Supporter representation - good or bad?

Thanks to Annis for continuing the discussion on supporter involvement in clubs following last week's Supporters Direct meeting with MPs. From the response on the forum and elsewhere it seems there are two very different views of what football is all about.

A lot of people say it's like any other business and that the owners of clubs can do what they like. After all it's their club. But a lot of us disagree fundamentally with this.

If I don't like what's showing at the cinema or the colour of the shoes on sale down Queen Street then I can either go elsewhere or go home. That's not the case with your football club. We have invested financially, yes, but more importantly we are engaged emotionally with our football club all our lives. Following your football club brings families together and provides a community focus like nothing else.

In his early statements Tg said that he saw himself as the 'custodian' of our club, a club which will be here for our children long after we have gone. You can compare owning a football club to living in a listed building. You may own your house because you bought it. But, because it is such an important part of our shared heritage, the government lists it so that it is protected for all our benefit. Of course you can live there, but as a society we tell you that there are some things you cannot do, knocking down a historic wall for example or painting it pink. I think a football clubs is actually more important than bricks and mortar because they are so deeply rooted in the community we live in. But they don't seem to have the protection that Cardiff Castle or Llandaff Cathedral have.

If you do not accept this argument then you probably believe that the club can do what it likes because it has no wider responsibility other than to make a profit. In that case it can charge what it likes for tickets, beer and replica shirts, change kick off times, relocate the stadium, change the name of the club, ban fans for no reason and pay what it likes to who it likes without taking into account anyone else's views. It's a private business after all. Is that really how you want clubs to be run?

What the Trust movement believes is that formal supporter involvement in decision making at the club is not only good for supporters but also for the club, and ultimately for its finances. That doesn't mean that fans should appoint the manager, select the team or set the directors pay, though they will of course have a view on this.

Last week's reception in parliament, which was attended by more than fifty MPs of all parties, was asking for three things. We want club licences stipulate that clubs have formal, structured relationships with supporters groups; that football stadia be designated as assets of community value so that they cannot be sold without consultation or separated from the club, and for a Government Expert Group to be established with the football authorities to further consider how the game in England and Wales is run.

In the top two divisions supporter ownership of clubs will for the time being be a rare thing. However, there is plenty that Trusts and organised fan groups can do to ensure a football club serves the communities which I believe are its true owners.

As I say if you don't believe that football has a value outside of being another entertainment business then these arguments will make no sense at all. If you do accept this view of football then you should be a member of the Supporters Trust!


Tim

magnificent post

Now that is a way to put your argument across.

Well done, Tim.

I have to say well done on your post Tim and you come across very good, as you know I was a member of the Trust for 2yrs, but felt very let down by them,so I left.
Talking to you the other day at Huddersfield for the first time and reading your post on here, hopefully the Trust are finally going forward, the problem I found with the Trust was when things needed to be done ASAP they took too long, it then ended up to late or nothing ever got done. I am not slagging the Trust off again nor do I want to go over old ground, but I am just saying I hope they can decide what they are doing on things in future a lot faster.

I like your argument regarding a listed building and likening it to that of a football club, there are certain things that should not be allowed to happen at football clubs and changing a teams identity and stripping parts of its history should never be allowed.

I have to say well done on your post Tim and you come across very good, as you know I was a member of the Trust for 2yrs, but felt very let down by them,so I left.
Talking to you the other day at Huddersfield for the first time and reading your post on here, hopefully the Trust are finally going forward, the problem I found with the Trust was when things needed to be done ASAP they took too long, it then ended up to late or nothing ever got done. I am not slagging the Trust off again nor do I want to go over old ground, but I am just saying I hope they can decide what they are doing on things in future a lot faster.

I like your argument regarding a listed building and likening it to that of a football club, there are certain things that should not be allowed to happen at football clubs and changing a teams identity and stripping parts of its history should never be allowed.

Taking too long over decisions is a fair criticism and one which has frustrated me at times in the past as well. But this has changed a great deal recently and should continue to do so and be more obvious.

Keith

p.s. I realise I still owe you a phone call (I have been away from Cardiff with work a fair bit recently) and will try tomorrow.

I have to say well done on your post Tim and you come across very good, as you know I was a member of the Trust for 2yrs, but felt very let down by them,so I left.
Talking to you the other day at Huddersfield for the first time and reading your post on here, hopefully the Trust are finally going forward, the problem I found with the Trust was when things needed to be done ASAP they took too long, it then ended up to late or nothing ever got done. I am not slagging the Trust off again nor do I want to go over old ground, but I am just saying I hope they can decide what they are doing on things in future a lot faster.

I like your argument regarding a listed building and likening it to that of a football club, there are certain things that should not be allowed to happen at football clubs and changing a teams identity and stripping parts of its history should never be allowed.

Taking too long over decisions is a fair criticism and one which has frustrated me at times in the past as well. But this has changed a great deal recently and should continue to do so and be more obvious.

Keith

p.s. I realise I still owe you a phone call (I have been away from Cardiff with work a fair bit recently) and will try tomorrow.

Good to hear Keith and thanks, look forward to it

I have to say well done on your post Tim and you come across very good, as you know I was a member of the Trust for 2yrs, but felt very let down by them,so I left.
Talking to you the other day at Huddersfield for the first time and reading your post on here, hopefully the Trust are finally going forward, the problem I found with the Trust was when things needed to be done ASAP they took too long, it then ended up to late or nothing ever got done. I am not slagging the Trust off again nor do I want to go over old ground, but I am just saying I hope they can decide what they are doing on things in future a lot faster.

I like your argument regarding a listed building and likening it to that of a football club, there are certain things that should not be allowed to happen at football clubs and changing a teams identity and stripping parts of its history should never be allowed.

The trouble I have with this annis is that it's ok advocating what the trust could do but the fact of the matter is that when fans were ripped off by ridsdale in the golden ticket scam they stayed in the back ground and missed the boat in securing a large number of new members by remaining neutral.
I don't believe for one minute that they could have had any influence on tan regarding the rebrand. Although I'm as surprised as anybody regarding the acceptance of the colour change I believe a change of name or relocation of the club would bring about a far different response from the fan base although I must stress I don't believe that tan would ever do either of those two evils.
Whilst I agree in principle that a football club needs a strong trust or supporters group this particular trust has missed the boat and will never get the numbers or backing from the supporters to move itself forward

I have to say well done on your post Tim and you come across very good, as you know I was a member of the Trust for 2yrs, but felt very let down by them,so I left.
Talking to you the other day at Huddersfield for the first time and reading your post on here, hopefully the Trust are finally going forward, the problem I found with the Trust was when things needed to be done ASAP they took too long, it then ended up to late or nothing ever got done. I am not slagging the Trust off again nor do I want to go over old ground, but I am just saying I hope they can decide what they are doing on things in future a lot faster.

I like your argument regarding a listed building and likening it to that of a football club, there are certain things that should not be allowed to happen at football clubs and changing a teams identity and stripping parts of its history should never be allowed.

The trouble I have with this annis is that it's ok advocating what the trust could do but the fact of the matter is that when fans were ripped off by ridsdale in the golden ticket scam they stayed in the back ground and missed the boat in securing a large number of new members by remaining neutral.
I don't believe for one minute that they could have had any influence on tan regarding the rebrand. Although I'm as surprised as anybody regarding the acceptance of the colour change I believe a change of name or relocation of the club would bring about a far different response from the fan base although I must stress I don't believe that tan would ever do either of those two evils.
Whilst I agree in principle that a football club needs a strong trust or supporters group this particular trust has missed the boat and will never get the numbers or backing from the supporters to move itself forward

Steve, I totally agree they missed the boat big time and we needed them then, hopefully they have learnt there lesson from it.

I think the one person we look to and has worked tirelessly for all of us is Vince Alm, he is heavily involved in the FSF and really up to date with all the legalities etc.
Anyone who travels away will appreciate what Vince does, hanging about sorting out tickets often whilst the game has kicked off, the end of season presentation and the Xmas party are organise to perfection, and whilst I think any fans role on the board will be token and a lip service role, it would be good to see someone like Vince involved, mind you the flak he would take after every defeat etc would be mental.

Not many people know that Vince was offered a place as a Director several years ago and turned it down, perhaps he may take a different view this time.

I think the one person we look to and has worked tirelessly for all of us is Vince Alm, he is heavily involved in the FSF and really up to date with all the legalities etc.
Anyone who travels away will appreciate what Vince does, hanging about sorting out tickets often whilst the game has kicked off, the end of season presentation and the Xmas party are organise to perfection, and whilst I think any fans role on the board will be token and a lip service role, it would be good to see someone like Vince involved, mind you the flak he would take after every defeat etc would be mental.

Not many people know that Vince was offered a place as a Director several years ago and turned it down, perhaps he may take a different view this time.

Gwyn, Without a doubt Vince deserves more recognition than any City fan I know, he does work tirelessly for our fans, putting us first every time before himself, in fact missing half the matches due to some fans letting him down whilst he still waiting to help them.I have nothing but the highest respect for Vince.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY Vince

I think the one person we look to and has worked tirelessly for all of us is Vince Alm, he is heavily involved in the FSF and really up to date with all the legalities etc.
Anyone who travels away will appreciate what Vince does, hanging about sorting out tickets often whilst the game has kicked off, the end of season presentation and the Xmas party are organise to perfection, and whilst I think any fans role on the board will be token and a lip service role, it would be good to see someone like Vince involved, mind you the flak he would take after every defeat etc would be mental.

Not many people know that Vince was offered a place as a Director several years ago and turned it down, perhaps he may take a different view this time.

To be honest gwyn I would expect Vincent to run a mile at the thought. I agree with your sentiments about Vince but after the way he was treated by the club over the rebrand I doubt he would want to dip his toe in that particular pond again

I find it all nonsense if I'm honest.
Owner pays the bills and he does what he wants at the end of the day. Easy for people to make decisions with other people's money.

And who is this super fan? Our fans never agree with anything so this person would soon be made a scapegoat by thousands.
As for the trust well, yes great we got some tables but at board level? I think not.

Thanks to Annis for continuing the discussion on supporter involvement in clubs following last week's Supporters Direct meeting with MPs. From the response on the forum and elsewhere it seems there are two very different views of what football is all about.

A lot of people say it's like any other business and that the owners of clubs can do what they like. After all it's their club. But a lot of us disagree fundamentally with this.

If I don't like what's showing at the cinema or the colour of the shoes on sale down Queen Street then I can either go elsewhere or go home. That's not the case with your football club. We have invested financially, yes, but more importantly we are engaged emotionally with our football club all our lives. Following your football club brings families together and provides a community focus like nothing else.

In his early statements Tg said that he saw himself as the 'custodian' of our club, a club which will be here for our children long after we have gone. You can compare owning a football club to living in a listed building. You may own your house because you bought it. But, because it is such an important part of our shared heritage, the government lists it so that it is protected for all our benefit. Of course you can live there, but as a society we tell you that there are some things you cannot do, knocking down a historic wall for example or painting it pink. I think a football clubs is actually more important than bricks and mortar because they are so deeply rooted in the community we live in. But they don't seem to have the protection that Cardiff Castle or Llandaff Cathedral have.

If you do not accept this argument then you probably believe that the club can do what it likes because it has no wider responsibility other than to make a profit. In that case it can charge what it likes for tickets, beer and replica shirts, change kick off times, relocate the stadium, change the name of the club, ban fans for no reason and pay what it likes to who it likes without taking into account anyone else's views. It's a private business after all. Is that really how you want clubs to be run?

What the Trust movement believes is that formal supporter involvement in decision making at the club is not only good for supporters but also for the club, and ultimately for its finances. That doesn't mean that fans should appoint the manager, select the team or set the directors pay, though they will of course have a view on this.

Last week's reception in parliament, which was attended by more than fifty MPs of all parties, was asking for three things. We want club licences stipulate that clubs have formal, structured relationships with supporters groups; that football stadia be designated as assets of community value so that they cannot be sold without consultation or separated from the club, and for a Government Expert Group to be established with the football authorities to further consider how the game in England and Wales is run.

In the top two divisions supporter ownership of clubs will for the time being be a rare thing. However, there is plenty that Trusts and organised fan groups can do to ensure a football club serves the communities which I believe are its true owners.

As I say if you don't believe that football has a value outside of being another entertainment business then these arguments will make no sense at all. If you do accept this view of football then you should be a member of the Supporters Trust!


Tim

Sorry I really don't get the listed building argument. Yes you can't alter the outside of a listed building (or knock it down) but often listed buildings are refurbished on the inside and turned into commercial business or living quarters. You could argue that Tan has done nothing to Cardiff City's name or stadium (the listed building) but has refurbished the playing colours (the rebrand)?

I'm not saying the rebrand was right (although I can see Tan's commercial thinking) but I do think you are shuting the stable door after the horse has bolted by suddenly becoming vocal on this issue 8 months or so after the rebrand has happened.

As pointed out above the Trust is so dam slow in reacting to situations or indeed they may not react at all (i.e. Ridsdale)

What you at the Trust have to do is build up your credability before preaching to the masses about joining. Frankly you are considered as an absolute joke by the vast majority of fans and that will continue to be the case until you show some backbone.

I find it all nonsense if I'm honest.
Owner pays the bills and he does what he wants at the end of the day. Easy for people to make decisions with other people's money.

And who is this super fan? Our fans never agree with anything so this person would soon be made a scapegoat by thousands.
As for the trust well, yes great we got some tables but at board level? I think not.

2B2H anyone with a sense of perspective would agree with what you have said. I would love the fans to be involved with decision making at CCFC but the brutal truth is we haven't put anything like £100m (and rising) into this club and we don't own it.

The buck stops with Tan so why would he hand over the decision making to those who could walk away scot free (financially) if the whole thing goes pear shaped.

I always laugh out load when people talk about backbone and making stands...the same few faces always seem to emerge...talk is cheap, time effort, commitment and very thick skin to take abuse of tossers who do feck all else but moan is what is required.
For instance,I look at the travel club now and apart from Carl,who has worked hard over the last few years the rest are lads who have been around doing stuff for years...Tony J for instance for over thirty years...there are doers in this world and criticisers who do feck all.

As regards the trust I think that the elected person must make quick, informed decisions based on their gut feelings...this has to be put into the constitution of the trust...that person lives or dies by that decision...if members don't like that decision they get rid of him/her....waiting and taking two much time deciding what action to take until all the membership has been consulted as proved to be a costly mistake...but that can change and the members can vote in a rule where a designated person can be elected to make swift decisions and statements on behalf of the members.

I have been working on the new SLO initiative for a couple of years and it will hit the clubs hard in the near future...the current order that all clubs must have a SLO is being abused by clubs and the hand book that was produced is not really being adhered to...a proper SLO will help the fans if the job description and the person chosen is done properly..SLO is a supporters Liaison officer by the way...
Here is what we put on our website a while back and I believe a SLO would be far more valuable that a fan on the board
Who should it be? Well that should be a well educated person with experience of dealing with fans and the issues fans have, they should be able to communicate with the club and the fans without any bias or prejudice...the post should be advertised and I think a youngish very enthusiastic applicant should get the job

Very soon UEFA wil ensure every club has one, they ahve already told clubs to work on it, it will be compulsory...after a short time checks will be made to see what clubs have done about this, to see if they have just used a club employee and give him/her the title...that will not be good enough....so let us see how the SLO will evolve at our club during the next 24 months.

http://www.fsf.org.uk/latest-news/view/ ... on-officer

As regards the trust I think that the elected person must make quick, informed decisions based on their gut feelings...this has to be put into the constitution of the trust...that person lives or dies by that decision...if members don't like that decision they get rid of him/her....waiting and taking two much time deciding what action to take until all the membership has been consulted as proved to be a costly mistake...but that can change and the members can vote in a rule where a designated person can be elected to make swift decisions and statements on behalf of the members.

Totally agree with this, for me a few tables in areas aren't enough tho.

But people can't be shouting about being on the board based on a few hundred fans.

I joined the trust when it was set up mainly because I knew corky and it seemed a great idea and believed in him (corky) but for me when he left the void wasn't filled and it became an administration for doing little, huge chances missed. It now seems to be totally irrelevant organisation other than for things like charity and community based projects unless it is totally reformed.

Thanks to Annis for continuing the discussion on supporter involvement in clubs following last week's Supporters Direct meeting with MPs. From the response on the forum and elsewhere it seems there are two very different views of what football is all about.

A lot of people say it's like any other business and that the owners of clubs can do what they like. After all it's their club. But a lot of us disagree fundamentally with this.

If I don't like what's showing at the cinema or the colour of the shoes on sale down Queen Street then I can either go elsewhere or go home. That's not the case with your football club. We have invested financially, yes, but more importantly we are engaged emotionally with our football club all our lives. Following your football club brings families together and provides a community focus like nothing else.

In his early statements Tg said that he saw himself as the 'custodian' of our club, a club which will be here for our children long after we have gone. You can compare owning a football club to living in a listed building. You may own your house because you bought it. But, because it is such an important part of our shared heritage, the government lists it so that it is protected for all our benefit. Of course you can live there, but as a society we tell you that there are some things you cannot do, knocking down a historic wall for example or painting it pink. I think a football clubs is actually more important than bricks and mortar because they are so deeply rooted in the community we live in. But they don't seem to have the protection that Cardiff Castle or Llandaff Cathedral have.

If you do not accept this argument then you probably believe that the club can do what it likes because it has no wider responsibility other than to make a profit. In that case it can charge what it likes for tickets, beer and replica shirts, change kick off times, relocate the stadium, change the name of the club, ban fans for no reason and pay what it likes to who it likes without taking into account anyone else's views. It's a private business after all. Is that really how you want clubs to be run?

What the Trust movement believes is that formal supporter involvement in decision making at the club is not only good for supporters but also for the club, and ultimately for its finances. That doesn't mean that fans should appoint the manager, select the team or set the directors pay, though they will of course have a view on this.

Last week's reception in parliament, which was attended by more than fifty MPs of all parties, was asking for three things. We want club licences stipulate that clubs have formal, structured relationships with supporters groups; that football stadia be designated as assets of community value so that they cannot be sold without consultation or separated from the club, and for a Government Expert Group to be established with the football authorities to further consider how the game in England and Wales is run.

In the top two divisions supporter ownership of clubs will for the time being be a rare thing. However, there is plenty that Trusts and organised fan groups can do to ensure a football club serves the communities which I believe are its true owners.

As I say if you don't believe that football has a value outside of being another entertainment business then these arguments will make no sense at all. If you do accept this view of football then you should be a member of the Supporters Trust!


Tim

The Trust here at Cardiff City does not have enough members. THATS the be all and end all of it!!

The march against Ridsdale did more in a couple of hours than the Trust has ever done in my opinion.
Why? Because it was there, in your face, the fans saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

Getting some kind of Government Legislation to me is a bit like legitimising the Cardiff City Trust
through the back door. Still a handful of people, but this time with Government legislation to back
it up, instead of thousands of supporters.

If the CCT had a few thousand members...First whisper of this bloody rebrand and Tan would HAVE
to have listened to the Trust. Maybe we would still be playing in Red, maybe Tans preference and all this
'lucky colour' runs too deep in him for him to have changed his mind. But the designs and particularly
the beermat could have been discussed, ideas thrown to and fro and some kind of compromise
reached that we could have ALL either accepted, put up with, or even liked!!

A strong Trust should be built from a strong membership, one that cannot be ignored. This Trust
should be figuring out ways to get the supporters on board, not the Government!!!

Thanks to Annis for continuing the discussion on supporter involvement in clubs following last week's Supporters Direct meeting with MPs. From the response on the forum and elsewhere it seems there are two very different views of what football is all about.

A lot of people say it's like any other business and that the owners of clubs can do what they like. After all it's their club. But a lot of us disagree fundamentally with this.

If I don't like what's showing at the cinema or the colour of the shoes on sale down Queen Street then I can either go elsewhere or go home. That's not the case with your football club. We have invested financially, yes, but more importantly we are engaged emotionally with our football club all our lives. Following your football club brings families together and provides a community focus like nothing else.

In his early statements Tg said that he saw himself as the 'custodian' of our club, a club which will be here for our children long after we have gone. You can compare owning a football club to living in a listed building. You may own your house because you bought it. But, because it is such an important part of our shared heritage, the government lists it so that it is protected for all our benefit. Of course you can live there, but as a society we tell you that there are some things you cannot do, knocking down a historic wall for example or painting it pink. I think a football clubs is actually more important than bricks and mortar because they are so deeply rooted in the community we live in. But they don't seem to have the protection that Cardiff Castle or Llandaff Cathedral have.

If you do not accept this argument then you probably believe that the club can do what it likes because it has no wider responsibility other than to make a profit. In that case it can charge what it likes for tickets, beer and replica shirts, change kick off times, relocate the stadium, change the name of the club, ban fans for no reason and pay what it likes to who it likes without taking into account anyone else's views. It's a private business after all. Is that really how you want clubs to be run?

What the Trust movement believes is that formal supporter involvement in decision making at the club is not only good for supporters but also for the club, and ultimately for its finances. That doesn't mean that fans should appoint the manager, select the team or set the directors pay, though they will of course have a view on this.

Last week's reception in parliament, which was attended by more than fifty MPs of all parties, was asking for three things. We want club licences stipulate that clubs have formal, structured relationships with supporters groups; that football stadia be designated as assets of community value so that they cannot be sold without consultation or separated from the club, and for a Government Expert Group to be established with the football authorities to further consider how the game in England and Wales is run.

In the top two divisions supporter ownership of clubs will for the time being be a rare thing. However, there is plenty that Trusts and organised fan groups can do to ensure a football club serves the communities which I believe are its true owners.

As I say if you don't believe that football has a value outside of being another entertainment business then these arguments will make no sense at all. If you do accept this view of football then you should be a member of the Supporters Trust!


Tim

Amen.