WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[arbitro]

15 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

yes you mentioned several times 

I'm really not sure why you would post something so antagonistic. It adds nothing to any debate.

[chaddyrovers]

14 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Point being, the Committee do not, and have never balloted the membership for their strategic decisions. Current said strategy being 'critical friends' of the club. So flip it round and they no longer want to be friends, as they are instead asking for Swag's removal, presumably they won't be asking the membership about it first...

I understand your point and you want a say in the strategy of the WATR group. 

1 minute ago, arbitro said:

I'm really not sure why you would post something so antagonistic. It adds nothing to any debate.

not sure why you think I am being hostility or actively opposition cos I'm not, but I understand what Matty is saying and Somewhat agreed that Members should have a say

[arbitro]

40 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I understand your point and you want a say in the strategy of the WATR group. 

not sure why you think I am being hostility or actively opposition cos I'm not, but I understand what Matty is saying and Somewhat agreed that Members should have a say

Read your post back to yourself.

[Upside Down]

On 20/01/2025 at 21:42, chaddyrovers said:

What going to be achieve by that vote? 

The Trust officially taking a stance on what is happening. Drum up some more attention to what's happening here. There has to be a point at which they say enough.

I've no idea what the trust's position is, they've bemoaned the small membership in the past yet there is no democratic involvement with the small membership that currently exists.

[Bethnal]

10 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

The Trust officially taking a stance on what is happening. Drum up some more attention to what's happening here. There has to be a point at which they say enough.

I've no idea what the trust's position is, they've bemoaned the small membership in the past yet there is no democratic involvement with the small membership that currently exists.

The Trust - as far as I can tell - is just a vehicle for their board members to participate in a shadow board. Which is appropriate, as they both do fuck all to help.

Honestly, never underestimate people’s need to feel important. 

[Upside Down]

7 minutes ago, Bethnal said:

The Trust - as far as I can tell - is just a vehicle for their board members to participate in a shadow board. Which is appropriate, as they both do fuck all to help.

Honestly, never underestimate people’s need to feel important. 

Even them pulling back their presence on here is piss poor TBH.

I know there's some real effort put in by some of the folk involved but there's absolutely no engagement with the membership.

[RoversClitheroe]

10 hours ago, Upside Down said:

Even them pulling back their presence on here is piss poor TBH.

I know there's some real effort put in by some of the folk involved but there's absolutely no engagement with the membership.

Agreed.

Ive not been asked my stance once I don't think.

Time for BRFCs to make a Rovers Trust that holds the club to account.

[Herbie6590]

3 hours ago, RoversClitheroe said:

 

Time for BRFCs to make a Rovers Trust that holds the club to account.

The Who Trusts The Trust Trust…

[RevidgeBlue]

So despite assurances it looks fairly certain there'll be no backing for the manager this window and that yet another golden opportunity has gone begging.

Furthermore the current approach of selling off any talent and not reinvesting any of the proceeds in the playing side is obviously not sustainable for much longer and frankly I feel we are one poor managerial appointment away from oblivion.

Is it not time for the Trust to ballot its members on re-evaluating its stance towards the Club?

[Moptop1]

1 hour ago, RevidgeBlue said:

So despite assurances it looks fairly certain there'll be no backing for the manager this window and that yet another golden opportunity has gone begging.

Furthermore the current approach of selling off any talent and not reinvesting any of the proceeds in the playing side is obviously not sustainable for much longer and frankly I feel we are one poor managerial appointment away from oblivion.

Is it not time for the Trust to ballot its members on re-evaluating its stance towards the Club?

That won’t be done until it’s all too late. 

[Herbie6590]

5 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

So despite assurances it looks fairly certain there'll be no backing for the manager this window and that yet another golden opportunity has gone begging.

Furthermore the current approach of selling off any talent and not reinvesting any of the proceeds in the playing side is obviously not sustainable for much longer and frankly I feel we are one poor managerial appointment away from oblivion.

Is it not time for the Trust to ballot its members on re-evaluating its stance towards the Club?

If I was a member...for transparency I am not...I would be requesting a lot more structured feedback be collected from the membership on a range of issues.

[Mike E]

Engagement from WATR is far below what it was from RT.

[RoversClitheroe]

The silence is deafening.

[lraC]

3 minutes ago, MCMC1875 said:

On 4th August, Pasha agreed to the reinstatement of mandatory Consultation Meetings to fend off a vote of no confidence by the Trust, much to the delight of Mike Graham and Duncan Miller. 6 months later: no Consultation Meetings.
It was the one and only time they had Pasha on the rack. 

Bottlers.

That was a big opportunity missed in my opinion.

Any comment from the Trust on this?

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Fiddling whilst Ewood Burns.Are they really fit for purpose?

[RoversClitheroe]

20 hours ago, lraC said:

That was a big opportunity missed in my opinion.

Any comment from the Trust on this?

I'm cancelling my membership

[TugaysMarlboro]

I first signed up for WATR was during the fan takeover against Watford during JDT's reign.

To be frank, the communication has been pretty abysmal.

Initially I didn't receive any newsletters for 8 months and had to chase twice for an update. I appreciate everyone volunteers for the role but it's not a great look giving even a small amount of money, to then feel forgotten about.

 

 

[Mattyblue]

Their comms has been terrible for years, like you I’ve often had to chase to just be on the mailing list.

[lraC]

No communication on here and there were/are posters, who should be able to at least give some basic feedback, but nothing.

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, lraC said:

No communication on here and there were/are posters, who should be able to at least give some basic feedback, but nothing.

Are Mike Graham and Duncan Miller regular posters? 

What feedback are you expecting? 

[MarkBRFC]

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

Are Mike Graham and Duncan Miller regular posters? 

Seemed to be when the Ewood fan takeover day against Watford was happening, or when the £50 discount on ST's was being fairly well received.

Edited February 5 by MarkBRFC

[Mattyblue]

£30 off, wasn’t it? (Mine on early bird went from £379 to £349).

Though the way they crowed about it you’d think they were half price…

[MarkBRFC]

Correct it was £30 off, giving them too much credit there!

[lraC]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Are Mike Graham and Duncan Miller regular posters? 

What feedback are you expecting? 

They certainly were regular posters on here (remember Miller 11?) and know that there is potential amongst the membership on here, to increase their membership.

Given what has been said on here in the past and in particular the announcement that they had issued a vote of no confidence in Pasha, which in turn triggered a meeting with a fan group for the very first time, then that is what i was expecting feedback on.

Would you be posting feedback on a site last this, if you were looking to expand the membership and get some dialogue with the clubs decision makers?

[Herbie6590]

On 04/02/2025 at 12:41, TugaysMarlboro said:

I first signed up for WATR was during the fan takeover against Watford during JDT's reign.

To be frank, the communication has been pretty abysmal.

Initially I didn't receive any newsletters for 8 months and had to chase twice for an update. I appreciate everyone volunteers for the role but it's not a great look giving even a small amount of money, to then feel forgotten about.

 

 

Those small amounts of money soon add up though…