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

[eddy11d]

This keeps coming up so I'll take it.

I manage the Social Media of the Rovers Trust. I work nights shifts. I set many of our posts on schedules for during the day, and whilst I did briefly see this one doing the rounds, I was worried about the legal ramifications attached with the sort of allegations contained therein.

Rightly or wrongly, I chose not to officially Retweet the article using the Rovers Trust account for that very reason. That said, the article has done an astounding trek across the internet without our promotion.

I hope that helps answer your question.

Get a grip for god sake, like you can get into trouble for retweeting an article.

[Jock]

There is always room for spontaneous and maverick protest actions...I'm sure WAR wouldn't want to preclude these nor could they control them.

Who's up for self-immolation in the centre circle at the Wolves game?

He likes this post.

[glen9mullan]

Get a grip for god sake, like you can get into trouble for retweeting an article.

If it was not safe it wouldnt of gone press. I would also have a legal letter as would the writer etc.

Done for RT, jeez , You could'nt make it up.

[47er]

Well, that's not the way four different supporters groups see it Glen, but we can agree to differ while respecting each others efforts toward the same outcome.

There's a lot of very good, very talented people who have put a lot of time and effort into getting rid of the Venky's, including yourself, but none of us have succeeded yet so it's bit much to claim we have been doing nothing!

The above post is very much in your style and, personally, I find this highly public, high maintenance approach off-putting. But, maybe that's just me.

I'll remind you and everyone else that no-one gets paid, we've all got demanding day jobs and families and we are all simply trying to do something positive and useful, however small or large.

Repeatedly having a go at other fans, or trying to make it personal, is not a sensible course for any of us to follow. That's why we've got together under the We Are Rovers banner. It's not about me or other members of the Rovers Trust, BRFCAG, Ewood Blues or brfcs.com - with you it always, in the end, seems to be about you.

The first time I spoke to Glen, and this is years ago, he was in the middle of trying to raise a few hundred quid to have someone followed! He hadn't been to bed for days but he willingly spent an hour on the phone putting me in the picture. And we had never met!

If you are going to wear his mantle, you have an awful lot to live up to.

I suggest you co-opt him pronto and use him rather than spend months trying to catch up.

Since so many of us feel this way, it is in Rovers interests, not yours perhaps but definitely Rovers.

[Athlete]

sounds like

Willies

Are

Rising

Willie waving as well... It's about egos

With Glens findings it's not just about venkys the club is more complicated owned

[Crimpshrine]

It's 40 years since the first Ramones album was released and today you see pensioners and teenagers and all ages in between wearing Ramones Tee shirts.

They weren't the best musicians in the world but they turned the music world upside down.

It nearly never happened because Johnny and Joey actually hated each other and hardly spoke.

They put all this aside for the common cause of the band they loved. So much so that people thought they were actaully brothers. Look what they achieved.

We're all Rovers fans. We have a common cause. We all want Venky's gone - When that day comes it will be as sweet as winning the premier league.

There is some momentum at the moment and we need to maintain it but we also need to be together.

Hey ho lets go #Venkysout

[47er]

I'm guessing Ste is representing BRFCS. It can only be him and/or Glenn, I assume?

edit

[grizfoot]

It's great to see things are being moved forward and that there's now at least a name in the "We Are Rovers" for all fans to get behind, Simon Garner giving his backing publicly to the movement is very positive indeed and hopefully more former players will speak out.

But I must admit I was of the view that some sort of separate committee would be formed to lead this movement. As it stands all that's been created is a banner, a name for the existing groups to work under with the vague promises of "sharing resources" and such like. But I really thought the idea of the open meeting was to let all the fans have a voice, whether they be part of a group or not. The way the thing is set up at the moment seems to me weighted towards people who are already in prominent positions in their respective groups to make decisions on behalf of everyone else.

What I want to know is who exactly is going to organise, deal with all the ideas and questions being put forward by the fans. Is it a matter of a combined effort from people at The Trust and BRFCAG? If so is that going to be any different than the regular channels that these groups would be contacted on? What is going to change now we have this "We Are Rovers" alliance is it simply a matter of working together to be as effective as possible?

I must say I'm not a fan of the logo either, in what way does that represent Blackburn Rovers fans at all? I'm guessing the idea is that it is merely a circle, which is to represent unity? But I honestly think a number of logos should be made and along with the existing one to be put upto a vote to decide.

It's wonderful to see so many people putting time and effort into fighting for the future of this football club. Keep up the good work everyone.

[JHRover]

I've not really contributed much to these discussions in the last few days as there's very little I feel I can add to the 'debate' about the way forward.

The way I look at it is that the WAR group is not about any individuals. It is a collective 'banner' that applies to a number of influential supporter groups and so in theory a sizeable chunk of the support base will be represented through their elected committees.

I don't really understand the need to descend into squabbling over this and that or over whether some people should be leading this group.

The way I've understood it is that every single Rovers supporter has the ability to contribute to this 'WAR' campaign if they so wish. If you are a 15 year old or 75 year old, if you someone who is privy to lots of important information or wouldn't know Mrs Desai if you walked past her in Blackburn shopping centre. It really shouldn't matter.

If people want to be elected or what to be a Chairman or leader then put yourselves forward to lead the Action Group or Ewood Blues in competition to the existing leadership. The whole concept here seems to be that WAR won't have a leadership other than the elected heads of the groups coming together.

I'm not going to criticise any of those who have gone to the trouble of getting WAR off the ground. The most obvious thing from last Thursday's meet was the need to come up with some sort of canvas for the various groups and ideas and this is what the outcome has been, in less than a week. It looks to me like a lot of effort has gone into setting it up in a professional manner and an important step on gaining publicity and momentum is to get someone with the weight of Simon Garner to release what I thought was a very good statement in the Lancashire Telegraph.

Its very simple really. If you want to contribute and feel there is something useful you can add to the campaign to get Venkys out then get in touch with WAR or the various supporter groups that feed into it. If you don't want to contribute, don't think its going to make any difference or don't feel you can help then don't do anything. WAR have been inviting all supporters online to put their views across and suggest courses of action. Anyone on Facebook or Twitter can very easily throw suggestions forward.

Of course there will be some procedural issues along the way and there needs to be a way to get the message over to those who don't access the internet very often, but at least now there ought to be one recognisable banner and logo for the campaign, hopefully in some ways similar to the CARD at Charlton and Tangerine Knights at Blackpool.

I don't see how this can be a negative. It might not achieve anything, in my honest opinion I don't think it will, but I commend those who are trying and who have gone to the effort and it must be worth a try. Worst case scenario is that it doens't achieve its goal of getting rid of the Indians, which is no different to what we've had the last 5 years with a more fragmented approach with various groups pulling at times in different directions

[AllRoverAsia]

Also posted in the 'Articles' thread

News is spreading and someone has done their homework at fansnetwork.co.uk

''Now the only question that really matters is exactly how much of Blackburn Rovers as we know it is going to be left when this shameful episode in British football’s recent history is over? If indeed there’s anything left at all.''

''If ever there was a case to be made for rules permitting league or FA intervention, seizing ownership of clubs being run in this manner, appointing an independent board and management team to oversee the restoration of sanity and sound business practice before eventually selling it back into the private sector once more then this is it.''

http://www.fansnetwo...ers/news/43756/

http://www.fansnetwo...ers/news/43755/

[mark1875]

Hi... whoever you are - edit, just seen above. Hi Neil. . I make it 19:30.

Question 1) what is the groups plan RE Venkys. will they continue the work which has been done previously in trying to find evidence of illegal activities that force the FA to act?

Straight forward answer - Yes.

The BRFC Action Group itself has never stopped trying to open doors in this field and will continue to do so. We now have four organisations working together and many resources can be called upon and pooled together to aid this. I'll use an example, the night before the open floor meeting, when we had a planning meeting, and the chairman of one of the groups put me on the telephone to somebody i had been trying to contact for months without success. Just like that, a coming together of the groups proving instantly that working together is more beneficial than bickering.

[perthblue02]

Can we get the low down on who is actually on the steering committee, how many from each of the 4?

Just thinking, if it is numbers based BRFCS needs more than 1 , and maybe the membership of BRFCS can propose via a online vote a 2nd representative from its membership

Hypothetical Question: if a proposal is put forward and seconded by trust members for the trust AGM which I presume will be in October for a vote of no confidence in certain individuals , if this motion goes through will they also have to vacate their place on the WAR committee as they do not have a mandate from the trust members to represent them?

[mark1875]

What is going to be done differently now that wasn't tried in 2012 or 2013?

Can we be assured that action to remove Venky's will continue even if they sack Owen Coyle and bring in somebody better, such as Neil Warnock? Are all the groups committed to a long-haul fight, as opposed to suddenly making a u-turn and calling for calm and "getting behind the lads" should the owners make a rare positive decision such as the Paul Lambert appointment?

Rest assured, it is Venkys Out, no matter who is the manager. The BRFC Action Group is committed to that cause, i cannot speak for the other organisations but i speak with complete confidence when i state that the message from W.A.R will be loud and consistent until the day the club has new ownership.

In my opinion, we need a form of protest at every game- not just Wolves.

Theres plenty of ideas for protests - it needs some co-ordination to have a mechanism for these to be put forward, debated, and agreed upon. Maybe thats a twitter poll, a poll on here etc, but someone needs to organise it.

Baz i agree. A consistent message is required and the co-ordination of it is something that is being worked on.

Will there be protests arranged or organised for boycotting fans who will not under any circumstances enter the ground?

I know this question was answered and you didn't think it was answered properly, so i shall state firmly that the answer is yes - protests will be organised for boycotting supporters.

I hold daily conversations with people who are boycotting who wish to protest, but refuse to enter to protest. Middle ground needs to be found, but protests need numbers and they must include both boycotting and attending supporters to be effective.

did the action group vote yay or nay for Glen on the top table?

was it open ballot or secret?

The BRFC Action Group did not vote in any ballot to Glen being on a 'top table', neither openly or in secret. There simply was no ballot.

It is important people understand that this is not a new forum, or a new group, or a new committee. This is members of existing committees opening dialogue and working together on initiatives, whilst continuing in our roles on the committee of the groups we represent.

[mark1875]

Sounds to me that there are NO real plans for protests inside the ground - except for the 18 75 protests which were already on the table - which is disappointing.

My fear with all this, is that it takes away the spontaneity of the fans, replacing that with more of a "we'll make the decisions" approach. There is room for protests here and abroad, you should encourage both approaches IMO.

As i answered above Den, the message needs to be consistent.

Planned, organised protests alongside spontaneous protests should be happening in my opinion. I would encourage everybody right now to do what they feel they should do, what makes them comfortable.

You will have supporters who:

• Want to hold a banner for 90 minutes and sing Venkys Out all game
• Want to support the team but will join in any planned protest to support the numbers
• Will protest at the ground, but won't enter it
• Blow whistles, release balloons, tennis balls, paper planes
• Support the team for 90 minute, then vent their anger outside the players/directors entrance after the game

Various people with differing ideas - but what is wrong with everyone doing what they feel is right - numerous protests occurring consistently.

The important thing is - people must respect each others right to do what they feel, no abusing people for holding a banner, no calling people 'happy-clappers' for supporting the team, this causing infighting and plays right into the owners hands.

We will be discussing protests a lot over the coming days and weeks, but my message is clear, if you want to do something and are comfortable doing it - then do it!

Not impressed - we need a steering committee that has a mandate. Four unelected groups....no way, I'm a lawyer, so what? Put the candidates up for election, clear ambitions, all the fan base can vote for, not just this board. I know loads of lapsed fans who have no idea of this board or what is going on.

I'm out.

Up for election to what?

Sadly, you are spot on Stuart.

I don't really care what politics are stopping Glens involvement but this fight, to get rid of Venkys, is going to take as many committed and dedicated people as possible. I don't know Glen, never met him but his actions over the last few years suggest he would be the first person you'd want in a group with this aim.

This is not a new group. This is groups working together and Glen chose to no longer be part of any of the groups he represented.

Have WAR asked NYC Rovers for input?

Contact with all overseas groups is being made.

[mark1875]

I've only met Glen a couple of times and I found him to be a good character. The main thing that got me was his passion. In the 6 years since the "business people" from India took over he has been a constant. There were only 100 of so of us at Havelock on that first protest march (and a dog) and I remember Glen really kicking things on from there. I don't remember seeing some of the people on committees out that day.

Like him or loathe him, he's stuck his neck out and published all he has. I must admit, I have loads to say but probably delete ¾ of I out of fear of getting in trouble. I am sure most Rovers fans feel the same. At least Glen had the guts to put his name in lights. For that he should be applauded.

I hope that WAR goes onto achieve its goals and units the fans. What I don't want is it to be the professional mouth piece of a lobbying group for a consortium.

I recall the day too, and i was there - as i always was. I remember about 8 of us stood at Brockhall protesting, asking the guys at sky to report that there was more of us!!!

I echo your sentiments on Glen, he does and continues to work tirelessly for this football club, and should be applauded for that

[perthblue02]

The BRFC Action Group did not vote in any ballot to Glen being on a 'top table', neither openly or in secret. There simply was no ballot.

That is fair enough , but lets have the name(s) of the person/people who made the decision and why, enough bloody problems with Venky's not being open and transparent without supporters joining in.

[mark1875]

Call it a committee, an umbrella group or a coming together of minds... Someone is always at the top... Who is it?

This is all new, it is still very much in its infancy and a lot of work needs to go into making this fruitful.

However, i shall try my best to explain how it works, or at least has done for now.

First and foremost to me, is the BRFC Action Group and consultation with our committee, that comes first and no decision could ever be made that went against the groups constitution, but we will work with all other organisations for the best interests of Blackburn Rovers, which is what we are doing.

Daily contact is kept up between the committee members of each group, where ideas and proposals are discussed.

A meeting was held on Monday, between myself, Wayne and Birdy. As chairmen of the organisations we felt the need to discuss and try and thrash out many things such as communication channels, the press release, the Wolves game, the open floor etc etc. Myself, Wayne, Birdy and now Ste all maintain contact throughout each day. However if you want me to say Wayne makes all the decisions, or I do, or Birdy does, then this simply is not the case....There is no chairman or leader here.

Fortunately so far, things have been pretty straight forward and most things have been agreed on easily throughout. There is no doubt this won't always be the case, but the mindset has to be that Blackburn Rovers is first and foremost.

I think this is a big step, gone are the days where open arguments occur on the internet, lets have the debates and move on for the good of the club, show a united front moving forward and pool our resources together for the fight that lies ahead, that is what We Are Rovers is all about.

Genuine question.

If an idea is put forward for a protest at a game that has no safety, legal etc concerns - who decides if it is backed by WAR, and can 1 of the 4 parties veto the decision. Is it a majority decision, does it go to a on-line poll etc?

If its a good idea, it'll be discussed and public opinion will be gauged on it.

I can only again speak for the BRFC Action Group when i say that if plenty of supporters want to do something, then the group will help promote it or facilitate it as much as possible

As for WAR if they continue to seemingly exclude the involvement of certain fans then I cannot support it.

If it becomes an inclusive organisation and forum for uniting the entire fanbase then it will have my full support.

Myself, Glen and PrestonBlue are meeting this week to go through our plans for the proposed trip to Pune next month, if it goes ahead then I am sure we will feedback our findings to everyone.

I am very disappointed Kamy that you are unable to support the co-operation and dialogue of multiple supporter groups.

I recall times when you have encouraged this, you have seen arguments and squabbling between groups and urged them to iron out their differences and work together - and when it happens, you cant offer it your support.

Real shame.

I've no intention of stopping doing what I'm doing at all.

It would however be a slight kick in the teeth if after promises from various people that they would get in touch about moving forward with venkysout.com that they then go and do their own thing whilst trying to send out the same messages and attract the same audience.

Matt, i have been busy with work all week, which is why i am catching up on this site before i go to bed, at this ungodly hour. You have my word, i will be in touch mate.

So can 1 of the 4 groups veto a 'WAR' protest?

I hope, that should the supporters call for something, then it will receive the backing of all groups!

Not one of the official group accounts have as of the last time I checked.

I should be more specific.

This story.

http://b-a-b.uk/2cwVwNd

A complete oversight by me and Paul, i honestly thought this had been retweeted by the group.

so will you tweet it now?

I just have, it was a genuine oversight.

[mark1875]

Can we get the low down on who is actually on the steering committee, how many from each of the 4?

Just thinking, if it is numbers based BRFCS needs more than 1 , and maybe the membership of BRFCS can propose via a online vote a 2nd representative from its membership

Hypothetical Question: if a proposal is put forward and seconded by trust members for the trust AGM which I presume will be in October for a vote of no confidence in certain individuals , if this motion goes through will they also have to vacate their place on the WAR committee as they do not have a mandate from the trust members to represent them?

There isn't a steering committee in place as such to be honest. It has been suggested that if and when a meeting happens, it should be a couple from each organisation.

I'm sure Ste will discuss the BRFCS vote with you?

Again there isn't as such a W.A.R committee to vacate from, but essentially your point is correct.

That is fair enough , but lets have the name(s) of the person/people who made the decision and why, enough bloody problems with Venky's not being open and transparent without supporters joining in.

I'm afraid i am not privy to the emails between Glen and the Trust, nor am i aware of any decision being taken. Glen has emailed me, i have read the email and i replied acknowledging it with my intention to reply after work - which i will be doing once i have caught up on this site before i go to bed.

[perthblue02]

Thanks for taking the time to answer the many questions Mark

[blue kiwi]

the 1st thing that came to my mind when i saw blackburn enders name is he a relation of Alf Thornton?as for GM being left out of the group,he obviously has had a fall out with one of the waynes,work or private life.But at this moment in time the senca bid is the only one on the table and surely if GM has to be the sacrificial lamb,its for a worthy cause.

[mark1875]

Thanks for taking the time to answer the many questions Mark

I will always try to be as transparent and open as i possibly can, i've never been any different.

[Stuart]

the end result is 4 groups are talking in same room and have sorted their differences which is progress for them.

It should be the start.

There isn't a steering committee in place as such to be honest. It has been suggested that if and when a meeting happens, it should be a couple from each organisation.

It doesn't sound like there is much momentum behind this, Mark.

[Ricky]

So you voted no?

I think we all talk same Language on same hymnn sheet, but its important people listen to the fans, ignoring people just turns them off.

Hence why this should not be group lead but supporter lead. I.e you are Ste , Not Ste representing BRFCS , whilst its panel should be supporter elected. I know more than most what flack a self elected voice gets, as i got loads prior to forming action group.

The negativity from certain people was on their twitter feeds before i even got home. Meaning no one was actually listened to

Glen, I don't think Steve is actually talking about you when he's talking about a popular poster. Someone who was banned some time ago for very valid reasons spoke at the open meeting and wanted to be allowed back on the site. I was a mod when he was banned so I can completely understand why he wasn't allowed back.

It's not all about you Glen

I've not really commented much on this but my initial comment was that I didn't think there should be the creation of a new group and that the aim should be to unite all groups and get them working together. That seems to have been achieved and it's something that everyone has wanted for a long time.

I can see why Glen's not involved at the moment as he's no longer involved with the 4 groups involved. If he was still involved in one of the groups he would be.

However, and I know we've not always agreed on his approach, I believe that there will be a place and time where Glen is involved. My belief is that the groups working together need to recognise people outside of those groups who can contribute and make a difference. People like Madon, Glen and Kamy. It would be stupid to ignore what these people can offer.

[Paul]

I was really pleased to see last Thursday's meeting take place. Good to see old friends for one thing.

Sadly I've a huge sense of deja vu at the moment. People are having to answer a barrage of questions, absolutely nothing wrong with fans having these questions, when their time would better be used on the campaign. It points to a lack of clarity and organisation which sadly was evident a week ago.

The last 2-3 weeks have been really exciting. Finally information which has necessarily been held back is out there - the biggest step forward in years. On the back of this we have fund raising to help take things even further in to the Raos backyard. Long may this continue.

It's clear from posts on here who are the people responsible for achieving this. Well done and keep it going.

I've read about possible leafleting fans at Ewood and an alternative programme. If whoever is organising this wants help with distribution I'm ready to stand on a street to help.

As for the rest of it? Disappointed. I'd hoped for more.

[Paul]

Glen, I don't think Steve is actually talking about you when he's talking about a popular poster. Someone who was banned some time ago for very valid reasons spoke at the open meeting and wanted to be allowed back on the site. I was a mod when he was banned so I can completely understand why he wasn't allowed back..

Really pleased to see Ricky has the same opinion as me. I'm 100% certain Ste's remark was not a reference to "voting" - everyone says there hasn't been one - against Glen but was referring to a banned member from BRFCS.