Jump to content

Trust Letter to AL


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, laticsmarra said:

The heat needs to be turned up on AL now. This is the first outward sign of his contempt for the whole fanbase.He may have had issues with the Trust in principle so ignored them, but I wouldn't give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.Since the day he walked into Boundary Park he has operated as a dictator ruining the lives of many good honest employees of the club,everyone has left either through his "sackings" or voted with their feet because they couldn't stand working for him.Name me one current paid employee who was at the club when he arrived.Free scarves,re naming the stadium were fronts to keep the fan quiet allowing him to progress with his own as yet undisclosed plan.The FA and EFL know what is going on but are impotent, its up to us guys.Whether it is boycotts,protests,not buying club merchandise we have to take the hard road. Things may get worse before they get better but ultimately we want our club famed in the past for being a family friendly club back.

Pete wild?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

 

Hughes and Evans put paid to that cuddly notion. 

I disagree. As we always say, the club is bigger than any one player/person. In any case, there's not much the fans could have done to stop the signing of Hughes and Evans (and I think rehabilitation is an important aim anyway), in the case of the latter financial considerations came into play. What is happening now is a fan-based initiative to get our club back to where it used to be (reputationally, not league position) and I applaud it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Worcester Owl said:

I disagree. As we always say, the club is bigger than any one player/person. In any case, there's not much the fans could have done to stop the signing of Hughes and Evans (and I think rehabilitation is an important aim anyway), in the case of the latter financial considerations came into play. What is happening now is a fan-based initiative to get our club back to where it used to be (reputationally, not league position) and I applaud it.

Plus Evans had his conviction overturned hasn’t he ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, simplythemostimportantkick said:

Plus Evans had his conviction overturned hasn’t he ? 

Not debating this further but what happened after the event was irrelevant to the situation at the time. It's in the past now. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, simplythemostimportantkick said:

Plus Evans had his conviction overturned hasn’t he ? 

 

Well yes but I think it was more of an inconclusive verdict, rape cases are notoriously difficult to gain convictions from.

 

Nethertheless it was a sorry episode in our clubs history where the directors (in particularly Barry Owen) Showed incredibly poor judgement in pursuing a signing that was only going to cause unnecessary problems.

 

My main hope since then was that we would have a new owner who would not create these kinds of shitstorms. Alas we've had a new owner who has just created even more problems and will only continue to cause problems in the future.

Edited by GlossopLatic
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Well yes but I think it was more of an inconclusive verdict, rape cases are notoriously difficult to gain convictions from.

 

Nethertheless it was a sorry episode in our clubs history where the directors (in particularly Barry Owen) Showed incredibly poor judgement in pursuing a signing that was only going to cause unnecessary problems.

 

My main hope since then was that we would have a new owner who would not create these kinds of shitstorms. Alas we've had a new owner who has just created even more problems and will only continue to cause problems in the future.

Was not guilty on retrial wasn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Was not guilty on retrial wasn't it?

 

It was not guilty I stand corrected. But as I said rape cases are notoriously hard to get conviction for.

 

Anyway the point is the decision to attempt to sign him was a bad episode for the club. Let's just draw a line under it there.

Edited by GlossopLatic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

The thing with this letter is that it was from the Trust in behalf of the fans. It’s not a Trust/club thing. The fact he’s ignored it shows the contempt for the fan(s) that he claims that the club is nothing without. He’s showing his duplicity again. 

 

It was a letter drafted by the trust and submitted with no fan sign off or approval, following a meeting with a very small group of fans who turned up to shout out a list of demands (some of which were ludicrous).  It is not on “behalf of (all) fans” by any stretch. 

 

I understand what the Trust tried to do here, I do... I just think it was a misfire that was never going to get anywhere. The only thing it will have done is create a bigger divide. (Yes I do know they’ve tried other approaches previously).

 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, kowenicki said:

The letter wasn’t great honestly, but the fact he hasn’t responded in any way at all is worse.... but 100% expected.  

 

So.... I’ll leave the obvious point that can be made as it seems people get defensive about it.  

 

However, it’s clear he sees his 97% as the key factor... he does not respect or recognise the trust.  In his head, he owns the club and can do as he pleases (which frankly is true). 

 

That’s your starting point. Good luck. I don’t envy you.

 

(A confrontational approach was/is never going to work with a character that has an ego though)

 

 

Anecdotally I would say most generally support the approach taken at this stage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

It was a letter drafted by the trust and submitted with no fan sign off or approval, following a meeting with a very small group of fans who turned up to shout out a list of demands (some of which were ludicrous).  It is not on “behalf of (all) fans” by any stretch. 

 

I understand what the Trust tried to do here, I do... I just think it was a misfire that was never going to get anywhere. The only thing it will have done is create a bigger divide. (Yes I do know they’ve tried other approaches previously).

 

 

 

 

120 fans is not “a very small group”. It’s around 4% of our ST holders. You might think it was a misfire but it’s what the fans who were there wanted. And AL has ignored them, his actions will have consequences. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

120 fans is not “a very small group”. It’s around 4% of our ST holders. You might think it was a misfire but it’s what the fans who were there wanted. And AL has ignored them, his actions will have consequences. 

 

Don't forget it wasn't just the 120 who felt like this alot of people myself included felt exactly the same way as those people in the room and weren't there. 

 

The Trust have done the right thing it was upto Abdullah how he handled it. He could have told us that some of the demands that were asked for were confidential and not disclose them publicly. He could have invited the Trust rep to see the accounts or for a meeting and asked them to sign confidentiality agreements. He could have responded to this in about 50 different ways better than he has done. His non-response here is pathetic and in line with the way he feels is acceptable to treat people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

120 fans is not “a very small group”. It’s around 4% of our ST holders. You might think it was a misfire but it’s what the fans who were there wanted. And AL has ignored them, his actions will have consequences. 

 

What are they? You sound like you know. If so please share. The trust represents the fans after all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Don't forget it wasn't just the 120 who felt like this alot of people myself included felt exactly the same way as those people in the room and weren't there. 

 

The Trust have done the right thing it was upto Abdullah how he handled it. He could have told us that some of the demands that were asked for were confidential and not disclose them publicly. He could have invited the Trust rep to see the accounts or for a meeting and asked them to sign confidentiality agreements. He could have responded to this in about 50 different ways better than he has done. His non-response here is pathetic and in line with the way he feels is acceptable to treat people.

 

I don’t disagree...but did you expect anything else honestly? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

I don’t disagree...but did you expect anything else honestly? 

 

No but it doesn't mean the approach the Trust took was the wrong. I'd rather they weren't taking a confrontational approach with the owner but his actions have left them with no choice.

 

Let's not lose sight of the fact that the problems at the football club like any failing organisation start at the top, and in many cases it can be a leaders ego getting in the way of what's best for the greater good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

 

Don't forget it wasn't just the 120 who felt like this alot of people myself included felt exactly the same way as those people in the room and weren't there. 

 

The Trust have done the right thing it was upto Abdullah how he handled it. He could have told us that some of the demands that were asked for were confidential and not disclose them publicly. He could have invited the Trust rep to see the accounts or for a meeting and asked them to sign confidentiality agreements. He could have responded to this in about 50 different ways better than he has done. His non-response here is pathetic and in line with the way he feels is acceptable to treat people.

 

 

AL 2 months ago..." We are one big family at Oldham Athletic, not one person here is bigger than the club which includes myself, my door is always open for a chat for anyone."

 

https://www.oldhamathletic.co.uk/news/2019/february/12022019-club-statement/

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

 

AL 2 months ago..." We are one big family at Oldham Athletic, not one person here is bigger than the club which includes myself, my door is always open for a chat for anyone."

 

https://www.oldhamathletic.co.uk/news/2019/february/12022019-club-statement/

 

To be fair he did meet some fans 😂 just appears he doesn't like the trust 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BP1960 said:

 

 

AL 2 months ago..." We are one big family at Oldham Athletic, not one person here is bigger than the club which includes myself, my door is always open for a chat for anyone."

 

https://www.oldhamathletic.co.uk/news/2019/february/12022019-club-statement/

 

 

He says alot of things including the below its difficult to believe anything he says to be quite frank.

 

I am personally contributing £200,000 a month

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The letter was from the Trust after a meeting of Trust members because the Trust has a role to play in the football club.  The Trust would like to represent all the supporters/fans of the football club but they need to join the Trust if they want a say in what the Trust does which is exactly what I did.

 

The Trust likes to operate on behalf of the supporters/fans and the more that join the easier it will be to do this.  Abdallah Lemsagam has a duty to respond to the Trust and has failed in that duty.  Insults are not the answer.

 

Owners are just an ephemeral thing in the life of a football club but can do great damage.  He may own it but it belongs to us and the actions he is taking are not going to stop me supporting my team but the Trust does need to assert itself and that I believe is the correct path which they are following.

 

Each to their own.  Boycott if you want to - I found out that I couldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

120 fans is not “a very small group”. It’s around 4% of our ST holders. You might think it was a misfire but it’s what the fans who were there wanted. And AL has ignored them, his actions will have consequences. 

It's around 10% of our current season ticket holders for next year. 

 

But presumably some of those that were at the meeting account for some of the missing 6%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jorvik_latic said:

 

120 fans is not “a very small group”. It’s around 4% of our ST holders. You might think it was a misfire but it’s what the fans who were there wanted. And AL has ignored them, his actions will have consequences. 

well technically speaking it is actually more....

 

100 in the room (none trust members)

25 were trust members

 

If we include the current register Trust members (-25 who attended the above) and look at ST of say 3000, then you could say the Trust represent 12% of the fan base. Trust and non-trust members

 

Well thats how I have looked at it.....some might interpret it a different way

 

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not you agree/disagree with the Trust's approach or you are with or against a protest, at least moves are being made to let Lemsagam know how he is held in disregard by the majority of the fan base. It may not bother him as he doesn't seem to be the type to be affected by those that disagree with him. The only effect seems to be a sacking, or so we are led to believe.

 

If fans want to hold a protest, that's fine. If others don't want to join in, that's fine too. Some will never set foot in Boundary Park again whilst he owns the club. That's a sad indictment of how the club is run, but that's fine. Others will continue to support the club and attend matches. That's also fine. It boils down to an individual's take on what is a very sad situation.

 

The fact that Abdallah has not even had the good grace to acknowledge the Trust's letter, irrespective of how you feel about it or it its content, speaks volumes about the man's arrogance, lack of manners or social skills and total disregard for the fans that he says are the lifeblood of the club. What he says and what he does are polar opposites.

 

The really sad thing is that we all, I think, welcomed him as it meant the Corney reign was over. I actually shook his hand at Oxford, thanking him for rescuing our club and looking forward to a brighter future. He said, "Thank you. I want to do this for the fans". Had I known then what I know now (that he's apparently a dishonourable and deceitful individual), I'd rather have shaken his throat. 

 

He is slowly but surely destroying the football club that I have loved and supported for very nearly 69 years and it hurts. It won't stop me going to matches whenever I can because that's what I look forward to; supporting the players and the manager, meeting up with like minded fans that I have come to know over the years. 

 

I am fully in support of what every single fan decides to do. It's their choice and no one can say it is right or wrong. What I do know is that should I bump into Abdallah again, it won't be a cordial meeting. It will be an opportunity to vent my spleen (in polite terms) and let him know what a charlatan he is. (I said it would be polite).

 

Now let's get 3 points from Swindon this afternoon and we just might all feel a bit better if this run continues.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Hands on said:

The letter was from the Trust after a meeting of Trust members because the Trust has a role to play in the football club.  The Trust would like to represent all the supporters/fans of the football club but they need to join the Trust if they want a say in what the Trust does which is exactly what I did.

 

The Trust likes to operate on behalf of the supporters/fans and the more that join the easier it will be to do this.  Abdallah Lemsagam has a duty to respond to the Trust and has failed in that duty.  Insults are not the answer.

 

Owners are just an ephemeral thing in the life of a football club but can do great damage.  He may own it but it belongs to us and the actions he is taking are not going to stop me supporting my team but the Trust does need to assert itself and that I believe is the correct path which they are following.

 

Each to their own.  Boycott if you want to - I found out that I couldn't.

Hello Hands....It wasn't a trust fans meeting only

 

It was a fan meeting regardless of the type of supporter you were as we felt the issues we for all to discuss. In fact from the attendance list only 25 were Trust members.

 

We wanted to represent the mood of the fan base and the outcome from the fans there was that they wanted a dialogue still and thats what we threw our weight behind.

 

Hope this makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...