Questions for the Sky Blue Trust (4 Viewers)

[limoncello]

Are you going to be making a statement regarding the recent SCG meeting?

Are you going to abide by the SCG's conditions to remain on the group?

Do you believe the opprobrium being directed by many on here at Mr Strange is justified?

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

Why don't you email Jan directly instead of posting yet another SCG related thread on here?

 

[dongonzalos]

I think the CET was trying to get the answers to this from both parties

 

[WiganSkyBlue]

Why don't you email Jan directly instead of posting yet another SCG related thread on here?

Hear, hear.

I expect (and hope) they will respond in good time, after consulting with other board members - and then they will inform SBT members of their position. Will the others who were present give out statements to the groups they claim to represent?

 

[dongonzalos]

Why don't you email Jan directly instead of posting yet another SCG related thread on here?

I imagine a lot of people are interested in the answers. If he just emails Jan then no one else knows.

 

[fernandopartridge]

I couldn't care less. Like I said yesterday, to worry about what's said at a consultative group which is really just a mechanism for the club's directors to get messages out to support their own position, seems odd.

 

[shmmeee]

I couldn't care less. Like I said yesterday, to worry about what's said at a consultative group which is really just a mechanism for the club's directors to get messages out to support their own position, seems odd.

Should we not care that that is what the SCG has become?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Should we not care that that is what the SCG has become?

That's what it always was, it was always a sham consultation.

Previously I think it was about being seen to consult the fans without ever really doing so, I think it's just a more extreme version of that now.

 

[lewys33]

Should we not care that that is what the SCG has become?

I think it is irrelevant whether we care or not. As has been discussed many a time on many CCFC related incidents.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

That's what it always was, it was always a sham consultation.

Previously I think it was about being seen to consult the fans without ever really doing so, I think it's just a more extreme version of that now.

How many of us actually knew an SCG existed for however many years?

Anyway, the initial premise of it was fine. If you want fan feedback you get representatives of certain positions... and that sure as hell doesn't mean they have to consult every fan going before attending meetings.

It is slightly concerning that they do seem to be afraid of the negative challenge however. Feedback should always be welcomed, even if it is negative feedback IMHO. You can still say 'no' constructively, after all.

Although to an extent that's not really related to the current meeting, where points of procedure are taking on greater significance than they would otherwise, as much due to the wider context.

 

[shmmeee]

That's what it always was, it was always a sham consultation.

Previously I think it was about being seen to consult the fans without ever really doing so, I think it's just a more extreme version of that now.

Could be wrong, but wasn't it set up by the Trust as a "Joint Council" at first? Seems that it had a fairly noble beginning, until recently. Like I say though, I wouldn't even have known it existed if I didn't come on here so could be well off.

 

[AndreasB]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

 

[dongonzalos]

I couldn't care less. Like I said yesterday, to worry about what's said at a consultative group which is really just a mechanism for the club's directors to get messages out to support their own position, seems odd.

I see your point unfortunately they are currently our only means if communication for the fans to the club.
Even though they seem to fail to consult the fans.
They are now trying to remove the only people who do.

 

[dongonzalos]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

That is what most of their member ( the fans) wanted.
The club instead of attacking the trust should work with them to change the mind of the fans

 

[pw362]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

The CCFPA arranged the Legends game at the Ricoh ,not the trust,before the club moved to sixfields. Also the game against Bristol was played on the Sunday because Northampton had a home game on the Saturday

 

[Jack Griffin]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

Your conspiracy theorist training is going well..

 

[AndreasB]

"Get down to the Ricoh next Sunday.........not a penny to Seppala" from our old friend Moz - head of communications from the Trust was amongst many tweets and communications from the trust who became flag wavers for this event. No conspiracy, only fact.

 

[wingy]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

The only problem with the Scattergun approach Is at best you achieve 50% accuracy ,must try harder.

 

[wingy]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

Sorry had to retrieve this to clarify the Schizophrenic and shifting ramblings of AndreasB position.


AndreasB

Experienced First Team PlayerJoin DateJul 2013Last Online3 Hours AgoPosts485Threads3
130 Like Received In 76 Posts

[h=2]

[/h]

Completely agree, sounds like a horrible mess of a meeting. For all their faults, Trust actually do represent the views of the majority of supporters. ie - we want to back at the Ricoh, dont want a new ground, and are rightfully suspicious of the owners.
I know the Trust have made some mistakes in the past, cozying up to ACL and PKH but are the most democratic and representivive fans group. For ML to bully and patronise them is completely out of order - it is the club who are there to answer questions, not the bloody trust!​

 

[blueflint]

Well all we are left with is the the bloody useless SCG due to the juvenile behaviour of the Trust..

The Trust actively campaigned to get rid of SISU, willingly supported admin and losing of 10 points, organised a charity game to coincide with the first sixfields game to divide fans, and most sickly of all, crept round Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the board....and we wonder why the club wont engage with them???

The Trust should go back to what they know - a rag tag SISU out rentamob - most on here would support that so why not do it and give up this sham of representing all fans.

in what way are you qualified to criticise the trust the trust has my support as they reflect most of my views.you don't represent any of my views

 

[lordsummerisle]

Your conspiracy theorist training is going well..

My irony-meter has just gone off the scale.

 

[Nick]

My irony-meter has just gone off the scale.

He was just congratulating him, like most teachers do

 

[Astute]

Sorry had to retrieve this to clarify the Schizophrenic and shifting ramblings of AndreasB position.


AndreasB

Experienced First Team PlayerJoin DateJul 2013Last Online3 Hours AgoPosts485Threads3
130 Like Received In 76 Posts

[h=2]

[/h]

Completely agree, sounds like a horrible mess of a meeting. For all their faults, Trust actually do represent the views of the majority of supporters. ie - we want to back at the Ricoh, dont want a new ground, and are rightfully suspicious of the owners.
I know the Trust have made some mistakes in the past, cozying up to ACL and PKH but are the most democratic and representivive fans group. For ML to bully and patronise them is completely out of order - it is the club who are there to answer questions, not the bloody trust!​

A Mobile 'like' from me

 

[torchomatic]

You couldn't disagree with "Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the booard..." though, eh?

And for what it's worth the Trust has always behaved and acted like an anti-SISU movement, which is fine, but they need to be more honest about their approach. The March was great, since then....

The CCFPA arranged the Legends game at the Ricoh ,not the trust,before the club moved to sixfields. Also the game against Bristol was played on the Sunday because Northampton had a home game on the Saturday

 

[covspain]

You couldn't disagree with "Haskell and Elliot in a nausiating show of sycophancy in an obvious attempt to get their faces on the booard..." though, eh?
And for what it's worth the Trust has always behaved and acted like an anti-SISU movement, which is fine, but they need to be more honest about their approach. The March was great, since then....

Can you explain the "nauseating display of sycophancy" ? What form did it take?

 

[thaiskyblue]

Can you explain the "nauseating display of sycophancy" ? What form did it take?

Can you explain what " sycophancy ", means ?

 

[torchomatic]

Can you explain what " sycophancy ", means ?

Its a poorly elephant im lead to believe.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[covspain]

Its a poorly elephant im lead to believe.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Really it's a genuine question Torch. I can't remember the Trust behaving in a sycophantic manner and I'm interested to know.

 

[thaiskyblue]

Well done to the trust for sorting out the peterborough trip for under sixteens, great gesture.

 

[jimmyhillsfanclub]

Genuine Q for the trust....

How much is in the "fighting fund" & what is the "fighting fund" for?

I seem to recall the SBT having over 4K membership earlier this season, so I assume there must be at least a couple grand left in the coffers....

 

[thaiskyblue]

Its a poorly elephant im lead to believe.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

hope sam get's better soon.

 

[limoncello]

Genuine Q for the trust....

How much is in the "fighting fund" & what is the "fighting fund" for?

I seem to recall the SBT having over 4K membership earlier this season, so I assume there must be at least a couple grand left in the coffers....

From the last minutes:

"Rachael reported that the Members’ Fund stands at £2847.27 and the Fighting Fund at £3011.41."

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Can you explain the "nauseating display of sycophancy" ? What form did it take?

Doesn't ring any bells with me......

 

[wingy]

Doesn't ring any bells with me......

Is'nt that Campanolog?

 

[nac]

From the last minutes:

"Rachael reported that the Members’ Fund stands at £2847.27 and the Fighting Fund at £3011.41."

If the trust aren't going to protest anymore, why do they need membership fees for anymore? I presume the squirrel is free, websites don't cost that much (no more than £20 pa to host) and I assume a volunteer is doing the web design.

I can only see the funds being used to continue paying the membership to supporter's direct annually. I cannot see the point of charging anymore if they aren't actually doing anything that costs money! I presume the £1 was a throw away amount so they can claim mass membership (I wonder how many are actually active in the SBT?), and this allow them to claim legitimacy when talking with sisu. Clearly that policy is not working, so why still charge a membership?

Seems very odd to me!