Mattyblue

Why would I be offended. But I take it you agree that those who will attend are not complicit with the owners?

Speedie Gonna Get Ya (member of Coalition) said ‘If you are content with the current ownership and the way the club is being run then attend’, that is complicity re-worded.

Yes, it makes perfect sense. Not sure why you are finding this so difficult. But once again: The Coalition needs support, there’s nobody else that’s going to front it and campaigns take many steps, so I’m happy to do my bit… but I think they should have chosen a different game and I don’t like language like ‘complicit’ aimed at anybody that doesn’t take part. Guess what, life and the decisions you make aren’t always easy, aren’t always black and white.

Well, no, you don’t have skin in the game for this particular protest as it’s an ask of people who do go, to not, as you already don’t you are a bystander, sorry. This is a place to exchange views. Unfortunately for you the thread hasn’t been locked after one post of ‘great idea, just get behind the Coalition FFS’. I’m going to do what’s being asked of me on the 24th and I’m a paid up member of one of the Coalition groups, so if I and others want to post an opinion (‘carping’ in your world) on a message board on what could be done differently, what might have been more effective, we will… and others are free to disagree, like Speedie further up, but at least they are doing it respectfully.

Pretty sure today is the first time I’ve even mentioned Suhail et al as being ‘the winner’, and that was after Herbie did, go after somebody else for once (you know, people that, unlike me, aren’t actually doing what’s being asked of them on the 24th) as being lectured to by somebody that doesn’t even go in the first place and ergo has no decision to make is getting tiresome.

So like I was saying the Coalition are struggling with the mindset of a lot of match goers. There are plenty in that ground that have no truck with the owners whatsoever, but they would not countenance not supporting the team. You can debate the rights and wrongs of that as a viewpoint, but that’s the reality, and saying ‘well, it means the attendees are all content with the owners and the regime’ is just another way of using loaded terms like ‘complicit’ and it isn’t helpful (well, it is to Suhail et al).

Think we can safely say it will be Crawley and Duckett opening the batting in the summer… it should be difficult to get in an international team, not out of it

As I’ve said previously, I think there’s a lack of understanding of match goers and their motivations. The lads around me aren’t particularly the happy clapper, turn up to Ewood to watch a team in blue and white and don’t think much else of if till the next game types (like some certainly are), they think the owners have been a disaster, we’ve had many a discussion about it. However, despite them, they see themselves as fans, as ST holders and as such they go and support the team. If you told them that they are ‘complicit’ because they are choosing to sit in a seat they’ve paid for to try and help the team stay out of the third division they’d see it as a very odd descriptor of them. As Herbie says above, only one winner from the looks of this thread.

It's the little things that (almost) grate as much. Making Blues Bar a beige shell, stripped of all Rovers memorabilia, a sports bar that doesn't even have a subscription for sport channels. The ground being in a state of disrepair and rot. Actively trying to empty out the Blackburn End Removing the history timelime murals (maybe it would have helped them remember when we last won the FA Cup). A club shop containing largely cheap tat (that doesn't even open on some working days). The 150th being a shambles from day one. A lack of care, attention, affection for such a fantastic, historic football club that goes back to the very beginning of the sport in this country.

Wasn't aimed at you.

I'm an actual attender that will be doing said boycott, so not sure what corner I'm painted into or how that makes me a 'naysayer', especially being called so from people that have no boycott to make as they already don't go! Some balls. However, this is a forum that is supposed to be about exchanging views and as I'm also a paid up member of WATR that is part of the Coalition, I'm more than entitled to offer some constructive criticism as to why, *in my opinion*, even though I'll do it anyway, this isn't the correct game.

Personally I don’t think an ‘official’ boycott is needed at all, but it’s out there now and if, and I think it is, the point of it is to get visuals and figures into the media as part of an overall campaign, then in my opinion a night game is preferable as the biggest bang for your buck - other club fan groups doing the same obviously pick said games for a reason.

Vinjay 👍 Like

Boycott, protest call it what you want. The whole point is a visual of the ground looking as empty as possible (backed up by a true FOI attendance figure) to give power to the arm of the anti-owner campaign - I.e midweek, just like Sheff Wed’s, just like tonight. Who cares about a ‘true reflection’, ‘well this game is 30% lower than a standard 3pm’ ‘oh is it 🤷‍♂️’. It’s about social media/traditional media eyeballs. ‘25,000 average crowds when they bought the club… just 3,000 home fans in the ground tonight’ accompanying said visuals.

And it’s now being reported across traditional/social media (with no disclaimer saying ‘well it is a night game’), a 3pm Saturday and plenty more would be there. Maximum impact, canny move from the organisers.