Latest SCG minutes (2 Viewers)

[Nick]

So, you're one of the adults sneaking in on a Kids ticket then.... :-;

I did once, I had my adult one also just in case . I was just seeing how easy it would be, walked through fine.

 

---

[ajsccfc]

Only had my season ticket checked once all season, the MK Dons game I think. Never seen them bother with who sits in what block either, which is a little surprising when you consider the pricing band brought back in.

 

[Nick]

The Sky Blue Trust is disappointed to read the latest minutes from the Supporters Consultative Group (SCG) meeting on November 30th which once again demonstrate how ineffective this forum has become.

At a time when our football club faces the biggest crisis in its history we find it staggering that a large section of the meeting was devoted to attacking individuals and different supporters groups rather than serving its intended purpose, to improve the supporter experience

Our fans are in turmoil at the moment at the clubs tragic demise. We believe therefore that the SCG should be doing everything it can to help improve the lot of those fans rather than allowing the meeting to deteriorate into such a sorry state

The SCG as it stands is not fit for purpose. We therefore urge those responsible to embrace the need for change , to offer proper representation and to set aside egos and personal aspiration in putting supporters first.

To highlight just one example of many where it appears not to recognise its intended purpose.

In the minutes, the SCG appears to believe that it is right for Football League guidance on supporter engagement to be confidential. That beggars belief and shows just how out of touch are the attitudes of these people on the need for supporters to be properly represented, informed and consulted.
We hope under a new chair that the SCG can become an effective and relevant conduit between fans and club that it was when originally instigated by the Trust.

It is all about egos, this will go to the telegraph and it will be reported. It will then get lots of "well saids" etc etc.

The trust can't really preach about who they represent either, as it's only representing people who go to the pub isn't it?

All as bad as each other, but as the trust is the only actual real fan group they should have a seat. PSB group, jimmy hill way etc are pointless so they can go via the trust as they are one and the same anyway.

 

[Ranjit Bhurpa]

Only had my season ticket checked once all season, the MK Dons game I think. Never seen them bother with who sits in what block either, which is a little surprising when you consider the pricing band brought back in.

Slightly worrying though that the focus appears to be on insignificant things. Like the original remit (supposedly) of the SCG concentrating on the matchday experience, and Wingy and others receiving unnecessary hassle the other week when there are 25,000 seats lying empty. For christ's sake, the club is crumbling around us, we're in great danger of dropping into Division 4, no ground, uncertainty surrounding the Academy, etc, etc.......yet the powers that be choose to confront triviality. You couldn't make it up.

 

[GaryPendrysEyes]

It is all about egos, this will go to the telegraph and it will be reported. It will then get lots of "well saids" etc etc.

The trust can't really preach about who they represent either, as it's only representing people who go to the pub isn't it?

Another dig at The Trust and the CT Zzzzzzzzzz
The Trust has a membership of hundreds of Cov fans, it has elections, it has regular open meetings. So no it isnt like the SCG.
What you dont like is people opposing Sisu.

 

[Nick]

Another dig at The Trust and the CT Zzzzzzzzzz
The Trust has a membership of hundreds of Cov fans, it has elections, it has regular open meetings. So no it isnt like the SCG.
What you dont like is people opposing Sisu.

Like I said, only people represented are those who go to the pub. They do have the reach though for everybody else with other methods like web streaming etc which hopefully they will also do.

Do you mean like the way I am saying the SCG is useless and should be fucked off and started again, I guess they oppose SISU then?

It's all a pathetic willy waving contest. Get rid.

 

[Joy Division]

It is all about egos, this will go to the telegraph and it will be reported. It will then get lots of "well saids" etc etc.

The trust can't really preach about who they represent either, as it's only representing people who go to the pub isn't it?

What on earth is that statement meant to mean?

 

[Nick]

What on earth is that statement meant to mean?

At the moment, it is only representative of people who are physically at the meetings. I think there are about 3,000 trust members, so it can't be said they are all being represented based on 20-30 people physically at a meeting.

There can be live streaming over the internet (video and audio), there can be people dialling in to listen.

Hopefully going forward that will be changed so it can be a wider spectrum.

Also, when the Trust Chairman is "double teaming" with Simon Gilbert it does get a bit worrying.

On that note, anybody know how much was raised at the meeting for the Legacy Fund?

 

[Joy Division]

I may have missed it in the meeting minutes but who does Jonathan Strange and Sandra Garlic represent?

 

[Nick]

I may have missed it in the meeting minutes but who does Jonathan Strange and Sandra Garlic represent?

Nobody at all isn't it? Along with Steve (now) and Jan.

I don't know who others are to comment.

Anybody on there should be a proper rep for people, actively looking for things within their remit.

ie. If somebody represents disabled fans for example and see somebody moan online that a steward blocked their view etc. (just an example). If somebody in a wheelchair cant buy a ticket etc.

 

[oldskyblue58]

Got to ask. Both resignations of the two members of the SCG refer to bullying and both directly point a finger at the trust. What has been said, or done? I have not seen or read anything in the public domain. Neither ward nor garlic have been frequent attendees recently so nothing in the minutes directed/reported relating to them. in fact didn't the SCG rules allow for garlic to be removed this time around because of non attendance ( not a good record for proposed next chair of the SCG ) timing is everything isn't it.

From what I have read of the last year or more scg minutes many meetings have degenerated in to attacks on the trust and its board. Led by fisher and strange. So what else has gone on and how has it been dealt with by the scg, the club or other bodies. I can't condone bullying in any form but it seems to be not one sided from the stuff I have seen published. If it were going on and I have to take at face value until proven otherwise shouldn't there have been comment at the scg before shouldn't the group and its chairperson have dealt with it firmly?

The other issue is that the scg was established to deal with match day experience. A strong chairperson would keep this body on line to meet its purpose. Cleary strange has not been up to the task. That means not only keeping say the trust away from protest at meetings but also not letting club officials use the meetings for non scg purpose matters.

Interesting that the scg gets challenged publicly on cwr and turn it and the resignations in to an attack on the fans and fans groups..... What has changed? Why now not before? Where are we looking? Where should we not look ?

Pointless discredited weak group not meeting its purpose and i agree with Nick far too much Willy waving - get rid of it end the scg

Why is the trust such a threat to the club and its owners now? ...... has always been dismissed, ignored patronized or ridiculed before

 

[Como]

I may have missed it in the meeting minutes but who does Jonathan Strange and Sandra Garlic represent?

As I understood it they are more appointed than elected. I believe he got involved through participation in CCLSC a long time ago.

I sort of knew Jonathan many many years ago, he would go on the train to games so we occasionally talked. Then he seemed to make his own way and occasionally I would see him at matches so he was obviously still going.

This was in the top flight days, a lot more people around.

I have no doubt he would like to see things change, nobody likes where we are, whatever your specific views on issues are.

 

[Nick]

Got to ask. Both resignations of the two members of the SCG refer to bullying and both directly point a finger at the trust. What has been said, or done? I have not seen or read anything in the public domain. Neither ward nor garlic have been frequent attendees recently so nothing in the minutes directed/reported relating to them. in fact didn't the SCG rules allow for garlic to be removed this time around because of non attendance ( not a good record for proposed next chair of the SCG ) timing is everything isn't it.

From what I have read of the last year or more scg minutes many meetings have degenerated in to attacks on the trust and its board. Led by fisher and strange. So what else has gone on and how has it been dealt with by the scg, the club or other bodies. I can't condone bullying in any form but it seems to be not one sided from the stuff I have seen published. If it were going on and I have to take at face value until proven otherwise shouldn't there have been comment at the scg before shouldn't the group and its chairperson have dealt with it firmly?

The other issue is that the scg was established to deal with match day experience. A strong chairperson would keep this body on line to meet its purpose. Cleary strange has not been up to the task. That means not only keeping say the trust away from protest at meetings but also not letting club officials use the meetings for non scg purpose matters.

Interesting that the scg gets challenged publicly on cwr and turn it and the resignations in to an attack on the fans and fans groups..... What has changed? Why now not before? Where are we looking? Where should we not look ?

Pointless discredited weak group not meeting its purpose and i agree with Nick far too much Willy waving - get rid of it end the scg

Why is the trust such a threat to the club and its owners now? ...... has always been dismissed, ignored patronized or ridiculed before

The trust are just as bad when they go to the telegraph with everything and anything.

With the trust being a double team with the telegraph (their words) and not really a surprise the club wouldn't want them near is it?

It's all very sly, so they all need to sort their act out.

Here's an idea, why don't the scg and trust have a conversation away from the meeting rather then ruining meetings or running to the telegraph. It might make it look like neither have agendas then if they sort their shit away from gilberts notebook or the actual meetings.

It needs somebody to tell strange to fuck off and get somebody who won't take shit off either side, if the trust want to play silly games with gilbert then they are gone. Same for strange or anybody else trying to then go at the trust. If they have beef they sort it after the meeting just them, so people like pat, Dave busst etc aren't having their time wasted listening to petty shit.

What's the deal with the fans forum with Fisher?

 

[oldskyblue58]

I think if I were the trust, the diamond club and the London supporters I would seriously consider walking away from the scg. It would then serve even less purpose and wither away. Maybe form their own forum.

Not sure people like pat raybould for jsb or the tickets for schools need the scg to be able to function. Could be invited to a new set up of course. Obviously invite the club to send a representative so there is a link between club and fans. Then take it back to purpose.

 

[Nick]

I think if I were the trust, the diamond club and the London supporters I would seriously consider walking away from the scg. It would then serve even less purpose and wither away. Maybe form their own forum.

Not sure people like pat raybould for jsb or the tickets for schools need the scg to be able to function. Could be invited to a new set up of course. Obviously invite the club to send a representative so there is a link between club and fans. Then take it back to purpose.

The trust doesn't need scg to function either.

Haven't the trust started up another group anyway in the Jimmy hill.stuff. It's pointless starting up groups every 5 minutes.

 

[oldskyblue58]

The trust are just as bad when they go to the telegraph with everything and anything.

With the trust being a double team with the telegraph (their words) and not really a surprise the club wouldn't want them near is it?

It's all very sly, so they all need to sort their act out.

Here's an idea, why don't the scg and trust have a conversation away from the meeting rather then ruining meetings or running to the telegraph. It might make it look like neither have agendas then if they sort their shit away from gilberts notebook or the actual meetings.

It needs somebody to tell strange to fuck off and get somebody who won't take shit off either side, if the trust want to play silly games with gilbert then they are gone. Same for strange or anybody else trying to then go at the trust. If they have beef they sort it after the meeting just them, so people like pat, Dave busst etc aren't having their time wasted listening to petty shit.

What's the deal with the fans forum with Fisher?

Agree with some of that but let's keep it on topic which is the scg. .

I wouldn't if I were the trust be organising that it needs to be done by a proper media outlet. It needs a strong chairperson and focussed questions and challenged answers. Trust should be part of not running it.

 

[Brylowes]

On a serious note - have you considered boycotting this group? The guy clearly does not represent the views of fans, and actually you being there is just giving him audience to spout his shite.

Would not attending be a viable approach?

Not one meeting more!!
NOMM.

 

[Nick]

Agree with some of that but let's keep it on topic which is the scg. .

I wouldn't if I were the trust be organising that it needs to be done by a proper media outlet. It needs a strong chairperson and focussed questions and challenged answers. Trust should be part of not running it.

Is it not also involving the trust then? My points are to do with trust / scg stuff.

Why shouldn't the trust run that? They did the others didn't they? Weird they demand communication and sit and watch people demanding to hear from Fisher but don't mention they turned a fans forum down.

It's all one big silly game and it's all about agendas.

 

[dongonzalos]

Ray Stephens for me. Anyone who speaks for supporters who have supported the club for 50 years or more is well worth hearing. Plus what they say should never be referred to as absolute nonsense by the chairman especially if what they are saying is the view of some of our most loyal Supporters.

Each Group should have a representation proportional to its size of membership.
For example the Trust should have at least 2 represtatives. Due to the sheer size of the amount of members it represents.
Each group should have a rep. Maybe some of the tiny groups could merge to share a rep.

Nobody should be on there if they are just representing themselves. Especially if they are a vocal domineering character. If their opinion is not reflective of a group and they become chairman they can impose their narrow minded opinions on the majority.

Each representative should have been Voted into their position by the group they represent.

The Chairman should change on rotation every 6 months. So everybody that wants to can have a go.

A website should be set up that the club can regularly review. Where questions are vetted so that they are not abusive or libel. Where fans can post their own unedited questions and the club reply directly on a monthly basis. Any that are not adequately answered could then be discussed at the meeting.

 

[letsallsingtogether]

Same old same old dont like what you see try and turn thr thread.
Duck the lot o

Is it not also involving the trust then? My points are to do with trust / scg stuff.

Why shouldn't the trust run that? They did the others didn't they? Weird they demand communication and sit and watch people demanding to hear from Fisher but don't mention they turned a fans forum down.

It's all one big silly game and it's all about agendas.

Funny you talking about agendas Nick.

 

[Nick]

Same old same old dont like what you see try and turn thr thread.
Duck the lot o

Funny you talking about agendas Nick.

Why, what's my agenda then?

 

[skybluetony176]

At the moment, it is only representative of people who are physically at the meetings. I think there are about 3,000 trust members, so it can't be said they are all being represented based on 20-30 people physically at a meeting.

There can be live streaming over the internet (video and audio), there can be people dialling in to listen.

Hopefully going forward that will be changed so it can be a wider spectrum.

Also, when the Trust Chairman is "double teaming" with Simon Gilbert it does get a bit worrying.

On that note, anybody know how much was raised at the meeting for the Legacy Fund?

Have you ever considered the possibility that the trust and CT are coming at this from the only possible angle that they can to try and do the best for the club? That's the club, not the owners.

 

[Nick]

Have you ever considered the possibility that the trust and CT are coming at this from the only possible angle that they can to try and do the best for the club? That's the club, not the owners.

How's that going? Getting the clicks? Selling some books?

 

[Grendel]

Have you ever considered the possibility that the trust and CT are coming at this from the only possible angle that they can to try and do the best for the club? That's the club, not the owners.

Trust policy is to represent its members. It's dalliance with Preston Haskell showed them to be as incompetent and self interested as the SCG - like strange they saw potentially rubbing shoulders with the board. Two peas in a pod in many ways

 

[skybluetony176]

how's that going?

Not well. You've clearly never considered it a possibility preferring instead to promote conspiracy theories like anything to kick the club. Have you seriously never ever tried to think about why they've took the line they have? Do you seriously believe it's just because they hate the club and will do anything to kick it while it's down? Is there any possibility that actually they hate the owners (with good reason I'm sure you agree) and the plain fact is that highlighting the problems at the club and the feelings of the fans isn't doing anything to kick the club and is in actually fact highlighting real issues that kick the owners over the state of the club.

 

[torchomatic]

Have you ever considered the possibility that the trust and CT are coming at this from the only possible angle that they can to try and do the best for the club? That's the club, not the owners.

I'm intrigued. Look at their stories. Those stories are the best for the club, are they?

 

[Nick]

Trust policy is to represent its members. It's dalliance with Preston Haskell showed them to be as incompetent and self interested as the SCG - like strange they saw potentially rubbing shoulders with the board. Two peas in a pod in many ways

It sums it up, one has a little bit of power And the others want it.

pretend football club owners, something for the business card.

 

[Nick]

Not well. You've clearly never considered it a possibility preferring instead to promote conspiracy theories like anything to kick the club. Have you seriously never ever tried to think about why they've took the line they have? Do you seriously believe it's just because they hate the club and will do anything to kick it while it's down? Is there any possibility that actually they hate the owners (with good reason I'm sure you agree) and the plain fact is that highlighting the problems at the club and the feelings of the fans isn't doing anything to kick the club and is in actually fact highlighting real issues that kick the owners over the state of the club.

How often do gilbert and perry go to games? Let's not give it the doing it for the club line.

 

[skybluetony176]

I'm intrigued. Look at their stories. Those stories are the best for the club, are they?

So is the reason that they're not best for the club because they're being reported or is it the fact that these story exist in the first place? Why do they exist in the first place? Is the fact that they exist in the first place the fault of the CT or the fault of those in charge of the club that are overseeing the worse period of decline in the club's history and the biggest exodus of fans in the club's history?

 

[wingy]

How's that going? Getting the clicks? Selling some books?

So have you ever considered that they rather than being cunts are acting on anything sensitive they may be aware of that may hasten an exit and allow room for whoever is ready to fill the vacuum in a significantly beneficial way or just to stop Fisher on maneuvers?

 

[Nick]

So have you ever considered that they rather than being cunts are acting on anything sensitive they may be aware of that may hasten an exit and allow room for whoever is ready to fill the vacuum in a significantly beneficial way or just to stop Fisher on maneuvers?

So they are jumping on a whisper they have had so they can take credit? Even worse really, like sixfields where it was down to their campaign to put on wiki pages

Are the trust acting on this sensitive information also then? Strange they didn't put that to the members.

 

[skybluetony176]

How often do gilbert and perry go to games? Let's not give it the doing it for the club line.

WTF has how many games they attend got to do with anything. Does that stop them doing what they believe is best by the club? You're being a condescending prick again pulling the attendance card when you can't argue or debate the point. It certainly doesn't make your point right. Why don't you try forming an argument instead of reverting to such bollocks?

 

[Nick]

WTF has how many games they attend got to do with anything. Does that stop them doing what they believe is best by the club? You're being a condescending prick again pulling the attendance card when you can't argue or debate the point. It certainly doesn't make your point right. Why don't you try forming an argument instead of reverting to such bollocks?

Don't start giving it loads again, you look like an angry little man.

How is it all best for the club? What's it achieved?

How much was donated? That's been quiet too.

A news paper with the council being the biggest stake holder, wasps a massive advertiser and nobody actually really a ccfc fan there. They want.clicks, they want to hit.click targets.

 

[torchomatic]

So is the reason that they're not best for the club because they're being reported or is it the fact that these story exist in the first place? Why do they exist in the first place? Is the fact that they exist in the first place the fault of the CT or the fault of those in charge of the club that are overseeing the worse period of decline in the club's history and the biggest exodus of fans in the club's history?

To be honest most of them aren't stories.

 

[skybluetony176]

Don't start giving it loads again, you look like an angry little man.

How is it all best for the club? What's it achieved?

How much was donated? That's been quiet too.

It's highlighted what a fuck up our club is and how it's effected the fan base. How is that wrong? How is that kicking the club? Surely the fact that the stories exist is that someone else is kicking the club? Or are the telegraph just making these stories up? How many corrections have they had to make? How many retractions have they had to make? How many apologies have they had to make?

I have to say I find it really odd that your issue seems to be that these stories are being reported not that they exist in the first place. Why is that?