Nick
Administrator
It isn't about the opinion, it's about voicing that opinion.
Personally I think it's disgraceful trying to associate somebody's job with an opinion. I want no part of it.
I receive payments into my personal bank account from a local council...
So do countless others for that matter. It's disingenuous to associate role with POV. It's also dangerous to start that, as it's all a bit McCarthyist.
Yet would you be on the board of an organisation that slated them?
I can understand perfectly why somebody wouldn't want to slate them, it's human nature.
Imagine if I had a business that had a good bank account because of SISU for example, what would the reaction be?
Its about defying expectations I guess. If people assume we are a bunch of angry trolls on the internet then we show we are reasonable and focused. The more conjecture we introduce and the wider we cast out net in terms of targets the less any individual point is taken seriously.
The photo in the report of the 'pop up shop' is from when were at 'home' at the Ricoh. They even took over the club shop there.
His dads got hold of the laptop again I think. Either than or he's got a split personality.Oh dear, here goes Shmmeee on the defensive again regarding the council
He’s right though. I’m happy to expand and guess and suggest on here what might be the case but when I email the bbc I need to state what I know clearly and stick to the facts. They should ask the parties the whyHis dads got hold of the laptop again I think. Either than or he's got a split personality.
Lots of support from other clubs in the comments section and few clarifications about the trust and the real truth.
People also want to see this game on TV. Bit perplexed myself that it isn't on TV but nonetheless will we will make our real voices heard!
I would have no issue slating the company that gave me money if I thought they were making huge mistakes, you can't make assumptions like that about everyone.
If, as I think he is he is saying, we need to present a cohesive argument & communicate it logically, one issue at a time- as opposed to just going around slating everyone all at once thus appearing to be a rabble of insurgents- then I think he is bang on the money.His dads got hold of the laptop again I think. Either than or he's got a split personality.
He’s right though. I’m happy to expand and guess and suggest on here what might be the case but when I email the bbc I need to state what I know clearly and stick to the facts. They should ask the parties the why
If, as I think he is he is saying, we need to present a cohesive argument & communicate it logically, one issue at a time- as opposed to just going around slating everyone all at once thus appearing to be a rabble of insurgents- then I think he is bang on the money.
We see this everywhere, even in politics- if you want to dilute a message then just swamp the place in conflicting angry complaints, that way nobody listens to any of it.
Only if it’s interesting - The Trust haven’t stuck to any facts and they get the story
Thats down to the communication.
Rugby clubs are a hot topic right now with Saracens, there has never been a better time to show the reality of what Wasps are doing, while the national sporting audience has the thought in their heads "oh look, the best rugby team is dodgy, I wonder what other teams are up to no good"- but no, not a single word on it.
If, as I think he is he is saying, we need to present a cohesive argument & communicate it logically, one issue at a time- as opposed to just going around slating everyone all at once thus appearing to be a rabble of insurgents- then I think he is bang on the money.
We also need to be careful not to be seen in the same was as the trust with their one enemy line. Then we become just another protest group.
Less of the we Rob. The trust represent themselves not us. You're correct though, any fans group with a voice and valid point would have been all over this. The trust just bend over compliantly and twist the story to suit there agenda. The sooner that we can get a more representative groups voice heard instead the better.The botton line here is that The Trust are doing Wasps' job for them, ie keep all coverage well away from the indemnity. And I agree with Grendel- there was a great piece waiting to be used here involving Wasps asking us to pay for their own issues, and avoiding legal lingo to get it into the perceptions of the wider audience, but we decided to invent stories about our own fans fighting with each other. Absolutely pathetic.
Less of the we Rob. The trust represent themselves not us. You're correct though, any fans group with a voice and valid point would have been all over this. The trust just bend over compliantly and twist the story to suit there agenda. The sooner that we can get a more representative groups voice heard instead the better.
That’s true tooOnly if it’s interesting - The Trust haven’t stuck to any facts and they get the story
I receive payments into my personal bank account from a local council...
So do countless others for that matter. It's disingenuous to associate role with POV. It's also dangerous to start that, as it's all a bit McCarthyist.
Pretty much everything you see or hear, no matter if it’s here, Facebook, Twitter or speaking to people at games, is the same. The indemnity is the issue that needs dealing with first and the trust aren’t representative of the fans.Surely the Trust should be reading all this and taking it on board? The fact that after years and years, they just ignore it.
We tried to keep balance in ours but I’m sort of regretting the trust sentenceThe botton line here is that The Trust are doing Wasps' job for them, ie keep all coverage well away from the indemnity. And I agree with Grendel- there was a great piece waiting to be used here involving Wasps asking us to pay for their own issues, and avoiding legal lingo to get it into the perceptions of the wider audience, but we decided to invent stories about our own fans fighting with each other. Absolutely pathetic.
I totally agree with that chiefdave we are much more united, we really are!Pretty much everything you see or hear, no matter if it’s here, Facebook, Twitter or speaking to people at games, is the same. The indemnity is the issue that needs dealing with first and the trust aren’t representative of the fans.
Yet somehow the trust have convinced themselves it’s just a handful of people on here who disagree with them and everyone else is onboard.
Reality is the fan base is the most united it’s been in a long time and the ones who are out of step with that are the trust.
Pretty much everything you see or hear, no matter if it’s here, Facebook, Twitter or speaking to people at games, is the same. The indemnity is the issue that needs dealing with first and the trust aren’t representative of the fans.
Yet somehow the trust have convinced themselves it’s just a handful of people on here who disagree with them and everyone else is onboard.
Reality is the fan base is the most united it’s been in a long time and the ones who are out of step with that are the trust.
We tried to keep balance in ours but I’m sort of regretting the trust sentence
Heard anything?I DM’d the BBC journalist, explained the indemnity and sent him our statement
Edit to add: I did not discredit the Trust or any individual within it.
Easy victim status and phil uptons focus on it and I don’t like not being liked I supposeWhy?
Easy victim status and phil uptons focus on it and I don’t like not being liked I suppose
Easy victim status and phil uptons focus on it and I don’t like not being liked I suppose
Oh no I get that it’s just reflecting on it. I’m pleased we were able to refute itOh it wasn't you Pete, you handled it really well.
Phil Upton would have done that on purpose. You could tell it was all he was bothered about.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?