A New Group of Attention Seekers

[mkowl]

But from that list you can see that some are potentially funded by the Club via donation etc. 

If the threat is to de-fund the groups by joining an umbrella group (emphasis on the If) then I am going to say that is pretty shitty from the owner really

I appreciate others will disagree on that point - I just want grown ups on both sides so we can work forwards positively not this angst FFS 

Edited June 11 by mkowl

[Reesh]

15 minutes ago, Bellsview said:

Fuck me! I got to page 4 of that thread before I stopped reading.

Absolute, total hysteria over fuck all. 

My gist of it is that DC will pull funding of the supporters groups which the club gives funding to if they join in with a combined group containing the 1867 wacko’s and other critics hell bent on destabilising the club, so said supporters groups have pulled out of joining any combined group.

My thoughts on that? A big well done DC! 

We’ve stayed up, we’ve tied DR to a new deal, there’s a genuine feel good factor about the club and still the vultures continue to circle, desperate to cease any possible opportunity to kick DC in the nads. I wish they would just fuck off! Every single act they’ve attempted to try and destabilise the club and discredit DC has left them with egg on their faces. They are the cancer of the club, not DC.

DC needs to stop engaging with these clowns because they’ll twist every single thing he says or does to suit their agenda - and the dumbfucks on Stalk will lap it up and cling on to every single negative word posted.

 

Well said Pete

[Tewksbury]

You can see why DC doesn't want to deal with that.

The fat headed guy from TWW said there's no forgiving Chansiri regardless of what he does on the podcast not long ago.

1867 and Owlstalk, less said the better.

The single issue groups are going to get quickly drowned out by the more militant and vocal (to use Jim from the 1867's own words), who are all massively anti-DC.

Why podcasts and OT are included I'll never know. The social media types proved they're useless last season when they had their forum with Chansiri following the fan's forum and instead of clarifying the ambiguous stuff from the forum and potentially stopping 99% of the drama over it, instead picking a couple of soundbites (themselves pretty ambiguous),  making something out of nothing and going for content over clarification.

[Reesh]

11 minutes ago, Tewksbury said:

You can see why DC doesn't want to deal with that.

The fat headed guy from TWW said there's no forgiving Chansiri regardless of what he does on the podcast not long ago.

1867 and Owlstalk, less said the better.

The single issue groups are going to get quickly drowned out by the more militant and vocal (to use Jim from the 1867's own words), who are all massively anti-DC.

Why podcasts and OT are included I'll never know. The social media types proved they're useless last season when they had their forum with Chansiri following the fan's forum and instead of clarifying the ambiguous stuff from the forum and potentially stopping 99% of the drama over it, instead picking a couple of soundbites (themselves pretty ambiguous),  making something out of nothing and going for content over clarification.

Who's the fat headed guy?

[Andyben]

2 minutes ago, Reesh said:

Who's the fat headed guy?

I have an idea but don't want to get banned

[Teddy Nickelarse]

3 hours ago, Reesh said:

It's why i avoid it like the plague mate. Hargreaves is a full weight wrong un ****.

He is. Bullying bigot masquering as a virtuous crusader. Obnoxious individual. 

That thread though! Just looked - 24 pages of the usual suspects posting the same regurgitated vitriol. Desperate. 

The gall of people seizing every opportunity or creating negatives out of nothing as a basis for accusing DC of rocking the boat is truly gobsmacking. 

 

 

[Teddy Nickelarse]

55 minutes ago, mkowl said:

But from that list you can see that some are potentially funded by the Club via donation etc. 

If the threat is to de-fund the groups by joining an umbrella group (emphasis on the If) then I am going to say that is pretty shitty from the owner really

I appreciate others will disagree on that point - I just want grown ups on both sides so we can work forwards positively not this angst FFS 

Ordinarily I'd agree but when the loudest voices of those apparently involved have a relentless recent history of campaigning to undermine and abuse DC I have no problem in condoning his (alleged) threat.

 

[Otto_Man]

1 hour ago, mkowl said:

But from that list you can see that some are potentially funded by the Club via donation etc. 

If the threat is to de-fund the groups by joining an umbrella group (emphasis on the If) then I am going to say that is pretty shitty from the owner really

I appreciate others will disagree on that point - I just want grown ups on both sides so we can work forwards positively not this angst FFS 

1867 have openly stated their sole aim is to force DC out of the club, why would he fund a groups associating themselves with an entity whose sole aim is that?

Not really for any of us to tell DC how to spend his money, but fuck me I sure as shit wouldn't expect him to spend his money on that.

It's as obvious as a dog with 2 dicks that 1867 are done (and good riddance) this is their last throw of the dice at attempting to stay relevant. 

Absolute ***** the lot of them, worse than the pigs, at least they don't try to hide their disdain for us.

Edited June 11 by Otto_Man

[Billysboy]

2 hours ago, mkowl said:

But from that list you can see that some are potentially funded by the Club via donation etc. 

If the threat is to de-fund the groups by joining an umbrella group (emphasis on the If) then I am going to say that is pretty shitty from the owner really

I appreciate others will disagree on that point - I just want grown ups on both sides so we can work forwards positively not this angst FFS 

Is it shitty though, correct me if I'm wrong but it seems groups like 1867, owlstalk, TWW and such are using the less hostile groups as a trojan horse to get round the table.

[BraddersTim]

In all of this has it been missed that when the Nevs said that DC refused to have a meeting with them that it wasn't true.

The Mattfootballtyper bloke off X had been involved in the Umbrella talks at some point and when the meeting with DC point came up, told the Nevs to email Trevor Braithwaite.  Instead they emailed DC and got no reply. Why should they if they didn't follow the process?

It's funny really...the according to them there's no structure, DC controls everything, he won't delegate etc etc.  Then they moan when they don't do what they're told and get in touch with the right person.  I can just imagine DC's face when he read (then deleted) that poorly written email.

[Reesh]

4 minutes ago, BraddersTim said:

In all of this has it been missed that when the Nevs said that DC refused to have a meeting with them that it wasn't true.

The Mattfootballtyper bloke off X had been involved in the Umbrella talks at some point and when the meeting with DC point came up, told the Nevs to email Trevor Braithwaite.  Instead they emailed DC and got no reply. Why should they if they didn't follow the process?

It's funny really...the according to them there's no structure, DC controls everything, he won't delegate etc etc.  Then they moan when they don't do what they're told and get in touch with the right person.  I can just imagine DC's face when he read (then deleted) that poorly written email.

The thing is, Jim from 1867, has said he's been getting tidbits of information from places that DC is being more open and acting on advice over certain things and is approving changes so why rock the fucking boat?

[BraddersTim]

1 minute ago, Reesh said:

The thing is, Jim from 1867, has said he's been getting tidbits of information from places that DC is being more open and acting on advice over certain things and is approving changes so why rock the fucking boat?

Because if they don't rock the boat they don't get attention and then they cease to have a reason to exist.

[HoylandOwl]

All I think this 1867/naysayers or whatever shit proves, is we won’t get a larger scale unified ‘fans’ group that’s relatively representative of people’s thoughts. 
 

[Reesh]

Watford trust sceptical over their owners offer of shares for sale https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c800yl311w7o

[Andyben]

48 minutes ago, HoylandOwl said:

All I think this 1867/naysayers or whatever shit proves, is we won’t get a larger scale unified ‘fans’ group that’s relatively representative of people’s thoughts. 
 

you spelled nevs wrong

[mkowl]

2 hours ago, Teddy Nickelarse said:

Ordinarily I'd agree but when the loudest voices of those apparently involved have a relentless recent history of campaigning to undermine and abuse DC I have no problem in condoning his (alleged) threat.

 

Just to clarify I was meaning just some of the groups on said list. Meaning the likes of the Disabled Supporters Group, Armed Forces. I genuinely have no idea whether they get funds or not, or the quantum thereof if they do. 

So my perspective on this is IF club charitable funding has been threatened to be withdrawn from a couple of the sub-groups that do very good work for their community (should they choose to join an Umbrella Group) then thats not something I am comfortable with. 

Chansiri not choosing to engage with elements of the intended umbrella group I can fully understand 

Indeed I looked at an email I sent back to Harrowby Owl - in fact may have been 2 separate occasions where I gave robust opinions on some of those on the list, folk on here can probably guess the one party that got my full disdain. 

 

[mkowl]

53 minutes ago, Bellsview said:

It won’t work because there are factions in there that have political motives, with the main one being to oust DC. 

They aren’t going to be interested in, for example, working with the club on improved facilities for disabled supporters - and they’re certainly not going to join in with anything that might be praiseworthy or even being tolerant towards DC. 

I’m all for democracy, freedom of speech and constructive criticism where it’s necessary, but on this occasion I fully agree with DC. You can’t let these loons have a voice at the top table of any supporters group, because they aren’t motivated by what’s best for the club and its supporters - they have an unwavering attitude and belief that everything wrong with the club is down to DC and that any success we have is achieved despite him being at the helm. It’s obsessive behaviour and all it will do is destabilise and damage the club, not to mention the supporters groups that agree to work with them.

 

Like I have said I am supportive of an umbrella group of a "Supporters Club" - I like what certain clubs do, the German approach in many ways but tweaked for how football historically works in the UK. It is hard to explain the concept because it would be a department of the Club, linked to membership but importantly not a lapdog of the owner. 

Its the sort of thing you could only set up with a new owner and when times are OK on the pitch

 

[Teddy Nickelarse]

38 minutes ago, mkowl said:

Just to clarify I was meaning just some of the groups on said list. Meaning the likes of the Disabled Supporters Group, Armed Forces. I genuinely have no idea whether they get funds or not, or the quantum thereof if they do. 

So my perspective on this is IF club charitable funding has been threatened to be withdrawn from a couple of the sub-groups that do very good work for their community (should they choose to join an Umbrella Group) then thats not something I am comfortable with. 

Chansiri not choosing to engage with elements of the intended umbrella group I can fully understand 

Indeed I looked at an email I sent back to Harrowby Owl - in fact may have been 2 separate occasions where I gave robust opinions on some of those on the list, folk on here can probably guess the one party that got my full disdain. 

 

Yeah fair do's - agreed.

[Otto_Man]

1 hour ago, mkowl said:

Just to clarify I was meaning just some of the groups on said list. Meaning the likes of the Disabled Supporters Group, Armed Forces. I genuinely have no idea whether they get funds or not, or the quantum thereof if they do. 

So my perspective on this is IF club charitable funding has been threatened to be withdrawn from a couple of the sub-groups that do very good work for their community (should they choose to join an Umbrella Group) then thats not something I am comfortable with. 

Chansiri not choosing to engage with elements of the intended umbrella group I can fully understand 

Indeed I looked at an email I sent back to Harrowby Owl - in fact may have been 2 separate occasions where I gave robust opinions on some of those on the list, folk on here can probably guess the one party that got my full disdain. 

 

Come on mk you're not that naive. I can't imagine anyone has an issue with SODA joining up with the wise old owls (say), but there's no way the club are going to provide charitable funding to anyone aligning themselves with a group who could then try to subvert what those funds were originally supplied for...

We've all heard of the turkeys voting for Christmas, but this takes the piss

Edited June 11 by Otto_Man

[Skamp]

We need a new Rita Nettleship.

 

She'll be turning in her grave bless her.

[mkowl]

1 hour ago, Otto_Man said:

Come on mk you're not that naive. I can't imagine anyone has an issue with SODA joining up with the wise old owls (say), but there's no way the club are going to provide charitable funding to anyone aligning themselves with a group who could then try to subvert what those funds were originally supplied for...

We've all heard of the turkeys voting for Christmas, but this takes the piss

I don't really disagree. 

I suppose I am looking at it from one angle. I don't like the suggested threat of withdrawing funding from supporter groups in any scenario.

But of course I understand that you don't want to be funding sub groups that, even indirectly, are potentially going to throw shit at you. 

So no I am not naive in that regard, just thinking there is a hell of a better way of doing this, certainly more constructive on both sides

 

[mkowl]

33 minutes ago, Skamp said:

We need a new Rita Nettleship.

 

She'll be turning in her grave bless her.

The concept of the Supporters Club or an updated version thereof is what i am rabbiting on about. Go back a few years I was involved in tentative steps to come up with a suggestion.

Did not get much love really, indeed the arse from Owlstalk basically used his forum to shout it down. Frankly did not have the energy to fight against it. 

Ironically I think the whole relationship between Club and fans would have been a lot better, perhaps more trusted if it has gained traction. But it needs setting up on an uptick in club fortunes, it needs understanding what it is, how it works, it cannot be usurped by a vocal minority. 

The perception of fans groups is very clouded by the actions of the past. It is difficult to un learn that 

[Tank_Owl2,0]

Is Clive Betts an Owl/Pig? If the latter why would any Wednesday fan group wish to deal with him?

Edited June 11 by Tank_Owl2,0

[Reesh]

3 minutes ago, Tank_Owl2,0 said:

Is Clive Betts an Owl/Pig? If the latter why would any Wednesday fan group wish to deal with him?

He's Wednesday....

[Otto_Man]

Absolutely nothing in that statement suggests the withdrawal of any funding because it clearly wasn't said and is slanderous.

Tells me everything I need to know about these rats...

[Otto_Man]

About time the bent* **** Betts stood down isn't it?

*bent as in dodgy because he "employs" his partner and pays him 45 grand a year

[HoylandOwl]

1 hour ago, Alan Finney said:

Statement from the trust. 

I remember DC turfing them out of get togethers he had with the supporters groups and continued the meetings with the other groups. That must have hurt them and they've been racking their brains ever since on how to become relevant again. So they came up with this umbrella group idea, linked it to the planned future legislation to try and force DC to engage with them again by removing anyone else that DC could engage with. But they'll do exactly to those groups what they are accusing DC of doing to them, i.e manipulate and control them.

Reading up online it sounds like they approached the groups without letting the club know but at least one particular group boss grassed them up to DC 😂😂😂. DC quite rightly used his influence on these groups so they didn't get themselves into a position where hostile groups could use them for their own ends.

There's accusations being bandied around elsewhere on who they think the grass is, unless they've been removed of course. I don't know the bloke or the site so can't comment on either as I don't do that particular type of SM.

Must admit, I thought they were on their last legs, but it appears they've been plotting. I await their inevitable demise after success on the field.

That ‘statement’ hurts my eyes. 
it helps if these groups made things accessible to all too.
 

That statement is NOT that. 

[Owling_Wolf]

54 minutes ago, Tank_Owl2,0 said:

Is Clive Betts an Owl/Pig? If the latter why would any Wednesday fan group wish to deal with him?

He's often at our away games.

[lobster]

1 hour ago, Tank_Owl2,0 said:

Is Clive Betts an Owl/Pig? If the latter why would any Wednesday fan group wish to deal with him?

It didn't think he was real just a cardboard cutout

[Tylluan]

I've read the Trust statement as the club have told various groups that they'll lose their individual places on the engagement panel because the wider WFA (new Trust) group that they've joined will have one voice on the the panel instead. 

Their are certain groups that benefit from closer ties to the club. Several members of the Armed Forces Owls represented the club at the National Arboretum D Day commemoration. SODA and Wise Old Owls enjoy close relationships as well. To lose their voice to a conglomerate entity that might not truly represent them was probably too much.

[Andyben]

47 minutes ago, Tylluan said:

National Arboretum D Day commemoration.

In Nottingham?

[mkowl]

56 minutes ago, Tylluan said:

I've read the Trust statement as the club have told various groups that they'll lose their individual places on the engagement panel because the wider WFA (new Trust) group that they've joined will have one voice on the the panel instead. 

Their are certain groups that benefit from closer ties to the club. Several members of the Armed Forces Owls represented the club at the National Arboretum D Day commemoration. SODA and Wise Old Owls enjoy close relationships as well. To lose their voice to a conglomerate entity that might not truly represent them was probably too much.

And they are right to not join if their views are going to be submerged 

I suppose how I see it is a Supporters Club is the overarching structure, but very much the individual sections run themselves, but become affiliated thereto. 

It opens an official channel to communicate with the Club, it could offer support and resources to those wanting to set up other groups.

 

 

[Andyben]

10 minutes ago, mkowl said:

And they are right to not join if their views are going to be submerged 

I suppose how I see it is a Supporters Club is the overarching structure, but very much the individual sections run themselves, but become affiliated thereto. 

It opens an official channel to communicate with the Club, it could offer support and resources to those wanting to set up other groups.

 

 

However, in the real world....

My thoughts / concept for a new supporters club from a while ago that I spoke to TB about could have worked 

[mkowl]

Just now, Andyben said:

However, in the real world....

My thoughts / concept for a new supporters club from a while ago that I spoke to TB about could have worked 

Remind us what you suggested.

I don't think it was that dissimilar to what I had put into the mix a decade ago.

I agree my considerations are pretty wishful thinking. Or more I wouldn't start from here to achieve it.

Like I say it almost has to be created when things are going well, so it's viewed as collaboration not confrontation. 

The Supporters Club I envisaged would have stated it was "non political".

My emails to Harrowby Owl were quite forthright and indeed predicted it would never work 

[Andyben]

There were two versions.

An independent one and one ljnked to the club.

[mkowl]

3 minutes ago, Andyben said:

There were two versions.

An independent one and one ljnked to the club.

I seemed to recall liking the concept when you mentioned it. Preferring the one linked to the Club / Membership scheme.

See any maverick trouble makers could have membership revoked or denied 

[Chelters]

Seriously how many fan groups do we need anyway??

Edited June 11 by Chelters

[Andyben]

18 minutes ago, Chelters said:

Seriously how many fan groups do we need anyway??

Just mine obvz - which would have had sub-committees / special interest groups etc all of which would be equally represented on the board, SODA / WOO/ JUNIOR OWLS / Armed Forces / Expats etc 

[mkowl]

1 hour ago, Chelters said:

Seriously how many fan groups do we need anyway??

I mean there is a need for a separate one for each poster on here as we would never all agree on everything or anything 

[MAL]

2 minutes ago, mkowl said:

I mean there is a need for a separate one for each poster on here as we would never all agree on everything or anything 

So we don't need any then.

Each and every one will not work 100% with another.

Even if we only have one, every member will not all think alike, which will/would/could cause friction.

[Billysboy]

Think with the money in the game at prem / championship level especially  for the bigger clubs that fans groups are a token gesture and just paid lip service most of the time.

[mkowl]

7 hours ago, MAL said:

So we don't need any then.

Each and every one will not work 100% with another.

Even if we only have one, every member will not all think alike, which will/would/could cause friction.

But then we have trade unions, political parties etc. So you might not agree with everything but you join or vote because broad brush your views align 

I suppose its whether you think fans groups are there to be confrontational, sadly that is when they are noticed, or it is more a broad church of Sheffield Wednesday fans. 

So you are a member of Sheffield Wednesday Football Club, automatically as a season ticket holder, you can join thereafter on different levels, the sub groups for overseas Owls, special interest groups are part of it.

And yes from that there could be a fan group representative on the board, channeling the considerations into the mix, does not have to be agenda driven.

I think Andy sort of grasps the concept, it's just re-thinking the thing

 

[mkowl]

Interesting that the Stalk thread seems to have disappeared. 

Anyway he is bemoaning and citing defeat in the battle against ticket prices with Chansiri.

The dichotomy here is that across the EFL the cumulative attendances were the highest since the 50s (cited as the golden period). So football is obviously doing something well and suggests pricing is viewed as reasonable. 

[Andyben]

44 minutes ago, mkowl said:

So you are a member of Sheffield Wednesday Football Club, automatically as a season ticket holder, you can join thereafter on different levels, the sub groups for overseas Owls, special interest groups are part of it.

And yes from that there could be a fan group representative on the board, channelling the considerations into the mix, does not have to be agenda driven.

I think Andy sort of grasps the concept, it's just re-thinking the thing

There'd be no representation on the board of the club - we've only got one director remember, but the SC would have a dedicated staff member to enable bilateral talks

This was the basic gist of it - 

1. Anyone with a ticket office ID automatically becomes a member of the SC and anyone else can join for free by registering at the OS. 
2. If you're a ST holder or other paid up member, you become a voting member and are able to stand for election and vote in elections to the SC's 'board' - all identities would be 'verified' using an online Due Diligence screener.
3. Within the SC there would be approved sub-sections with their own mini-charters which would have a place on the board and would hold their own 'elections' based on their charter.
4. Funded by memberships and £5/£10 from each ST to cover staff costs at the Club (SC liaison officer, admin & IT etc)
5. Sorry Tee/Reesh - official Forum (locked to SC members) on the club website and official social media accounts.

There's other stuff but I've forgot most of it

The unofficial SC would be 80% of the above but with sponsorship and fundraising to provide the working capital to run IT systems and employ people etc

Edited June 12 by Andyben

[mkowl]

23 minutes ago, Bellsview said:

I don’t think there’s a need for a group like 1867 to exist right now, when its moral purpose is to ridicule, belittle, criticise and slate the Chairman. Even trade unions work with employers, not against them.

If things go tits up at Wednesday then that’s the time for an 1867 Group. To have a group hovering in the background, just waiting for something to go wrong and continually putting a negative spin on anything DC does is simply out of order.

They aren’t needed, they aren’t wanted and they contribute nothing positive towards SWFC. The sooner they fuck off the better!

And I guess this is where the Supporters Club concept comes from. You build it when things are heading in a more positive way. And hopefully if it worked well then you never get to the stage of the acrimony between some fans and the owner that we have seen. It will never be perfect, the recent example at Wolves is interesting to follow from afar, that the Club appear to have listened to elements of the complaints. At the same time I am sure most fans see it as trying to get a fair balance so you are competitive on the pitch but also fans are not priced out, replaced with the tourists 

[mkowl]

1 minute ago, Andyben said:

This was the basic gist of it - 

1. Anyone with a ticket office ID automatically becomes a member of the SC and anyone else can join for free by registering at the OS. 
2. If you're a ST holder or other paid up member, you become a voting member and are able to stand for election and vote in elections to the SC's 'board' - all identities would be 'verified' using an online Due Diligence screener.
3. Within the SC there would be approved sub-sections with their own mini-charters which would have a place on the board and would hold their own 'elections' based on their charter.
4. Funded by memberships and £5/£10 from each ST to cover staff costs at the Club (SC liaison officer, admin & IT etc)
5. Sorry Tee/Reesh - official Forum (locked to SC members) on the club website and official social media accounts.

There's other stuff but I've forgot most of it

The unofficial SC would be 80% of the above but with sponsorship and fundraising to provide the working capital to run IT systems and employ people etc

Totally on board with that idea. Sort of what I was suggesting - just a bit clearer for others to follow. 

I genuinely think Wednesday could become a leader that others follow

[Beaconowl]

Watching the Euros I see an advert at the game for “BYD, the number One Nev maker”. Are BYD behind the 1867 group?

[Chelters]

1 hour ago, Beaconowl said:

Watching the Euros I see an advert at the game for “BYD, the number One Nev maker”. Are BYD behind the 1867 group?

Whichever factory is churning them out needs to change their brain cell supplier. 

[Andyben]

10 minutes ago, Chelters said:

Whichever factory is churning them out needs to change their brain cell supplier. 

Or consider finding one...

[lobster]

7 hours ago, Beaconowl said:

Watching the Euros I see an advert at the game for “BYD, the number One Nev maker”. Are BYD behind the 1867 group?

According to some motoring guru on You Tube BYD is known as Burn Your Dealership due to the number of fires their cars have in China