FA Watch

[Montgomery Burns]

FA Watch represents football fans of all English Premier League clubs who are worried that the Football Association (FA) as an organisation are either unable or unwilling to police the laws of the game in a fair, objective and consistent manner.

FA Watch is committed to highlighting specific examples of such perceived bias where clubs and players do not appear to have been treated by the FA in a fair and objective manner. This will be generally in relation to disciplinary incidents, especially those concerning[1] violent conduct and goal celebrations, where referees and subsequently the FA’s own Regulatory Commission have dealt with incidents in a manner inconsistent with reasonable expectations[2].

FA watch enables to provide supporters, as a key stakeholder group, with the ability easily to monitor the FA's performance of its disciplinary function and to assist them in putting forward any observations they may have concerning the FA's conduct.[3]

Feel free to ignore any or all of the above - it's just the random musings of a tired bloke who'll be hitting the sack soon. Reasons for suggestions given below, the numbers equating to those in square brackets in the body of the text in the quoted paragraph immediately above:

1 - Lawyer's point, really, but that's what I am! Your original text binds yourself very specifically to certain incidents only. I suggest that you be slightly less definite just to give yourself extra "wiggle room". You never know when something else may come up that you might want to comemnt on or look at.

2 - In the original text, it read as though it would be the incidents themsleves that needed to be inconsistent, whereas in fact it's inconsistency in the way the FA deals with them that you're bothered by. My wording may not be the best way of saying it, but I think it would be better to phrase things so as to make that clear.

3 - I've suggested a new third para. I know that a mission statement needs to be short and punchy. However, it seems to me that the key aspects of what you're doing involve providing a service to interested fans which will let them: (a) see what's going on; and (b) help them to take it forward if they want to. I think that's worth making explicit in the mission statement.

This is meant to be constructive, not critical, and I hope the tone of this message doesn't suggest otherwise. Nor will it offend if you don't run with my suggestions (that's all they are, for you to take or leave). I do admire you for having the drive to take this forward, and like what you've produced so far. I wish you well!

Dyed,

Thanks a lot for taking the trouble - I've a few suggestions to look at and it's near the top of my 'to do' list. All this feedback is constructive so don't worry, i take it all in the spirit it is given and we'd never improve anything if we didn't ask others.

Cheers,

Monty

 

[Montgomery Burns]

Help!

I was in the middle of doing an announcement when I got distracted. I clicked the 'save' button so should be able to retrieve it, but can't see where it is - any ideas?

 

[judleberry]

FA Watch represents football fans of all English Premier League clubs who are worried that the Football Association (FA) as an organisation are either unable or unwilling to police the laws of the game in a fair, objective and consistent manner.

FA Watch is committed to highlighting specific examples of such perceived bias where clubs and players do not appear to have been treated by the FA in a fair and objective manner. This will be generally in relation to disciplinary incidents, especially those concerning[1] violent conduct and goal celebrations, where referees and subsequently the FA’s own Regulatory Commission have dealt with incidents in a manner inconsistent with reasonable expectations[2].

FA watch enables to provide supporters, as a key stakeholder group, with the ability easily to monitor the FA's performance of its disciplinary function and to assist them in putting forward any observations they may have concerning the FA's conduct.[3]

Feel free to ignore any or all of the above - it's just the random musings of a tired bloke who'll be hitting the sack soon. Reasons for suggestions given below, the numbers equating to those in square brackets in the body of the text in the quoted paragraph immediately above:

1 - Lawyer's point, really, but that's what I am! Your original text binds yourself very specifically to certain incidents only. I suggest that you be slightly less definite just to give yourself extra "wiggle room". You never know when something else may come up that you might want to comemnt on or look at.

2 - In the original text, it read as though it would be the incidents themsleves that needed to be inconsistent, whereas in fact it's inconsistency in the way the FA deals with them that you're bothered by. My wording may not be the best way of saying it, but I think it would be better to phrase things so as to make that clear.

3 - I've suggested a new third para. I know that a mission statement needs to be short and punchy. However, it seems to me that the key aspects of what you're doing involve providing a service to interested fans which will let them: (a) see what's going on; and (b) help them to take it forward if they want to. I think that's worth making explicit in the mission statement.

This is meant to be constructive, not critical, and I hope the tone of this message doesn't suggest otherwise. Nor will it offend if you don't run with my suggestions (that's all they are, for you to take or leave). I do admire you for having the drive to take this forward, and like what you've produced so far. I wish you well!

I think this one is good, only changes I can think are:

In the first para, say "concerned" rather than worried.

Also, I know ione of the driving forces behind this is ovr the goal celebration, and that we are using this as an example, but i think it maybe seems like we are being bitter about Ade by putting it in our mission statement. I definitely think it should be a signifant example of the inconsistancies, but in general, goal celebrations are not a hugely poinant matter for fans of other clubs, whereas violent conduct definitely is, so perhaps we should have violent conduct being the main focus, and other things (ie celebrations, soft penalty decisions, etc) being another thing we highlight as an inconsistancy with the FA?

My other though was that we should put somewhere in the statement that we are looking for an explanation from the FA to EXPLAIN or JUSTIFY the inconsistancies in a way that is devoid of bias? Perhaps make it look like we are wanting to help all the fans to understand the decisions so they don't think the FA is bias (even though they blatantly are).

Sorry this is a bit rambly-er than i was intending...

 

[Montgomery Burns]

OK folks, I'm delighted to be able to tell you that we've managed to fill another two of the many posts that will need sorting over the next few days.

Moonbeams has kindly agreed to take on the job of fan co-ordinator, that is, taking responsibility for contacting owners/mods of other fan sites, for both City and other Premier League clubs. This is potentially a mammoth task and she will need a lot of assistance with this but she will be able to set out to each volunteer exactly what is required - we have standard letters to send so it's just a case of making contact and following things through - none of this will happen before our website goes live though.

Many of you have already offered to help in general terms/ways so I have passed these names over to Moonbeams and she will be in touch shortly. She will still need about another half dozen or so to help so if you could spare a couple of hours we'd be very grateful in that the load will be spread more fairly - please contact Moonbeams direct if you are able to help us.

And Not My Fault has agreed to become our Media co-ordinator. This involves dealing with the press and all other forms of media, and Not My Fault will become our official spokesperson to the outside world. He is keen to spread our message far and wide and is prepared to travel to the ends of the earth to do this. Such dedication to the cause is of course admirable, especially when you consider he will have to do this at his own expense - sorry NMF!

As things stand then the current set up we have in terms of responsibilities are as follows:

Website (general): Sam the Drummer
Website programming: Ric/Damocles
Website design: 100% manc
Fans co-ordinator : Moonbeams
Media: Not My fault
FA: Montgomery Burns

This will change/be added to in the near future as other roles are filled. We will also need mods for the website and if you're interested in doing this please contact Sam.

When you have something specific to discuss that is related to the areas listed above could you please remember to contact the people named in the first instance.

My thanks go once again to you all for the help and support you have given; it is difficult to comprehend this has only be going for 3 days now and the progress has been remarkable. Just think where we might be at the end of next week!

I'll do some work next on that mission statement but I'm started to get distracted now thinking about tomorrow- Come on You Blues!

Monty

 

[bluemoon05]

Monty, I presumed you've heard about the fact Clattenburg has told the FA his booking of Ade on saturday was for time wasting. Just thought I'd give you some extra ammunition.

 

[not my fault!]

Monty, I presumed you've heard about the fact Clattenburg has told the FA his booking of Ade on saturday was for time wasting. Just thought I'd give you some extra ammunition.

Really? Thats a joke. He even pointed to the away fans when booking him! This is why the site is being set up for these type of events.

 

[Montgomery Burns]

Feel free to ignore any or all of the above - it's just the random musings of a tired bloke who'll be hitting the sack soon. Reasons for suggestions given below, the numbers equating to those in square brackets in the body of the text in the quoted paragraph immediately above:

1 - Lawyer's point, really, but that's what I am! Your original text binds yourself very specifically to certain incidents only. I suggest that you be slightly less definite just to give yourself extra "wiggle room". You never know when something else may come up that you might want to comemnt on or look at.

2 - In the original text, it read as though it would be the incidents themsleves that needed to be inconsistent, whereas in fact it's inconsistency in the way the FA deals with them that you're bothered by. My wording may not be the best way of saying it, but I think it would be better to phrase things so as to make that clear.

3 - I've suggested a new third para. I know that a mission statement needs to be short and punchy. However, it seems to me that the key aspects of what you're doing involve providing a service to interested fans which will let them: (a) see what's going on; and (b) help them to take it forward if they want to. I think that's worth making explicit in the mission statement.

This is meant to be constructive, not critical, and I hope the tone of this message doesn't suggest otherwise. Nor will it offend if you don't run with my suggestions (that's all they are, for you to take or leave). I do admire you for having the drive to take this forward, and like what you've produced so far. I wish you well!

I think this one is good, only changes I can think are:

In the first para, say "concerned" rather than worried.

Also, I know ione of the driving forces behind this is ovr the goal celebration, and that we are using this as an example, but i think it maybe seems like we are being bitter about Ade by putting it in our mission statement. I definitely think it should be a signifant example of the inconsistancies, but in general, goal celebrations are not a hugely poinant matter for fans of other clubs, whereas violent conduct definitely is, so perhaps we should have violent conduct being the main focus, and other things (ie celebrations, soft penalty decisions, etc) being another thing we highlight as an inconsistancy with the FA?

My other though was that we should put somewhere in the statement that we are looking for an explanation from the FA to EXPLAIN or JUSTIFY the inconsistancies in a way that is devoid of bias? Perhaps make it look like we are wanting to help all the fans to understand the decisions so they don't think the FA is bias (even though they blatantly are).

Sorry this is a bit rambly-er than i was intending...

Judleberry,

Thanks to you and everyone else who has helped on this. There were some excellent suggestions which really helped in coming up with a far superior statement than the first draft. After reflection this the version I intend us to use:

FA Watch represents football fans of all English Premier League clubs who are concerned that the Football Association (FA) as an organisation are either unable or unwilling to police the laws of the game in a fair, objective and consistent manner.

FA Watch is committed to highlighting specific instances where clubs and players do not appear to have been treated by the FA in a fair and objective manner. This will generally be in relation to disciplinary incidents, where referees and subsequently the FA’s own Regulatory Commission have dealt with incidents in a manner inconsistent with reasonable expectations.

FA Watch aims to provide fans, as a key stakeholder group, with the ability easily to monitor the FA's performance of its disciplinary function and to assist them in putting forward any observations and representations they may have concerning the conduct of the FA and its officials. (end)

Many thanks again.

Monty

 

[Montgomery Burns]

Monty, I presumed you've heard about the fact Clattenburg has told the FA his booking of Ade on saturday was for time wasting. Just thought I'd give you some extra ammunition.

Really? Thats a joke. He even pointed to the away fans when booking him! This is why the site is being set up for these type of events.

Hmmm! He's had to try and cover his back because Ade didn't leave the pitch!

But if you remember, neither of the letters to the FA questioned the decisions in relation to Adebayor - it's just that we will now use the standard set by Clattenburg (and Atkinson with SWP at Stoke last season as another example) as the yardstick by which we judge other incidents and the treatment thereof by the refs and the FA's Regulatory Commission.

So whilst Ade has to take it on the chin we expect others to as well for their misdemeanours.

 

[acquiesce]

Just been contacted by moonbeams. I'm on board so good luck to all! Can't wait to get this underway.

 

[not my fault!]

Just been contacted by moonbeams. I'm on board so good luck to all! Can't wait to get this underway.

Welcome aboard, although Moonbeams never contacs me ;0) lol.
Think we can really make a difference with this.