Fans Forum/Roverstore/Commercial Chat

[Mashed Potatoes]

1 minute ago, glen9mullan said:

Its more complex than this, club has to submit fan engagement plan forwards. Whilst if they choose to go bare minimum it needs to be a democratic voice.

Yes, I was aware of the requirement regarding future plans for fan engagement. The problem of course is that the language in the Act and the explanatory notes is so vague that it will be some time before anybody can be sure of what quite is going to be required of our or any other club. In the meantime provided meetings continue to go ahead I suspect that delays of a few weeks in the release of minutes will not be seen by the Regulator as an issue.

[glen9mullan]

Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

Yes, I was aware of the requirement regarding future plans for fan engagement. The problem of course is that the language in the Act and the explanatory notes is so vague that it will be some time before anybody can be sure of what quite is going to be required of our or any other club. In the meantime provided meetings continue to go ahead I suspect that delays of a few weeks in the release of minutes will not be seen by the Regulator as an issue.

To be clear , the club to the best of my knowledge ain't holding the minutes up.

They were signed off quickly.

The accuracy of them is being discussed with the forum members.

Ive been told , they've never asked for edits and nothing in the meeting was explicitly stated to not be minuted.

 

[Upside Down]

4 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

Do you think there’s a point where no communication would be the better option?

It has to be broken off by the club. 

The fans can't be responsible for that but when it happens, and I can see a day when it does, we'll have them on the ropes.

[Mashed Potatoes]

7 hours ago, Upside Down said:

It has to be broken off by the club. 

The fans can't be responsible for that but when it happens, and I can see a day when it does, we'll have them on the ropes.

I don't think that will happen. As stated above, the new law places a statutory obligation on clubs to hold regular meetings with a representative group of supporters. Any club which was in breach of that obligation could potentially have their licence to operate withdrawn by the Independent Regulator.

[Upside Down]

51 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

I don't think that will happen. As stated above, the new law places a statutory obligation on clubs to hold regular meetings with a representative group of supporters. Any club which was in breach of that obligation could potentially have their licence to operate withdrawn by the Independent Regulator.

It also requires that law to be enforced.

The people who run this place are reasonably dense and unbelievably petty. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that they would breach these rules as they have so many others in the past. 

I for one hope they do breach these terms and get made an example of and get their right to operate revoked.

[Mashed Potatoes]

1 hour ago, Upside Down said:

It also requires that law to be enforced.

The people who run this place are reasonably dense and unbelievably petty. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that they would breach these rules as they have so many others in the past. 

I for one hope they do breach these terms and get made an example of and get their right to operate revoked.

It isn't the people who operate the place who would have their licence to operate revoked but the club, which would not then be allowed to participate in English football in the top professional leagues thereby rendering the club insolvent - it's not going to happen just for the sake of the occasional difficult meeting with supporters.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

14 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

The accuracy of them is being discussed with the forum members.

 

Here we go folks!

[47er]

14 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

Yes, I was aware of the requirement regarding future plans for fan engagement. The problem of course is that the language in the Act and the explanatory notes is so vague that it will be some time before anybody can be sure of what quite is going to be required of our or any other club. In the meantime provided meetings continue to go ahead I suspect that delays of a few weeks in the release of minutes will not be seen by the Regulator as an issue.

Well if they have to meet regularly with a representative group of Supporters, the Fans Forum doesn't cut it because it isn't elected.

[Mashed Potatoes]

1 minute ago, 47er said:

Well if they have to meet regularly with a representative group of Supporters, the Fans Forum doesn't cut it because it isn't elected.

I think you're right - a question for the club is what are their plans for establishing the supporters group now that the legislation has been enacted.

[chaddyrovers]

28 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

I think you're right - a question for the club is what are their plans for establishing the supporters group now that the legislation has been enacted.

Dues the Legislation say any many supporter groups they have to meet each year? 

[Mattyblue]

The regime will do always do what is needed to keep their nose out of trouble and the media from sniffing around, they’ve done that since day dot… it’s why you’ll never see a Sheff Wed situation here and it’s why they’ll do whatever the bare minimum is to adhere to this legislation too

 

 

 

[Mashed Potatoes]

47 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Dues the Legislation say any many supporter groups they have to meet each year? 

They meet just the one group of supporters, who have to be representative of the fanbase as a whole, and have to hold "regular" meetings. Separately the EFL currently require 2 meetings a year to be held with a fans forum although it remains to be seen if that requirement will continue now this legislation has been introduced.

[OldEwoodBlue]

2 hours ago, 47er said:

Well if they have to meet regularly with a representative group of Supporters, the Fans Forum doesn't cut it because it isn't elected.

I think this is wrong, certainly as far as making any complaint goes.

There isn't one fan group, there are many. The club would argue the FF is representative of the most diverse range of fans.

Many of the attendees represent specific fan groups.

An example is K-Hod represents this forum and opemly asks if any members wish any questions to be asked.

Duncan represents WATR as another example.

So the club will continue to comply at the most basic level (tick) which most of us find unacceptable.

We will need to read their new Fan Engagement Plan when it gets published.

My opinion is the only way to get them, is for the Fans Forum to have a vote of no confidence in the current process. Perhaps also to say they will not attend further meetings until the open, recorded, consultation meetings are reinstated.

No FF meetings mean the club cannot fullfil its obligations, as it has left itself with all its eggs in the FF basket.

However that won't happen because some of the attendees hold a vastly different personal opinion to the vast majority of fans.

 

Glen,

How many of the fans forum members are part of groups within the coalition or individually support it ?

Edited 1 hour ago by OldEwoodBlue

[OldEwoodBlue]

It is also worth remembering. The club won THE top EFL award for fan engagement last season. Number 1 out of all the EFL....

That was largely for something conceived and implemented by fans, the very same fans, the club then fucked over and stopped all communication with.

They are a complete set of self serving cunts who need expediting out of our proud club. 

[Gav]

5 minutes ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

It is also worth remembering. The club won THE top EFL award for fan engagement last season. Number 1 out of all the EFL....

That was largely for something conceived and implemented by fans, the very same fans, the club then fucked over and stopped all communication with.

They are a complete set of self serving cunts who need expediting out of our proud club. 

Say how you feel OEB 😂

Fully agree with you by the way. 

[47er]

41 minutes ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

I think this is wrong, certainly as far as making any complaint goes.

There isn't one fan group, there are many. The club would argue the FF is representative of the most diverse range of fans.

I'm not arguing that any member of the FF isn't worthy. They cannot be seen to be representative of the fans unless they've been elected by them.

If an election resulted in exactly the same members being returned I wouldn't have any issue with it.