All Activity

You're obsessed with this notion of there being "winners" and "losers" arising out of the call for a boycott. There's no such thing - if the boycott is "a success" and say 2 k less people than even the current paltry attendances refuse to attend then that would be nice, but it doesn't mean the owners will sell up the following day. Similarly if there is no noticeable decline in the attendance, there's nothing lost, there'll be some publicity for the cause, the ground will look extremely sparse anyway and it it will be a solid and welcome first step in what will probably need to be an unrelenting and fairly lengthy campaign if it is to be successful.

I'm not happy with venky's at all I've said this before but the watford game falls closest to my lads birthday,so i'd already booked 2 none refundable hotel rooms (as we live an hour and half away and only get to a handfull of home games a season as lad plays saturday's),tickets and jack's kitchen by the time the boycott was announced(the tickets went on sale earlier than normal,maybe due to being included in the xmas bundle) So that's the reason we'll be attending....i'm happy to enter the ground 5 minutes late as has been suggested above though

So like I was saying the Coalition are struggling with the mindset of a lot of match goers. There are plenty in that ground that have no truck with the owners whatsoever, but they would not countenance not supporting the team. You can debate the rights and wrongs of that as a viewpoint, but that’s the reality, and saying ‘well, it means the attendees are all content with the owners and the regime’ is just another way of using loaded terms like ‘complicit’ and it isn’t helpful (well, it is to Suhail et al).

Rovers will be on a DNR instruction in another couple of years under this ownership

I understand but if we send mixed messages it will really waterdown the effectiveness of the protest. We cannot promote a boycott but say if you do go please show your ire. We have had many protests attempted in ground before. They never get off the ground. This is a simple and effective way of sending a clear message. We reason we are now at the stage of trying a boycott is that everything else hasn't worked.

Probably 🙂 At least it wasn't DNR !

are they making them sign NDAs in in blood now? 😉

This 'ITK' posted this. But I take everything he says as bs

I see your point, but I think as many as possible should just get behind the idea...

Depends on the truth of the matter and we've only heard one side and we only will once hes signed his DNA and gone. However a contract is a contract and the clowns at Ewood probably gave him a good one so if they want him out and can't find a buyer there's only one option. Unless he breaches the contract or requests a move.

Time ticking to get all of these signings in by Hull as requested. Surely an easy task for such an organised club.

I don't think that would be the fairest thing to do at all. I don't agree with being paid exorbitant sums for failure and laziness.

It's the latter more than the former IMO. He definitely isn't so bad that he shouldn't even make a bench that has zero strikers in a team that plays 2 at a time, one of whom already isn't a striker (or any good at all). Ismael wants to make a point about training standards, and that's his prerogative tbh.

Sounds like a great use of time… https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c62ver6z7z8o

I don't think its ever been unusual in football except here they are playing their games out in public. Same as 'Wanted to leave/Greedy/Wanted to be closer to home/Was offered a record wage here but still chose to leave' etc etc. Works both ways to be fair as i assume Gueyes agent will be saying pay us off in full and we'll go. Which in theory would be the fairest thing to do but it uses up vital money and exposes those who brought him in as making a massive balls up. Maybe THEY should be made to pay him up instead !

I don’t think it’s helpful to suggest someone attending means they’re content with the running of the club. It would be far better to try and establish how people who wish to attend can contribute in a different way.

Oh, constructive dismissal by bullying/ marginalising?

tbf that was pretty much the point I was trying to get across - we'd only have a sniff if literally no-one else was biting for some reason.

Hes that bad. Plus seemingly cant be arsed in training.

I'm still not sure what he's done, or not done, to warrant exclusion from the squad at time when we only have one forward fit.

We are all individuals and have free will. We all see things differently. I believe that if you think we need change and want to convey that message then boycotting ONE match will be the best way to do that. If you are content with the current ownership and the way the club is being run then attend. If you are not, I struggle to understand why you find it difficult to join an organised boycott. It is a small sacrifice for the greater good.

At least that would convey their displeasure, rather than acceptance of the status quo

Would a realistic compromise be… Those who want to boycott do so; Those who don’t enter the ground (eg) 5 minutes after kick off?

Probably because they want Gueye to ask for a transfer so they don't have to pay him to leave because lets face it nobody is buying him.

Wonder if we took inspiration for our away kit lol