What did we boycott for?

[thefutureistangerine]

Oh, that’s the level you’re going to? Well, stay at home and keep your opinions to yourself you old senile daft **.

Crikey, no need for this really. I go to quite a few games with @straightatthewall; he is a bit of a daft ** tbh, but he's not old or senile.

Plenty of disgruntled fans making their voices heard after games and general unrest wherever you look on here, or social media etc. I'm not sure digging fans out constantly (many of whom will have had years' of season tickets leading up to the boycott, where as you probably never have, thus affecting them a lot more) about their ambition and bringing up the boycott is doing what you think it is.

There's been plenty of improvements for the club, for a start. Inescapably, Simon is a first-time football club owner and has made some questionable decisions. We should also be doing better form-wise at the moment with the resources we have. Investment in the squad needs to be better too, IMO. All can be true without slating other fans.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

Of course losses accelerated the boycott and made it easier for fans because organising a large scale boycott is incredibly difficult and separating people from their football club with collective action is unprecedented and never happened before. Nobody wanting to go and watch is get battered every week helps.

But the idea it would have happened without the story breaking about Owen taking 11 million, or the Oystons suing fans, or any number of the things they did, I find quite farcical. Once people realised their money was going to go to the efforts to bankrupt and ruin other supporters it was a line in the sand for many, and this is the main and most important ommission in your devil's advocation.

The question was 'what was the boycott for'. Not what combination of events caused or correlated with it. And honestly I think the answer is very obvious, is it not?

Foggy

I certainly wasn't saying some things that you suggest/assume.

On your point re Owen taking £11m - I just referred to that when replying to seaside and before reading your reply - this became public knowledge just before the Peterborough game in March 2012 yet there was certainly no supporters boycott until MORE THAN 2 YEARS LATER.

I know there is no official date but I think it would be fair to suggest there was no boycott before the start of the 2014/15 season which is more than 2 years after Owen took the £11m and some avid Oyston supporters suggested that it was OK to attend during that season, presumably because they had already purchased their season ticket for that season and that would mean that the boycott did not begin until MORE THAN 3 YEARS AFTER Owen had taken the £11m.

I was and am playing devil's advocate as you acknowledge and you certainly make good and fair points.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

Nobody boycotted in the prem as no-one was aware exactly what the Oystons were up to until we got relegated. Whilst in the prem Holloway overachieved with extremely limited resources - in fact no team has ever achieved what we did with one hand tied behind its back. That being said it was clearly a house of cards built mainly on Belokons investment - if only he'd been able to fully buy the Oystons out then things might have been different. But that's football as series of ifs buts and maybes - we are in a totally different place as to where we were under the Oystons. Fans fall out with owners/coaches/players - but the constant is the club.

St Annes

You make good and fair points and I agree with all you say but again - as per my responses to seaside and Foggy - nothing you say changes my suggestion which was that there is some form of correlation between supporters boycotting and on field results, at Blackpool and every other football club.

I was playing devil's advocate but it is true.

Not for a second am I suggesting that supporters should boycott now.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

Crikey, no need for this really. I go to quite a few games with @straightatthewall; he is a bit of a daft ** tbh, but he's not old or senile.

Plenty of disgruntled fans making their voices heard after games and general unrest wherever you look on here, or social media etc. I'm not sure digging fans out constantly (many of whom will have had years' of season tickets leading up to the boycott, where as you probably never have, thus affecting them a lot more) about their ambition and bringing up the boycott is doing what you think it is.

There's been plenty of improvements for the club, for a start. Inescapably, Simon is a first-time football club owner and has made some questionable decisions. We should also be doing better form-wise at the moment with the resources we have. Investment in the squad needs to be better too, IMO. All can be true without slating other fans.

Future

I have reported your post to the moderator.

This is AVFTT, please take your balance and diplomacy elsewhere.

 

[foggy]

Foggy

I certainly wasn't saying some things that you suggest/assume.

On your point re Owen taking £11m - I just referred to that when replying to seaside and before reading your reply - this became public knowledge just before the Peterborough game in March 2012 yet there was certainly no supporters boycott until MORE THAN 2 YEARS LATER.

I know there is no official date but I think it would be fair to suggest there was no boycott before the start of the 2014/15 season which is more than 2 years after Owen took the £11m and some avid Oyston supporters suggested that it was OK to attend during that season, presumably because they had already purchased their season ticket for that season and that would mean that the boycott did not begin until MORE THAN 3 YEARS AFTER Owen had taken the £11m.

I was and am playing devil's advocate as you acknowledge and you certainly make good and fair points.

People weren't boycotting when the accounts came out because we were in a playoff push and were still playing the best football I have ever seen. But again the question was 'what did we boycott for?', not 'what perfect storm of conditions came together to allow it to be successful?'. There were certainly folk who stopped going in 2012, it took more things to go wrong for others to join, including the on field chaos.

The biggest thing was suing fans and it cannot be underestimated. It was the biggest driver. It was about getting the Oystons out. Not demanding better than 8th in League One. Anyone who wants to try another boycott is welcome to try it.

 

[Wizaard]

Yep probably the same bunch who hate the Premier League and everything it stands for yet went to every bastard match when we got there

We have a weird bunch

You constantly conflate issues.

You can despise the whole Premier League set up for being the money making cartel it is, and still want your club to win every game.

We're currently in League One. Should I love it because we're in it? That's what you're saying about our Premier League stint.

 

[Phil_bfc deux]

You constantly conflate issues.

You can despise the whole Premier League set up for being the money making cartel it is, and still want your club to win every game.

We're currently in League One. Should I love it because we're in it? That's what you're saying about our Premier League stint.

Nope

 

[Wizaard]

Nope

Reword it then, because that's how it reads.

 

[Phil_bfc deux]

Reword it then, because that's how it reads.

Can't be arsed

 

[AngelBFC]

Where we have fallen down for me in particular is with our managerial choices which ironically the Oystons ( particularly Karl ) got right more often than not.

The Oystons employed 16 managers .
Only 5 were successful.
Billy Ayre
Steve McMahon
Simon Grayson
Ian Holloway
Gary Bowyer
More often than not they got it wrong .

 

[SEASIDE2020]

People weren't boycotting when the accounts came out because we were in a playoff push and were still playing the best football I have ever seen. But again the question was 'what did we boycott for?', not 'what perfect storm of conditions came together to allow it to be successful?'. There were certainly folk who stopped going in 2012, it took more things to go wrong for others to join, including the on field chaos.

The biggest thing was suing fans and it cannot be underestimated. It was the biggest driver. It was about getting the Oystons out. Not demanding better than 8th in League One. Anyone who wants to try another boycott is welcome to try it.

Foggy

Nothing has changed, I am not suggesting that there should be any boycott.

I was just pointing out that there is some correlation - not direct - between supporters boycotting and on field results.

You mentioned correctly that Owen helped himself to £11m, that became public knowledge in March 2012 yet there was no suggestion of any boycott at the time and the first real boycott was OVER 2 YEARS LATER when coincidentally on field results had plummeted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[foggy]

Foggy

Nothing has changed, I am not suggesting that there should be any boycott.

I was just pointing out that there is some correlation - not direct - between supporters boycotting and on field results.

You mentioned correctly that Owen helped himself to £11m, that became public knowledge in March 2012 yet there was no suggestion of any boycott at the time and the first real boycott was OVER 2 YEARS LATER when coincidentally on field results had plummeted !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course there is a correlation, I never claimed otherwise. Again, the question was what was it for. How many fans would have accepted relegation to non-League to get rid of the Oystons after they started suing the fans? The answer is a lot, especially among those who boycotted. And therein lies the answer.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

The Oystons employed 16 managers .
Only 5 were successful.
Billy Ayre
Steve McMahon
Simon Grayson
Ian Holloway
Gary Bowyer
More often than not they got it wrong .

I think the Oyston's did relatively well when appointing managers and I think you are being a little selective there to be honest.

They appointed Megson who left for a better paid job and effectively promotion at the time, they appointed Allardyce who went on to be quite successful - used to be the England manager !!!!!!!!!!!!

Worthington didn't do too bad either.

I'm with TAM on this one, we might all hate/dislike the Oyston's but they certainly didn't do too bad in this area.

 

[seasideone]

seaside

I have no problem with that and have no reason to disbelieve what you say.

I'm not sure what you say has got too much to do with my suggestion that there is some correlation - albeit not direct - between boycotting and on field performances.

Just before the Peterborough game - March 2012 ? - it was revealed that Owen had helped himself to £11m, I won't say nobody gave a feck because plenty weren't happy about it and some supporters even defended his actions but more to the point there was certainly no mention of any boycott.

Everybody kept going and there was no mention of any boycott until MORE THAN TWO YEARS LATER when on field results had plummeted.

You might very well have decided to boycott when the Oyston's began taking legal action against the supporters but regardless of your chosen action, there is some form of correlation between supporters boycotting and on field results and it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

AVFTT CAVEAT - Not for a second am I suggesting that supporters should boycott now, I am merely suggesting that there is some form of correlation between supporters boycotting and on field results at Blackpool Football Club and every other club.

It’s ridiculous to suggest many of us boycotted because of results - I have seen Blackpool apply for re-election and still went, I even carried on going week in week out under Colin Hendry.

I have seen us play terrible football most of my life.

Your assumption is simply wrong.

I and many others ONLY boycotted because of the suing of fans.

They crossed a line and that was it - I was not going back EVER until they went.

 

[AngelBFC]

I think the Oyston's did relatively well when appointing managers and I think you are being a little selective there to be honest.

They appointed Megson who left for a better paid job and effectively promotion at the time, they appointed Allardyce who went on to be quite successful - used to be the England manager !!!!!!!!!!!!

Worthington didn't do too bad either.

I'm with TAM on this one, we might all hate/dislike the Oyston's but they certainly didn't do too bad in this area.

They got lucky with a few.
The majority of the managers they employed did nothing . Being very generous even adding the three you mention takes it to 8 and therefore more often than not they did not get it right. 8 out of 16.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

Of course there is a correlation, I never claimed otherwise. Again, the question was what was it for. How many fans would have accepted relegation to non-League to get rid of the Oystons after they started suing the fans? The answer is a lot, especially among those who boycotted. And therein lies the answer.

"Of course there is a correlation"

We got there in the end Foggy.

 

[foggy]

"Of course there is a correlation"

We got there in the end Foggy.

Literally said it in the first sentence of my first reply to you mate

 

[TwelveAngryMen]

seaside

I have no problem with that and have no reason to disbelieve what you say.

I'm not sure what you say has got too much to do with my suggestion that there is some correlation - albeit not direct - between boycotting and on field performances.

Just before the Peterborough game - March 2012 ? - it was revealed that Owen had helped himself to £11m, I won't say nobody gave a feck because plenty weren't happy about it and some supporters even defended his actions but more to the point there was certainly no mention of any boycott.

Everybody kept going and there was no mention of any boycott until MORE THAN TWO YEARS LATER when on field results had plummeted.

You might very well have decided to boycott when the Oyston's began taking legal action against the supporters but regardless of your chosen action, there is some form of correlation between supporters boycotting and on field results and it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

AVFTT CAVEAT - Not for a second am I suggesting that supporters should boycott now, I am merely suggesting that there is some form of correlation between supporters boycotting and on field results at Blackpool Football Club and every other club.

The taking of the £11m in itself didn't tell the full story - the breakdown in relations with Belokon remained under wraps as did the extent of the loans taken to support other enterprises
What we saw happen with Holloway and Appleton in quick succession in late 2012/early 2013 led to concerned fans getting together and forming SISA however even then we knew little of what was going on and there was no concerted Oyston Out campaign. At the start it was just about having an independent fans group and trying to persuade the O's to ' put football first '
As 2013 went on however the Oystons intentions started to become clearer and the March 2104 meet with VB confirmed the reasons for his absence
The Oyston Out campaign ( inc the SISA led protests ) and then NAPM in it's embryonic form started before the suing of fans - the first letters didn't go out until August that year That was though by far and away the biggest catalyst for it's widespread adoption
The correlation with on-field success for me is limited in that the lack of investment was manifested in poor performances - however it's more symptom than cause

 

[SEASIDE2020]

It’s ridiculous to suggest many of us boycotted because of results - I have seen Blackpool apply for re-election and still went, I even carried on going week in week out under Colin Hendry.

I have seen us play terrible football most of my life.

Your assumption is simply wrong.

I and many others ONLY boycotted because of the suing of fans.

They crossed a line and that was it - I was not going back EVER until they went.

seaside

It might be an idea to read what I actually said.

All I suggested was that there is a correlation - albeit a non direct one - between supporters boycotting and on field results.

What you say about the suing of fans and when you chose to boycott have got nothing to do with anything.

My assumption is not simply wrong, it is very obvious as Foggy stated.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

They got lucky with a few.
The majority of the managers they employed did nothing . Being very generous even adding the three you mention takes it to 8 and therefore more often than not they did not get it right. 8 out of 16.

I certainly think that it's fair to say that they - certainly Karl - got lucky at times.

I would imagine that his selection process was based more around who was cheap and available at the time rather than any well thought and detailed analysis.

Considering our place at the time and what he was willing to pay - perhaps that should be what he was not willing to pay ? - I think it's remarkable that we have had as many good managers as we have.

I'm not saying I'm right and you are wrong Angel, I'm sure you could argue that some of the duffers were really bad but I just think they've actually done well so it's just one that we'll never agree on.

 

[Tango1953]

I think the Oyston's did relatively well when appointing managers and I think you are being a little selective there to be honest.

The rest of your post was selective. Tell us about Colin Hendry, Paul Ince, Barry Ferguson, Jose Riga, Neil Mcdonald and Lee Clark. They had a 1 in 4 strike rate. Which is about where Sadler is.

Managers being successful with clubs after us, doesn't count at all.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

The taking of the £11m in itself didn't tell the full story - the breakdown in relations with Belokon remained under wraps as did the extent of the loans taken to support other enterprises
What we saw happen with Holloway and Appleton in quick succession in late 2012/early 2013 led to concerned fans getting together and forming SISA however even then we knew little of what was going on and there was no concerted Oyston Out campaign. At the start it was just about having an independent fans group and trying to persuade the O's to ' put football first '
As 2013 went on however the Oystons intentions started to become clearer and the March 2104 meet with VB confirmed the reasons for his absence
The Oyston Out campaign ( inc the SISA led protests ) and then NAPM in it's embryonic form started before the suing of fans - the first letters didn't go out until August that year That was though by far and away the biggest catalyst for it's widespread adoption
The correlation with on-field success for me is limited in that the lack of investment was manifested in poor performances - however it's more symptom than cause

TAM

Given what you've been through, I'd rather teach my dad how to sh@g than argue with you on this matter.

I was only playing devil's advocate and pointing out a very simple truth that there is a correlation between supporters boycotting and on field results.

I can't remember exactly when your coffin protest was - March/April 2014 ? - but I was stood outside in the rain witrh my little niece not sat in the stand with 2 pies and posting on here that everybody should be getting behind the team.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

The rest of your post was selective. Tell us about Colin Hendry, Paul Ince, Barry Ferguson, Jose Riga, Neil Mcdonald and Lee Clark. They had a 1 in 4 strike rate. Which is about where Sadler is.

Managers being successful with clubs after us, doesn't count at all.

"Managers being successful with clubs after us, doesn't count at all"

Fair enough Tango but some might suggest that attracting a future England manager to the club on approx £30k per annum was a feather in the cap ?

Again though Tango, interesting to hear that you think the Oyston's didn't do particularly well with managerial appointments because despite my dislike of them, I have always thought they'd done on that front.

Perhaps I'm giving them too much credit ?

 

[Tango1953]

Fair enough Tango but some might suggest that attracting a future England manager to the club on approx £30k per annum was a feather in the cap ?

Judging them on where they end up 20 years later is fine, if you are also prepared to not assess any of Sadler's managers until they've hd the same luxury. By the same token, any achievement before shouldn't count. Otherwise, there'd be a case to make for McCarty being a good appointment, no?

As an owner, there's no point in appointing the right man at the wrong time. It serves no benefit.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

Judging them on where they end up 20 years later is fine, if you are also prepared to not assess any of Sadler's managers until they've hd the same luxury. By the same token, any achievement before shouldn't count. Otherwise, there'd be a case to make for McCarty being a good appointment, no?

As an owner, there's no point in appointing the right man at the wrong time. It serves no benefit.

Tango

I'm not bashing Sadler.

I said I thought the Oyston's did well when it came to managerial appointments and I said so in isolation.

I have already acknowledged that it was just my personal opinion and up for debate.

Our very small sample has it at 2 each, Angel and yourself against the Oyston's and TAM and me for the Oyston's.

Again, can I stress that my opinion has got nothing to do with Sadler.

 

[Tango1953]

Tango

I'm not bashing Sadler.

I didn't say you were. My post is aimed at you saying the Oystons were good at hiring managers. Which they weren't. Your refined statement seems to be Oystons hired managers who were proven good, in time. Which I think is inconsequential.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

I didn't say you were. My post is aimed at you saying the Oystons were good at hiring managers. Which they weren't. Your refined statement seems to be Oystons hired managers who were proven good, in time. Which I think is inconsequential.

No probs Tango, it was just you mentioned Sadler.

Forget about my "refined statement", I still think that the Oyston's weren't too bad when it came to managerial appointments.

I actually think they did very well but I appreciate that others don't agree and have no problem with that.

 

[seasideone]

seaside

It might be an idea to read what I actually said.

All I suggested was that there is a correlation - albeit a non direct one - between supporters boycotting and on field results.

What you say about the suing of fans and when you chose to boycott have got nothing to do with anything.

My assumption is not simply wrong, it is very obvious as Foggy stated.

Please don’t be rude - I read what you said - I simply think it’s wrong for many reasons

To simplify: the performance on the field had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH BOYCOTTING FOR ANYONE I HAVE EVER MET!!!!!

 

[fcblackpool]

Please don’t be rude - I read what you said - I simply think it’s wrong for many reasons

To simplify: the performance on the field had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH BOYCOTTING FOR ANYONE I HAVE EVER MET!!!!!

Had results been half decent the boycott would not have been as large. I think that's just human nature.

 

[Phil_bfc deux]

Please don’t be rude - I read what you said - I simply think it’s wrong for many reasons

To simplify: the performance on the field had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH BOYCOTTING FOR ANYONE I HAVE EVER MET!!!!!

Of course it played a part

If we had of stayed up in the Premier league and we nearly did then people still would have gone to matches even though it was blatantly obvious what the Oystons were doing

You used to defend the Oystons on this site anyway

 

[seasideone]

Had results been half decent the boycott would not have been as large. I think that's just human nature.

We have had crap results for decades apart from the odd few years.

Suing of fans made the difference.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

Please don’t be rude - I read what you said - I simply think it’s wrong for many reasons

To simplify: the performance on the field had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH BOYCOTTING FOR ANYONE I HAVE EVER MET!!!!!

No need to be so precious seaside.

We all know that you are an uber supporter with more money than the rest of us put together but there is a correlation - albeit not direct - between supporters boycotting and on field results and nothing you have said changes that whether you use capitals or not.

 

[seasideone]

We have had crap results for decades apart from the odd few years.

Suing of fans made the difference.

I am not quite sure how to say this again “The suing of fans was a game changer for most”

 

[seasideone]

No need to be so precious seaside.

We all know that you are an uber supporter with more money than the rest of us put together but there is a correlation - albeit not direct - between supporters boycotting and on field results and nothing you have said changes that whether you use capitals or not.

See my previous posts!

 

[fcblackpool]

We have had crap results for decades apart from the odd few years.

Suing of fans made the difference.

I'll be honest, I heard it said that the fans deserved it. Probably by those who didn't boycott, but it was said.

Whilst results weren't the catalyst for boycott they certainly didn't diffuse any intent and probably made it easier. As I say human nature.

 

[seasideone]

I'll be honest, I heard it said that the fans deserved it. Probably by those who didn't boycott, but it was said.

Whilst results weren't the catalyst for boycott they certainly didn't diffuse any intent and probably made it easier. As I say human nature.

Not for me - I would have kept going, but to sue your own was just to much.

…and that’s the same for many I know.

 

[Hazi]

I think the Oyston's did relatively well when appointing managers and I think you are being a little selective there to be honest.

They appointed Megson who left for a better paid job and effectively promotion at the time, they appointed Allardyce who went on to be quite successful - used to be the England manager !!!!!!!!!!!!

Worthington didn't do too bad either.

I'm with TAM on this one, we might all hate/dislike the Oyston's but they certainly didn't do too bad in this area.

Worthington was my all time hated manager he was chit with a capital S.

 

[Hazi]

We boycotted because we are entitled to win every game and play like Brazil in the process.

 

[Ginge 2]

No idea why you boycotted. I did because the owners were clearly using the club as a cash machine and massively taking the piss.

I didnt boycott because I demanded success year in year out. If I wanted that, I'd support City or United or Madrid or whoever is the 'best' at any time.

Great summary

 

[AngelBFC]

No probs Tango, it was just you mentioned Sadler.

Forget about my "refined statement", I still think that the Oyston's weren't too bad when it came to managerial appointments.

I actually think they did very well but I appreciate that others don't agree and have no problem with that.

They didn’t do very well at all .
We were promoted 5 times in 32 years of ownership.
Hardly record breaking.

 

[SwannDangerous]

Have I missed something? What did we boycott for? There are far bigger Blackpool fans than me. But I’ve never not been invested in this club every weekend of my life and every game day since 1995. Whether that’s refreshing teletext, an app, travelling to ** Hull from Wiltshire or watching every game during COVID.

I don’t remember boycotting to accepting medicore ** bollocks we are watching now. It’s extremely poor and the whole feel good factor has been lost.

We had a better time under the Oyston’s.

 

[JJpool]

The fans being sued was a tipping point for many, but as the lack of investment became more evident, no legacy from the premier league and a shambles of a club being run as if the best trip and mega money never happened all contributed to get people on board. But fans being sued was that tipping point, although I cant speak for everyone.

It certainly wasn't about being in league 1, as is shown by the crowds now now, and was shown then when people returned in league 1.

 

[JJpool]

We had a better time under the Oyston’s.

The Oystons were incredibly lucky. Football is a lot richer these days, the Premier league is a far better and technically better league now.

There's no way a team going up could do what we did on a shoestring, not wanting to pay agents etc.

Also the small investment we did get from VB etc would be eaten up now with ease and would be unlikely to do a lot.

The amount of good players we managed to get for next to nowt was incredible.

I doubt players of that calibre would slip through other clubs nets as easily now.

The Oystons would get found out so fast these days.

 

[SwannDangerous]

The Oystons were incredibly lucky. Football is a lot richer these days, the Premier league is a far better and technically better league now.

There's no way a team going up could do what we did on a shoestring, not wanting to pay agents etc.

Also the small investment we did get from VB etc would be eaten up now with ease and would be unlikely to do a lot.

The amount of good players we managed to get for next to nowt was incredible.

I doubt players of that calibre would slip through other clubs nets as easily now.

The Oystons would get found out so fast these days.

I didn't say "We would be having a better time under the Oystons"

 

[PdxTangerine]

We boycotted because our previous owners were suing fans for expressing opinions on the internet, causing a devastating impact for some of them. I have a vivid memory of the whole awful shebang and that was the moment it really turned, specifically remember the poor fella who was sued for a post to about a dozen or so Facebook friends.

The idea that we'd boycott over a lack of success on the pitch is incredibly insulting to those who made sacrifices to the cause.

 

[JJpool]

I didn't say "We would be having a better time under the Oystons"

I didn't say you did, am carrying on the discussion on the back of that, why it wouldn't work today and how they were incredibly lucky.

Many factors combined and we had the best trip, despite them in many ways, but used as motivation for the players.

The player bonus probably helped, but many probably have that, it's a win win.

 

[SeasideKurt]

Crikey, no need for this really. I go to quite a few games with @straightatthewall; he is a bit of a daft ** tbh, but he's not old or senile.

Plenty of disgruntled fans making their voices heard after games and general unrest wherever you look on here, or social media etc. I'm not sure digging fans out constantly (many of whom will have had years' of season tickets leading up to the boycott, where as you probably never have, thus affecting them a lot more) about their ambition and bringing up the boycott is doing what you think it is.

There's been plenty of improvements for the club, for a start. Inescapably, Simon is a first-time football club owner and has made some questionable decisions. We should also be doing better form-wise at the moment with the resources we have. Investment in the squad needs to be better too, IMO. All can be true without slating other fans.

Have a read at what he said originally to be fair, you can't dish out abuse and not expect it back. He'd certainly get the exact same response in person speaking to me like that as he would on here.

Re-read the thread, he started that level of abuse after I actually agreed the original post I made wasn't worded right. But it was done after a few beers watching another shambolic performance after travelling +5 hours round trip again to watch us lose to a sub par team.

 

[SeasideKurt]

We boycotted because our previous owners were suing fans for expressing opinions on the internet, causing a devastating impact for some of them. I have a vivid memory of the whole awful shebang and that was the moment it really turned, specifically remember the poor fella who was sued for a post to about a dozen or so Facebook friends.

The idea that we'd boycott over a lack of success on the pitch is incredibly insulting to those who made sacrifices to the cause.

Nope, read the thread properly. That is not what I said at all.