underdog

On 4/19/2019 at 3:51 PM, singe said:

Markubd had been taken off as SLO, but he's back on it again. 

Yes tis true...mark has been re-appointed as SLO. He told me b4 my jolliez

Can't think why he was removed as SLO on the first place..hmmmmmm

2 minutes ago, disjointed said:

When we were there my 2 boys were 14 and 12 in 2008. Cycling was a passion and fishing. We tended to incorporate these. I would say just take in the beauty and tranquility of the place, you will be back in the rat race before you know it. 

Cheers...just a tad rainy now..but lovely

13 minutes ago, disjointed said:

Lucky you on the Isle of skye, what a beautiful place. 

Cheers..jist done tbe NC500 route but factored in Skye. Wildcampednat old man of storr and just on Dunvegan now.

Sunburn and frost bite everyday now where does that remind me of..oh yes BP...hehe

Any recommendations?

Bit the bullet and renewed today from Isle of Skye on my jollies

No answer lunchtime via phone so logged online, created myself, selected and paid for it all.

Phew!

19 hours ago, Midsblue said:

Do you reckon they’ll allow me to join the FB group?

 

F**k me, I didn’t think my post would cause so much grief but I’m glad it’s rattled their cage.  I cannot believe this bloke has the audacity to allege the Trust is crooked over my harmless comments.... it was my own personal view to prompt a reaction that is not only needed but long overdue.

 

Just to clarify; I’m not a representative of the Trust but a very frustrated fan who is even more disgusted over the Clown’s contempt of not only our fans but the Trust who represents the fans.  I pay to attend matches and poured tens of thousands into the club over the years so I trust (excuse the pun) that allows me a say and to vent my frustration.... my OWN opinion and NOT that of The Trust!

 

It’s taken days after a very lenient deadline set by the Trust to receive his reply and this latest reply from the Clown demonstrates even more contempt to us fans.  No detail around “his plans”, no clear commitment on his part, no addressing of our immediate concerns or answering to our questions but an even more worrying suggestion that the budget will be slashed even further next season.  The Clown is taking the club even further backwards and expected us fans to blindly buy STs in return for uncertainty, absence of ambition, meddling (Scholes has placed on record that The Clown dictated recruitment & selection - you going to sue him Lemsagam, eh?) and no evidence of what debts he inherited, what’s he paid out and what is future plans exactly are.

 

I’ll quiet down now and leave the Trust to decide next steps following the club’s “response”

yep all your fault.....hahh

Come sit on the naughty terrace step with me and a few thousand....scare that you can post something anyway and it pops up somewhere else.

No problem and we do appreciate you posting the above...cheers

38 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Yes. I’m a bit confused.

 

The original Trust response was (to paraphrase) “AL’s letter is not acceptable, we move to step 2” and that is reaffirmed at point 5 of the response above. 

 

Yet we have this paragraph too? (Which seems slightly more conciliatory)

 

That is the first such communication of this type in many months. It is step forward in enabling us to understand the owner’s perspective and form a view as to whether he is going to be capable of running the club in a responsible manner. You may wish to prejudge the answer to that question but this is a process and we have to take it in incremental steps. 

 

So is the plan to just try to engage further with AL or not? 

 

 

 

 

Yes...Asked for fan/trust meeting next week if possible

1 hour ago, Lee Sinnott said:

For the record, he has said that the coach company was paid and turned up to take the players to the Bury game. Think that was Orion, wasn't it?

 

There's no mention in that response from him about why Swans wouldn't take us. Wasn't he asked for proof that we didn't owe Swans any money?

 

And don't even get me started on the not interfering in team selection...

Swan's is firmly in m mind re evidence request..

3 hours ago, kowenicki said:

 

This is all a bit... hmmm... your way or the highway isn’t it?  “We have holidays” , “we are volunteers you know”. To play devils advocate, he may well be extremely busy or out of the country too. 

 

You are demanding a meeting before season end... why? What’s wrong with the week after? What is it that is so time sensitive?  I’d be very grateful for a proper answer to this because it seems unnecessarily awkward if you are “reaching out”. 

 

 

 

 

 

We are lead to believe owner may not be available much after post season...and why not roll out the vision as is?

Well....its never a dull moment is it.

Trust published a summary yesterday as we felt the fans we overdue an answer, especially with timescales set at the meeting with fans.

We did this so we could seek written permission and clarity from the owner if he wanted the letter in his entirity to be published on the Trust website and be free from any legal action if we did. Bearing in mind it mentions 3 specific points the Chairman maybe acting on and we did not want to jeopadise any impending cases.  His original letter did not instruct/give us permission to say that he did want it in the public domain and It is address to 2 specific people at the Trust only and I did not fancy being sued if we did publish without permission. We asked for permission today.

I hope you can see why we would want to ask permission and if it did get out in the public domain as is and how it would make Chairman and club seem.

Bearing in mind did it actually address any/some/all of the fans expectations from the original letter we sent in. Or did it?

Believe it or not, there has been a lot of work gone into where we are up to now since last Friday.  The reminder to club on Monday,  reviewing what we received on Monday night and how we issue what we did on Tuesday, sending response back to club to say trust/fan meeting asap and its only Wednesday

We have requested meetings to be done before the end of the season for both fans and Trust. Ball is back in chairmans court.

Its not easier to do when 9 volunteers have day to day lives all has been done out of 9-5hours. There are 3 of us away from tomorrow and to be honest....communication maybe sparse until 1 returns next week. Managing fans expectations is having its toll on us all....sorry to moan but it is.

Now off to collect dog from vets, I have not opened up my birthday card yet and it will be holiday mode from 8pm tonight.

Sorry and thanks

1 minute ago, singe said:

Sorry itdid not come across right, I meant if he had a brain he would be really, really phsychotically in prison dangerous. As it is he is just dangerous, like when he confronted you. Given what Top off got up tow as bad, The imbecile should be banned for a lot longer.
The only saving grace is very few people will seee it.

Glad you have been accepted though... Really I'd bide your time, let him hang himself, then unleash the screens shots...

What must the club think. This is a fan they invited into their friday Meeting

Then again, the club have not even acknowedledge my email with regards to the my altercation with him either

35 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

Calling it a “crooked organisation” is probably defamation. 

 

 

I can;t tell if he is being clever as he can't get our name right as an organisation and he post under Chuckle when he wants to be controversial.

I am sure Singe said that might not cut the mustard with regards to a change of name and slander (maybe)

I remember one trust director several seasons ago,  having words with him as he has done it previously, saying he is in business and if any clients saw that and lost him business...well.. lets leave it there.

33 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Bit of sport with Chuckle and his disciples...  

I will take  bets on how long you last...

I will say 6pm tonight......anyone else?

Just now, kowenicki said:

 

Oh, I hadn’t gone back far enough. 

 

Is Midsblue even a trust official? 

 

I need to get into this Facebook group, doubt I’ll last long though... 

Its page 21 on this thread as well

No Midsblue is not and regardless, Trust communication in the main are on our website or links to 

aagghh

19 minutes ago, singe said:

If he had a brain, he'd be dangerous.

But it is dangerous.

There are Trust people who are  directors of or Co-optees  who are directors of businesses in their own right. Can you imagine what their employer might think?

I need to lie down

8 minutes ago, tony4938 said:

 

This one

Thank you oh so very much and accepting me onto your FB site as well.

15 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

What is the post that’s been copied? 

Believe it or not its something you were involved in with Midsblue I think on Monday when you both discussing possibility of liquidation/admin?

Its Midsblue  bullet points....I can only see a screen shot that someone has stuck on another OAFC site. I am on my laptop, let me see if I can get a photo from my phone and log back in on here.

Its shocking how he has taken someones opinion and twisted in.....I have no idea what Midsblue will think of it all.....TBA

https://www.facebook.com/groups/251730198199887/2360766997296186/?comment_id=2361140863925466&reply_comment_id=2361161347256751&notif_id=1555425535514050&notif_t=group_comment

No I can't seem to do it but the fan on the site who has copied into another fan forum and its the FB link above if it works

I am just flabberghasted...

Afternoon all. Worlds quickest update.

Trust will be updating fans immenantly with regards to chairman response to fan letter and next steps. Yes we got one which is good.

I am only updating this site with this info as I love you all....equally that is just to tick that box off...hahah.

Trust is trying to defuse a fans post on FB, that has been copied from this forum with the message that it is from the Trust with what our plan is. It is not

However, we cannot get onto that fan's FB page as everything is vetted before posting and Trust people were removed several weeks ago.

Ohh....I miss the days when as Dolly would say...."working 9 til 5..." and I missed a lot of the X files stuff.

TBA on update and this site will done as soon as I can copy and paste stuff in...hahah

12 hours ago, rosa said:

Let us know if there's anything we can do to help. 

I have contacted the club myself at the end of week to see what the club could do....bit of free PR if managed right. I did Offered to pay for a donation item myself, but I have had no response.

You could look put for them about 9.30pm outside the club entrance and give them a friendly wave...hahah

14 minutes ago, wiseowl said:

It's very poor form by the owner not to have responded.

 

I do wonder whether he is close to appointing a director/s (remember the non-exec positions advertised for fans' rep/s?), with a view to then holding a proper board meeting ASAP thereafter (including the Trust rep) and hopes that will quell some of the (now somewhat muted) anger.

 

It's about the only logical conclusion I can come to - it still doesn't excuse him not responding and telling us that (if it does, indeed,  turn out to be the case).

With regards to club board, Fit and proper has to be passed, all the legal stuff signed off with a solicitor ect with that and you have to give EFL notification of who they are (I think 10 days notice) before any board meetings. I think that's right but happy to be corrected

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.

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

13 minutes ago, Bobledgersheart said:

I've got a muzzle for a big dog it it's any use ?

Could bring it tomorrow as I'm not boycotting !

Actually I have one now yo mentioned it..cheers.....the other option is one of those neck brace thingies...however trying to get a German shepherds neck into one that I have left over from my jack russel ain't going to work.

Cheers though

17 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Ok. So this is where some will get defensive and others will just jump on me.  I would hope people don’t ask questions only to get answers they like. People are allowed opinions. 

 

I wouldn’t have sent a letter. But if I had I wouldn’t have included such ‘trivial’ detail and ‘petty’ demands.  Some of it was cringeworthy honestly, not worth mentioning and would get most people’s backs up.  The letter was labelled by the Trust as a way to “reach out”, but it read more like a letter to chastise to me and was a series of demands. 

 

I would have just urged him to meet... put across the mutual benefits of a meeting, explained how the Trust intentions are honest and constructive and left it at that.  If he doesn’t want to meet on even that basis then a confrontational letter of demands is going to get binned anyway. 

 

In the end you would probably be in the same place anyway, as it seems he isn’t interested. I just think taking him on was not going to get anywhere due to his ego.  It’s now probably too late for any other approach though. 

 

Now, if the real intention of the letter was more a case of putting down a marker and beginning an audit trail for legal purposes then fine, it’s achieved that, but in no conceivable way could it be considered as ‘reaching out’. 

It was never going to please everyone...we went on the passion/concensus from the meeting with i hoped a balanced push on both fan mood and Trust entitlement.

We do appreciate your feedback. That is why i love this forum.

Cheers

PS and my dog has now managed to eat through her paw bandage....I am not amused