Brent's party on 14th

I see Peter Ryan is trying to manoeuvre the Trust forces on pasoti. Are there a couple of snipes at other groups also?

This post is about supporter representation - please keep on the main board.

Now that 2012 is upon us, the time is right for a further strengthening of the Trust's position as the main voice of supporters in and around the club; this will be legitimised by the forthcoming election.

Note that the Trust is the only significant independent voice of supporters at the club. Other groups or individuals have financial links or are closely allied with the club itself as individuals. The Trust exists specifically not to be in that position, so it can act as a critic (in the full meaning of the word) of what goes on there. This is vital so that the Trust can act in an advisory capacity to our benevolent owner, and and be prepared to act as a counter balanace should things ever go wrong if owners are not as benevolent in the future.

I urge all Trust members who can, to be at the meeting on 14th January at the Guildhall. I feel it is vital that the Trust, after a period where - quite naturally - it was somewhat less visible than previously - cements its place as the main voice of supporters, so that well known individual supporters (no matter how well intentioned) do not subvert more democratic repesentation.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

An interesting and almost controversial post from Peter Ryan. Well done. Wonder if it will be moved off piste to the Trust forum ?
It obviously shows a little of the underlying tension, disagreement and even dislike that there is underneath all the froth and nonsense.
It would be nice to think a head of steam could be got up to supplant the self elected and self serving.

Quote :

so that well known individual supporters (no matter how well intentioned) do not subvert more democratic repesentation

I wonder who he is talking about here ?

I must say dane, it would be remarkable if quite a lot of fans didn't hold similar views to many on here as regards to this particular individual's efficacy.

Ps ...... Ali, could you try and re size your avatar if at all possible please?

lets not kid ourselfs, its only the fans who use this board and pasoti that know him, the majority of fans wont have a clue who the turnip is !!!

Chemical Ali wrote:

I see Peter Ryan is trying to manoeuvre the Trust forces on pasoti. Are there a couple of snipes at other groups also?

This post is about supporter representation - please keep on the main board.

Now that 2012 is upon us, the time is right for a further strengthening of the Trust's position as the main voice of supporters in and around the club; this will be legitimised by the forthcoming election.

Note that the Trust is the only significant independent voice of supporters at the club. Other groups or individuals have financial links or are closely allied with the club itself as individuals. The Trust exists specifically not to be in that position, so it can act as a critic (in the full meaning of the word) of what goes on there. This is vital so that the Trust can act in an advisory capacity to our benevolent owner, and and be prepared to act as a counter balanace should things ever go wrong if owners are not as benevolent in the future.

I urge all Trust members who can, to be at the meeting on 14th January at the Guildhall. I feel it is vital that the Trust, after a period where - quite naturally - it was somewhat less visible than previously - cements its place as the main voice of supporters, so that well known individual supporters (no matter how well intentioned) do not subvert more democratic repesentation.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I think that sub-text has been around for a while in the postings of various people. I'm pleased to see it.

I'm also very pleased to read this, the Trust will gain greatly from the comments.

It has been moved off the main board and onto the Trust forum. Not a bad thing really - if the Trust is to be seen as separate from pasoti whilst still having a presence there then that is the compromise position. Tony Cholwell is posting again in his anti-Trust stance. I am often taken by what he has to say but I'm not sure why he feels the need to argue against the Trust so relatively frequently.

I am intrigued by the constant reference to the Green Taverners. Who are they? Are they simply a group of (relatively) rich local businessmen? Initially I had thought they were a bunch of people who organised whist drives, car-boot sales and sold raffle tickets. But now, especially with all the nonsense around Tony Wrathall and his possible sponsorship by some of the GTs, they appear to be another select group of Special Fans, this time buying their way in and seemingly holding the club to ransom by threatening to withdraw sponsorship by any company they are involved with. Is there a list of members anywhere? Are they a legally constituted body? I am aware that PP has made comment about their questionably "charitable" status and, on the basis that he is always right, do they actually have a Charity registration? I may be wrong in this. Does anyone have any knowledge of the GTs?

Lots does seem to hinge on the meeting on 14th January. I hope that the various fans' bodies are not to be put into opposition either by Brent's policies or by the personalities of the fans involved.

i play for the green taverners cricket team , i was of the opinion its just a group of fans who set up fundraising events

I'm coming round to thinking that fan representation is overrated. One mans free buses is another mans chance to ridicule. How difficult can knowing what fans want and what issues need sorting.

Take out the football stuff about which we might grumble about and suggests this or that player but ultimately we can do little about what else is there?

Half Time Catering
Ticket Prices
Concessions
How Many Turnstiles are Open
Toilets
Free Buses

Is it not within the realm of all probabilties that anyone can work out what is needed and either put it in place or explain why it can't be put in place without having Mr and Mrs T Cobbley trooping up to Home Park to share prawn sandwiches with Mr Brent and his sidekicks (or if your lucky a lunch out at one of his hotels)

Why not find out where fans reps work best or if trusts work best or maybe just being open works best?

The 14th will be interesting. Interesting to see which groups are invited to the table and in what proportion i.e. elected members in direct correlation to members of said group. Are the Taverners going to have equal representation to season ticket holders for example. The Trust to get equal numbers with the PLymouth Supporters Branch. It could get very rep heavy.

Dougie wrote:

The 14th will be interesting. Interesting to see which groups are invited to the table and in what proportion i.e. elected members in direct correlation to members of said group. Are the Taverners going to have equal representation to season ticket holders for example. The Trust to get equal numbers with the PLymouth Supporters Branch. It could get very rep heavy.

It certainly will be interesting. Most likely, it will have already been discussed and favouritte scenarios flagged way back in the days of the contingency plan.there will no doubt be an attempt to bulldoze through what trhey have already decded they want.
The Taverners number no more than 30 probably, if one includes the cricket team, so why should they have equal say to 1500 members of a Trust and hundreds and hudred of members of supporters associations that have been around for decades, PASALB etc.
I would bet the intention is to have a system where this bunch can punch above their weight, and in effect will have something similar to a block card vote that people like Ian Newell always detested about the Trade Unions... rather ironic actually.
Regardless of what they say, I believe they are natural bedfellows with the likes of Ridsdale, and that is one of the reasons they have had such immediate prominence, along with the very favourable press they receive on Pasoti compared to the Trust.

I personally think IF there is to be a rep it should be one person voted for once a year by season ticket holders and supporters club members. I also think that you should have to be in the supporters club to be able to buy a season ticket! This would increase the importance of the supporters club

That's a very good post from Peter Ryan. I'll bet he's got a few messages in his in box.

That was a brave comment from Peter Ryan, someone had to come out with it and he has, good for him I say!

The Trust will never be the perfect scenario for fan representation, but it's the best there is. I like others, will listen and view comments with a cynical eye and we should all ask lots of questions, but my support for the Trust will be strong providing the agendas of fairness and democracy are at the summit of those that would like to represent us.

As far as I am concerned Peter Ryan's comments deserve my respect.



Pirate and Nick, any chance of a John Snow kinda Newsnight gadgetry for the election night?

Dougie wrote:

I'm coming round to thinking that fan representation is overrated.

Quite. I've been saying the same thing for quite some time now. When the Trust first started I did seriously consider getting involved, but then asked myself what exactly can it achieve? I've not come up with an answer yet, apart from that it should be a conduit from the fans to the Chief Executive for complaints and moans, as per Dougie's list. That's all well and good but is reactive rather than proactive.

The label of fans representative has been misused so much by the likes of Webb and Newell for their own ends recently, that I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people have been put off - I certainly have.

Anyway, I wish the Trust all the best in their efforts - there do seem to be some decent thinkers there now - although they do need to rid themselves of being associated with Mr Webb and his rabble rousing.

What a great idea Gob, there might be a sort of widget out there we could find in time.
Also, that was a good post bby Plympton Pilgrim.
i too am struggling to see what on earth the point would be. To me, a Trust should remain out in the constituency and prepare for government, proper government and ownership.
And with an owner that doesn't want to hang around, and with a stadium owned by PCC, that is where they should start The club could probably be bought for an accessible figure once Brent has extracted his profit. I wouldn't like to see the next generation of a bunch of fans with no money ( where have we heard that before) trying to wing it for a couple of years, get their feet under the table and coble together a deal for themselves that is no use to man nor beast. Make no mistake, the idea would have gone through the odd head or two.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Contingency Plan committee will act as the supporters' representatives.

I think Brent has to distance himself from the CPers. That horse has run its course. The trust should be at the top table and everyone else should come under their umbrella.

My thoughts exactly, Frank. Whether or not we like it, the Trust is the only body capable of representing all Argyle fans. The various supporters' clubs represent people in specific geographic areas; Pasoti and the Green Taverners have no claim to represent anybody; and other groups like the shareholders' association represent specific groups. The Trust is there for everybody: whether or not we choose to join and be represented by it is a different matter.

Dougie makes a good point, too, and I'll carry on Penzance's (and my!) trade union comparison. A trade union can be fairly passive, only dealing with complaints, or it can be active, following a wider agenda on things like training, equality of opportunity, even the direction a company's going in. It's the same for a Supporters' Trust: it can simply raise the issues we moan about, like the price of beer or the need for an outside smoking area, or it can actively pursue wider campaigns like safe standing, anti-racism, local community issues and so on, as well as seeking a voice in the overall running of the club or even planning to take it over.

The current Trust leadership have done a great job in starting off a more active approach, and I hope this continues after the elections.

Well at least James has shown he has a sense of humour....this quote from his pre-match speech,

"...and our Green Army has found a new voice - Forza Verde 1886 which surely must rival the Military Wives who are with us here today. We hope to hear our choir roar during the game."

I wonder what he must have thought of 90 minutes of virtual silence?

GOB wrote:

Pirate and Nick, any chance of a John Snow kinda Newsnight gadgetry for the election night?

Like this?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Czarcasm wrote:

Well at least James has shown he has a sense of humour....this quote from his pre-match speech,

"...and our Green Army has found a new voice - Forza Verde 1886 which surely must rival the Military Wives who are with us here today. We hope to hear our choir roar during the game."

I wonder what he must have thought of 90 minutes of virtual silence?

At least James Brent knows what it should have been called!

Peggy wrote:

My thoughts exactly, Frank. Whether or not we like it, the Trust is the only body capable of representing all Argyle fans. The various supporters' clubs represent people in specific geographic areas; Pasoti and the Green Taverners have no claim to represent anybody; and other groups like the shareholders' association represent specific groups. The Trust is there for everybody: whether or not we choose to join and be represented by it is a different matter.

Dougie makes a good point, too, and I'll carry on Penzance's (and my!) trade union comparison. A trade union can be fairly passive, only dealing with complaints, or it can be active, following a wider agenda on things like training, equality of opportunity, even the direction a company's going in. It's the same for a Supporters' Trust: it can simply raise the issues we moan about, like the price of beer or the need for an outside smoking area, or it can actively pursue wider campaigns like safe standing, anti-racism, local community issues and so on, as well as seeking a voice in the overall running of the club or even planning to take it over.

The current Trust leadership have done a great job in starting off a more active approach, and I hope this continues after the elections.

Surely this is the type of debate the meeting has been set up to have?

Look forward to hearing your own and indeed everyones input from the floor.

No it isn't. As I've stated a number of times before, the meeting is the equivalent of an employer recognising an independent trade union (the Trust), but then also setting up some kind of internal staff committee (whatever's going to be proposed next week) so as to play the two off each other.

Any chance this Brent meeting could be 'broadcast' live? on Argyle World?