Mashed Potatoes

I usually ignore your posts but the simple fact is that when he was sold there don't appear to have been any competing bids from bigger clubs able to offer higher fees. Yes, I could see he was a "good" player - ie one likely to make it at Premier League level.

It's not "contrarianism" - it's looking at the facts and expressing an opinion founded in facts. You seem to have a problem with people expressing opinions you don't agree with.

If "EVERYBODY" knew that I would have expected the likes of Manchester City, Liverpool and Arsenal to have come in for him when he was available for sale - instead it was Crystal Palace.

I don't think the new independent regulator has been appointed yet so is that meeting a promise to meet when appointed or a meeting with a member of the Regulator's Office ?

Might be a bit much to ask the journo to write the minutes in the first instance, but could act as an independent arbitrator in dealing with the sort of dispute that has arisen here.

Players can only be shipped out if they agree to be. Regarding Tronstad, haven't people on here said that he wants to stay for the last year of his contract and then move back to Norway - where I guess wages are rather lower- where his wife has already relocated to ?

The powers of the EFL are extremely limited. At Sheffield Wednesday there has been a pattern of non payment of wages/taxes and reports that part of the ground is not safe - yet the EFL have been unable to force a sale. There was a pattern of similar behaviour at Reading over a period of years before the owner was forced to sell. At Blackburn Rovers we are talking about a failure to publish minutes 23 days after a meeting between the club and supporters representatives - which is hardly in the same league of misbehaviour - so I don't think the EFL are going to do anything. The new Football Governance Act does impose an obligation on clubs to engage in an acceptable level of fan engagement and once that is up and running properly - the Independent Football Regulator is yet to be appointed - then there will be a process by which supporters can complain to the Regulator if the club is not engaging in an appropriate manner.

I don't think the government regulate the EFL as government interference in running football is against FIFA and UEFA rules. Also the local MP is not a member of the government.

The minutes are a matter of record that appear on the club website so it is important they are got right.

No. I need to know why holding the meetings with the fans forum means that club is taking the fans for mugs.

This is a debate about the effectiveness of the fans forum. What has the above got to do with that ?

Yes - please provide a serious answer.

How are the club taking the fans for mugs ?

The WSL - women's equivalent of the Premier League - had an average attendance last season of just 6662 so there are obviously a lot of fools out there if you are correct.

I don't know enough about the Fans Forum but according to one or two posts on here membership is by invitation whereas the expectation is that the supporters group will be democratically elected - so it doesn't meet the requirement. Others may know better.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Isn't it more likely that we will have them "well sussed" ?

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.

I think the EFL rules - which to a degree may be superseded by the new rules in the Football Governance Act - are that clubs are required to meet twice a season with a representative group of supporters. Not sure what the rules if any are regarding the release of minutes but I doubt if a delay of 2 or 3 weeks in release of the minutes means that those rules have been broken.

The recently enacted Football Governance Act requires that clubs hold regular meetings with a representative group of supporters.

How can you know what he was offered ? Maybe it was fair and what he's looking for is excessive - I don't know, nobody on here does.

Even if the player has been offered a new contract on no worse terms ?