Jump to content

BRFCS

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

[Archived] Has a date been agreed for supporters consultation meeting


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 402
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Cheston's plan for the meeting will be to bring Mowbray along and let him talk football to deflect attention away from him/Coar/Pasha and off the pitch/ownership issues.

Of course the whole point in these meetings is to discuss non-footballing issues with the non-footballing staff (owners and directors).

The manager can engage with supporters at any one of numerous events over the course of a season.

The purpose of these consultation meetings is to hear directly from the owners/representatives/directors about major issues affecting the overall operation.

Coar shouldn't be there, nor should Mowbray or Lindsay Talbot. It should be Cheston, Pasha and whoever else is involved in the overall running of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Cheston's plan for the meeting will be to bring Mowbray along and let him talk football to deflect attention away from him/Coar/Pasha and off the pitch/ownership issues.

Of course the whole point in these meetings is to discuss non-footballing issues with the non-footballing staff (owners and directors).

The manager can engage with supporters at any one of numerous events over the course of a season.

The purpose of these consultation meetings is to hear directly from the owners/representatives/directors about major issues affecting the overall operation.

Coar shouldn't be there, nor should Mowbray or Lindsay Talbot. It should be Cheston, Pasha and whoever else is involved in the overall running of the club.

Quite frankly, if I was Cheston I wouldn't be anywhere near these events.  I don't care what he is paid, nobody should have to put up with being abused in the way he is at these meetings.  At least Suhail has the good sense to keep away from this nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Parsonblue said:

Quite frankly, if I was Cheston I wouldn't be anywhere near these events.  I don't care what he is paid, nobody should have to put up with being abused in the way he is at these meetings.  At least Suhail has the good sense to keep away from this nonsense.

I don't think he will have any option to be honest. I think under the charter, the club have to provide a director, to answer the fans questions. Unless he can persuade either Suhail, thingy what his name to come, or Mrs D and her family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderation Lead

People are frustrated Parson and quite rightly so. We've got far bigger problems as a club/fanbase than the treatment of a director complicit in our continued failings......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, K-Hod said:

People are frustrated Parson and quite rightly so. We've got far bigger problems as a club/fanbase than the treatment of a director complicit in our continued failings......

Sadly, once you start throwing abuse at folk in these meetings you've lost the argument.  There are many points to be made but they tend to be lost as it becomes a shouting match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderation Lead

I'm more concerned with the sustained abuse the club has received under Cheston's bosses to be honest. Even though he hasn't been here long, he's still arguably complicit....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Parsonblue said:

Sadly, once you start throwing abuse at folk in these meetings you've lost the argument.  There are many points to be made but they tend to be lost as it becomes a shouting match.

Generally I would agree but if the answers to questions are deliberately evasive (or even lies) then there is bound to be frustration. In my opinion Cheston should be seriously challenged about his involvement in the Coyle appointment, the single biggest reason we were relegated. And he shouldn't be allowed to wriggle off the hook. John Williams and Tom Finn were always truthful with the fans. It really isn't too much to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Parsonblue said:

Quite frankly, if I was Cheston I wouldn't be anywhere near these events.  I don't care what he is paid, nobody should have to put up with being abused in the way he is at these meetings.  At least Suhail has the good sense to keep away from this nonsense.

Yep. Fans asking questions about the running of the club certainly is nonsense. You are right there. The shadow managing executive, chairman, global advisor, director of football......(what is he?) certainly shouldn't be expected to face any sort of questioning from the fan base of the club he's been put in charge of. I mean his role isn't even clearly defined so why should he be expected to face the people he should represent?

Cheston shouldn't be expected to face the fans either. After all, he's just a yes man. Picking up a substantial wage as (insert one of numerous roles here) despite having failed at almost every hurdle put before him.

Why should any of these men that have drove this club down league after league be expected to face questioning? They should be allowed to continue being vague, distant and poor at their jobs. In fact, have KPMG allocated any additional funds for a Cheston bonus? He's done brilliantly at his job so far. Decreased revenue, decreased fan base, decreased ST sales, decreased quality on the pitch, still no more board members and a league below from when he started. Did a good job pushing that Wes Brown contract through though. Jobs for the boysssss.

They wouldn't receive any abuse if they were transparent in what they do. Rovers fans are notoriously patient, hence why some still defend men like these, and certainly wouldn't perform a witch hunt of a man with integrity. They are asked questions, dodge them by either manipulating the agenda of the meeting or providing meaningless, vague answers and then receive the backlash that such deserves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Parsonblue said:

Sadly, once you start throwing abuse at folk in these meetings you've lost the argument.  There are many points to be made but they tend to be lost as it becomes a shouting match.

......and who started the abuse and threats? (pedantic I know but sets the tone) our very own Robert Coar, have you forgotten about that Parson in your attempt to defend the club?

The club have lied and cheated their way through the past 7yrs, these meetings are no different and passions obviously run high because people don't like being lied to. 

I respect you as a poster Parson, but its about time you woke up to the fact supporting someone like Mike Cheston is going to wind posters up the wrong way, you should be vilifying his terrible decision making not bleedin supporting him.

:angry:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Parsonblue said:

Quite frankly, if I was Cheston I wouldn't be anywhere near these events.  I don't care what he is paid, nobody should have to put up with being abused in the way he is at these meetings.  At least Suhail has the good sense to keep away from this nonsense.

Parson, I agree it might not be the best way to make progress, but who (realistically) would you suggest represents the club at these gatherings?  Isn't director-level representation required?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Neil Weaver said:

Parson, I agree it might not be the best way to make progress, but who (realistically) would you suggest represents the club at these gatherings?  Isn't director-level representation required?

If the climate was different then Suhail, Cheston, Coar and Mowbray are the four you would want at these meetings.  However, with a hostile atmosphere guaranteed you know that Suhail won't appear and that Cheston will be the one left to take to flak.  Cheston is a paid employee and like the rest of us has to do as instructed by his bosses or look for other work.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Cheston as a director of BRFC is duty bound to attend these events in the absence of others so he has to man up it's a part of his well paid job and we all have to face the music from time to time so enough of the spineless excuses.

Granted there should me measures put in place so they don't just recieve outright abuse but again he's brought a lot of it on himself as has silent Bob etc and if they aren't fit for purpose then they shouldn't have a title that says they are. 

All it would have taken for Mike to be viewed differently and maybe with a degree of understanding would have been him saying he interviewed certain candidates and made his recommendations but at that moment in time the owners felt Coyle was the right man. Quite simple  he chose to spin it completely and put his name to it so basically told bare faced lies to an already rightly suspicious group of fans. What followed was more bare faced lies by Coyle himself so no wonder the anger.

You live by the sword and die by it in the real world so no excuses and as for Suhail (seems some are on first name terms) no point making excuses for him he'd never have attended if all things were rosy because too many questions await him and his role. Not long ago some chief excuse maker was saying this guy had been told not to say a word to fans and hide in the background so why now try and twist it that he won't turn up because its hostile ????

Complete rubbish its nearly as bad as the Venky / snowball myth. All too convenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Parsonblue said:

If the climate was different then Suhail, Cheston, Coar and Mowbray are the four you would want at these meetings.  However, with a hostile atmosphere guaranteed you know that Suhail won't appear and that Cheston will be the one left to take to flak.  Cheston is a paid employee and like the rest of us has to do as instructed by his bosses or look for other work.   

Fans fault for the hostile atmosphere ?

Anyway out it appears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, MGPensioner said:

Quite possibly your worst post ever.

Keep reading. I was more concerned with the 'hostile atmosphere' comment to defend those whose responsibility it is to not steer the ship directly towards the rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MGPensioner said:

Disagree

Given the choice Balaji, Suhail and Mike would be there.

Owners and their senior representatives to discuss finance and governance of the club. That is the purpose. Mowbray is not required.

After the last meeting I spoke at length with Bob Coar about Suhail.

He said Suhail will never speak to fans as he has been specifically instructed not to by the Raos, to avoid any repeat of Shebby mistakes. He is 100% loyal to the Raos and is 100% trusted by them, hence his position.

He is employed by the club as a management consultant.

i.e. the club pay for his services (not that they can choose)

He is not a direct employee of the club.

 

Given the in effect Managing Director is instructed by the owners to not attend then the owners should attend themselves even if by video link.

 

Mike knows his bosses have hung him out to dry fronting these meetings. He is paid well enough to shoulder the responsibility or likewise he could look for anther job. No need for feeling sorry for him.

That's exactly my point MG - the meetings are a waste of time.  The owners are never going to appear - either in person or by video link.  Suhail will stay well away from them because that's what the owners want and, as you say, he is the one person that has the trust of the owners.  That leaves the likes of Bob Coar, who has little or no input into the daily running of the club and Mike Cheston who is not in a position to answer the questions that people want answering.  I suspect we were both talking with Coar at the same time after the last meeting in the reception area at the Blackburn End.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, mhead said:

October 5th. 5 Invites per Group as before.

Who asks question about Coyle/Warnock and Owners persistent interference.?

IMO on the last occasion, we would have benefited from active collaboration between all the different groups.

This would have allowed fewer, sharper questions and more focus on the areas they all wanted to er..move on from.

This time there will be no Paul Senior and no "guilt" factor re TM's new start etc.

But, perhaps more importantly, a certain Mr Bayes will keep things moving on and away from sharp focus.

As for the minutes and the Radio Lancs audio record, the least said the better....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Parsonblue said:

Quite frankly, if I was Cheston I wouldn't be anywhere near these events.  I don't care what he is paid, nobody should have to put up with being abused in the way he is at these meetings.  At least Suhail has the good sense to keep away from this nonsense.

Quite frankly, If I were Cheston, I would have resigned after the Coyle recruitment fiasco. He must not have an ounce of self respect.

" The outsanding candidate"? I rest my case...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serious question to Parson, - what abuse are we talking about?

these meetings are demanded by the EFL and part of that demand is that the club must put forward the people at the top of the club and the people who are the main policy makers, the people responsible. As far as the EFL are concerned they MUST attend.

you would support that wouldn't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, den said:

Serious question to Parson, - what abuse are we talking about?

these meetings are demanded by the EFL and part of that demand is that the club must put forward the people at the top of the club and the people who are the main policy makers, the people responsible. As far as the EFL are concerned they MUST attend.

you would support that wouldn't you?

What I don't support den is the way in which some believe that being verbally abusive to someone is a way of getting answers to questions, particularly when the people who are the only ones who have the real answers are sitting on the other side of the world without any intention of attending such meetings.  The two meetings thus far have provided very little in terms of moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

What I don't support den is the way in which some believe that being verbally abusive to someone is a way of getting answers to questions, particularly when the people who are the only ones who have the real answers are sitting on the other side of the world without any intention of attending such meetings.  The two meetings thus far have provided very little in terms of moving forward.

Sounds to me like you've accepted the venkys and making do. People like you need to take a stand instead of just passing the buck and belittling the ones trying to do something to rid us of this cancer at the heart of our club.

They've broken you down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Sounds to me like you've accepted the venkys and making do. People like you need to take a stand instead of just passing the buck and belittling the ones trying to do something to rid us of this cancer at the heart of our club.

They've broken you down.

Nope. They haven't. Parsonsblue is by all accounts "one of the 6 thousand". We could be playing down at Pleasington and I would hazard a guess he would still be there. Extremely admirable as it is these types of hardcore fans that see us through the terrible times like this, if these terrible times weren't down to the corruption and greed of individuals.

The only niggle I have with these type of fans is their constant ability to just 'accept it' on the premise that better times will one day come. In my opinion it enables owners like Venkys. They can say the club still attracts some fans, STs are still sold they can leverage loans on, merchandise still bought and important voices still saying we should halt protesting, halt questioning and just suck it up and wait out the bad times. It's a symptom of every club in crisis but unfortunately it's huge at Rovers. We have a commendable die hard like Parsons that could be hugely influential in any dialogue or action against the owners that simply won't because they have 'seen us here before'.

I'm sure there's a quote by someone somewhere that says Blackburn Rovers will always maintain "X" thousand of supporters, regardless of what happens to the club. It rings true right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • 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.