What should define a BFC supporters club?

seasideone

seasideone

Well-known member
It appears that the club are going to bring in two levels of supporters clubs that they will have different levels of dialogue with.

Which makes sense to me.

For argument sake let’s call it Tier 1 and Tier 2.

It seems obvious already and logical that BST will be a Tier 1, as they (to my knowledge) are the largest with a democratic led constitution and a proven membership.

So my question is - what is the min standard required to become a Tier 1?

Some thoughts on this and this and it is not complete?

Democratic v Dictorial
Accountable v Unaccountable
Proven membership v made up or guessed number
Just effectively a travel club?
Legally constituted v not

Plus many more I cannot think of.

The club are going to have to define this, not just for today but going forward and stick to it - that doesn’t mean it cannot be changed - but you don’t want to do that every day.

Imagine them having a scenario in the future where someone comes forward and says ‘I represent 500 expat Seasiders from around the world’ - should they be given Tier 1 status without proper proof??

Also, what level of proof is required?

…but if the criteria is that no proof is required, then they would probably pass the test of a Tier 1 supporter club.

It’s an interesting one - and I thought after all the debate recently it would be worth discussing - it may even help the club decide themselves.

Bottom line is whatever the criteria is, you need to test it with reasonable hypothetical situations.

Thoughts - as I genuinely do not know the answer?
 
You could add proven time in existence perhaps?

It would stop a whole load of silliness if people formed groups just to be annoying but qualify as Tier 2 by doing it?

Also minimum number of proven members, as above (avoid large amounts of silliness)

Edit: I’m thinking too on how to preclude a group of disruptive Nobbers forming a group and gaining access to the club. So what precautions can be taken? Season ticket or ticket proof for group leaders? Maybe but how to regulate for overseas groups? Some sort of paid membership? TTV

Has to be some precaution
 
Chunkylad said:
You could add proven time in existence perhaps?

It would stop a whole load of silliness if people formed groups just to be annoying but qualify as Tier 2 by doing it?

Also minimum number of proven members, as above (avoid large amounts of silliness)

Edit: I’m thinking too on how to preclude a group of disruptive Nobbers forming a group and gaining access to the club. So what precautions can be taken? Season ticket or ticket proof for group leaders? Maybe but how to regulate for overseas groups? Some sort of paid membership? TTV

Has to be some precaution
Click to expand...
It’s not that simple is it?
 
Just for the Peoples Popular Front of left handed pigmy's to get their just seat's at the table.

1.) You must have a minimum of X amount "Registered" members
2.) You must hold a minimum of 2 accessible meetings notified to all members
3.) You must have a minimum membership quorum of 30% in any meeting
4.) Each group must have a yearly vote to select their groups committee
5.) You must publish your meeting notes on any social media platform within 14 days.

Just because you 'say' you represent a group of supporters means nothing unless you can prove it.
I doubt certain groups will want this but without it, your just 6 guys who meet up for a pint before the game and have a twitter account.
 
Last edited:
seasideone said:
It appears that the club are going to bring in two levels of supporters clubs that they will have different levels of dialogue with.

Which makes sense to me.

For argument sake let’s call it Tier 1 and Tier 2.

It seems obvious already and logical that BST will be a Tier 1, as they (to my knowledge) are the largest with a democratic led constitution and a proven membership.

So my question is - what is the min standard required to become a Tier 1?

Some thoughts on this and this and it is not complete?

Democratic v Dictorial
Accountable v Unaccountable
Proven membership v made up or guessed number
Just effectively a travel club?
Legally constituted v not

Plus many more I cannot think of.

The club are going to have to define this, not just for today but going forward and stick to it - that doesn’t mean it cannot be changed - but you don’t want to do that every day.

Imagine them having a scenario in the future where someone comes forward and says ‘I represent 500 expat Seasiders from around the world’ - should they be given Tier 1 status without proper proof??

Also, what level of proof is required?

…but if the criteria is that no proof is required, then they would probably pass the test of a Tier 1 supporter club.

It’s an interesting one - and I thought after all the debate recently it would be worth discussing - it may even help the club decide themselves.

Bottom line is whatever the criteria is, you need to test it with reasonable hypothetical situations.

Thoughts - as I genuinely do not know the answer?
Click to expand...
For me BST should be the tier 1 supporters group. As I have said elsewhere, all of the other groups could be affiliated to it without any need for tier 2. Certainly, those fans in the geographically spread groups (YS, BASIL) may already be members of both without any complication. @Toryhas already posted in this vein. Those other groups - who might feel they have a specific cultural and/or demographic cause to be distinctively incorporated - would, to my way of thinking be able to affiliate to BST without feeling swamped or overlooked.
 
Personally,I wouldn’t bother, I joined bst because it seemed the best option to put pressure on the oystons, but now, unless it’s for social purposes, or organising coaches, I can’t see any reason for them to exist. The board are well aware of things fans are concerned about, they read this forum and other social media, so there’s nothing they can learn from formal meetings with selected members of selected groups.
 
Matesrates said:
Personally,I wouldn’t bother, I joined bst because it seemed the best option to put pressure on the oystons, but now, unless it’s for social purposes, or organising coaches, I can’t see any reason for them to exist. The board are well aware of things fans are concerned about, they read this forum and other social media, so there’s nothing they can learn from formal meetings with selected members of selected groups.
Click to expand...
Thats fine - but not everyone uses this forum.
 
Matesrates said:
Personally,I wouldn’t bother, I joined bst because it seemed the best option to put pressure on the oystons, but now, unless it’s for social purposes, or organising coaches, I can’t see any reason for them to exist. The board are well aware of things fans are concerned about, they read this forum and other social media, so there’s nothing they can learn from formal meetings with selected members of selected groups.
Click to expand...
The experience of the Oyston saga taught us that the fans will always need to be ready with an organised Trust as a bulwark against adverse behaviour by owners and potential investors, no matter where it comes from. The fact that the relationship is currently a benign one must not dissuade us from this position.
 
No SG should be in Tier 1 unless it has at least 20% of the average gate as members. Otherwise who are they representing?

There should be an affiliate level where you'd ask the smaller groups if they would join that.

Also, although I'm not in favour of the SG dialogue with the board, if you are going to have it then all meetings should be streamed and all correspondence published the same day in full. I'm sure the 80% would like to know that the reps for the 20% aren't actually creating a mess.
 
Who knows what the Club's intentions are, but there's no question that we have a broad range of different supporters groups.

It's not straightforward though and I think the Club needs to tread very cautiously if it intends to start offering certain special privileges or adopting special relationships with certain supporter groups and not others. That said, I also think that a tiered system has some merits and might enable better communication on the whole.

As I see it the Club has one massive conundrum here that it has to solve ... Whether it treats both the MSG and BST even handedly. Beyond those two major groups, I think it's very easy to treat the smaller 'associations' as well as the TK's who would probably acknowledge are not really a member based organisation differently.

As Phil has mentioned on here, the MSG do have a lot of younger fans who would almost certainly lend their support to that group and as has become pretty apparent, that group aren't going to take any attempt to push them out lying down. On the other hand, the Club itself has a quandary because a) The MSG doesn't seem to have a provable membership (it's kind of a loose association) b) It's not openly democratic c) They can be pretty radical and unpredictable etc..

I'm not sure what I would do to be honest....
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Who knows what the Club's intentions are, but there's no question that we have a broad range of different supporters groups.

It's not straightforward though and I think the Club needs to tread very cautiously if it intends to start offering certain special privileges or adopting special relationships with certain supporter groups and not others. That said, I also think that a tiered system has some merits and might enable better communication on the whole.

As I see it the Club has one massive conundrum here that it has to solve ... Whether it treats both the MSG and BST even handedly. Beyond those two major groups, I think it's very easy to treat the smaller 'associations' as well as the TK's who would probably acknowledge are not really a member based organisation differently.

As Phil has mentioned on here, the MSG do have a lot of younger fans who would almost certainly lend their support to that group and as has become pretty apparent, that group aren't going to take any attempt to push them out lying down. On the other hand, the Club itself has a quandary because a) The MSG doesn't seem to have a provable membership (it's kind of a loose association) b) It's not openly democratic c) They can be pretty radical and unpredictable etc..

I'm not sure what I would do to be honest....
Click to expand...
If the MSG fear they are being pushed out they should probably think about creating a membership for a nominal fee

Say 50 pence a year or something just so they can prove some supporter numbers that would outnumber BST and all other groups put together

The MSG Facebook group for example as over 2 and a half thousand people in the group and the Twitter page over 4 and a half followers

Its obvious who represent the most fans they would just need to prove it

Fcuk all to do with me, but it's what I would do and would shut a few up on this site
 
Last edited:
Phil_bfc deux said:
If the MSG fear they are being pushed out they should probably think about creating a membership for a nominal fee

Say 50 pence a year or something just so they can prove some supporter numbers that would outnumber BST and all other groups

The MSG Facebook group for example as over 2 and a half thousand people in the group and the Twitter page over 4 and a half followers

Its obvious who represent the most fans they would just need to prove it

Fcuk all to do with me, but it's what I would do
Click to expand...
Yep... There's a few things they could probably do in order to legitimise themselves a bit more although I'm not sure conforming to rules and regulations is likely to be too appealing. Facebook followers is great and likewise twitter, but It's not proof of membership or representation.

There are other issues though... I mean for example BST would establish support for a particular decision or policy, based on a democratic decision from the members (obviously they might then completely ignore that and for example have a clandestine meeting with Owen Oyston regardless) whereas the MSG do not seem to be openly democratic and so there might be questions about how they make decisions (obviously if you don;t ask your members opinions, then how can you possibly claim to represent them etc..).

Finally, I also think the Club might be looking for a certain amount of reciprocation and trust to be established within the relationship and as we know the MSG have had a tendency to go rogue on occasions. And I'm not entirely sure that any of us would necessarily benefit from the MSG being reeled in and controlled by the Club

It's not easy to solve mate and I don't envy the Club in trying to find a resolution....

Personally I think that it might be in everyone's interests for BST to have a closer / special relationship with the Club and for the MSG to maintain more of a professional distance. That way the MSG don't need to conform and can maintain a more radical approach as and when it is needed.
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
If the MSG fear they are being pushed out they should probably think about creating a membership for a nominal fee

Say 50 pence a year or something just so they can prove some supporter numbers that would outnumber BST and all other groups

The MSG Facebook group for example as over 2 and a half thousand people in the group and the Twitter page over 4 and a half followers

Its obvious who represent the most fans they would just need to prove it

Fcuk all to do with me, but it's what I would do
Click to expand...
It feels to me as though a group that congregate or coalesce around the collective support for Blackpool - is a supporters group and should be considered as one by the club.

It really is that simple.

To prove the point, they may need to say "we are a supporters group" and as you say someone pays a nominal membership to prove it.

The club should WANT dialogue with all of the various groups; each has a niche, a niche could very well feel the need to use at some point.

IMHO TK and MSG are fantastic at what they do, BST have done some stuff really well - it's not and never should be a competition - to create a division in the supporters is for one purpose only - to conquer and I hope BFC really don't feel the need to do that.
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
If the MSG fear they are being pushed out they should probably think about creating a membership for a nominal fee

Say 50 pence a year or something just so they can prove some supporter numbers that would outnumber BST and all other groups put together

The MSG Facebook group for example as over 2 and a half thousand people in the group and the Twitter page over 4 and a half followers

Its obvious who represent the most fans they would just need to prove it

Fcuk all to do with me, but it's what I would do and would shut a few up on this site
Click to expand...
I agree with that. Social media numbers are meaningless and likely include nobbers.
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
If the MSG fear they are being pushed out they should probably think about creating a membership for a nominal fee

Say 50 pence a year or something just so they can prove some supporter numbers that would outnumber BST and all other groups put together

The MSG Facebook group for example as over 2 and a half thousand people in the group and the Twitter page over 4 and a half followers

Its obvious who represent the most fans they would just need to prove it

Fcuk all to do with me, but it's what I would do and would shut a few up on this site
Click to expand...
Is it just about number of members, or do you have to have accountability and responsibility plus democratic v dictatorship etc as well?
 
seasideone said:
Is it just about number of members, or do you have to have accountability and responsibility plus democratic v dictatorship etc as well?
Click to expand...
Surely the amount of fans you represent should be the most important thing

BST have less than a thousand members yet appear to call all the shots
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
Surely the amount of fans you represent should be the most important thing

BST have less than a thousand members yet appear to call all the shots
Click to expand...
I definitely think it’s a big factor.

What am I asking - should it be the only factor and if not what else should be considered?

Using an extreme example, if you had 5000 people who are members of a group causing a full on riot every week - yet they had the most members - should they be at the top table?
 
seasideone said:
I definitely think it’s a big factor.

What am I asking - should it be the only factor and if not what else should be considered?

Using an extreme example, if you had 5000 people who are members of a group causing a full on riot every week - yet they had the most members - should they be at the top table?
Click to expand...
That's a bizarre example and completely irrelevant
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
That's a bizarre example and completely irrelevant
Click to expand...
It is relevant though - and I did say it was extreme.

Can you answer the following and I am not saying any answer is right - as I genuinely do not know the answer myself.

Q1 Do you think number of members is the only criteria that should be used for Tier 1

Q2 If no to Q1 - what other areas do you think should be considered?
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
Surely the amount of fans you represent should be the most important thing

BST have less than a thousand members yet appear to call all the shots
Click to expand...
It's not really that simple TBH...

In all likelihood I'd say that BST probably represent far more supporters than their membership would suggest(plenty of lapsed members and also non-members who would hold them in high regard and be happy and confident in letting them represent).... And I'd also say that the MSG possibly represent far fewer people than their FB followers suggests.
 
seasideone said:
It is relevant though - and I did say it was extreme.

Can you answer the following and I am not saying any answer is right - as I genuinely do not know the answer myself.

Q1 Do you think number of members is the only criteria that should be used for Tier 1

Q2 If no to Q1 - what other areas do you think should be considered?
Click to expand...
There should be no such thing as a tier system

Not sure that answers you though
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
There should be no such thing as a tier system

Not sure that answers you though
Click to expand...
Which is a valid point of view, but not one I personally agree with - I am not saying I am right either.

All that said if there are no Tiers, that means the club could be dealing with thousands of people about the same thing and not a few points of contact - which to me makes no sense.

There should of course be fans forums open to all in my view as well.
 
Perhaps they could just email everyone on the data base and advise on developments when relevant. They can then concentrate their time putting words into action.
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
If the MSG fear they are being pushed out they should probably think about creating a membership for a nominal fee

Say 50 pence a year or something just so they can prove some supporter numbers that would outnumber BST and all other groups put together

The MSG Facebook group for example as over 2 and a half thousand people in the group and the Twitter page over 4 and a half followers

Its obvious who represent the most fans they would just need to prove it

Fcuk all to do with me, but it's what I would do and would shut a few up on this site
Click to expand...
I follow them on twitter, it does not mean that I will be paying any kind of fee to those complete halfwits.

They are absolutely not representative of the younger supporters, just because a few "younger" people are a bit gobby on social media platforms.

I just follow them because I enjoy (enjoy here meaning that i basically enjoy to hate them) reading the idiotic and downright mindless shite they spout on a regular basis.

When they can begin to act as an actual organisation rather than a bunch of radical self-serving yobs them I'm sure the club will be more than happy to start a dialogue with them.
 
seasideone said:
Which is a valid point of view, but not one I personally agree with - I am not saying I am right either.

All that said if there are no Tiers, that means the club could be dealing with thousands of people about the same thing and not a few points of contact - which to me makes no sense.

There should of course be fans forums open to all in my view as well.
Click to expand...
Question for you @seasideone...

What's the general perception of themselves within BST?

Is there a recognition that (for whatever reason) they perhaps no longer have the same following / gravitas that they once had and do you perhaps think that they should be granted this imaginary Tier 1 status, based on their constitution alone?
 
seasideone said:
It is relevant though - and I did say it was extreme.

Can you answer the following and I am not saying any answer is right - as I genuinely do not know the answer myself.

Q1 Do you think number of members is the only criteria that should be used for Tier 1

Q2 If no to Q1 - what other areas do you think should be considered?
Click to expand...
Q1 - No.
Q2 - As per your op and I’d say

Democracy and accountability to the membership - post 8 by B side was a reasonable first stab. Regular meetings. Election of the committee. Clear roles for the committee members. And all of it on an official website.

Regular Communications with the membership and wider fan base and Transparency - as far as that’s possible given that some things sometimes have to remain confidential (data protection issues; commercially sensitive matters; things shared in confidence).

Financial controls - the members will pay subs which will necessitate a bank account. I recall there was a bit of history about cash in buckets, and allegations of improprieties etc.

It’s not rocket science. Just think about any small charity, golf club etc. What do they do?

As BFCx3 has said MSG (and the smaller geographical groups frankly) may not have the appetite for so much formality, which is fine. It is a complete ball ache after all. Maybe that’s where Tier 2 comes in?

So maybe the debate should be about the level of involvement and representation at BFC that comes with Tier 1 and what comes with Tier 2? And obviously that depends on BFC and ultimately Simon Sadler and what he is prepared to accept in terms of fan engagement.
 
Thinking out loud. Under the ownership model we have, the owner has no obligation to talk to fans as things stand (although I believe that is going to change?)

It seems smart though for the owner to maintain dialogu with th paying customers. And to listen to their concerns. Perhaps th answer is a simple one. Like regular meetings (monthly or quarterly) with a selection of fans. Maybe one or two from each group that has a minimum number of members and a few selected at random each time from a database of people who satisfy a minimum ticket purchase requirment and apply to be considered.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Q1 - No.
Q2 - As per your op and I’d say

Democracy and accountability to the membership - post 8 by B side was a reasonable first stab. Regular meetings. Election of the committee. Clear roles for the committee members. And all of it on an official website.

Regular Communications with the membership and wider fan base and Transparency - as far as that’s possible given that some things sometimes have to remain confidential (data protection issues; commercially sensitive matters; things shared in confidence).

Financial controls - the members will pay subs which will necessitate a bank account. I recall there was a bit of history about cash in buckets, and allegations of improprieties etc.

It’s not rocket science. Just think about any small charity, golf club etc. What do they do?

As BFCx3 has said MSG (and the smaller geographical groups frankly) may not have the appetite for so much formality, which is fine. It is a complete ball ache after all. Maybe that’s where Tier 2 comes in?

So maybe the debate should be about the level of involvement and representation at BFC that comes with Tier 1 and what comes with Tier 2? And obviously that depends on BFC and ultimately Simon Sadler and what he is prepared to accept in terms of fan engagement.
Click to expand...
So you've basically just said that only BST should have a voice thus alienating thousands of fellow fans

Nice one
 
voyeur said:
Thinking out loud. Under the ownership model we have, the owner has no obligation to talk to fans as things stand (although I believe that is going to change?)

It seems smart though for the owner to maintain dialogu with th paying customers. And to listen to their concerns. Perhaps th answer is a simple one. Like regular meetings (monthly or quarterly) with a selection of fans. Maybe one or two from each group that has a minimum number of members and a few selected at random each time from a database of people who satisfy a minimum ticket purchase requirment and apply to be considered.
Click to expand...
The answer is open fan forums available on a first come first served, otherwise you end up annoying someone somewhere.

You can't control the questions as you can with other meetings, but you shouldn't have to. Even the Oystons did it.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
The answer is open fan forums available on a first come first served, otherwise you end up annoying someone somewhere.

You can't control the questions as you can with other meetings, but you shouldn't have to. Even the Oystons did it.
Click to expand...
Karl was the supreme exponent of it. Where do you see the club being in 5 years time Karl? Solvent. Next question?
 
voyeur said:
Karl was the supreme exponent of it. Where do you see the club being in 5 years time Karl? Solvent. Next question?
Click to expand...
Joffrey's standar answer to every question list.

1) Solvency.
2) Dad's put a lot of money in.
3) You're welcome to buy the club if you think you can do better.
4) That was Steve's decision as manager.
 
voyeur said:
Thinking out loud. Under the ownership model we have, the owner has no obligation to talk to fans as things stand (although I believe that is going to change?)

It seems smart though for the owner to maintain dialogu with th paying customers. And to listen to their concerns. Perhaps th answer is a simple one. Like regular meetings (monthly or quarterly) with a selection of fans. Maybe one or two from each group that has a minimum number of members and a few selected at random each time from a database of people who satisfy a minimum ticket purchase requirment and apply to be considered.
Click to expand...
I must confess I don’t know what the current rules are nor what they are likely to be if legislation on football governance is ever passed.

In the absence of a legal or EFL requirement around fans’ engagement then (as I’ve said in my previous post) it’s very much down to the owner and what he’s prepared to agree to.

This is a very interesting debate but until we know what’s on offer that’s all it is - a debate (although I dare say this might be an attempt to influence the internal debate within the club).
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
So you've basically just said that only BST should have a voice thus alienating thousands of fellow fans

Nice one
Click to expand...
Nope. Didn’t say that. What I actually said was that MSG might have some hard decisions to make. And they might not have the appetite. Following up on BFC’s point really.
 
Phil_bfc deux said:
So you've basically just said that only BST should have a voice thus alienating thousands of fellow fans

Nice one
Click to expand...
Edit to add: the above was not aimed at me sorry, but the points I make are still valid I think.

Far from it, I do not think a supporters group has to go as far as BST with legal structure, full constitution etc.

…but I also don’t think people claiming all sorts without any real proof is acceptable either - or no accountability is acceptable.

For me to be recognised as a Tier 1 you can obviously go as far as BST, but I also think there is a happy medium - exactly where that happy medium is - I am not sure.
 
seasideone said:
Far from it, I do not think a supporters group has to go as far as BST with legal structure, full constitution etc.

…but I also don’t think people claiming all sorts without any real proof is acceptable either - or no accountability is acceptable.

For me to be recognised as a Tier 1 you can obviously go as far as BST, but I also think there is a happy medium - exactly where that happy medium is - I am not sure.
Click to expand...
You are losing me with all this Tier nonsense
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Nope. Didn’t say that. What I actually said was that MSG might have some hard decisions to make. And they might not have the appetite. Following up on BFC’s point really.
Click to expand...
That's how it reads as do all your posts on this subject

Memberships, constitutions, legalisations etc etc

It matters not nor should it
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I must confess I don’t know what the current rules are nor what they are likely to be if legislation on football governance is ever passed.

In the absence of a legal or EFL requirement around fans’ engagement then (as I’ve said in my previous post) it’s very much down to the owner and what he’s prepared to agree to.

This is a very interesting debate but until we know what’s on offer that’s all it is - a debate (although I dare say this might be an attempt to influence the internal debate within the club).
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone knows the rules that are coming until legislation is released.

I have no idea if this would influence the club or not. Although, if they read this then it may - but if it’s a reasoned debate among supporters maybe it should!

You could say that about anything on here!

…but the lack of reasoned debates might put them off 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🧡
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top