BW Supporters Trust

[Peter Thompson]

We might just need our Supporters Trust after all if everything goes wrong ...

Well done to all involved

What are the supporters trust going to do? Clubs dead if we ever need to rely on them for anything.

Supporters trust can do one for me....I cancelled my £10 membership a month ago

I'm 100% behind KA....

[Worthy4England]

Iles has his say in a BN comment piece.

I think describing Deano as "the elephant in the Boardroom" was a bit harsh...

[Peter Thompson]

Apparently its the Supporters Trust who have personally asked the football league to investigate the clubs accounts - what a complete bunch of c*nts !

"we have asked the Football League, as part of their post-takeover monitoring conditions, to look into this matter"

[TANGODANCER]

I'm really strugling here to decipher what they hope to achieve by pushing for investigations that could drop the club right in the shxt? Supporters Trust? Fine support this is....

[Worthy4England]

Apparently its the Supporters Trust who have personally asked the football league to investigate the clubs accounts - what a complete bunch of c*nts !

"we have asked the Football League, as part of their post-takeover monitoring conditions, to look into this matter"

Without pre-judging or casting any aspersions, I think there have historically been issues with Ken Anderson which are well chronicled elsewhere. I'm happy to leave it be for now, but I do think we need to ensure that everything's above board...

[TKIZ!]

Apologies for seeming really thick in all of this but I have one question. Did the League, as a condition of the takeover, say that KA would have to show on a monthly basis that the club could be a'growing concern' or am I dreaming that?

[BWFC_Insane]

Apparently its the Supporters Trust who have personally asked the football league to investigate the clubs accounts - what a complete bunch of c*nts !

"we have asked the Football League, as part of their post-takeover monitoring conditions, to look into this matter"

Without pre-judging or casting any aspersions, I think there have historically been issues with Ken Anderson which are well chronicled elsewhere. I'm happy to leave it be for now, but I do think we need to ensure that everything's above board...

He claims it isn't chronicled accurately. Regardless, the supporters trust once again show themselves to be attention seeking gobshites of the highest order.

Feck, enough people are monitoring the club without them sticking their oar in whenever the mood takes them. Also they seem to react to news reports that have little new news in them. Entirely reactive social media shitgibbons.

[Peter Thompson]

Absolute set of attention seeking sanctimonious arseholes - just because KA wouldn't meet them privately they have put the knife in, they call themselves BWFC supporters when they are actually nothing of the sort.

Constantly trying to undermine the club, constantly trying to undermine the owners - they should all just crawl back under the stone they came from - they should be ashamed of themselves, how on earth they can call themselves supporters

[Worthy4England]

Apparently its the Supporters Trust who have personally asked the football league to investigate the clubs accounts - what a complete bunch of c*nts !

"we have asked the Football League, as part of their post-takeover monitoring conditions, to look into this matter"

Without pre-judging or casting any aspersions, I think there have historically been issues with Ken Anderson which are well chronicled elsewhere. I'm happy to leave it be for now, but I do think we need to ensure that everything's above board...

He claims it isn't chronicled accurately. Regardless, the supporters trust once again show themselves to be attention seeking gobshites of the highest order.

Feck, enough people are monitoring the club without them sticking their oar in whenever the mood takes them. Also they seem to react to news reports that have little new news in them. Entirely reactive social media shitgibbons.

Well he would, wouldn't he.

Reality and fact is he was struck off as a Director for 10? years. Whilst I agree that the ST shouldn't be sticking their oar in completely, we still should have the Accounts. That's a fairly standard thing for running a business...

[bristol_Wanderer3]

Personally I like the BWFCST is asking tough questions. Moreover I feel that that is their best role.

Owners of football clubs all over the country have proven themselves to be unfit for purpose. From Blackburn to Charlton to Coventry, owners have arrived with frivolous intentions and are destroying once proud clubs that have thrived from prudent and careful direction for decades. Owning English football clubs has become a fashionable, populist exercise for hard nosed wealthy people, but it has become a lottery whether that benefits loyal supporters of those clubs.

Ken Anderson, who has never had a role as owner/chairman before, appears to be steering the club satisfactorily from early impressions but nobody really knows what is really going on. What we do know is that we are still under scrutiny and still haven't met our obligations as a business after eights months of this regime, despite promises to the contrary. Until our accounts are submitted and penalties paid and embargoes are lifted then we should as supporters not be satisfied with our new ownership imho. And if Ken Anderson does start to show he is a poor owner/chairman then organizations like the BWFCST will hopefully call him out at an early stage and allow us all to take action to either get rid of him, or force him to act correctly.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I'm not a fan of the ST, but would anyone feel different if right now we were sitting 15th in the table? It's easy to brush concerns away when things on the pitch are good, but if they were indifferent or worse I suspect there'd be a greater clamour for answers.

I am concerned as the only reason for delay that I can see is either trying to hide something or delaying something to avoid some sort of sanction. I think the ST are right to be asking questions, just that they shouldn't have postured in the way they did around the time of the takeover and the aftermath.

[BWFC_Insane]

I'm not a fan of the ST, but would anyone feel different if right now we were sitting 15th in the table? It's easy to brush concerns away when things on the pitch are good, but if they were indifferent or worse I suspect there'd be a greater clamour for answers.

I am concerned as the only reason for delay that I can see is either trying to hide something or delaying something to avoid some sort of sanction. I think the ST are right to be asking questions, just that they shouldn't have postured in the way they did around the time of the takeover and the aftermath.

I'm not brushing away concerns. I'm saying the supporters trust are nice people who wanted to own the club and run it. There are people in the trust who don't believe in businessmen running footba clubs and think every club should be fan owned projects that basically can't compete financially, but hey at least the fans are involved right?

They aren't honest or transparent and yet they push their agenda continually. I imagine they aren't representing the majority of their membership.

I wanted an ST who would work to get a seat on the board and act as a genuine safety valve that way. Instead they just want to post quips on Twitter and write 'letters'. Let's say Ken is a bad 'un, I'm sure a few letters from the trust will change that....

[Hoboh]

I think after what happened at Blackpool, folk should be a little more careful what they say about Anderson.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I'm not a fan of the ST, but would anyone feel different if right now we were sitting 15th in the table? It's easy to brush concerns away when things on the pitch are good, but if they were indifferent or worse I suspect there'd be a greater clamour for answers.

I am concerned as the only reason for delay that I can see is either trying to hide something or delaying something to avoid some sort of sanction. I think the ST are right to be asking questions, just that they shouldn't have postured in the way they did around the time of the takeover and the aftermath.

I'm not brushing away concerns. I'm saying the supporters trust are tw*ts who wanted to own the club and run it. There are people in the trust who don't believe in businessmen running footba clubs and think every club should be fan owned projects that basically can't compete financially, but hey at least the fans are involved right?

They aren't honest or transparent and yet they push their agenda continually. I imagine they aren't representing the majority of their membership.

I wanted an ST who would work to get a seat on the board and act as a genuine safety valve that way. Instead they just want to post quips on Twitter and write 'letters'. Let's say Ken is a bad 'un, I'm sure a few letters from the trust will change that....

Don't disagree with any of that. A proper trust should be asking questions, just not as many shit ones they have been.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think after what happened at Blackpool, folk should be a little more careful what they say about Anderson.

That was a different circus with different monkeys, but you're right that what we say on this forum is legally actionable.

[Andy Waller]

I think after what happened at Blackpool, folk should be a little more careful what they say about Anderson.

That was a different circus with different monkeys, but you're right that what we say on this forum is legally actionable.

Even if i say his hair is a bit of a mad shade?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think after what happened at Blackpool, folk should be a little more careful what they say about Anderson.

That was a different circus with different monkeys, but you're right that what we say on this forum is legally actionable.

Even if i say his hair is a bit of a mad shade?

First question is can they sue; second, bigger question is will they sue.

Could he sue for you saying his hair is a bit of a mad shade? The legal question is whether it reduces the plaintiff's reputation in the eyes of a right-minded member of the public (a phrase subject to predictably tortuous legal debate). That would be a hard one for him to prove, but also not easy for you to disprove.

But you get the point.

[Worthy4England]

I think after what happened at Blackpool, folk should be a little more careful what they say about Anderson.

That was a different circus with different monkeys, but you're right that what we say on this forum is legally actionable.

Even if i say his hair is a bit of a mad shade?

First question is can they sue; second, bigger question is will they sue.

Could he sue for you saying his hair is a bit of a mad shade? The legal question is whether it reduces the plaintiff's reputation in the eyes of a right-minded member of the public (a phrase subject to predictably tortuous legal debate). That would be a hard one for him to prove, but also not easy for you to disprove.

But you get the point.

I'm quite happy to stick with there having been problems articulated elsewhere, because there have and he can't do diddly around someone posting that he was struck off as a Director, because he was. As to whether anyone connected with Blackpool may or may not be complete c*nts, I'm not close enough to the complete c*nts to express a well balanced opinion either way. So I wouldn't dream of it.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

To be clear, Worthy, I wasn't grumbling about you or indeed anyone in particular. Just a public service warning.

[Worthy4England]

To be clear, Worthy, I wasn't grumbling about you or indeed anyone in particular. Just a public service warning.

Yes-sir. Trying to stick to the factual.