Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I don't have time to prove fools like you wrong with 1 account, let alone 2!:claping hands:
Does a siren go off at home when your names mentioned?
Scg (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter letsallsingtogether
- Start date
Does a siren go off at home when your names mentioned?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
In that case I propose Tony to join as well
Tony could serve the drinks.
Can the trust sub a taxi home after the meeting in the pub?
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
In that case I propose Tony to join as well
Does the Squirrel have a 24 hour license and a hot tub?
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
In that case I propose Tony to join as well
No no no no no I couldn't take it mind you it would be great thinking about it we'd have to issue tickets
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Most from the jolly few.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I'd gladly pay for the taxi myself. We could arrange the meeting for your night off so somebody else could wear the headphones
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Have I missed something didn't know anybody had proposed you
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Sorry if i am running the trust there's no allowing you and Tiny Tony to do that sort of thing in public.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Come to think of it I think you should learn to run a bath first
NorthernWisdom
Well-Known Member
The fact you're sharing Grendel's jokes now makes me ve-ry suspicious.
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I happen to think I'm sorry he's very funny
letsallsingtogether
Well-Known Member
Thought you would have seen her in the exec boxes at wasps games, I bet you served her with her champagne
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
What did the email from supporters direct actually say?
Nick
Administrator
Have a read, it's in the documents from the ccc grievance thing.
Ah, that's supposed to be concluded next week isn't it?
All talking aload of bollocks about an organisation that does not stand up for the fans and bends over backwards like a bunch of tarts whilst arguing with each other and being advised they dare not tell the fan base what they are doing or what has been achieved, yeah sounds great.
Both are just as embarrassing as each other
Broken Hearted Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
What you mean is three or four individuals trying to stand up for the fans while the rest spend their time following the clubs agenda of removing the said three or four individuals.
But it's no wonder you have that attitude because that's City fans for you follow the board no matter what they do. I dislike Liverpool and their fans but when just a few of their fans were threatened with a price hike for next season thousands of them walked out of the ground and their board did a u turn. City fans? Accept any shit
Nick
Administrator
Wasn't it a fair vote throughout everybody?
Who are all the people who could vote? Are they all yes people?
lamtara2006
Member
Steve has already said on here #122 that it was a fair vote and that club personnel could not vote. So, that implies that all those who exercised their right to vote were "supporters representatives".
I am interested to know what Sandra Garlick's credentials are as a Supporters' Rep though. As I understand it (I am prepared to be corrected) she originally was invited to attend SCG meetings as a liaison from the new Stadium Forum to which she was appointed by Tim Fisher. When it was clear that nothing was going to happen with a new Stadium for the foreseeable future, that Forum was mothballed. However, she was invited to remain on the SCG as a "regular member" in October 2014.
It seems to me that she does not represent any group of supporters, she has no project that she currently leads. Why is she even on the SCG, let alone considered to be an acceptable choice as Vice-Chair?
In the early part of this thread we had references to "Sky Blue Tits" and "Vultures". It seems to me this is a "Cuckoo".
lamtara2006
Member
http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/...-group-bios-coventry-city-260614-1690227.aspx
Out of date but covers most including Ms Garlick.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Is this the group where the amount of the fans you represent doesn't really carry any weight.
So you have all sorts of people representing all sorts of different weird and wonderful supporter groups.
So it could be the CCFC bury supporters club of 4 members.
(Just a hypothetical example. )
This person's vote carries the same weight the one person representing 2000 fans.
Sandra Garlick has a very impressive background to be fair to her.
She also did finally say no more stadium meetings till land is bought.
However it is strange to vote for someone who did not turn up to your meetings.
So you have all sorts of people representing all sorts of different weird and wonderful supporter groups.
So it could be the CCFC bury supporters club of 4 members.
(Just a hypothetical example. )
This person's vote carries the same weight the one person representing 2000 fans.
Sandra Garlick has a very impressive background to be fair to her.
She also did finally say no more stadium meetings till land is bought.
However it is strange to vote for someone who did not turn up to your meetings.
And that is exactly what pisses me right off with our fans, just bend over backwards and accept a few nice words here and their in their chimps meetings and brush all the real issues under the carpet so as long they keep the board attendees happy.
Garlick vice chair .. says it all what a bunch of wet farts we have running these meetings.
Good luck to those who it interests but my view is it offers absolute naff all to the fanbase and certainly not something I feel represents me.
Nick
Administrator
To be honest I can see a couple of them who might be "SISU Lovers" but most look like normal fans (never met them, just going through the statements by their name).
My impression is, it is a status thing... Judging by the description on there she is chair, vice chair of that, trustee of that, chair of this, chamber of commerce etc... Could be wrong.
On another note, I think they should update that to remove the crap about sixfields. It isn't a badge of honour to have stood on the hill or the other one about making a group about it, no need. Just get rid of that.
Joy Division
Well-Known Member
Reading through that list it struck me that, and correct me if I'm wrong, there is a lack of a younger fan on on the board. Maybe there should be some representation for those 15-25 year old age bracket block 15 regulars?
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
I think CJ goes to them, he is a bit younger and is down with that sort of thing. Also don't know who the Darren Davies guy is, maybe he sits over there?
Darren Davies is not a younger guy (no offence Darren) he used to sit in block 15 but I believe is now over in main stand.
He is in the midst of setting up a North Warwickshire Supporters group. Am sure Darren and other members would like someone who has a Season ticket in the corner to come to a meeting.
There are two younger members, Rob Tidmarsh who helps Pat with the JSBs and CJ who although slightly over 25 now is also classed in the younger bracket.
Nick
Administrator
No offence but any need for groups like that?
I can understand if somebody opens a bar and says it's a supporters club if that's what it is?
smouch1975
Well-Known Member
Oi !
I represent the Perth Sky Blue supporters club.
Membership presently one
Sent from my SM-N915G using Tapatalk
oldskyblue58
CCFC Finance Director
Really struggle to see the point of the SCG in its current guise and make up. Most who sit on it do not represent anyone other than themselves. Who do the Chairperson and his vice chair person represent? Why is Ms Garlick a good future Chairperson? What makes her particular insight appropriate? Is this a formal group or is it just a talking shop?
Don't get me wrong there are some very good people on there, but do they need to be on the SCG to do what they do for us. I might be doing many of the others a dis-service but it seems they have no role other than to themselves but it sounds good to be on the mighty SCG
What has it achieved over the years ? Those that do represent identifiable sections of the fan base did they consult them as to who to vote for, or even what views they should put forward? Does a talking shop for a select few really need formal officers? Should it take a month or more to agree minutes of meeting - especially when this is supposed to be a timely link with the supporters, information should be a two way thing should it not?. Why does the Club edit the minutes, if something is so sensitive the club doesn't want it disclosed then don't provide that information at the SCG meeting. The club editing smacks of control doesn't it and that kind of defeats the purpose of the group doesn't it?
I can see a need for say an independent fan or two who represents no one, it should act as a form of balance, but the rest must have a way of canvassing the views of who they purport to represent, put those forward even if not their own view and then be able to report back promptly, properly and fully (not months later as sometimes has been the case)
Seems to be that the minutes of meeting are edited by the club, so that means the SCG is not independent of the club, and places those "in the know" in a privileged position. How else does the Club influence what the SCG says or does? Surely the object of the SCG is the distribution of information not its restriction, a two way conduit with the club we all support?
Tick box exercises on supporter connection to appease the Football League in the end fool no one because they end up achieving nothing other than frustration
As for the number of times that certain and often the same individuals have caused or allowed the SCG to descend in to a name calling ego trip or promotion of very specific agendas then that in itself says the whole set up is wrong and should mean the SCG is disbanded
I like NW's forum idea, I think it better suits the context and usefulness of these meetings. The present set up I have no faith in whatsoever, it seems to me the SCG represents very few of us.
Just my opinion
Don't get me wrong there are some very good people on there, but do they need to be on the SCG to do what they do for us. I might be doing many of the others a dis-service but it seems they have no role other than to themselves but it sounds good to be on the mighty SCG
What has it achieved over the years ? Those that do represent identifiable sections of the fan base did they consult them as to who to vote for, or even what views they should put forward? Does a talking shop for a select few really need formal officers? Should it take a month or more to agree minutes of meeting - especially when this is supposed to be a timely link with the supporters, information should be a two way thing should it not?. Why does the Club edit the minutes, if something is so sensitive the club doesn't want it disclosed then don't provide that information at the SCG meeting. The club editing smacks of control doesn't it and that kind of defeats the purpose of the group doesn't it?
I can see a need for say an independent fan or two who represents no one, it should act as a form of balance, but the rest must have a way of canvassing the views of who they purport to represent, put those forward even if not their own view and then be able to report back promptly, properly and fully (not months later as sometimes has been the case)
Seems to be that the minutes of meeting are edited by the club, so that means the SCG is not independent of the club, and places those "in the know" in a privileged position. How else does the Club influence what the SCG says or does? Surely the object of the SCG is the distribution of information not its restriction, a two way conduit with the club we all support?
Tick box exercises on supporter connection to appease the Football League in the end fool no one because they end up achieving nothing other than frustration
As for the number of times that certain and often the same individuals have caused or allowed the SCG to descend in to a name calling ego trip or promotion of very specific agendas then that in itself says the whole set up is wrong and should mean the SCG is disbanded
I like NW's forum idea, I think it better suits the context and usefulness of these meetings. The present set up I have no faith in whatsoever, it seems to me the SCG represents very few of us.
Just my opinion
Last edited:
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
For me its simple. You draw up a list of who needs to be represented (younger supporters, older supporters, long distance, disabled etc). Then ask people who represent each ground to put themselves forward and have a vote. Then on a rolling basis (so you don't replace everyone at once) say every 12 - 24 months have a new vote, people can either stand for re-election or others can put themselves forward.
CCFC have a large database of supporters, can't be that hard to find a way to run a fair vote.
Then each section of the fanbase knows who represents them and who they need to speak to if they have an issue.
CCFC have a large database of supporters, can't be that hard to find a way to run a fair vote.
Then each section of the fanbase knows who represents them and who they need to speak to if they have an issue.
dongonzalos
Well-Known Member
Good idea......
Also it should be completely independent of the club. It should provide the club with the feedback from the fans and it should provide regular updates as the club responds to the feedback. The updates should be in a website.
Last edited:
