Steve L's Low Profile

[Robbored]

What about Wilksi? On numerous occasions he's told you on here that he'd like the SC to get involved with the East End issue.

I asked Wilksi to introduce himself to me on a matchday and he has not responded.I have yet to recieve a copy of the petition either.

Read my post on this thread before this one and you will get a clearer picture.

[worthyred]

The SC does listen to its members, and indeed has when they have expressed their views on particular issues.

As I have already said several times - not one SC member has approached me regarding the EE issue.Therefore the SC hs not got involved in the debate.

Its not rocket science to work out who I am.I'm a regular poster on this forum and can be found on matchdays in the SC lounge bar along with several committee members.I even read out the team sheet!

All any member has to do is ask to speak to me or a committee member.

I don't see the role of the SC as a political or militant organisation and we do not therefore actively seek the views of our members.

Herein lies the problem with the supporters club it should be seeking the views of its members or really what is the point of the club in the first place other than a jolly boys drinking club?

So the supporters club wont actually take any action unless they are approached by 750 members? I have seen a few people on here ask for this to be taken up by the supporters club. Which is more realistic, expecting 750 individuals who have no contact details for any others who may feel the same way to come together and approach the committee or for the supporters club who hold a database of all their members to canvass the opinions of their membership on a subject?

You claim in an earlier post that you have been approached personally by other supporters club members before and that you achieved a happy outcome, does this not contradict your statement that you won't take any action because one or two blokes are moaning?

On a personal note - I as chairman of the SC do not 'influence' anything.Nor do any of my committee.We are not in that kind of buisness.We get no priveledges of any kind from the FC - nor do we seek them.All the time we put into the SC is entirely voluntary.

[tompo]

[cider head]

I have yet to recieve a copy of the petition either.

Read my post on this thread before this one and you will get a clearer picture.

emailed to you by north street and posted on here Oct 19 2006

http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=66090&st=225

cider head Oct 19 2006, 3:34 PM Post #251

Sub Cider

Group: Members

Joined: 24-October 03

From: Bristol

Member No.: 27

THE PETITION, The non belivers need not take part.

With a big game at forest with a big following of city fans which will be great

to collect names, therefore if you think you can help get names then print it off A4 SIZE

collect your names and return to:

The EastEnd petition

P.O. BOX 15 RADSTOCK

BA3 3QF

The petition is going well but if anyone wants to help it's there for

all the interested fans to take part, and to stop chatting on about

it on a forum and do something.. good luck...

http://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=66090&st=225

[phantom]

I have yet to recieve a copy of the petition either.

emailed to you by north street and posted on here Oct 19 2006

What is going on here !

It appears there is every excuse being given why the SC has not taken the EE peittion to its members.

First it was mentioned no members had requested you to run with this, Yet members on this forum have requested that it is done so.

Then there are claims that there was no copy made available. But that looks to be wrong as well !

What is going on ??!???

[Guest]

What is going on here !

It appears there is every excuse being given why the SC has not taken the EE peittion to its members.

First it was mentioned no members had requested you to run with this, Yet members on this forum have requested that it is done so.

Then there are claims that there was no copy made available. But that looks to be wrong as well !

What is going on ??!???

Am I reading the latest Robbered post right; 750 S.C members now required and 50% of the rest before they would "approach the board"

[redrocks]

Am I reading the latest Robbered post right; 750 S.C members now required and 50% of the rest before they would "approach the board"

Let's face it, Robbored can't be arsed with the aggro. Not sure I blame him. Anything more political than which brand of peanuts to put up behind the bar will probably be too much hassle for the supporters' club. Perhaps they should rebrand themselves the "Cosy Drinking Club" to try to differentiate themselves a bit more. They could also do with some kind of mission statement along the lines of "To provide somewhere nice and warm for cheap beer and unpolitical chit-chat".

[Collis]

Let's face it, Robbored can't be arsed with the aggro. Not sure I blame him.

Oh if he "can't be arsed" thats ok then!

An important member of the "supporters" club and he doesn't want to know?

Very ignorant.

[Robbored]

Am I reading the latest Robbered post right; 750 S.C members now required and 50% of the rest before they would "approach the board"

If 50% or over of the SC membership felt that the EE issue was something that the committee should persue with the club then we would do so.My point is that as a committee we have to represent all of our members - not just those that are active in the EE debate.

Its just possible that over 50% of our membership couldn't give a toss about the EE and therefore if I were to go to the board without more than 50% of membership support I could not say that I was representing the overall wishes of our members.

I would look pretty silly if I went to Lansdown and said "Steve, there are 5% or so of our members that want the EE open". On the other hand, if I were able to go to him and say "Steve, over 50% of our membership want the EE open" he would have to listen more seriously.

[Robbored]

Oh if he "can't be arsed" thats ok then!

An important member of the "supporters" club and he doesn't want to know?

Very ignorant.

Like all of us you are entitled to your view but leave out the personal insults.

Btw - If I didn't want to know do you really think I'd be bothering to respond to the points raised on this thread?

[redrocks]

Robbored, you can also add "the consistent misspeller of the word 'pursue'" to your list of credentials.

[Robbored]

Robbored, you can also add "the consistent misspeller of the word 'pursue'" to your list of credentials.

I'd love to - but I'll have to take it to the committee meeting next week.......

[redrocks]

I'd love to - but I'll have to take it to the committee meeting next week.......

Bloody Jobsworth!

[Guest]

Like all of us you are entitled to your view but leave out the personal insults.

Btw - If I didn't want to know do you really think I'd be bothering to respond to the points raised on this thread?

"I`m glad you no longer support City - you`d probably get down the Gate and cheer the opposition" now I take that as a personal insult after 40 years of loyal support.

Now who was it who said that..... oh yeah YOU!

[Robbored]

"I`m glad you no longer support City - you`d probably get down the Gate and cheer the opposition" now I take that as a personal insult after 40 years of loyal support.

Now who was it who said that..... oh yeah YOU!

Thats not a personal insult - its an opinion.

[Guest]

Thats not a personal insult - its an opinion.

O.K thats alright then

[RedTop]

To answer the points made so far, I would say:

1. SteveL hasn't had a low profile. He did a Q&A with supporters a few weeks ago that is available for all fans to watch. He's also been on the radio, and I've not noticed any drop in his profile or attempt to dodge fans! In fact, the complete opposite. At the forum he took the issues most pressing to supporters head-on, including the East End question. You might not agree his answer, but you can't claim he's avoided giving reasons why he doesn't believe the EastEnd should be opened. They are there for you to see with your own eyes. I've not yet seen anyone from the pro-EastEnders put such a cogent argument in favour of opening the East End.

2. It seems harsh to me to expect Robbored to do this through the SC or to give him a hard time. As he says, it basically seems to be a fund-raising organisation rather than one aimed at representing fans as such. That is the gap now being filled by the ST, who I suggest those of you complaining about the EE should join if you want a voice on it. Personally, I'm against opening up the EastEnd because I think it's a complete waste of money. The club is losing enough as it is, without pouring it down the drain just so some of you can get a crapper view and get closer to the away fans to taunt them. And the personal abuse aimed at Robbored is simply nasty and vindictive, and there is no excuse for it.

3. It's a shame the energy put into trying to get the EastEnd reopened hasn't been channelled into something more productive that might actually do the club some good instead of costing it money it does not have.

[redrocks]

I was wondering when the Lansdownista spin doctors/forum prefects were going to show up.

[Dave L]

Its just possible that over 50% of our membership couldn't give a toss about the EE and therefore if I were to go to the board without more than 50% of membership support I could not say that I was representing the overall wishes of our members.

Personally I'm one of those who isn't remotely interested in going into the East End. I'm quite happy with my seat in the Dolman.

But I do recognise that this is an issue that means a lot to a very great number of fans. I do accept a lot of the club's arguments against re-opening it, but neither do I think they can completely ignore a large portion of their fanbase who clearly feel very strongly about this. Surely there ought to be an acceptable compromise? It seems to me that the main problem is the closeness of the way supporters, and the insistence of a bunch of immature morons on both sides who think it's clever to goad each other and provoke trouble rather than watch the football.

If I was Chairman of BCFC I would re-open the East End to home fans and remove a couple of blocks of seats on the Dolman side to provide a terrace for those who want to stand. The terrace would be split into pens, to limit numbers who could go into one area and employ the sort of safety precautions that work very well at other grounds with much bigger terracing areas. I would then make the rest of the EE seated, as it is now, for home fans only, and put the away fans into the end block of the Williams. I would leave the EE block next to the away fans empty but use it for overflow when there was a large away attendance. I would make sure that the EE block next to that was for identified season ticket holders only, and make sure that any home fans who tried to goad or cause trouble with away fans were cautioned in the first instance and banned in the event of repeat transgressions.

And if I was Chairman of the Suporter's Club I would certainly want to ask my membership their views on this very important issue rather than wait for them to come to me. And what better way would there be than to make a freely circulated petition available for those who might want to sign it? And if having canvassed my membership I was convinced that there was no support for re-opening the EE, I would speak out and say so. But if it was clear that the majority of my members did support the aims of the petition, then I would feel obliged to communicate that to the Board. Surely the Supporter's Club has to have a view on this, and needs to be pro-active in canvassing opinion?

[Guest North Street]

I have yet to recieve a copy of the petition either.

Robbored i did e mail you a petition on Oct 30th and if you did not recieve it that is good enough for me.

I can if you wish still send you a copy of the petition and a clip board just in case by post direct to the supporters club.

[Guest Jan Mollars Gloves]

And if I was Chairman of the Suporter's Club I would certainly want to ask my membership their views on this very important issue rather than wait for them to come to me. And what better way would there be than to make a freely circulated petition available for those who might want to sign it? And if having canvassed my membership I was convinced that there was no support for re-opening the EE, I would speak out and say so. But if it was clear that the majority of my members did support the aims of the petition, then I would feel obliged to communicate that to the Board. Surely the Supporter's Club has to have a view on this, and needs to be pro-active in canvassing opinion?

Exactly the point many have tried to make & very well put.

The Supporters Club should be more proactive in it's role.

They DO have an important role & should represent it's members.

[Mr Mosquito]

If I was Chairman of BCFC I would re-open the East End to home fans and remove a couple of blocks of seats on the Dolman side to provide a terrace for those who want to stand. The terrace would be split into pens, to limit numbers who could go into one area and employ the sort of safety precautions that work very well at other grounds with much bigger terracing areas. I would then make the rest of the EE seated, as it is now, for home fans only, and put the away fans into the end block of the Williams. I would leave the EE block next to the away fans empty but use it for overflow when there was a large away attendance. I would make sure that the EE block next to that was for identified season ticket holders only, and make sure that any home fans who tried to goad or cause trouble with away fans were cautioned in the first instance and banned in the event of repeat transgressions.

And if I was Chairman of the Suporter's Club I would certainly want to ask my membership their views on this very important issue rather than wait for them to come to me. And what better way would there be than to make a freely circulated petition available for those who might want to sign it? And if having canvassed my membership I was convinced that there was no support for re-opening the EE, I would speak out and say so. But if it was clear that the majority of my members did support the aims of the petition, then I would feel obliged to communicate that to the Board. Surely the Supporter's Club has to have a view on this, and needs to be pro-active in canvassing opinion?

Dave L, with those afore mentioned comments you are truely the voice of reason. I wish you were the BCFC Chairman.

[Robbored]

And if I was Chairman of the Suporter's Club I would certainly want to ask my membership their views on this very important issue rather than wait for them to come to me. And what better way would there be than to make a freely circulated petition available for those who might want to sign it? And if having canvassed my membership I was convinced that there was no support for re-opening the EE, I would speak out and say so. But if it was clear that the majority of my members did support the aims of the petition, then I would feel obliged to communicate that to the Board. Surely the Supporter's Club has to have a view on this, and needs to be pro-active in canvassing opinion?

" Very important issue" is a moot point.I don''t know if you've read through the posts on this thread but there has been a distinct lack of interest from SC members.Untill this thread got underway not one single member brought this issue to the committee.The answers to your other points have also been addressed.

I don't see the role of the SC to be a political organisation and to proactively seek to canvas our members on an issue that is seemingly the domain of a limited number of activists.

[Dave L]

" Very important issue" is a moot point.I don''t know if you've read through the posts on this thread but there has been a distinct lack of interest from SC members.Untill this thread got underway not one single member brought this issue to the committee.The answers to your other points have also been addressed.

Al, It's my view that this is an important issue because people have been talking about it constantly for years, and despite the best efforts of the club it just won't go away. So in order to find out what your members think, why not ask them? Where's the harm?

I don't see the role of the SC to be a political organisation and to proactively seek to canvas our members on an issue that is seemingly the domain of a limited number of activists.

I don't think this is a political issue. It's the sincerely held view of a lot of passionate fans who care about this football club. I think the 'limited number of activists' have hundreds of signatures for this petition. No doubt Cider Head or someone will tell us exactly how many. Whether you agree with them or not, these people are clearly 'supporters', whether they are members of the SC or not. And if the SC isn't there to represent or at the very least find out what its members think, what is it for exactly?

Dave L, with those afore mentioned comments you are truely the voice of reason. I wish you were the BCFC Chairman.

Cheers RG. Lend me twenty million quid and I'm sure I can strike a deal with Steve L.

[Guest North Street]

I don't think this is a political issue. It's the sincerely held view of a lot of passionate fans who care about this football club. I think the 'limited number of activists' have hundreds of signatures for this petition. No doubt Cider Head or someone will tell us exactly how many. Whether you agree with them or not, these people are clearly 'supporters', whether they are members of the SC or not. And if the SC isn't there to represent or at the very least find out what its members think, what is it for exactly?

1000+ including ex players, current first teamer, City office staff, stewards and even the kit man!

[Mr Mosquito]

Cheers RG. Lend me twenty million quid and I'm sure I can strike a deal with Steve L.

If I had £20 million to spare I'd gladly give you the money to become Chairman.

[redrocks]

If I had £20 million to spare I'd gladly give you the money to become Chairman.

It sounds like a good idea. Some of the strategies Dave would put out there might be interesting. We could look forward to the following changes:

-Team kit to be called "Glad Rags".

-Playing in an exciting and attractive fixture to be called "going up West".

-Any local rivals to be taken out by hit men whilst walking along by the New Cut.

-Any players coming off a contract to be 'written out of the script' rather than going out on a Bosman. Cue interesting demises with players being hit by buses whilst crossing the road, going crazy in their potting sheds, emigrating to South Africa, etc.

-The Wedlocks pub to be reopened and to become the centre of all things Bristol City. All other pubs in the area to immediately go out of business.

[Guest North Street]

[tompo]

If I had £20 million to spare I'd gladly give you the money to become Chairman.

Alternatively for just £12 a year (or £1 a month or 25p a week) you could join the ST and rightfully claim to a part owner of BCFC. You know it makes sense.

[Mr Mosquito]

Alternatively for just £12 a year (or £1 a month or 25p a week) you could join the ST and rightfully claim to a part owner of BCFC. You know it makes sense.

Just £12 per annum to be a part owner of the mighty Bristol City FC is truely an excellent deal tompo.

And tompo, if the ST is ever in a position to install a BCFC Chairman - Dave L as Chairman would be my considered choice.