maddog

3 hours ago, OAFC1958 South said:

On the basis he surely doesn't want to watch his Bank Account balance reduce by 000,000s for nothing...or may be I'm stupid..no comment.

Well then he’s stupid. Fans have turned because of his actions and inactions. Therefore his bank balance is plummeting.

*Also, he ‘didn’t know what he was buying’. 

1 hour ago, OAFC1958 South said:

 

 

....he is not stupid....

 

 

How sure are we about this? 

.

Latics 2-1 Mansfield (1-1)

Clarke

5234

Cheltenham 1-2 Latics (1-1)

Afolayan

3789

1 minute ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Probably because they're WORKING on the no response.

 

And as soon as next step is in place they'll update everyone.

 

So nothing prepared for the obvious no response. Even Stevie Wonder saw that coming

And that’s why they sought advice on a ‘no response’ in advance of knowing there was no response. Now they know, now they can strategise with the options they have pre-sought. And bearing in mind the current on-pitch situation. 

13 minutes ago, mcfluff1985 said:

And people wonder why some have an issue with how the trust is run. Zero plan as expected.

How on earth did you come to either of those conclusions from that post?!

2 minutes ago, underdog said:

Dear all

 

I am briefly logging back in tonight just to keep you folks updated.

 

As of 18.30pm. The Trust have not had a response to the letter that was sent to the owner and club secretary by three different methods.

 

We are all disappointed.

 

We have already been advised by Supporters Direct to the what if we did/did not get a response and we are working on the no response now over the weekend. 

 

As soon as the next step is in place we will update you all.

 

Thank you all for your continuing support and dialogue....its good to talk.

 

Anyways, my new ink is on fire and my dog has decided to cut her pad so I am not amused....have you ever tried to bath a bloody dogs paw and prevent them eating their bandage off? any hints? its going to be a long night....

 

Thanks everyone and TBA

 

 

You might be disappointed, but be honest... nobody expected him to reply. He is not the type of character to be held to account by anyone. Especially the all-important (pesky) fan. 

5 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

Absolute nap that this just peters out into nothing now.

 

Early bird deadline will be extended until last game of season, most of the waverers will take the bait.

 

Cycle will start again when the rest of the big earners are released.

Yep. We won’t be renewing if there’s been no response. It shows disdain towards the Trust and a disrespect for the fans. 

We actually did renew our STs then asked for (and got) a refund after the whole Scholes palaver. We still have a season ticket for the rest of this season, although we haven’t gone since Scholes left (because of all the shit about what was going on behind the scenes couldn’t be ignored any longer - not because we liked Scholes). We’re doing Cheltenham and Exeter away. If we get to the play offs, we’d be stupid not to go. But after that, we’re still stuck with a shithead owner, and whatever the outcome, next season will still be a shit-show overseen by a shithead. So we’re unlikely to renew either way.

If he responds in a convincing way, however....

Latics 2-0 Swindon (1-0)

Lang

4123

5 minutes ago, Lukers1 said:

Ritchie ?

Richie. 

6 minutes ago, Steve_R said:

Blackpool didn't take that option, or most of them didn't anyway. They always brought a good following pre boycott, in fact I always considered them similar to ourselves, shit home support but good away numbers.  They've brought a few hundred only since.They only took 5,000 to Wembley for the Div 4 play off final. Their protest was against Oyston's taking money out of the club, as they creamed off all they made from the premier league and hived it off into shareholder payments and loans to other companies they owned. Lemsagam may be a dickhead, but he won't be making any money out of Latics.

Why is he involved then? It sure as fuck isn’t to have a successful football club. 

14 minutes ago, latics22 said:

I think he will respond, if he doesn’t he is basically giving the trust the v’s! I don’t think he will want to piss anymore people off. Not saying he will give all the answers, but he will certainly respond imo

Nah. That’d be giving the fan the v’s. The questions came from the fan. 

3 minutes ago, LaticsPete said:

That’s not what I was talking about. 

Jorvik said that he wasn’t going. BigDog indicated that he disagreed with that stance. Both are entitled to their own opinion- and shouldn’t be outraged if someone disagrees with it. I felt “f off for judging people” was ott. 

Some of us will boycott, some of us will continue attending. 

I think ‘fuck off for judging people’ is about right, given ‘some of us will boycott and some of us will continue attending’. We’re not judging those who are continuing to attend, even though we disagree with their stance. 

12 minutes ago, Lee Sinnott said:

Expecting at least a change or two. A couple more have caught the lurgy...

The ‘banished to the youth team’ lurgy?

7 minutes ago, al_bro said:

You'd be surprised how many fans who go to matches have little knowledge of what goes on. When I'm travelling to or returning from a game on the bus, and general discussions I hear, people just don't know. They used to depend on the Chron. for info. but now it's not printed they have no means of knowing about the club in general.

I spent half of Mother’s Day explaining to my parents why we were boycotting. Their view was very simplistic - if you’re a supporter, you go and support. But they didn’t know any of the goings on behind the scenes. They are choosing to still go and have already renewed their season tickets - but they were appalled at some of the stuff we told them, and now see why we’ve taken the stance we have (not to go to any home games despite having season tickets, and to not renew). 

The circus stuff is not widely known, especially amongst older fans and fans who do not use this message board or social media. Hence, organisation of any boycott or protest is going to need some really hard work to get the word out there to be effective. 

1 hour ago, BP1960 said:

 

Not officially in writing has he?

No. But why would he? 

8 hours ago, HarryBosch said:

 

We're talking about a song Tranmere were singing. 

We are, well spotted! And there’s a context to your opinion. Which I spotted and pointed out. 

2 minutes ago, HarryBosch said:

Am I alone in thinking it was one of the cringiest songs I've ever heard at a football match? 

 

 

You hate every song we sing and think anything suggested as new is ‘cringy’

Colchester 1-2 Latics (0-0)

Lang

3012

29 minutes ago, milnrow latics said:

Latics 1 v 3 Tranmere

 

HT 0-2

 

Lang

 

4972

 

Now it's time for you to copy and paste (like Saturday)! No need to mention your username.

Name and shame (although only 2 people, in lower divisions, posted the same result and score predictions as you)!

8 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

#honestlookersstandandy  @maddog @rosa

Hmmm. Self-sabotage now? Interesting tactic. Setting up for some future sleight of hand?

51 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

Losing focus here lads, Chuckle is a minor irritant, nothing more.

I see your point, but a man who is a puppet of the main show threatening and intimidating the  female face of the supporters’ trust, who have just challenged the proponent of the main show, is a bit more significant than irritating. 

1 hour ago, Magic Mikey said:

He's very pro Lemmy and in the tame fans group that he "met" with. AL will look after him I'm pretty sure. 

But how did the whole thing come about?

49 minutes ago, peanuts said:

because he is ALs usefull idiot very effective at diseminating his propaganda especialy through his various facebook groups 

Very clever or stupid ally when you look at it.