this time!

Can't you really understand it K-Hod? A massive own goal by the new committee.

Call for unity then pull the rug out from under it.

[mark1875]

Mark, you are doing the right thing. The WAR grouping is sensible and a step forward. You do however risk failing to gain the support of a wider group of fans by exclusion of the very person who has got Venkys ownership back on the agenda. We all know Glen is passionate and perhaps shoots first and asks questions afterwards.....but would I rather have him on the inside, the answer is yes.

I certainly am not excluding anyone, in my position of chairman of the BRFC Action Group, i will talk and work with anyone. W.A.R is simply an umbrella under which stands 4 existing organisations, talking and co-operating.

Nobody needs to 'sell' Glen Mullan to me, or tell me how knowledgeable he is and how brave he is. I lived and breathed this with Glen 24x7 for a long long time and nobody knows better than me what makes him tick and what he is capable of.

I'll be honest about Glen, and i'm sure he won't mind me saying this, but Glen acts and reacts quickly, at times before discussing things, he walked away from groups because he felt they held him back, and i guess at times they did....he didn't like to wait around for discussions and 'approval', because he just wanted to land a blow and more often than not, he landed them with effect. He made the decision that the freedom to act on his own worked better for him, and who can argue that this wasn't a good decision?

There is no exclusion, not to my knowledge.

[Hasta]

Agreed.

Ste is co-owner of this site, why shouldn't he participate. This site is not a membership organisation, it is made up of "activists" with different views.

My view on this is:

Four supporter groups have agreed to work together on a shared goal which is Venkys Out.

BRFCAG, Rovers Trust, Ewood Blues, BRFCS all agreed that there was areas where we could work together on this shared goal.

Each group put forward it's representatives to Co work with the other groups on possible shared initiatives. However each group still operates independently on a day to day basis on behalf of its membership. A new group has not been formed, a new committee has not been formed. It is four independent groups working together as and when there is a shared initiative.

No comment needed.

[USRoverME]

I'm a yank, never been to Ewood, heck, not sure I've ever met another Rovers fan in person, let alone anyone in charge of a group mentioned, or Glen. But, in reading this all... all I see is 2 opposite views, naturally enflamed by passion for Rovers.

The 2 views really are:

What happened at the open meeting vs. What some hoped would happen.

What some hoped WeAreRovers would be vs. What it is aiming to do.

Some folks wanted the open meeting to form a coordinated board to lead the charge and fight hard and actively to get #VenkysOut.

What happened was that the 4 groups self nominated by some means some folks to share info to work together, under a new name with new accounts and icons.

WeAreRovers isnt a bad thing. Getting 3 supporters groups (as noted BRFCS is not a true supporters group, as its a messageboard), all likely filled with folks wanting whats best for Rovers (even if the view on 'best' or how to get it, is different), formerly at odds with each other, willing to talk and work together... that cant be bad.

But its also less than the ideal some wanted.

I saw the questions Glen posted, and I see what the "top table" folks are saying, and to me its clear, there are 2 different expectations.

WeAreRovers cant, and wont be driving the bus. Its setup is not capable of it. No decision making powers, no process, nothing in their "mandate". Just a clearinghouse of ideas, a set of contact info. It will likely help folks get in touch with each other so the organic protests will have more outreach options, and likely, more backing, more chances.to find folks in advance to join in. But its not creating new ideas that the groups themselves were not already doing. At best, one of those contact info holders might be able to combine ideas, and merge similar events/protests.

What Glen and others wanted was an actively leading, elected, committee (or new group) that agressively led protests, persued media attention, investigated for leaks and more info on wrong doings, etc.

These types of efforts are still needed, and WeAreRovers might support them, (and doesn't or shouldn't preclude them) in fact, if brought to their attention, and there are resources in other groups that might be helpful. But WeAreRovers itself is essentially a paper company, and is setup to be incapable of it in and of itself.

To me, the sad part isnt that Glen M. isnt a part of WeAreRovers, Whether by his choice, or because of their percieved setup, or by an active refusal to include him. Frankly, based on his postings, I think he'd hate sitting in that role, too little action, too much talk.

The sad part is that there may be folks in the groups under the banner who have info or contacts, or skills that might help Glen's digging and aggressive approach, but, because of these differing views and beliefs, those contacts might not get made.

The real question, to me, isnt "why isnt glen involved?" The question should be, "if Glen needs help, or if someone under the banner has something that would help Glen, would WeAreRovers make that help/contact happen?"

If yes, why the key clicking *bleep*storm?

If no, then WAR misses the mark.

[Jock]

Is it worth hiring a box in the JW for the Wolves match? Are they expensive?

Just a thought that some suits could have a right go at our so called Directors.

[AggyBlue]

Can't you really understand it K-Hod? A massive own goal by the new committee.

Call for unity then pull the rug out from under it.

Yep. It all appears too cliquey. I think the fans wanted a new working group to be formed to push the limits not the same old faces who seem to have done sweet FA for the last few years.

It just seems the three groups ( I don't know why BRFCS is included) have jumped on the bandwagon to appear to be at the forefront of a renewed initiative.

[AllRoverAsia]

First attempt................

[AggyBlue]

First attempt

Crap?

Yes. It makes it look to outsiders like another supporters group

[AllRoverAsia]

First attempt................

I didn't think it could look any worse..................but I succeeded

[J*B]

First attempt................

Yep, absolutely terrible. Props for trying though.

[the original david brent]

Having just trawled through this thread, I cannot believe the criticism the likes of Ste B etc are getting for putting their heads above the paraphet and forming WAR. It's more than I have done; I couldn't be doing with the hassle. They should be commended. Just seems to be a few toothless tigers giving them grief.

Eddy you seem to be rather critical. Do you live in Blackburn or the local area? Could you commit to this task on a daily basis?

[USRoverME]

If anything, they need to think about the symbolic nature of the icon.

4 groups? Why not use 4 colors on the circle, not just 2, 1 for each group.

And given tje colors more meaning,

Blue n white, of course

Black is there

Add a "steel" color too?, nod to Uncle Jack and to strength?

Or use the red of the rose...

Simple can be fine, if it has meaning

[cmb211087]

If anything, they need to think about the symbolic nature of the icon.

4 groups? Why not use 4 colors on the circle, not just 2, 1 for each group.

And given tje colors more meaning,

Blue n white, of course

Black is there

Add a "steel" color too?, nod to Uncle Jack and to strength?

Or use the red of the rose...

Simple can be fine, if it has meaning

Blue white yellow black?

Obviously the club colours and the protest colours

[eddy11d]

Eddy you seem to be rather critical. Do you live in Blackburn or the local area? Could you commit to this task on a daily basis?

I just think that the way it's been done has been wrong right from the start. It seemed strange that this site has got a seat on WAR's committee (and we didn't even know which person was representing the site until Kamy told us yesterday), whilst WAR has actively tried to ignore someone like Glen.

To answer your questions, yes I do live here and no I'm not willing to 'put my head above the parapet' as you say (which is completely beside the point) but Glen will and for some reason he's been ostracised by a group that BRFCS are large part of. We should have a poll to see if the site still wants to be involved with WAR whilst it is excluding key members of the fight against Venkys.

[Claytons Left Boot]

If WAR is an umbrella under which stand the four organisations and BRFCS is one of those organisations, why then do we not have Ste B and Glen representing BRFCS?

Glen would therefore be involved and problem solved. Or is that too simple?

[yoda]

If WAR is an umbrella under which stand the four organisations and BRFCS is one of those organisations, why then do we not have Ste B and Glen representing BRFCS?

Glen would therefore be involved and problem solved. Or is that too simple?

Different Glen/Glenn

[Gav]

Different Glen/Glenn

Not if BRFCc puts forward Glen M as our rep along with Steb.

[yoda]

Not if BRFCc puts forward Glen M as our rep along with Steb.

Mmmmmmmmm,

interesting concept, do you think Glenn and Steb would go for it ?