Another Thread

[Dave L]

If you wish to discuss in more detail why I personally think the concept of a ST inherently breeds mediocrity then I am quite happy to do so but perhaps we could do that on another thread.

Discuss.

[lukejones2]

it is my belief that STs inherently breed mediocrity

Orj

I disagree with vast amounts of your post although suggest that as much of the specific crticism is aimed at Miles as Chair of the Trust, and much of the rest is very general, I shall allow him to respond rather than sticking my nose in.

I would just like to ask you to explan how this could be the case? I am assuming that you are suggesting having a fans' organisation "breeds mediocrity" on the pitch - how can this be?

Incidentally, my own personal opinion is that on nights such as the launch night where players of the present come face to face with fans celebrating players of the past it can only serve to motivate todays players. GJ indeed recounted the meeting with legends of Bristol City that evening during the dinner last night. Further, when the fans and the club get closer together, something the Trust look to achieve, the players feel more of an identity for the club they play for and the fans are more able to identify with the players. How close were the fan and players back in the mid seventies? Very!

[redrocks]

We might as well lock this thread already. Save us all a bit of time.

[lukejones2]

We might as well lock this thread already. Save us all a bit of time.

Not at all and this is a ridiculous comment. If Orj would like to post an answer to the question, I look forward to seeing it. Of course, there is no need to attack any individuals based on opinion as the question does not relate to individuals at all.

[Guest Orj]

I've been placed on moderator preview so I'll refrain from expanding my opinion for now.

I'll wait until my status is resolved then I'll gladly chew the fat about the merits of STs.

[redrocks]

Not at all and this is a ridiculous comment. If Orj would like to post an answer to the question, I look forward to seeing it. Of course, there is no need to attack any individuals based on opinion as the question does not relate to individuals at all.

Why is it a ridiculous comment?

[lukejones2]

Why is it a ridiculous comment?

Because there is no reason for it to happen, and no substance for your comment which is in my opion, just another thinly veiled attack at the mods as tends to come from yourself.

Please put me right if I have misunderstood...?

I also look forward to Orj's post explaining his comment which I have yet to see.

[redrocks]

Mr Jones,

I never had any problem with the mods until the ST took over. Since then I have had cause to take issue with their occasionally heavy-handed approach. Given the fact you were probably the worst offender I think you are the last person that should get on their high horse about it.

Thanks anyway.

rr

[cheshire_red]

I also look forward to Orj's post explaining his comment which I have yet to see.

Perhaps he has been banned, looks like someone has reading between the lines of Jay's commants on the locked thread.

[PhatWill]

Incidentally, my own personal opinion is that on nights such as the launch night where players of the present come face to face with fans celebrating players of the past it can only serve to motivate todays players. GJ indeed recounted the meeting with legends of Bristol City that evening during the dinner last night. Further, when the fans and the club get closer together, something the Trust look to achieve, the players feel more of an identity for the club they play for and the fans are more able to identify with the players. How close were the fan and players back in the mid seventies? Very!

And what have Stockport County achieved since their ISA has been in place? Other than the obvious - the fact that they've been relegated 2 divisions and don't look likely to return in the near future. Has bringing the fans closer to the players helped them?? Or have the financial restrictions that they've imposed on themselves held back their progress, or indeed caused regression.

Discuss!

[RedZepperin]

[lukejones2]

All

I don't wish to dwell on the moderation as that is not really the subject of this thread. I will say though, that I stand by the moderation I did personally whilst a mod and that I certainly feel the forum is less heavily modded since the ST took on the board.

So, back on topic I look forward to heaing from Orj - you may be on MP but if your thread does not attack individuals with opinion purporting to be fact, doesn't include swearing and doesn't include text talk (unlikely!! ) then there is no reason why it wouldn't be allowed.

Will - Thank you for your question and the Stockport sitution is an interesting one. I have put your question to a board member at Stockport and awat his response although I would suggest that the on field problems at Stockport occured whilst the Club was not Trust owned and may have had something to do with the financial difficulties that imprudent management of the club brought about. Indeed, taken from Wikipedia:

2005/06 saw Stockport County change owners again. After reportedly losing £4m, Cheshire Sports chairman Brian Kennedy handed ownership of the club to the Supporters Trust, whose aim was to rescue the club from revenue loss, eventually breaking even & turn Stockport County into a community based football club. On the July 8 at 10:30 the deal went through, making County one of a handful of supporter-owned clubs in the country. On the pitch, despite the lower level of football the team failed to adapt. On Boxing Day 2005, already five points adrift of safety, County lost 6-0 at local rivals Macclesfield Town, leading Turner to resign after just seven wins in 50 matches.

Former player Jim Gannon came in as caretaker manager, while the club searched for a replacement. An impressive change to both results & performances under Gannon's leadership led the club to give him the position full time, and the remarkable run of form continued. Stockport picked up 35 points from the final 23 games, compared to just 17 from the first 23 matches. On an extremely tense final day of the season, County held champions Carlisle United to a 0-0 draw; a last minute winner for Leyton Orient at Oxford United sent Oxford down & meant that the Hatters were safe, sparking scenes of celebration at Edgeley Park.

This backs my thoughts that the on field problems occured prior to the ST takeover.

I will make another point whic I think is key here, taking over control of the football club is simply not an aim of the Bristol City ST at this point. we want the fans to own more shares yes, we want this so that the fans have a bigger voice yes, we want the club to be run for the fans yes, but we have no desire to take the reigns as is the case at Stockport.

If Orj was to suggest that a ST owning the club breeds mediocrity (perhaps due to frugal/cautious financial management) then that argument would be one which is not applicable to the Bristol City ST. The comment from Orj however was that STs at a football club breed mediocrity - this is what I struggle to understand.

Cheers for reading - this post must be fairly long as my arm is aching from the weird typing angle I currently have!

[EmersonsKev]

I've been placed on moderator preview so I'll refrain from expanding my opinion for now.

I'll wait until my status is resolved then I'll gladly chew the fat about the merits of STs.

And why have they put you on MP?

[Collis]

And why have they put you on MP?

Because there is no such thing as freedom of speech on here.

I have my views on the ST, don't really want to be banned by expressing them though...

[bh_red]

Because there is no such thing as freedom of speech on here.

I have my views on the ST, don't really want to be banned by expressing them though...

spot on, if certain people from the ST don't like what you have to say it gets deleted, amended or just the topic closed down.

freedom on speech on this forum! don't make me laugh

[EmersonsKev]

Because there is no such thing as freedom of speech on here.

I have my views on the ST, don't really want to be banned by expressing them though...

I'm sure you can say what you want aslong what you say stay within the forum rules.

[Maesknoll Red]

Because there is no such thing as freedom of speech on here.

I have my views on the ST, don't really want to be banned by expressing them though...

And you won't be if you do, so long as they aren't libellous.

The ST members on here know my opinion of it and that I'm not likely to join anytime soon, it doesn't have to be an ST love in, but, I'm sure they'd be interested in your reservations.

[Collis]

spot on, if certain people from the ST don't like what you have to say it gets deleted, amended or just the topic closed down.

freedom on speech on this forum! don't make me laugh

Which is why I won't express my views on OTIB. If, however they want to hear my views (which they probably don't) I will quite happily send a PM/E-mail to whoever it may concern!

And you won't be if you do, so long as they aren't libellous.

The ST members on here know my opinion of it and that I'm not likely to join anytime soon, it doesn't have to be an ST love in, but, I'm sure they'd be interested in your reservations.

Trouble is there is a thin line between constructive critisism and saying something that is going to offend someone.

Touchy subject I feel.

[lukejones2]

Which is why I won't express my views on OTIB. If, however they want to hear my views (which they probably don't) I will quite happily send a PM/E-mail to whoever it may concern!

Trouble is there is a thin line between constructive critisism and saying something that is going to offend someone.

Touchy subject I feel.

Collis

I for one would be happy to converse with you on your views and maybe take any suggestions on board? - as a body of people, the ST board don't shirk questions and are completely open to discussion. You are right that there is a fine line between constructive criticism and offense being caused - personally I think "how would I feel if that was aimed at me?" This generally seems to be enough to keep me from being offensive. Everyone has their moments, we are all human, and it is often better not to post in haste too

All - would be good to try and keep this topic away from moderation issues if possible? Not that there is a problem discussing them, but because this thread could potentially be a good and interesting debate on the merits or otherwise of the ST whereas only 1/4 of the mods are ST members so it si not directly related.

Luke

[cheshire_red]

I can't believe the ST haven't got you to put together a 'how to post on otib' instruction manual. :razz:

[Dave L]

this thread could potentially be a good and interesting debate on the merits or otherwise of the ST

Luke

Which is exactly why I started it. Still waiting for the good and interesting debate though.

I have my own thoughts on the subject, but first I wanted to give Orj the chance to explain his claim that ST's breed mediocrity. I don't really understand what he means.

[swindlered]

I was at the Supporters Direct National Conference on Friday to listen to keynote speeches from Richard Caborn, Minister of Sport and William Gaillard, UEFA's Head of Communications. Richard Caborn announced a new 3 year funding deal for Supporters Direct (The Trust movements governing body) worth £1.8 million over three years. As part of this Supporters Direct will be tasked not only with expanding into Northern Ireland but also to start establishing a formal Trust structure in other sports such as Rugby Union, Rugby League and Speedway.

UEFA have committed funds to a pilot study looking at rolling out the Supporters Trust model accross Europe. It is their view, the governments and the FA's that the Trust model is one of the preferred methods for club ownership. People are entitled to their own opinions and all Trusts should be judged on their own records however the concept is here to stay and i'd expect the movement to continue to snowball over the next decade.

[bh_red]

I've been placed on moderator preview so I'll refrain from expanding my opinion for now.

I'll wait until my status is resolved then I'll gladly chew the fat about the merits of STs.

Orj, you views my were discuss by myself and a few colleguges on friday afternoon prior to the thread being amended and locked by the mods, to be honest we know how you fee and quite honestly agree, l feel sorry for you that you are now subject to "such sanctions" such as "moderator preview"

(dear mods hope this is better for you!)

[SE23Red]

I was at the Supporters Direct National Conference on Friday to listen to keynote speeches from Richard Caborn, Minister of Sport and William Gaillard, UEFA's Head of Communications. Richard Caborn announced a new 3 year funding deal for Supporters Direct (The Trust movements governing body) worth £1.8 million over three years. As part of this Supporters Direct will be tasked not only with expanding into Northern Ireland but also to start establishing a formal Trust structure in other sports such as Rugby Union, Rugby League and Speedway.

UEFA have committed funds to a pilot study looking at rolling out the Supporters Trust model accross Europe. It is their view, the governments and the FA's that the Trust model is one of the preferred methods for club ownership. People are entitled to their own opinions and all Trusts should be judged on their own records however the concept is here to stay and i'd expect the movement to continue to snowball over the next decade.

If the Government think it is a good idea then I'm even more sceptical! I guess it should be no surprise to know we now have £1.8m of public money going into a quango to represent football fans. Why?

Football is now big business. Although I don't expect every club to be subsidised by a wealthy benefactor a broad collection of fans contributing a pound a month doesn't appear to be a business model any more appealing than the current one. I don't know of a single example of a club that has moved forward from the point of ownership being transferred to a trust.

Where STs should be rightly applauded are cases where they have brought stability to a club in crisis. They have been the focal point of fans' determination to stop the club they love from going out of existence. I just don't think you can apply that success story to all clubs, the key to the success being timing and a common cause.

My main worry is that in setting up a Trust when things are becoming increasingly stable on the financial side and more promising on the pitch BCST is destined to achieve very little.

To take the worst case scenario that in 3-5 years SL, cackling wildly to himself, walks off in his gas shirt with ownership of the stadium company I'd rather we didn't have an existing ST that had spent those years alienating one part of the fanbase with perceived over moderation of a forum, a second with lack of representation on the East End, and a third from that good old Bristoian tradition of looking in from the outside and moaning* - The ST becomes a part of the establishment in exactly the same way as supporters clubs have done.

*I'm allowed to say that without irony as I'm typing this in London :razz:

[bh_red]

My main worry is that in setting up a Trust when things are becoming increasingly stable on the financial side and more promising on the pitch BCST is destined to achieve very little.

To take the worst case scenario that in 3-5 years SL, cackling wildly to himself, walks off in his gas shirt with ownership of the stadium company I'd rather we didn't have an existing ST that had spent those years alienating one part of the fanbase with perceived over moderation of a forum, a second with lack of representation on the East End, and a third from that good old Bristoian tradition of looking in from the outside and moaning* - The ST becomes a part of the establishment in exactly the same way as supporters clubs have done.

Very Very Well put that man, they were set up as an something for the fans, instead they are just another off shout puppet of the board who just appear to be alienating themself from what fans actually believe and want.

[lukejones2]

Very Very Well put that man, they were set up as an something for the fans, instead they are just another off shout puppet of the board who just appear to be alienating themself from what fans actually believe and want.

I can't discuss in detail at the mo as in work but on what do you base this? I personally don't believe it to be the case at all.

[jellyred]

You wouldn't think that though would you, you are a board member after all and not one of us great unwashed!

[swindlered]

If the Government think it is a good idea then I'm even more sceptical! I guess it should be no surprise to know we now have £1.8m of public money going into a quango to represent football fans. Why?

Football is now big business. Although I don't expect every club to be subsidised by a wealthy benefactor a broad collection of fans contributing a pound a month doesn't appear to be a business model any more appealing than the current one. I don't know of a single example of a club that has moved forward from the point of ownership being transferred to a trust.

Where STs should be rightly applauded are cases where they have brought stability to a club in crisis. They have been the focal point of fans' determination to stop the club they love from going out of existence. I just don't think you can apply that success story to all clubs, the key to the success being timing and a common cause.

My main worry is that in setting up a Trust when things are becoming increasingly stable on the financial side and more promising on the pitch BCST is destined to achieve very little.

To take the worst case scenario that in 3-5 years SL, cackling wildly to himself, walks off in his gas shirt with ownership of the stadium company I'd rather we didn't have an existing ST that had spent those years alienating one part of the fanbase with perceived over moderation of a forum, a second with lack of representation on the East End, and a third from that good old Bristoian tradition of looking in from the outside and moaning* - The ST becomes a part of the establishment in exactly the same way as supporters clubs have done.

*I'm allowed to say that without irony as I'm typing this in London :razz:

The government have put the money in because as you point out Trusts have taken over at those clubs where otherwise they'd have gone out of business and also because of the special nature of sport its better off in the long-run to have clubs owned by fans democratically rather than PLC's. That no clubs have gone out of business following the collapse of ITV Digital is testament of the effort many fans have gone too to keep their clubs alive.

Were City to fall into crisis (which isn't a likelihood at present one hopes) there are distinct benefits in having an established Trust with the experience of liaising with fans, (BCST is only 18 months old and I think its fair to say that people are still learning as they go along) , connections with local businesses and with a proven history. When I look at the Trust through my rose-tinted spectacles and see whats been achieved with so little manpower and experience then its hard for me not to be proud of what we've achieved and what would be possible if we did have more members and more volunteers.

Its ironic that you've ended your statement mentioning looking in from the outside and moaning. One of the Exeter Trust board members is based in London as is one of the GasTrust board members. No excuses!

[lukejones2]

In response to the question about Stockport's achievements, please see the following responses from our friends from that end of the Country:

"What have Stockport County achieved since the" Trust (we are not an ISA) "has been in place?"

Well first of all, the Trust has been "in place" since July 2005. The Trust became the owners of the football club at that time and, in the fifteen months since then the club has:

* Broken even for the first time in a very, very long time, after years of making a trading loss of over £1m per year.

* Achieved record season ticket sales

* Achieved one of the highest average attendance levels in the division (a higher average attendance figure than some clubs in the division above too)

* Brought in a manager who the supporters adore, a manager who managed to guide the club to safety when it was all but relegated into the Conference on Boxing Day - and the procedure we created and used to appoint the new manager is now being adopted by other clubs

* Put a proposal to the local council to purchase and develop an area of land close to the football ground, development which will be beneficial to the local community while putting the club on a sound financial footing with substantial assets.

* Improved the morale of the club's employees, both on and off the field of play

* Started various schemes in partnership with the local council, including a scheme called "Fit To Read" which is aimed at providing help for young people who have reading difficulties.

I'm sure there are other things I have not mentioned here but I think

that is enough to be going on with.

"The fact that" Stockport County has "been relegated 2 divisions and don't look likely to return in the near future."

In fact, since New Year's Day 2000 the club on the field has been in a decline which, as has the questioner correctly stated included County being relegated 2 divisions in six years. Doesn't sound too good does it, but hey, the decline took place while the club was in private ownership. It hardly seems fair to blame the decline on the Trust. Especially as there are signs of improvement on the field. I won't pretend to believe that we will be pushing for promotion this season. I will say that Stockport County over the past six years could be likened to a supertanker travelling at top speed in the wrong direction and the past fifteen months has seen the start of the long process of slowing

down the tanker, turning it around and starting to head back in the right direction. It is going to take time though, but I would argue against the statement that we don't look likely to return in the near future.

"Has bringing the fans closer to the players helped them??"

At this level of football, the players and the fans have always been close. There are players who now ply their trade at clubs up and down the country who will tell you that they loved playing for County because of the special relationship they had with the supporters. That has not changed, and those players are always greeted with generous applause and the fans chant their names whenever they turn out to play against us. Ask players like Kevin Cooper at Cardiff, Alun Armstrong at Darlington, Ali Gibb at Hartlepool about their time with County and ask them what they think of the supporters.

"Or have the financial restrictions that they've imposed on themselves held back their progress, or indeed caused regression."

The only financial restrictions that we've imposed are that we will not spend money that we do not have. That has not prevented us from providing the manager with a player budget which is amongst the top six in League 2. We have refused to gamble the future of the football club by overspending in an attempt to buy success. We all need to learn the object lesson that Leeds United (and other clubs) has taught us.

No, we far prefer to be a club that continues to exist and live within our means, rather than be a club that burnt brightly for a short period of time and then died because it cannot pay off the massive debts it runs up while trying to progress too far too quickly.

We aim to be around for a very long time to come. I firmly believe that we are doing what is necessary to achieve that aim.

Rob (of Reddish) Donaldson

Stockport County Trust

Luke

The initial thing to point out is that there is a factual error. We have not been relegated since we have owned the club - our relegations happened when we were owned by Britain's 238th richest man. So money didn't buy us success there did it?

We are quite open that we are never going to put our club at risk by spending recklessly on players. We will run the club prudently. I think that is something that all clubs should be aiming to do, however they are owned.

And while we haven't been tremendously successful on the pitch, things are turning round. Other trust owned clubs have done better on the pitch - if I'm not mistaken Brentford finished somewhat above Bristol City last season!

It's also worth noting that our gates have gone up. We sold more season tickets for last season, despite having dropped a division (under previous ownership). We sold even more this year, having had a very poor season. I am sure that some of this robust support happens because fans are genuinely involved in the club, can communicate directly with board members, and have a stake in our success.

And finally, you are never going to persuade everyone that trust ownership is a good thing. Some people will never remove their blinkers, nor will they see the dangers of a club being in the hands of a single individual.

Dan

What have we achieved? I suppose I'll have to step back to before we took over the club, because simply having the nerve to attempt a take over was our biggest achievement. At the time we had just over 100 members and around £3k in the bank. Luckily though we had some assets that made it achievable, namely Dan Levy, Mark Maguire and David James. Those 3 understood the nature of the take over game and no Trust should even attempt a take over without having such people on board. It was during the take over process that the foundations were laid down that made it possible for the club to at least break even in the first year. We made it very clear that the present owners must do the dirty work and present us with a workable break even budget before completion of the deal. It was a buyers market with us being the only viable bidders from their point of view, so we could make such demands. Still, if they hadn't delivered, make no mistake we would have walked away. Then their was the small matter of finding the £500k the FA insisted we must have as a rainy day fund + the around £70k costs for the necessary due diligence. All this was one way or another found.

Then after we took over we had to deal with the fact that slashing a million plus off the previous budget meant we were left with only the dregs of a previously poor team, couple this with the fact we were virgins in the football club running business and you could see we had a further mountain to climb. I well remember the first home game, I was still on the Trust board at the time so I had to look the part of an owner and go suited up. I don't know about the rest of the Trust board but I felt totally like a fish out of water. At one

point I went up to the tunnel entrance and sheepish asked the steward stood there if it was ok to go through to the boardroom, he stood back and gave me the once over before letting me through. I honestly felt like it was him that owned the club and I was just a trespasser, that feeling increased when I had to turn back and say "Can you tell me where the boardroom is please". Still, we overcome every obstacle in our way, of which there was plenty and survived as a football league club.

So really all I can do at this point is put the question back at you and ask. Have we achieved anything of note in your opinion?

Paul

Now in all seriousness, I think that there are some valid points made above and that we should ignore the swipe at our beloved City!! Phatwill, do you still hold your view that their Supporters Trust is at the heart of their problems? It sounds to me as though the health of the club is improving.

You wouldn't think that though would you, you are a board member after all and not one of us great unwashed!

I am no different to any of you in reality, although as you correctly point out I am a member of the Supporters Trust board and unlikely to share the view that the ST are a board puppet. Moreover, being a member of the board means that I can see the disagreements we have with the club (anybody working in partnership will disagree on issues) but that also I can see the fact that in order to get the best for the fans of Bristol City there needs to be a constructive partnership in place with the men in control of the club. We always aim to conduct our business with professionalism and this includes our relationships with the club - that doesn't mean we don't tell them when we disagree though.

[cheshire_red]

For those not fully in the picture, it might be a good idea to clarify which 'Board' you are a member of.