Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
Were the motions not sent out in advance to members via e-newsletters or general emails / on the FSA website?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
FSA AGM - reportedly a fans' motion supportive of APT rules proposed
- Thread starter Luddite_Blue
- Start date
Were the motions not sent out in advance to members via e-newsletters or general emails / on the FSA website?
HelloCity
Well-Known Member
We've very publically called out Byrne as evidenced on this page mate. It's more complex than saying we should rethink our involvement with them. The people we deal with at SOS are fine but there are clearly others - Byrne in particular - who don't get that when fan groups work together on issues, they should put club rivalries to one side. Some of the SOS lot had a meeting with LFC about ticket prices towards the end of last season as they were emboldened by 1894's protest banner regarding our own ST price increases. The bloke from LFC that they met up with said "Why are you bothering to protest against us about ticket prices - why don't you do some banners aimed at MCFC and the 115 charges instead?". The SOS lads present politely told him to get fucked, that that is a club issue, and that they have a decent relationship with 1894 when campaigning on various issues that affect the fans. The wanker at LFC couldn't comprehend that fan groups from rival clubs actually work together on things.
They really are a special bunch.
Absolute rats.
Stoned Rose
Well-Known Member
He won't reply as you're not one of his constituents, he's just a free loading Scouse wanker, woulda't piss on him if he was on fire.
Edit, just seen you're not getting a reply, stock answer. Now, if you want something raising with Angela Rayner I'm in a position to do that, I've already sent her a complaint about selling a vehicle on the 1st June with the DVLA taking a months tax off me and charging the new owner for the month as well, told them they were "fucking charlatans of the highest order". Not expecting a positive response.
Should’ve cc’d Tim Burgess in.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,758
The OSC were not represented at the meeting, thanks.The OSC was represented at every FSF / FSA conference I ever went too (usually Alan Galley, but I haven't attended one in 13 years!)
Maybe @Tim of the Oak could find out if the OSC was represented?
Absolutely laughing at the statement, presumably written by the Spirit of Shankly, bemoaning that the spending gap between the top and the bottom has increased and could increase further.
Did the SOS think this was an issue when Liverpool were buying all the top players and winning 3 titles on the bounce throughout their dominant period of the 70's / 80's? Did MUST have an issue when Wooney, Wio and Veron were being bought, smashing British transfer records along the way and the rags were winning 3 titles (twice) on the bounce during their period of dominance in the 90's / 00's?
Of course, both sets of groups will bring up the tired nonsense about ''spending was done with clean / earnt / organic money'' rather than outwardly invested money (or the usual dirty oil money) without understanding their gerrymandering of both the Premier League and the Champions League meant that without outside investment, no club could ever break into the cartel.
What amazes me is groups like the West Ham and Wolves supporter's clubs going along and backing this motion, whilst failing to understand how the rags and Liverpool (and Arsenal too) were feasting at the top table to the detriment of their own clubs, who were happy to be thrown scraps every now and then and were grateful for what they received.
18:40
@TheOSC8
The OSC agree 100% with @WeAre1894 on this. We were also not in attendance and would also have abstained had we been there. Worse still was that @WeAreTheFSA had absolutely no dialogue with us prior to this motion. We will look to discuss this process with the new FSA Chair asap.
14:38 • 25/07/2024 from Earth • 2,695 Views
4 Reposts 15 Likes
Centurions
Well-Known Member
Stinks to high heaven that.
Just for accuracy. Was the FSA AGM widely publicised ?
Were the 'topics to be discussed' on the FSA website prior to the AGM
Did 1894/OSC get an invite.
If I've read the previous posts correctly, neither 1894 or the OSC knew of the AGM nor the topics to be voted on until the FSA put them on a tweet. If I'm correct that is just a shitty stich up by mard arsed fans of history clubs.
Were the 'topics to be discussed' on the FSA website prior to the AGM
Did 1894/OSC get an invite.
If I've read the previous posts correctly, neither 1894 or the OSC knew of the AGM nor the topics to be voted on until the FSA put them on a tweet. If I'm correct that is just a shitty stich up by mard arsed fans of history clubs.
bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
Look likes the FSA is starting its own fans' cartel like the PL one for the redshirts.Stinks to high heaven that.
M18CTID
Well-Known Member
Just to clarify that 1894 - and, I’m guessing, the OSC - knew about the AGM (I’d actually describe it more as an annual conference rather than an AGM). 1894 normally have someone in attendance - as do the OSC - but our issue this year is that we couldn’t get anyone down there in person. We did have a couple of guys following the motion remotely about co-ordinated action on ticket prices which 1894 have been heavily involved in. Whether the motion about APTs was properly communicated in advance, I’m not sure as I’ve been out of the loop a bit over the past couple of months due to family issues. The impression I get is that it’s kind of been shoved through the back door and as you can see, both 1894 and the OSC aren’t happy about that.Just for accuracy. Was the FSA AGM widely publicised ?
Were the 'topics to be discussed' on the FSA website prior to the AGM
Did 1894/OSC get an invite.
If I've read the previous posts correctly, neither 1894 or the OSC knew of the AGM nor the topics to be voted on until the FSA put them on a tweet. If I'm correct that is just a shitty stich up by mard arsed fans of history clubs.
I still think this has got Ian Byrne’s fingerprints all over it and it’s been worded in a way to try and sucker other fan groups in to vote in favour of the motion.
Can I just say thanks to @Luddite_Blue for posting the details on here.
Just to clarify that 1894 - and, I’m guessing, the OSC - knew about the AGM (I’d actually describe it more as an annual conference rather than an AGM). 1894 normally have someone in attendance - as do the OSC - but our issue this year is that we couldn’t get anyone down there in person. We did have a couple of guys following the motion remotely about co-ordinated action on ticket prices which 1894 have been heavily involved in. Whether the motion about APTs was properly communicated in advance, I’m not sure as I’ve been out of the loop a bit over the past couple of months due to family issues. The impression I get is that it’s kind of been shoved through the back door and as you can see, both 1894 and the OSC aren’t happy about that.
I still think this has got Ian Byrne’s fingerprints all over it and it’s been worded in a way to try and sucker other fan groups in to vote in favour of the motion.
Can I just say thanks to @Luddite_Blue for posting the details on here.
A Liverpool MP who was suspended by the Labour Party after voting against the government over a child poverty policy has said he was 'devastated' to have the party whip removed - but felt he had to vote with his conscience.
bluemanchester
Well-Known Member
Always interesting to hear Spirit of Shanklys views.
Could you add subtitles please. Its hard enough one on one when they attempt to speak English, having to try when they sing with a guitar makes it impossible, for me anyway;-)