The Conway Out group was founded on a false information and false identities. Now you've got a kid trying desperately to hold it all together while shadowy people from the side-lines are telling him they are serious buyers and have funding in place to make an offer. I highly doubt even Luke knows who these mystery business folks are, which is why there was zero mention of them tonight. I don't want to get into the "definition of hoax" discussion again, but whichever way you look at it, the Conway Out group isn't a credible vehicle for change.
I was at Easter Road tonight, watched a lad marshal a defence who couldn’t get a look in at Barnsley because of all the competition at centre half. There is something seriously wrong that Toby Sibbick couldn’t get in our squad.
Tonight I went to the meeting at the garrison....I applaud Lukes presentation ...he spoke from the heart and got the applause he throughly deserved at the end...his presentation was clear pricise and to the point He wasn't heckled nor Interrupted everyone gave him respect listened and sat in silence until he finished....personally I thought the meeting was conducted in a cordial manner ( and I don't mean pop lol) He presented facts that when put together questioned if the spread sheet actually gave value for money when you take into consideration the minimum profit on players sold when they've been sold previously for less than market values compared to huge profit margins other clubs make on their transfers....he talked on numerous topics all which if I understood was broadcast live.... The audience was a mix range of ages ...6 young lads in their teens were the only ones who left after an hour or there abouts.... There were representatives in the room from the club notably the CEO Khalid El -Ahmad amongst others who I understood didn't want to comment at the time and therefore was given the respect of not been pursued nor pressurised into doing so..... I will say I've been critical of him in the past due to lack of contact over my mother's letter re west stand closure...but can I go on record by saying he has now gained my respect by A) Turning up to what could in actual fact been an aggressive reception B) He made himself available to speak with everybody who wished to engaged in conversation after lukes presentation... Needless to say I raised the disappointment regarding my mother's treatment by the club with him and received an apology from the very man Ive questioned.....id also add from the rest of our conversation a good ten / 15 minutes maybe more.... I honestly believe he feels our pain and understands our fears....but he's one man....hands tied juggling oranges So many thanks not only to Luke for conducting himself in a respectful manner but also thankyou to Khalid much respect for making himself available and for attending tonight.
So ceo their for 2 hours and no questions. **** me. Im off to volley my hamster and chinese burn our lass
I wouldn't go that far, they put a lost of effort I'm sure. I just think they are a bit close to the club to really advocate for change. I might have joined once- too busy with work these days to give it the time it deserves- but it's always come across as a bit of an 'us and them' club. Could be wrong but I see a lot on here that supports that impression. I usually just go to games, keep my head down but I was genuinely annoyed by some of the comments about tonight so I thought I would give my opinion in return.
Let's see what comes of the Conway Q&A, if it's more bull$hit like the latest CEO one then I would expect the Supporters Trust to be alot more vocal in their dissatisfaction in the way things are been run.
I think this is a problem/opinion that runs through the supporter base to be honest so it's one worth discussing in more detail. This is definitely how a handful of supporters think (although saying 'a lot on here' over call is somewhat). Especially ones that have little time for the Trust. But what is it actually based on and where does it come from? I'd be keen to know because in my six years of being on the Trust Board there are zero benefits, zero perks, zero club pots to piss in, and far more often than not unneeded stress and personal online criticism. If you explained what it was like or what it involved to anyone they'd think you were mad for even bothering - even get mocked as 'glorified barmen' for having the audacity to keep Preedy's open and giving the FanZone a go. If it's 'us' and 'them' why would we have called out every obvious bad move the club have made? Surely we'd be keen to keep everything sweet because all supporters are 'them', and we're the 'us' with the club? Same point on being 'too close to the club'. Haven't we proved over recent years we're not trying to protect that? Maybe we haven't. Or maybe people aren't aware of what info we do put out and that's something we need to work on. Either way there's definitely a misconception out there for whatever reason.
I felt Luke did well tonight to stand up there for as long as he did with the presentation. It’s not easy. Thank you to Robbie at The Garrison, and to those fans we spoke with before and afterwards who were passionate and well-mannered. I'm glad you took some comfort from your chat with Khaled tonight, Bri. It was a very respectful couple of hours. On Saturday, our offices were invaded and one of my dearest friends ended up covered in beer and having to seek help from security. A woman I adore, who like myself loves the club she works for and with a fanbase the pair of us only ever defend and stand up for. On Sunday, I felt like handing in my notice. Tonight (as you suggested) could have been another edgy atmosphere. But it wasn't, at all. So thank you to all involved. We all want the best Barnsley FC. I'm not getting involved in any of the actual debate, because it would be utterly futile. But let's be kind.
For those questioning why when the CEO was in the room that he wasn't asked questions and put on the spot....the answer is....he was given the respect and professionalism both he and Luke deserved on the night and in my opinion it was case of mutual respect for each others views between 2 men from different camps ......
Maybe. But as there wasn't really much of a Q&A, nor a break in play from the presentation once it got going, and that Khaled turned up at all. I'd be surprised. Different opinions I guess but when 15% of your presentation critical (but fair) of the job being done by someone in the room, I'm not sure mutual respect comes in to it. I think if offered and invited Khaled would have leapt at the chance of reply, but it wasn't his evening to force his involvement on.
[ If that's how you feel there is definitely a misperception. There's a lot of good stuff like the fanzone, not sure anyone would be anything but supportive of that. Fact remains though that the other group has tapped into something bigger here. Personally I think, and this is just my opinion, that the ST has two head honchos on here who talk down to folk when they disagree with them. For example: "did you watch the whole 2 hour Q+A" anytime somone asks why we have no clariry on key issues from the club. Then the whole 'hoax' post- which is essentially accusing hundreds of fans of falling for one- that's what makes me feel like it's 'us and them'.
This is a genuine question and isn't talking down to someone. Especially when it's in response to a comment similar to yours and when so many people don't always see what's available online. To be fair the hoax was in regards to there being new owners waiting in the wings and came after a whole host of supporters were kicked out of the group for asking fair questions, in a respectful way, about needing more info. Wouldn't be my choice of words, but we're not closer to disproving it after tonight are we? It wasn't said about people wanting the owners to leave. The fact you refer to people as 'the two head honchos' probably shows your true feelings anyway so nothing I say will get you to soften I imagine.
So if I'm reading this right a passionate reds fan stood up and gave a decent summary of where we are but it's likely this takeover talk is just ********? Is that a fair summary?
Thought we were getting somwhere after the last post. Bit surprised you've said that tbh- and exactly what I mean in the above.
You'll have to help me out here. Honestly, I'm not being difficult. But line one is me being completely honest and genuine. Asking if you've seen the interview is a go to response at the moment because so many people haven't seen it or the answers to other questions freely available online. Paragraph two is a fair and honest reflection of my interpretation of the word 'hoax' being used whilst acknowledging I wouldn't have used it myself. And line three is fair isn't it? If someone is referring to people as the 'two head honchos' it's not really from a positive place, so likely your opinion is a difficult one to change. Not sure any of that is talking down to you or creating an 'us and them' situation. Apologies if I'm wrong though.