WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[Herbie6590]

1 hour ago, Upside Down said:

Is that because whenever they interview you the bullshit that gets peddled gets put right?

Maybe not all media but generally when they get mentioned their absolute destruction of this club is glossed over at best. The majority of the stuff I see is from the like of that cretin McGuire telling us how fantastic they are.

I do my bit 😉

[Herbie6590]

1 hour ago, ABBEY said:

they don't? 

1 time only Andy bayes played into them .. sacked as a result

 

I’m not referencing local media for absolute clarity. The local reporters have a very fine line to tread in not burning bridges whilst writing something objective. 
Don’t envy them. 

[chaddyrovers]

14 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

I think he means Any Cryer, when he went to town on them and kean in a front page article titled "Time to go Steve" maybe?

He didn't last long at the LET after that.

Imagine Elliot doing that, for me he is the absolute worst "reporter" the LET has ever had.

The LT has to be very careful with Rovers and don't want to upset their relationship with them cos Rovers is major part of the people who view their websites. 

that's the situation. 

[Upside Down]

30 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

I’m not referencing local media for absolute clarity. The local reporters have a very fine line to tread in not burning bridges whilst writing something objective. 
Don’t envy them. 

Yeah I wasn't including the LET as they pretty much only exist because of Rovers.

Without the club the LET would be trying to get by on whatever classes as local news these days which is usually something like:

EXCLUSIVE! Lifelong heroin addict and mother of four switches to crack.

 

[ABBEY]

1 hour ago, Herbie6590 said:

I’m not referencing local media for absolute clarity. The local reporters have a very fine line to tread in not burning bridges whilst writing something objective. 
Don’t envy them. 

more respect if they stuck up for fans who after all are what footy is about.  Burn bridges big respect 

brown nose , no respect 

[ABBEY]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

The LT has to be very careful with Rovers and don't want to upset their relationship with them cos Rovers is major part of the people who view their websites. 

that's the situation. 

why ..

so happy clappers can clap. 

[ABBEY]

1 hour ago, Upside Down said:

Yeah I wasn't including the LET as they pretty much 

EXCLUSIVE! Lifelong heroin addict and mother of four switches to crack.

 

Mrs d of Pune..

 

 

if carlsburg did the venkygraph 

[arbitro]

I was checking for something on the Rovers Customer Charter and came across the item below. Can anybody confirm that these took place? I'm assuming the hastily convened meeting at Brockhall in January doesn't count as one.

During the 2023-24 season, the club will be creating a new Supporter Consultation group to discuss strategic matters.  This will consist of members of We Are The Rovers (Supporter Trust) and other supporter groups and key stakeholders.  Meetings will be held at least bi-annually with members of the Board and Senior Management Team in attendance.  We Are The Rovers (Supporter Trust) will invite members and fellow supporter groups to attend and manage attendance at the meeting.

 

[Mike Graham]

39 minutes ago, arbitro said:

I was checking for something on the Rovers Customer Charter and came across the item below. Can anybody confirm that these took place? I'm assuming the hastily convened meeting at Brockhall in January doesn't count as one.

During the 2023-24 season, the club will be creating a new Supporter Consultation group to discuss strategic matters.  This will consist of members of We Are The Rovers (Supporter Trust) and other supporter groups and key stakeholders.  Meetings will be held at least bi-annually with members of the Board and Senior Management Team in attendance.  We Are The Rovers (Supporter Trust) will invite members and fellow supporter groups to attend and manage attendance at the meeting.

 

Tony.  This is news to WATR.  Nothing discussed, nothing agreed.

[only2garners]

I know that there have been suggestions about setting up such a group for a little while now but it hasn’t happened yet (or if it has I wasn’t invited!). We have our next Fans Forum next week on 16th, postponed from tonight mostly because of me.

[arbitro]

1 hour ago, Mike Graham said:

Tony.  This is news to WATR.  Nothing discussed, nothing agreed.

Thanks Mike. It was strange that it referred specifically to 23/24 season. Will WATR be taking this up with the club and hopefully resurrect the Consultation Meetings?

[wilsdenrover]

Does anyone know by what date the club has to publish the below?

[Mike Graham]

52 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Thanks Mike. It was strange that it referred specifically to 23/24 season. Will WATR be taking this up with the club and hopefully resurrect the Consultation Meetings?

Both Duncan and I believe the supporter consultation meetings should return.

We have a WATR Board meeting next week with the new Board of 14 (plus Secretary) and will reach a formal WATR view and therefore put this to the Club.

[arbitro]

1 hour ago, Mike Graham said:

Both Duncan and I believe the supporter consultation meetings should return.

We have a WATR Board meeting next week with the new Board of 14 (plus Secretary) and will reach a formal WATR view and therefore put this to the Club.

With it being referenced in the Customer Charter and not happening it should be a one-sided conversation. Although I'm not a shareholder I understand from people that are that there haven't been any Shareholder Meetings since covid.I

Anyone would think they have something to hide. 😉

[RoversClitheroe]

4 hours ago, Mike Graham said:

Both Duncan and I believe the supporter consultation meetings should return.

We have a WATR Board meeting next week with the new Board of 14 (plus Secretary) and will reach a formal WATR view and therefore put this to the Club.

Be interested to hear the WATR view on the articles and fall out that occurred from the Rovers Women?

[J*B]

4 hours ago, lraC said:

It does feel like an opportunity missed after the last meeting and the questions asked.

I do believe that this site is a place where some further ideas, to take the club to task, via the trust, can be agreed.

I know there is a meeting soon and already on here, some call for clarity on certain things has been sought, so hopefully this is going to be forthcoming, as the last few days on here and beyond, does feel like there is a new groundswell of anger. 

I’ve hidden the original post because it breaks the sites rules.

HOWEVER, I wanted to post saying it’s easy to comment from the sidelines. I went to the WATR AGM meeting recently, a small turn out and honestly my unhappiness with the club was clearly in the minority. I didn’t really speak too much because it was clear my views on this club didn’t reflect the majority of the room. 

WATR have had space on their board for as long as I remember which they’ve struggled to fill until the latest AGM. WATR are having internal meetings and MOU meetings with the club. Thats a big commitment especially to those additionally working, raising a young family etc. 

One thing I’ve noticed - ever since the Action Group era - is there’s a lot of talkers and very few doers. A lot of people who say they’re willing to do something and ultimately, for whatever reason, never deliver. 

[Miller11]

57 minutes ago, J*B said:

I’ve hidden the original post because it breaks the sites rules.

HOWEVER, I wanted to post saying it’s easy to comment from the sidelines. I went to the WATR AGM meeting recently, a small turn out and honestly my unhappiness with the club was clearly in the minority. I didn’t really speak too much because it was clear my views on this club didn’t reflect the majority of the room. 

WATR have had space on their board for as long as I remember which they’ve struggled to fill until the latest AGM. WATR are having internal meetings and MOU meetings with the club. Thats a big commitment especially to those additionally working, raising a young family etc. 

One thing I’ve noticed - ever since the Action Group era - is there’s a lot of talkers and very few doers. A lot of people who say they’re willing to do something and ultimately, for whatever reason, never deliver. 

I missed the post(s) that are hidden, but in response to Carl’s quoted above:

Josh has made really valid and accurate points regarding space on the board, but it goes even further than that.

We are a democratic membership organisation. Anyone who feels WATR should be taking a different approach/implementing ideas raised on this message board - it costs £10 a year to join.

[Mike Graham]

1 hour ago, J*B said:

I’ve hidden the original post because it breaks the sites rules.

HOWEVER, I wanted to post saying it’s easy to comment from the sidelines. I went to the WATR AGM meeting recently, a small turn out and honestly my unhappiness with the club was clearly in the minority. I didn’t really speak too much because it was clear my views on this club didn’t reflect the majority of the room. 

WATR have had space on their board for as long as I remember which they’ve struggled to fill until the latest AGM. WATR are having internal meetings and MOU meetings with the club. Thats a big commitment especially to those additionally working, raising a young family etc. 

One thing I’ve noticed - ever since the Action Group era - is there’s a lot of talkers and very few doers. A lot of people who say they’re willing to do something and ultimately, for whatever reason, never deliver. 

There is a FF meeting next Tuesday evening.  There is also a meeting of the new WATR Board that night as well.  For information WATR are in discussion with the Club about the date of our next MoU meeting.

What is pleasing is that we now have a full compliment of elected Board members (14 plus a Secretary); the roles and responsibilities of each Board member have been drawn up and will be agreed or otherwise nest Tuesday, these will then be shared in the next membership newsletter.

I am not being controversial here but in answer to the comment from IraC that we should take ideas from this messageboard is not quite how we operate, however we do of course pick up a number of issues from here.  We are a membership based organisation and ultimately they decide albeit the Board are elected to deal with the day to day tasks.  We do get a lot of direct member feedback and I respond to this on a regular basis; it would be true to say that the feedback is almost universally supportive of engagement with the Club.  Our approach is that of the ‘critical friend’.

For information (not aimed at Josh) non of the Board members are paid, we don’t take out expenses and we often finish up subsidising activities.  We are all committed to Rovers and ensuring the Club survives when ownership and senior management changes as it ultimately will; the one consistent will be the Trust, as WATR, will be around when change happens.  It takes up a lot of our time but we do it because we all love Blackburn Rovers.  I am not going to directly answer a comment on another thread suggesting we are ‘super fans’ apart to say non of us are so called  ‘super fans’ (I definitely am not) but what we are is committed fans who are prepared to make a difference; we are doers, not talkers.   Being doers brings criticism and we will never please each and every supporter, nor do we aim to do so.

[Mattyblue]

End of the day is there a massive clamour out there for them to sell? Not that I’ve seen.

Most fans seem content enough to plod on indefinitely with these owners, so it’s no surprise that J*B held a minority view at the AGM, as his view is a standard brfcs one, and as we know this place is definitely out of step with the majority of the fanbase 

[RevidgeBlue]

2 hours ago, Mike Graham said:

There is a FF meeting next Tuesday evening.  There is also a meeting of the new WATR Board that night as well.  For information WATR are in discussion with the Club about the date of our next MoU meeting.

What is pleasing is that we now have a full compliment of elected Board members (14 plus a Secretary); the roles and responsibilities of each Board member have been drawn up and will be agreed or otherwise nest Tuesday, these will then be shared in the next membership newsletter.

I am not being controversial here but in answer to the comment from IraC that we should take ideas from this messageboard is not quite how we operate, however we do of course pick up a number of issues from here.  We are a membership based organisation and ultimately they decide albeit the Board are elected to deal with the day to day tasks.  We do get a lot of direct member feedback and I respond to this on a regular basis; it would be true to say that the feedback is almost universally supportive of engagement with the Club.  Our approach is that of the ‘critical friend’.

For information (not aimed at Josh) non of the Board members are paid, we don’t take out expenses and we often finish up subsidising activities.  We are all committed to Rovers and ensuring the Club survives when ownership and senior management changes as it ultimately will; the one consistent will be the Trust, as WATR, will be around when change happens.  It takes up a lot of our time but we do it because we all love Blackburn Rovers.  I am not going to directly answer a comment on another thread suggesting we are ‘super fans’ apart to say non of us are so called  ‘super fans’ (I definitely am not) but what we are is committed fans who are prepared to make a difference; we are doers, not talkers.   Being doers brings criticism and we will never please each and every supporter, nor do we aim to do so.

Each to their own but I think the situation at the Club over the last 12 months or so has gone way beyond that where you adopting a stance of "Critical friend" is required.

Is there anything specific to lead you to think there will be a change of ownership? Prior to the recent shift in the financial landscape I wouldn't necessarily have expected a change in my lifetime (I'm 60) and even now I think they may try to ride things out.

[lraC]

4 hours ago, J*B said:

I’ve hidden the original post because it breaks the sites rules.

HOWEVER, I wanted to post saying it’s easy to comment from the sidelines. I went to the WATR AGM meeting recently, a small turn out and honestly my unhappiness with the club was clearly in the minority. I didn’t really speak too much because it was clear my views on this club didn’t reflect the majority of the room. 

WATR have had space on their board for as long as I remember which they’ve struggled to fill until the latest AGM. WATR are having internal meetings and MOU meetings with the club. Thats a big commitment especially to those additionally working, raising a young family etc. 

One thing I’ve noticed - ever since the Action Group era - is there’s a lot of talkers and very few doers. A lot of people who say they’re willing to do something and ultimately, for whatever reason, never deliver. 

Josh,

Sorry for breaking the site rules, I had no intention to do that and if you can PM me and let me know what I did, I will ensure I do not purposely do that again.

I take on board any criticism aimed at me, but would point out to you and to others, who maybe have taken any offence at my post, that I have got off my backside and taken Waggott to task over certain things and although I can't say very much about it now, also made certain people who will be judging the owners quite soon, fully aware of some of the apparent misdemeanours that have gone on over the last 14 years.

As people who know me on here know, I am not able to attend many meetings or matches for that matter, due to where I live, but do try to do my bit when, both from afar and in person, when I am in the UK. 

[lraC]

3 hours ago, Miller11 said:

I missed the post(s) that are hidden, but in response to Carl’s quoted above:

Josh has made really valid and accurate points regarding space on the board, but it goes even further than that.

We are a democratic membership organisation. Anyone who feels WATR should be taking a different approach/implementing ideas raised on this message board - it costs £10 a year to join.

Hi Duncan,

Please see the post above, in response to Josh.

You are certainly aware of what I am saying in most of that post and as mentioned, do not have any problem with any criticism, aimed at me. 

[roversfan99]

There is definitely a lot of presumably non members demanding action which to me is unfair.

I am not a member and from the outside the group seem to be very pally with Waggott etc and his charm seems to be working on them where they start singing from the same hymn sheet. You see the response to season tickets whereby minor changes to pricing that ultimately wont move the dial are painted as a huge success story driven by the group. There is clearly a desire to want to feel important and valued and as if they are making a big difference. But a lot of spare time must be spent so you can somewhat understand it.

Ultimately I dont believe that anything they do will make any difference, bar more trivial matters like matchday experience. The culprits are in India unaware of such meetings. 

[ABBEY]

4 hours ago, J*B said:

I’ve hidden the original post because it breaks the sites rules.

HOWEVER, I wanted to post saying it’s easy to comment from the sidelines. I went to the WATR AGM meeting recently, a small turn out and honestly my unhappiness with the club was clearly in the minority. I didn’t really speak too much because it was clear my views on this club didn’t reflect the majority of the room. 

WATR have had space on their board for as long as I remember which they’ve struggled to fill until the latest AGM. WATR are having internal meetings and MOU meetings with the club. Thats a big commitment especially to those additionally working, raising a young family etc. 

One thing I’ve noticed - ever since the Action Group era - is there’s a lot of talkers and very few doers. A lot of people who say they’re willing to do something and ultimately, for whatever reason, never deliver. 

I wouldn't sit down with maggot for anything..I'd end up doing time. 

been twatted by coppers , threatened , spat on  , personally I took health route to help my health and Mrs health by not  being a " doer" . 

any big protests I'm in but sitting down with any venky rats no thanks I'd rather watch love island with dingles 

[Miller11]

41 minutes ago, lraC said:

Hi Duncan,

Please see the post above, in response to Josh.

You are certainly aware of what I am saying in most of that post and as mentioned, do not have any problem with any criticism, aimed at me. 

No criticism aimed at you Carl, just making the point that if people want the Supporters Trust to act in a certain way they need to be a member.