Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] BRFC Action Group

mark1875

By mark1875
in Football Messageboard Archive

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Gav

Gav

Posted
Posted

May I ask: Why are you trying to make me (and others) justify having an opinion about the AG?

1. They put out statements with little apparent thought. While some of us (myself included) were uninspired at the appointment of Appleton, we did not suggest it was action-worthy, but the AG leapt onto it because they had a few emails. How do they justify such action, given it directly contradicts their mission statement?

2. The AG's press statements often contain poor spelling and grammar, which is unprofessional. Ricky, myself and a few others have offered to proof-read before release and, to my knowledge, no-one has been acknowledged in this respect, let alone their help accepted. The group also complains that their statements are cherry-picked, when they are far too long and any journalist worth his salt will cherry-pick the bits worth reporting.

3. Anything the group says will be construed as the opinion of the majority of Rovers fans (the name 'BRFC Action Group' suggests as much). Many times, this is simply not the case, which is why so many get angry with the group. You'll say 'that's not the group's fault' and you'll be quite right. But it is the case nonetheless and is detrimental to opinions of the fans of this club from fans of other clubs. It makes us look absolutely tin-pot. Look at the ridicule ManUtd and Liverpool protest groups got from other fans; that is the ridicule with which we are viewed now. The best way to stop this is for the group to shush up.

Those are the 3 main points I (and others) have made. What is unjust about these views? They are not 'baseless drivel', they are genuine criticisms with good reason and advice behind them for the betterment of the group. Other groups under the Blackburn United umbrella don't have these problems, so the AG doesn't need to have them either. But as long as they ignore advice from the wider support-base and continue to make mistakes, they will be hated amonst rovers fans.

Take that last sentence. Who else can it be applied to? (Venkys). Got it in one. That's why the AG continues to draw angst from ordinary fans. My father dislikes the group simply for Glen appearing on SSN giving a view that he completely disagreed with. That's just one man, who's been a fan of rovers for 65 years now. What about other fans who've felt similarly? 'Just drivel', ofc......

I've not got time to bat this back and forth with you I'm afraid, you decided to weigh in on the subject and are now complaining, if you don't want to get involved don't join the debate.

You can have whatever opinion you like on BRAG, The Trust or the state of the roads in Darwen, I couldn't careless, but when you spend seemingly your entire existinace on this site hammering an organisation that are trying to make a difference you'll be pulled on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Backroom
Mike E World Cup

Mike E

Posted
  • Backroom
Posted
I've not got time to bat this back and forth with you I'm afraid, you decided to weigh in on the subject and are now complaining, if you don't want to get involved don't join the debate.

You can have whatever opinion you like on BRAG, The Trust or the state of the roads in Darwen, I couldn't careless, but when you spend seemingly your entire existinace on this site hammering an organisation that are trying to make a difference you'll be pulled on it.

Correct, you are pulling me on it. As is your right. But YET AGAIN you dismiss the opinion with no regard for it's content. Did you even read what I said?

You seem to be of the opinion that I'm against the AG's existence, which I am not. I have suggested ways in which it could improve it's image with the fans at wide (why would I put such a view forward if I felt the group was of no use?)

Quite why you're trying to make this about me, I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PAFELL World Cup

PAFELL

Posted
Posted

May I ask: Why are you trying to make me (and others) justify having an opinion about the AG?

1. They put out statements with little apparent thought. While some of us (myself included) were uninspired at the appointment of Appleton, we did not suggest it was action-worthy, but the AG leapt onto it because they had a few emails. How do they justify such action, given it directly contradicts their mission statement?

2. The AG's press statements often contain poor spelling and grammar, which is unprofessional. Ricky, myself and a few others have offered to proof-read before release and, to my knowledge, no-one has been acknowledged in this respect, let alone their help accepted. The group also complains that their statements are cherry-picked, when they are far too long and any journalist worth his salt will cherry-pick the bits worth reporting.

3. Anything the group says will be construed as the opinion of the majority of Rovers fans (the name 'BRFC Action Group' suggests as much). Many times, this is simply not the case, which is why so many get angry with the group. You'll say 'that's not the group's fault' and you'll be quite right. But it is the case nonetheless and is detrimental to opinions of the fans of this club from fans of other clubs. It makes us look absolutely tin-pot. Look at the ridicule ManUtd and Liverpool protest groups got from other fans; that is the ridicule with which we are viewed now. The best way to stop this is for the group to shush up.

Those are the 3 main points I (and others) have made. What is unjust about these views? They are not 'baseless drivel', they are genuine criticisms with good reason and advice behind them for the betterment of the group. Other groups under the Blackburn United umbrella don't have these problems, so the AG doesn't need to have them either. But as long as they ignore advice from the wider support-base and continue to make mistakes, they will be hated amonst rovers fans.

Take that last sentence. Who else can it be applied to? (Venkys). Got it in one. That's why the AG continues to draw angst from ordinary fans. My father dislikes the group simply for Glen appearing on SSN giving a view that he completely disagreed with. That's just one man, who's been a fan of rovers for 65 years now. What about other fans who've felt similarly? 'Just drivel', ofc......

Excellent post. One which I believe many others will agree with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ste B World Cup

Ste B

Posted
Posted

I cant help but think of Matt Damon in Team America with all these Sean Trencher comments.

I don't understand, So your just being an argumentative hypocrite then(just for the sake of it!)-Total WUM(and not even a funny or halve intelligent one).

Seems you must have met Gav. He's definitely half ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bundesburn Premier League

Bundesburn

Posted
Posted

Thats complete and utter bunkum in my opinion, look at the people who have signed up for the Trust for instance, they're 'doing something' aren't they, much like BRAG who are 'doing something' also.

You may not agree with whats these groups are doing, but when the club is being raped and pillaged its not acceptable to criticise others, when you're doing absolutely bugger all, in my opinion.

Yikes, well the problem is that the quote is lifted out of context a little (though I'm flattered that it's now an inter-thread quote - who do I speak to about royalties?) and so you're not looking at the wider point. Taken the liberty of reposting, for the sake of context:

If you've heard of the SLA and Patty Hearst, humour me as I weave a tenuously-linked analogy based upon two of my favourite things: Rovers and the '70s.

Now, the SLA were a radical militant group based in the USA, who kidnapped an heiress to a global media empire, turned her onto their way of thinking and led the American media on a merry dance for about 2 years.

At the core of their raison d'être was the emergence of the "counterculture" in the States. Protests against leaders that had alienated, disenfranchised and upset them with their actions. Their message was clear; empower the masses. Their ransom demands for the kidnapping included a food program in California for the poor inhabitants of major metropolitan areas. The Hearst family blew $2million on it. It was a game-changer. A tiny band of radicals had the elite asking, "How high?"

What transpired from this relative giant-slaying was a bank robbery, violence, more and more absurd demands and proclamations, murder and a cat-and-mouse game with the police. By the end, the SLA was fighting the police and, it all ended in a literal blaze of not so much glory. They burned to death whilst under siege and engaging in a firefight with the LAPD. Now, despite having been global headlines and inciting the largest private volunteer movement the United States had ever seen, most people don't have a clue who they were. Why? Because they didn't know when they'd won and what to do next.

It's probably patently obvious how these two groups link together. Plucky underdogs and all that. But, you see, it's the fundamental problem with most (granted, not all) grass-roots organisations and movements. They're ill-prepared and they're very prone to losing focus. The SLA wanted a voice and to be a voice of the oppressed. The day of their firefight with the LAPD, they had pretty much every major news network in the States broadcasting live from the scene. They had their ultimate platform, waiting for them. The microphone was live, the cameras were waiting. Instead, they went for glory and pursued their own personal vendetta and agenda. They lost sight of why they even existed in the first place.

BRAG have had a winning moment so far. Kean left. It doesn't matter how they go in, they all count and that was definitely a goal for BRAG and the fanbase as a whole. Instead of reassessing their position and taking stock of their options, it seemed they just needed to find a reason to be. So, building links with the club has been - perhaps unfairly, perhaps correctly - perceived as digging their claws in.

The fact is, people won't agree on this because it's the very nature of "resistance." Resistance is standing up for what you believe is right. That doesn't necessarily make that which you believe in right in itself. With resistance, comes the desire for change. But, unless you have a real, coherent and practical alternative, then you leave yourself wide open for criticism and, personally, stepping outside the confines of context for a moment, I think that criticism is fair, just and imperative.

So, what I'd say is, be sceptical, challenge others' views, make them prove they're worthwhile investing in, but remember why you're interested, too. Remember that there is always a constructive path to take.

And, finally, the argument posed by some based around the adage "it's better than nothing," is inherently flawed. Doing nothing maintains a relative status-quo, the terms and parameters of which are understood and accepted. Action for the sake of action is as likely to change for the better as it is to change for the worse. Accepting your limitations will do wonders for your ability to make sure you don't do any harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gav

Gav

Posted
Posted

I don't understand, So your just being an argumentative hypocrite then(just for the sake of it!)-Total WUM(and not even a funny or half intelligent one).

You're clearly as thick as pig Kean, come back when you can string a sentence together numb nuts.

At least your mates can debate a subject in a clear and coherent manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.