Coventry supprters club (11 Viewers)

D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I get the impression the planned protest is not against wasps but on the day of the first game
Not arguing that, as not heard about it until this very moment (a small aside again, but a poor protest is one nobody knows about - we can speak from experience!)

But if you're banning people who wish to protest, then you really have to extend that to anybody who protests against any of the parties invoilved, otherwise you yourself are engaging in a political act by deciding which protests are worthwhile.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
It does read that way but surely that can't be right. Not even the trust would do something that stupid would they?
By definition, if you were outside Wasps on the first day, you'd be encouraging *some* disruption of their game, whatever the message. That being said, currently we have a protest, the numbers of which make our protest look like one of the Stop the War efforts!
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
"the truth will out" etc was among a few veiled accusations as if to say there is more to it than just because of being on the board previously. Whilst that may or may not be true, slinging mud without substance does them no favours. Either come out and say it then let people make their mind up or don't imply they've done anything that contravenes rules. Their initial response was to say it was because of being a board member then this all came from Rob SBA later. Why do they even have a board? The notion of supporters is for the supporters. You might have a face at the front of it, I even get a few rules, but it should be self policing, inclusive to all and with one common goal of supporting the team. I really do find it all quite odd.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
"the truth will out" etc was among a few veiled accusations as if to say there is more to it than just because of being on the board previously. Whilst that may or may not be true, slinging mud without substance does them no favours. Either come out and say it then let people make their mind up or don't imply they've done anything that contravenes rules. Their initial response was to say it was because of being a board member then this all came from Rob SBA later. Why do they even have a board? The notion of supporters is for the supporters. You might have a face at the front of it, I even get a few rules, but it should be self policing, inclusive to all and with one common goal of supporting the team. I really do find it all quite odd.
Thing is, we all have our views over the political situation, but I get that the L&W group is about listening to Doyle bang on about a great tackle he made against Southend in 2013, and things like that. If I went to a meeting to listen to him and / or others, it wouldn't change my view of the wider issues, wouldn't change your view either. I get that there's a time and a place for different types of support.

What's likely to change my view is strange arbitrary rules being applied over who can and can't go. As far as I can tell anybody's welcome at L&W and Bedworth etc, and that's how it should be.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
Tbf it probably was a great tackle v Southend in 2013, but unlikely to be as good as his tackle against Wimbledon resulting in a 45 yard goal :)
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Currently CJ seems more bothered about his holiday in Jamaica tbh...
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
The 'the truth will come out' stuff is pathetic. This is something I've aimed at the trust before as they won't release certain things to the fans. If you've got something be up front about it. It makes them look cliquey.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
The 'the truth will come out' stuff is pathetic. This is something I've aimed at the trust before as they won't release certain things to the fans. If you've got something be up front about it. It makes them look cliquey.
tbf, we had that from RFC for a fair while on here about the whole scenario. It's two sides of the same coin. Somewhere in the middle, not nailing your colours to one mast or another, ensures *all* parties end up scrutinised, and also ensure people can chat bollocks with Dom Hyam!

I also don't like it when interested parties try to interfere. This 'it'll hamper negotiations' is bollocks. The same line was given when we had our protest against Wasps... and it didn't do any harm! What'll happen is either the numbers'll be so pitiful that nobody notices, or it's large enough that it shows there's actually an incentive to get something done. I'd like to know who's purpose it serves to try and restrict protests. I have a theory, but many would label it a conspiracy one and, in the spirit of other supporters' clubs, this ain't the thread to raise it...
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
tbf, we had that from RFC for a fair while on here about the whole scenario. It's two sides of the same coin. Somewhere in the middle, not nailing your colours to one mast or another, ensures *all* parties end up scrutinised, and also ensure people can chat bollocks with Dom Hyam!

I also don't like it when interested parties try to interfere. This 'it'll hamper negotiations' is bollocks. The same line was given when we had our protest against Wasps... and it didn't do any harm! What'll happen is either the numbers'll be so pitiful that nobody notices, or it's large enough that it shows there's actually an incentive to get something done. I'd like to know who's purpose it serves to try and restrict protests. I have a theory, but many would label it a conspiracy one and, in the spirit of other supporters' clubs, this ain't the thread to raise it...
I thought RFC was just trolling as he was so outlandish in his claims. Definitely not someone who you'd want making decisions for a non-political organisation.

You don't know your protest didn't do harm, Wasps could have been ready to sign a deal but remembered you lot causing trouble and thought "nah it's not worth it" ;)
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
no sympathy, he loves wasps more than ccfc anyway

also what actually happens in a supporters club? you have parties? watch games together? have meetings to talka bout favv players?

lol sorry sounds childish,i am sure there is a point to it all.

p.s fuck the trust
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I thought RFC was just trolling as he was so outlandish in his claims. Definitely not someone who you'd want making decisions for a non-political organisation.
RFC's twitter account is just the same. I agree, there's been a few over the years I assume are comedy trolls (from all POVs). It slightly unnerves me when they turn out to be real!

westterrace2, there's another from the opposite side of the fence!
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
I have asked several members of the Trust Board directly about this supposed protest plan against the owners & club at the next Wasps game. Got a categorical NO such plan at the moment & "fake News" I would assume CJ could back that up

There are no negotiations going on with Wasps. The new sporting CEO at wasps confirmed that they still have contact between wasps & CCFC but the dispute between both sets of owners blocks any form of negotiation. So any protest should there ever be one is not going to damage anything.
 

HuckerbyDublinWhelan

Well-Known Member
I have asked several members of the Trust Board directly about this supposed protest plan against the owners & club at the next Wasps game. Got a categorical NO such plan & "fake News" I would assume CJ could back that up

There are no negotiations going on with Wasps. The new sporting CEO at wasps confirmed that they still have contact between wasps & CCFC but the dispute between both sets of owners blocks any form of negotiation. So any protest should there ever be one is not going to damage anything.
Of course they won’t protest at a wasps game... that’ll cause slight inconvenience to Nick Eastwood - he might stop giving the trust free wasps tickets
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
no sympathy, he loves wasps more than ccfc anyway

also what actually happens in a supporters club? you have parties? watch games together? have meetings to talka bout favv players?

lol sorry sounds childish,i am sure there is a point to it all.

p.s fuck the trust

Says man who spends significant portion of his waking hours doing exactly those things on here :p
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
Says man who spends significant portion of his waking hours doing exactly those things on here :p
i did think that, i just think internet is right place for it

would be weird to go to a meeting to talka bout this sorta stuff imo but each to their own

is that wat supporters clubs are then?
 

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
Clearly if the Trust isnt planning any protest (whatever your view point on that) against anyone including ccfc , wasps and sisu ........ and there are no negotiations going on for a return ................. then why should anything else that has been expressed as a reason for expulsion be believed or be seen as anything other than bullying by a small group who think they have some power (and who actually dont, just like the rest of us)
 

Nick

Administrator
I have no clue what's going on.

giphy.gif
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Where have I said Moz should or shouldn’t be banned?

And I have no idea who rob foster is.

You said the Trust wouldn’t organise a protest at a Wasps game, Rob Foster runs the supporters club and says Moz needs to be kicked out because the Trust are organising a protest at a Wasps game.

Ergo, you are claiming he was kicked out unfairly.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
- Super fan Moz Baker isn’t allowed to joint RFCs Coventry Supporters group

- pro trust people are up in arms.

- Meanwhile there’s an alleged protest at wasps first game, not against Wasps but possibly at the Ricoh

The pro-trust accounts jumping to his defence are (imo) not helping. I was on there defending him and I'm about as anti-trust as you can get. If the yare there representing themselves and with no agenda, just as a supporter to enjoy an evening listening to players with likeminded CCFC fans, remembering what it used to be like before all the bickering, then I don't see what the harm is. The trust has had its day. Its so divisive and I think should disband, but to deny someone the enjoyment simply because they were once associated with another board and before they were even formed is laughable at best. Non political is an absolute joke. One thing I would say is those on the trust board, whilst I might consistently disagree with their stance and their tactics, they are all City fans giving up their spare time for no real reward and believe they are doing the right thing. Some have egos and don't want to relinquish the power, but others believe for the greater good.

It's such a shame that when things are for once looking positive on the pitch, that we have all of these rival factions and petty disagreements when we surely all want the same end.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
According to Rob Foster: yes.

According to the Trust: no

Whheeeeee another day supporting CCFC

Christ your ability to digest facts deteriorates by the day. There is no claim about a wasps protest at all by the trust
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top