BST statement.

I would hate to be on the BST committee, whatever they do there is always someone (usually anonymous) who will pop up and say that they should have done it differently. Saddler is also in a similar position except that he is often criticised for also spending his own money on the club.
If the BST had received an invite to speak to Saddler and refused it (as some seem to be arguing) then perhaps the 'what are they for' argument could be used. But they didn't, they went and we don't really know what was said, so the accusation of them being patsies is pure speculation. The reason why they went to the meeting is because they are the elected representatives of BST, if the anonymous critics on here want to do it better or differently then they can put themselves up for election to the committee. I don't care that they didn't tell me about it, it's kind of what I would expect them to do.
My message to BST is keep up the good work, the voices on this thread in all likelihood do not represent the membership at large.
I'm not surprised Saddler wanted to meet with fans either, threats to disrupt training (surely this is bound to be counter productive) and throwing stuff on the pitch need to be dealt with.
 
Everything on here here over the past few days has been blown way of of proportion
Quite pathetic really that grown adults seem to want to know every minute detail of comings and goings with the club. I’m surprised some on here don’t want to know when Simon last had a 💩
People need to focus on the summer break, leave the football club and owners to do their jobs and report what they feel needs reporting such as a new manager,new director and player recruitment etc. Take a chill pill and enjoy the bloody summer break
 
Love BFC🍊 said:
Everything on here here over the past few days has been blown way of of proportion
Quite pathetic really that grown adults seem to want to know every minute detail of comings and goings with the club. I’m surprised some on here don’t want to know when Simon last had a 💩
Click to expand...

Has it? If Sadler has been going around calling our fans "cunts" as the Muckers claim then he's no better than the Oystons and shoud go!
 
Gynn & Tonic said:
Has it? If Sadler has been going around calling our fans "cunts" as the Muckers claim then he's no better than the Oystons and shoud go!
Click to expand...
Doubt that very much tbh.
How many fines will the club have had this season for as you say c***s throwing things in the pitch etc. I’d be pretty pissed off if I was Simon Sadler too. Threatening to go to the training ground really. Some on here don’t realise just how good we’ve had it since Simon took over.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
From what I’ve seen, BST have been focused on other matters for far too long.

In the absence of a strong guiding hand and clear ‘voice of the fans’ on matters that actually concern the average Blackpool Supporter, the mantle has been seized by others.

In choppy waters, we need calm heads, strong guidance and direction on how to react and behave. What we’ve had is chaos, whilst BST has remained buried up to its armpits in its Governance Vanity project.

Throughout the Boycott Years the Trust was always a guiding light and a source of common sense, moderation and clear headed ‘non-reactionary’ action. An organisation that the majority of fans could take their lead from.

Hopefully this meeting will mark a significant change in BST policy and we will see a return to ‘Blackpool Centric’ Supporters Trust and the pulling of collective heads out of their arses.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that the perception may exist that this is the case however all I can say is that since I returned to the committee two years ago very little time has been spent dealing with football governance.

To put in context I would say less than 10%.

Some of the committee members are of course also on the FSA however that's wholly separate and I don't see that impacting on what they do for BST - most certainly those who are involved are I would say the ones who also devote the most time to BST itself and indeed far more time than I for instance can give.
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
I appreciate that the perception may exist that this is the case however all I can say is that since I returned to the committee two years ago very little time has been spent dealing with football governance.

To put in context I would say less than 10%.

Some of the committee members are of course also on the FSA however that's wholly separate and I don't see that impacting on what they do for BST - most certainly those who are involved are I would say the ones who also devote the most time to BST itself and indeed far more time than I for instance can give.
Click to expand...
Perception plays a big part in fans opinions of organisations even though if a lot of those perceptions are unfounded and unwarranted.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
I would hate to be on the BST committee, whatever they do there is always someone (usually anonymous) who will pop up and say that they should have done it differently. Saddler is also in a similar position except that he is often criticised for also spending his own money on the club.
If the BST had received an invite to speak to Saddler and refused it (as some seem to be arguing) then perhaps the 'what are they for' argument could be used. But they didn't, they went and we don't really know what was said, so the accusation of them being patsies is pure speculation. The reason why they went to the meeting is because they are the elected representatives of BST, if the anonymous critics on here want to do it better or differently then they can put themselves up for election to the committee. I don't care that they didn't tell me about it, it's kind of what I would expect them to do.
My message to BST is keep up the good work, the voices on this thread in all likelihood do not represent the membership at large.
I'm not surprised Saddler wanted to meet with fans either, threats to disrupt training (surely this is bound to be counter productive) and throwing stuff on the pitch need to be dealt with.
Click to expand...
Excellent post mate. Exactly right.
 
The season finished less than a week ago and people are already expecting/demanding statements on the new CEO, manager, signings, season tickets and how the club are going to put right what went wrong. Now everyone wants to know what has or hasn't been said to BST, with a few slating Simon for what he may or may not have said. It's embarrassing!

The fact we've been relegated has a huge impact on our budget and planning. The requirement for a CEO is holding up appointing a manager, setting season ticket prices and budget. Things any new manager worth his salt need to know, in terms of what squad he'll have at his disposal. It's massively disappointing to be behind the bulk of L1 clubs, in terms of planning, but stamping our feet and acting like babies, really isn't going to change anything. Whether you trust Simon, or not, we need to allow him the time to put things right and judge him on his actions. Personally I'd prefer he takes his time to make such key appointments and provide a measured statement.
 
TwelveAngryMen said:
I appreciate that the perception may exist that this is the case however all I can say is that since I returned to the committee two years ago very little time has been spent dealing with football governance.

To put in context I would say less than 10%.

Some of the committee members are of course also on the FSA however that's wholly separate and I don't see that impacting on what they do for BST - most certainly those who are involved are I would say the ones who also devote the most time to BST itself and indeed far more time than I for instance can give.
Click to expand...
Sorry mate, but it has nothing to do with ‘perception’ and everything to do with a failure to adequately communicate and lead from the front.

There’s been zero direction or guidance coming from the supposed ‘voice of the fans’ at all this season (or for some time) and that has created a vacuum for others to fill.

Priority Number 1 should always be on ‘Blackpool Supporters’. At times it’s on anything but.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
I genuinely think the head of media needs to hire a good PR person. Some of the nonsense could be dealt with by better and rapid communication. The club media is so much improved, but PR is rubbish . Maybe the club has a view that is the SLO role, in my opinion it is not.
Click to expand...
Can't really be the SLO's role - it's a voluntary position.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
I genuinely think the head of media needs to hire a good PR person. Some of the nonsense could be dealt with by better and rapid communication. The club media is so much improved, but PR is rubbish . Maybe the club has a view that is the SLO role, in my opinion it is not.
Click to expand...
Absolutely…we lack what I would describe as “savvy”
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
I was with your opening post on the thread Grim but I hope you are not criticising BST/podcasts etc etc for the "drastically bad season" on the field.

I certainly see no problem with you or anybody else offering constructive criticism against BST or individual members of the committee because they happen to work on a voluntary basis.

To be honest with you, I would expect any credible organisation to encourage and welcome such criticism
Click to expand...
SEASIDE2020 said:
I was with your opening post on the thread Grim but I hope you are not criticising BST/podcasts etc etc for the "drastically bad season" on the field.

I certainly see no problem with you or anybody else offering constructive criticism against BST or individual members of the committee because they happen to work on a voluntary basis.

To be honest with you, I would expect any credible organisation to encourage and welcome such criticism.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t blaming BST or the podcast for a terrible season, no.

I was merely saying I believe they should be showing transparency with their members regarding all meetings as people would like to know.
 
ElBurroSinNombre said:
I would hate to be on the BST committee, whatever they do there is always someone (usually anonymous) who will pop up and say that they should have done it differently. Saddler is also in a similar position except that he is often criticised for also spending his own money on the club.
If the BST had received an invite to speak to Saddler and refused it (as some seem to be arguing) then perhaps the 'what are they for' argument could be used. But they didn't, they went and we don't really know what was said, so the accusation of them being patsies is pure speculation. The reason why they went to the meeting is because they are the elected representatives of BST, if the anonymous critics on here want to do it better or differently then they can put themselves up for election to the committee. I don't care that they didn't tell me about it, it's kind of what I would expect them to do.
My message to BST is keep up the good work, the voices on this thread in all likelihood do not represent the membership at large.
I'm not surprised Saddler wanted to meet with fans either, threats to disrupt training (surely this is bound to be counter productive) and throwing stuff on the pitch need to be dealt with.
Click to expand...
Rather a sad attempt at trying to spell to our illustrious chairman's surname correctly. How about: Sadler.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top