Sure I don't really disagree with that, I just didn't feel compelled to include him as it's not a book about the history of SISA/BST. Tim became the head of the organisation, was sued, had connections to Latvia, so he made more sense to focus on as a conduit in a sort of way. I know some people have spoken about writing a sort of historical document about the history of SISA/BST but that would be a bit dry for me
I think most of us can appreciate that there needs to be a certain amount of literary licence, but it’s also important to tread with a certain amount of sensitivity too.
I think that attributing what can be seen as key factors in the campaign to the wrong individuals crosses a line between literary licence and factual inaccuracy. So failing to mention Smith might be one thing, but attributing the role he played to someone else is another thing entirely.
The same with the BST thing… To essentially credit them for driving a campaign, that they actively encouraged their members to vote against lending an official endorsement to feels like a disservice to others and to the facts.
Does it? Not in my opinion it doesn't. It's only important to Blackpool supporters - and even then there was that much going on it's almost impossible to untangle it.
It's all history now. It's an interesting read for those that lived through it but is it important? Not at all. It's really really not important. If some of the major ego's on here pulling it apart are SO enraged by some so called inaccuracies - then go and write a new book. There is nothing stopping them. Or maybe shut up because they are boring everyone else who are simply reading it for entertainment?
Why do you always have to focus on attacking individuals?
The writer of the book has included a sticky at the top of the forum, asking people to provide feedback. You feel the need to aggressively attack and insult people for offering up some feedback...Why?
If you view the inaccuracies as unimportant, then that's fine, I don't have an issue with you holding that perspective, nor do I feel the need to call you names for it. Some people clearly do feel that certain inaccuracies are important and, given the author has requested feedback, then this feels like a reasonable and appropriate place to communicate them, without fear of insult and abuse from others. Further, I'm not sure it is necessary for anyone to write an alternative book, just because they have challenged some inaccuracies with this one on here.
I'm pretty sure that Foggy was careful to fact check any reference to Oyston extremely thoroughly.... So clearly accuracy will have been important to him at least in certain respects.
Incidentally, if you are reading the book for entertainment, then that's great.... If you feel bored or that you need to attack people for leaving feedback on this thread, then perhaps just ignore it.