| Independent Supporters Group on 19:08 - Dec 3 with 2339 views | TenbySwan |
This new group COULD give the Trust more ammunition to get the Board to agree to things in a sort of good cop, bad cop way.
I would support |  | |  |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:23 - Dec 3 with 2290 views | DrGonzo |
Will it have a militant wing? |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:27 - Dec 3 with 2262 views | Neath_Jack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:23 - Dec 3 by DrGonzo |
Will it have a militant wing? |
It is the militant wing as far as i can see. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:34 - Dec 3 with 2237 views | TheResurrection |
| Independent Supporters Group on 18:57 - Dec 3 by monmouth |
My gut feeling is that it has to be connected in some way to the Trust as otherwise what is the Trust for? That is, the Supporters Trust and the Supporters surely should have aligned objectives.
I totally get that it could be a militant wing that is not controlled by the Trust, could be much more vocal, and in fact can be a vehicle to keep the Trust 'honest' (can't think of a better word), but I can't see how they could have differing broad objectives. Otherwise what happens when the supporters trust disagrees with the supporters group or vice versa? Both must implicitly support each others activities even if there is no explicit public confirmation, or both grous will end up fighting each other rather than looking after the interests of supporters against the common 'enemy' (couldn't think of a better word).
Actually that idea of keeping the Trust from going 'native' (can't think of a better word) is getting more appealing by the second, as if this second group was to grow and the Trust Board was letting us down, then we all join the Trust and take it over, by voting all the 'natives' off. So I'm back to thinking there has to be a complicit agreement, even if the Trust can't or won't state that publicly.
Just stream-of-consciousness musing, sorry. That's a long winded way of saying yes, a group that can maybe do what the trust can't, and is not constrained by form over substance, in principle has my support. |
I'm sorry but the Trust doesn't have to that wet.
Phil, you could have done this while on there. We were all actually begging you. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:43 - Dec 3 with 2187 views | vetchonian |
Sounds good Phil and I'm in......
On another note can anything be done to stop the deal? |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:43 - Dec 3 with 2185 views | Landore_Jack |
Surely, this would be a nail in the Supporters Trust coffin? A move welcomed by the Americans and Jenkins. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:48 - Dec 3 with 2157 views | Landore_Jack |
Why has this idea only now been suggested when fans have been begging the Trust for years to take on board and action the concerns of the supporters? In fact, Phil S clearly stated that all fans should get behind the Trust when a Supporters Action group was being suggested by Murph and Morning Star. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:53 - Dec 3 with 2124 views | max936 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:48 - Dec 3 by Landore_Jack |
Why has this idea only now been suggested when fans have been begging the Trust for years to take on board and action the concerns of the supporters? In fact, Phil S clearly stated that all fans should get behind the Trust when a Supporters Action group was being suggested by Murph and Morning Star. |
Things have seemed to change since McDonald came on board or is that just a coincidence? unless the Yanks have told them to get in line and shut the fuk up. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:53 - Dec 3 with 2124 views | Highjack |
The most important thing is what are we going to call it.
Last time we had 'The War Against Tony'.
What about:
'Battle Against Sellouts Then Americans, Recover Dear Swans'?
'Conquest Of Conk Knose?'
'Fans Against Nefarious New Yorkers'? |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:57 - Dec 3 with 2100 views | monmouth |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:34 - Dec 3 by TheResurrection |
I'm sorry but the Trust doesn't have to that wet.
Phil, you could have done this while on there. We were all actually begging you. |
THis is what I'm struggling with. It has to do something that the current Trust is unable (Board/Shareholder restrictions) or unwilling (not acting in supporters interest) to do. Otherwise the Trust should just do it. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:59 - Dec 3 with 2084 views | Joe_bradshaw |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:43 - Dec 3 by Landore_Jack |
Surely, this would be a nail in the Supporters Trust coffin? A move welcomed by the Americans and Jenkins. |
I imagine they think the Trust is just fine and dandy and wouldn't want a nail in its coffin right now... |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:01 - Dec 3 with 2065 views | SwanLuke |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:53 - Dec 3 by Highjack |
The most important thing is what are we going to call it.
Last time we had 'The War Against Tony'.
What about:
'Battle Against Sellouts Then Americans, Recover Dear Swans'?
'Conquest Of Conk Knose?'
'Fans Against Nefarious New Yorkers'? |
T the W war A against T the S sell outs |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:01 - Dec 3 with 2063 views | budegan |
In.
I've learnt a lot I didn't know tonight and appreciate Phil giving up so much time on a Sunday to this forum. |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:03 - Dec 3 with 2055 views | Garyjack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 19:48 - Dec 3 by Landore_Jack |
Why has this idea only now been suggested when fans have been begging the Trust for years to take on board and action the concerns of the supporters? In fact, Phil S clearly stated that all fans should get behind the Trust when a Supporters Action group was being suggested by Murph and Morning Star. |
LJ, I am morningstar. At the time the action group was suggested, it was taken very seriously by certain members of the trust. Fortunately it coincided with an upturn in our fortunes on the field, and it lost momentum. But there were certainly plans ready to be put in place. |  | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:06 - Dec 3 with 2023 views | max936 |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:03 - Dec 3 by Garyjack |
LJ, I am morningstar. At the time the action group was suggested, it was taken very seriously by certain members of the trust. Fortunately it coincided with an upturn in our fortunes on the field, and it lost momentum. But there were certainly plans ready to be put in place. |
Rekindle them Gazzer. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:10 - Dec 3 with 1985 views | SgorioFruit |
Sounds good Phil, count me in
also, I have recent experience handling the media, Sky Sports News etc, I'm sure I can offer my letter writing services somehow |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:11 - Dec 3 with 1975 views | Swanjaxs |
Let's make this happen.... no more apathy, your either in or don't bother at all, go play bowls on a weekend 👠Time to reclaim OUR club 👊 |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:12 - Dec 3 with 1965 views | Garyjack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:06 - Dec 3 by max936 |
Rekindle them Gazzer. |
Isn't that we're trying to do here Max?  | | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:13 - Dec 3 with 1953 views | exiledclaseboy |
I’ve no idea how this would work if I end up being co-opted onto the Trust board but f*ck it. I’m in anyway. |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:14 - Dec 3 with 1951 views | Landore_Jack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:03 - Dec 3 by Garyjack |
LJ, I am morningstar. At the time the action group was suggested, it was taken very seriously by certain members of the trust. Fortunately it coincided with an upturn in our fortunes on the field, and it lost momentum. But there were certainly plans ready to be put in place. |
Thanks Gary. Would you consider using those plans again or would you rather start from scratch? | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:17 - Dec 3 with 1923 views | Jackfath |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:13 - Dec 3 by exiledclaseboy |
I’ve no idea how this would work if I end up being co-opted onto the Trust board but f*ck it. I’m in anyway. |
You is going to be well busy init |  |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:19 - Dec 3 with 1914 views | Garyjack |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:14 - Dec 3 by Landore_Jack |
Thanks Gary. Would you consider using those plans again or would you rather start from scratch? |
Yes i would, but it would be up to the people involved what course of action we take. | | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:21 - Dec 3 with 1904 views | monmouth |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:13 - Dec 3 by exiledclaseboy |
I’ve no idea how this would work if I end up being co-opted onto the Trust board but f*ck it. I’m in anyway. |
If it works properly there should be synergy not conflict between the two.
You can float Queenlike on the Trust Board, whilst lighting the blue touch paper on the Militant Wing. | |
| |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:24 - Dec 3 with 1884 views | 3swan |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:21 - Dec 3 by monmouth |
If it works properly there should be synergy not conflict between the two.
You can float Queenlike on the Trust Board, whilst lighting the blue touch paper on the Militant Wing. |
Don't say Queenlike he'll only burst into song  | | | |
| Independent Supporters Group on 20:26 - Dec 3 with 1862 views | londonlisa2001 |
Ive been thinking about this for a couple of hours now.
My thoughts, for what they're worth.
My belief is that the only responsibility of the Trust was to work as best it could towards the principles it sets out in its objectives, namely:
To maintain a professional football club in Swansea;
To bring the football club closer to it’s local community;
To have elected representation on the Board of Swansea City Football Club;
To maintain and increase a stake in the club, in pursuance of the aims above;
To represent the needs and aims of our members at all times;
If, at any point, those objectives became contradictory, then they should be prioritised, with (1) and (2) being the most important.
How it achieved that is a matter of opinion, and has certainly changed over the years.
I don't see anything in those aims which say 'make sure that the Trust never creates waves'. 'Make sure that the Trust never speaks out against the direction the club is taking'. Or anything similar.
Most on here believe that the club is a shambles. It lacks direction, fan engagement, the recruitment is woeful, the manager is floundering, players are needed, the squad is patchy and unbalanced, and we look like we are careering toward the Championship.
If the Trust does not speak out about this, then the first couple of stated Trust objectives are simply not being heeded.
Many on here have been saying for ages that the Trust needs to take action. To launch a PR campaign to explain to the fan base at large exactly what has happened at the club to get us to this point. I believed and still do, that this should be accompanied by legal action to build a war chest that gives the Trust the best chance of one day taking a strong position in the club once more.
I don't believe that the owners know what they are doing, and I don't believe they care about anything other than making a profit or at the very least getting their money back.
The Trust has been silent and toothless in terms of pointing this out.
So an opportunity has now come up for a few people who believe in change joining the board to make that change. I have volunteered to do this, as have others on here.
We now talk about a new group being formed instead.
I will bet everything that I have, that if a new group is formed, within months the only focus of the Trust will be fighting against the new group. I have zero interest in being involved with that. I'm not joining a Trust in an attempt to give it teeth for once, to find that those who are prepared to show their teeth have now set up an alternative vehicle.
Either the view is we get the Trust doing what it should be doing, or we take the view that the Trust is a patsy, and set up an alternative group. Doing both, seems to me to be divisive. I don't mind which it is (although if they won't listen to a 21% shareholder, God knows why they'll listen to another group) but if this is happening, I can't see the point of trying to change within the Trust as well. It'll be like Life of Brian.
The only other note I'd make - on a number of occasions, including recently, the Trust have called for fans to refrain from showing discontent within the ground, for fear it would upset the team (snigger). I take it that Phil and Matt didn't agree with this. Once again, I'm wondering who the absolute f*** has been taking these decisions. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
