Tekel Towers » Today's Game

Affshore · 25/1/2017 4:22 am

PatReilly wrote:
Affshore wrote:
Fed guys you're wasting your time on here

heads in the sand dusc
Affshore, I sometimes wonder if you post just to get a reaction: think you do.

Nobody is happy, but as I've asked elsewhere, what do YOU suggest the fans do? Simple enough question, but nobody appears to have an answer.

Hows it a reaction saying the fed guys are wasting their time? Read the posts read what they say, they sat in meetings with directors and guys on here are basically dismissing it as shite, whats the fucking point???

As sad as it is I think the support should talk with their feet, only thing that will make him leave is lack of money then he'll have no option to leave.

Affshore · 25/1/2017 4:23 am

PatReilly wrote:
Affshore wrote:
Fed guys you're wasting your time on here

heads in the sand dusc
Affshore, I sometimes wonder if you post just to get a reaction: think you do.

Nobody is happy, but as I've asked elsewhere, what do YOU suggest the fans do? Simple enough question, but nobody appears to have an answer.

Hows it a reaction saying the fed guys are wasting their time? Read the posts read what they say, they sat in meetings with directors and guys on here are basically dismissing it as shite, whats the fucking point???

As sad as it is I think the support should talk with their feet, only thing that will make him leave is lack of money then he'll have no option to leave.

Sieb22 · 25/1/2017 8:01 am

Affshore wrote:
Sieb22 wrote:
Affshore wrote:
Fed guys you're wasting your time on here

heads in the sand dusc

Don't try and start a siege mentality, them v us, Fed guys v everyone else on here.

Its narrow minded and just wrong.

I don't have anything against the Fed, and I don't really know who is all in the Fed on here, barring a 3 or 4, or anyone else who is involved in any other associations. Nor do I care.

I take each person on face value and what they contribute to the forum, no matter if I agree with them or not.

If you don't like this forum, then I would suggest you can take a leaf out of Tek's book and start your own.
No starting fuck all, just saying the fed guys on here are clearky wasting their time, dont think theres anything wrong in that, never said i dont like this forum either so dont know why the fuck you would say that?

Just noticing that most of your posts are either retaliatory or pretty negative, and you were telling the Fed guys that your wasting their time on here, so I assumed you don't like this forum.

If that was the case, then life's too short to be mad all the time.

Apologies if I'm wrong, if so let's start over again as im sure we both can't be bothered with the back and forth adolescent stuff

Last edited by Sieb22 (25/1/2017 8:07 am)

Affshore · 25/1/2017 8:12 am

Sieb22 wrote:
Affshore wrote:
Sieb22 wrote:

Don't try and start a siege mentality, them v us, Fed guys v everyone else on here.

Its narrow minded and just wrong.

I don't have anything against the Fed, and I don't really know who is all in the Fed on here, barring a 3 or 4, or anyone else who is involved in any other associations. Nor do I care.

I take each person on face value and what they contribute to the forum, no matter if I agree with them or not.

If you don't like this forum, then I would suggest you can take a leaf out of Tek's book and start your own.
No starting fuck all, just saying the fed guys on here are clearly wasting their time, dont think theres anything wrong in that, never said i dont like this forum either so dont know why the fuck you would say that?

Just noticing that most of your posts are either retaliatory or pretty negative, and you were telling the Fed guys that your wasting their time on here, so I assumed you don't like this forum.

If that was the case, then life's too short to be mad all the time.

Apologies if I'm wrong, if so let's start over again as im sure we both can't be bothered with the back and forth adolescent stuff

Pretty negative, sorry but there aint alot to be happy about just now...yeah i told hem they are wasting their time whats the point in saying what they were told when its so easily dismissed as shite ? I'd give up!

Apology accepted

Last edited by Affshore (25/1/2017 8:14 am)

PatReilly · 25/1/2017 9:50 am

I've edited previous posts for the following

Affshore wrote:
PatReilly wrote:
Affshore wrote:
Fed guys you're wasting your time on here

heads in the sand dusc
Nobody is happy, but as I've asked elsewhere, what do YOU suggest the fans do? Simple enough question, but nobody appears to have an answer.
As sad as it is I think the support should talk with their feet, only thing that will make him leave is lack of money then he'll have no option to leave.

In 2012, the warning of non renewals of season tickets worked with many Scottish club chairmen/owners, including our own.

So it's possible that a collective notification that a number of fans will be committed to not buying for season 2017-18 unless answers are provided and assurances given would be effective.

But the problems are getting enough supporters who will back such a move, and wording such information to the club in a non inflammatory manner. Plus the effect on the team on the park, which, no matter what happens, will have to be rebuilt again next season.

Tangy · 25/1/2017 9:54 am

Alright sweary pete. Calm yerself down.

You gave an opinion, chum but talk with the authority of somebody giving out facts.

Ever tried meditation? Could help to work out some of those knots of anger....

PatReilly · 25/1/2017 9:56 am

Affshore wrote:
PatReilly wrote:
Affshore wrote:
Fed guys you're wasting your time on here

heads in the sand dusc
Affshore, I sometimes wonder if you post just to get a reaction: think you do.
Hows it a reaction saying the fed guys are wasting their time? Read the posts read what they say, they sat in meetings with directors and guys on here are basically dismissing it as shite, whats the fucking point???

I mean, you are trying to get a reaction, Affshore. Not that you are reacting.

Are you meaning the Fed meeting with Spence and Stewart, and the admin/straight to liquidation stuff?

I'm suggesting that this was put to the Fed in order that they encourage folk to buy season tickets, rather than Spence/Stewart revealing anything about the financial state of the club. It would be illegal, as far as I know, to indicate a going concern was likely to take such steps.

Trap_6 · 25/1/2017 11:04 am

PatReilly wrote:
Affshore wrote:
PatReilly wrote:
Affshore, I sometimes wonder if you post just to get a reaction: think you do.
Hows it a reaction saying the fed guys are wasting their time? Read the posts read what they say, they sat in meetings with directors and guys on here are basically dismissing it as shite, whats the fucking point???

I mean, you are trying to get a reaction, Affshore. Not that you are reacting.

Are you meaning the Fed meeting with Spence and Stewart, and the admin/straight to liquidation stuff?

I'm suggesting that this was put to the Fed in order that they encourage folk to buy season tickets, rather than Spence/Stewart revealing anything about the financial state of the club. It would be illegal, as far as I know, to indicate a going concern was likely to take such steps.

Pat, I'm on the Fed committee as of last summer. Things were said at meetings at that time. And I thought just that. This is emotional blackmail/scaremongering/whatever you want to call it, in order to get folk to buy season tickets. However, it's been repeated several times since.

As far as I can read it, what is being said is not that the club would bypass admin and go straight to liquidation. But that people associated with the club have held informal discussions with Bryan Jackson over the new rules surrounding administration. He believes it's a virtual certainty that the next club or clubs who fall into administration will not survive the process.

The other warning that's gone alongside that is that, unless further investment is secured, United will have zero cash to fulfil its obligations before the season is out. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't think that's been said since Robertson triggered the appearance clause with Hull so it may be that our bacon has been temporarily saved.

Scaremongering? Who knows. But surely no-one can blame anyone at the Fed for taking these warnings very seriously. We don't proclaim to have the answers, we certainly don't have the means to remove him from the club. But, with the information we have been given, we won't stop banging on about this.

Last edited by Trap_6 (25/1/2017 11:05 am)

25/1/2017 11:16 am

I don't think anyone is suggesting that it's brushed under the carpet. The problem is the manner of communication from the Fed (not excusing the comms from the club)

Like Tangy has said, the approach needs to be more diplomatic and dare I say it, sympathetic.

Trap_6 · 25/1/2017 11:48 am

Sorry, we're being told by representatives of the club that liquidation is a very real prospect. But the problem is the Fed's manner of communication?

Is that really the problem here?

Tangerine_Ultra · 25/1/2017 11:51 am

Trap_6 wrote:
Sorry, we're being told by representatives of the club that liquidation is a very real prospect. But the problem is the Fed's manner of communication?

Is that really the problem here?

Spot on mate.

25/1/2017 11:54 am

Well, given the next proposed meeting was cancelled, I'd say yes

Tangy · 25/1/2017 12:00 pm

Put aside the blame game just for 2 minutes.

Doesn't matter if ST is a wee ginger pr!ck or has lashes of flowing auburn hair. Doesn't matter if he has single handedly ruined the club or is leading us to a new dawn along a v bumpy path.

What's matters (according to some of the fed members on here - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that communication between the fed and the board are somewhere between zero and none.

So how do you get communication from somebody/ an organisation which is reluctant. Do you verbally batter them and offer them loaded questions with the possibility of follow up battering or do you go in with a more measured approach. Try to gain their trust and show you are both working to the same ends?

As long as the lynch mob are baying for blood, then you are getting NOTHING from the board. All you are then left with is a wierd sense of entitlement and a massive amount of resentment.

What's the worst that can happen?

Trap_6 · 25/1/2017 12:06 pm

Cool bud. You crack on with your real problems - whether or not everyone is taking a sufficiently sympathetic tone with the chairman.

And we'll crack on with ours.

Trap_6 · 25/1/2017 12:12 pm

Tangy wrote:
Put aside the blame game just for 2 minutes.

Doesn't matter if ST is a wee ginger pr!ck or has lashes of flowing auburn hair. Doesn't matter if he has single handedly ruined the club or is leading us to a new dawn along a v bumpy path.

What's matters (according to some of the fed members on here - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that communication between the fed and the board are somewhere between zero and none.

So how do you get communication from somebody/ an organisation which is reluctant. Do you verbally batter them and offer them loaded questions with the possibility of follow up battering or do you go in with a more measured approach. Try to gain their trust and show you are both working to the same ends?

As long as the lynch mob are baying for blood, then you are getting NOTHING from the board. All you are then left with is a wierd sense of entitlement and a massive amount of resentment.

What's the worst that can happen?

It's a fair point. But the club themselves proposed the format of the meeting, namely that they would answer a set of pre-submitted questions from our members.

We can't control what questions are submitted. Nor can we rewrite, censor or edit them. We've no right to do that, even if we wanted to.

If it came as any surprise to the chairman that a large percentage of the questions came across as angry, then he's more detached from reality than I thought.

25/1/2017 12:22 pm

Trap_6 wrote:
Cool bud. You crack on with your real problems - whether or not everyone is taking a sufficiently sympathetic tone with the chairman.

And we'll crack on with ours.

So how do you expect to get the answers to your questions if you won't change your approach?

It's clearly not working and you can't control what ST does. The only thing in the Fed's control is how they communicate.

lifesanocean · 25/1/2017 12:25 pm

I know that the club Associate Director said this. However, no fucking way should he be saying this, regardless of whether it is true or not. Unprofessional doesn't even cover it, it is also treating the fans who obviously will take this to heart with utter contempt. If things are that bad the club should be making a statement asking fans to get the buckets out. Not getting a club lackey to throw a hand grenade in and then step back and pretend it never happened, thereby leaving other fans to question the sincerity of the people who heard it and dividing the fans.

The same person said at the Arabtrust AGM that there was absolutely NO budget for players this season and we'd be going with a team of youths and yet we've signed about 11 players including one we paid a significant amount of money for.

You either say it through official channels to everyone, or you keep your puss shut and say fuck all. There are more leaks in Tannadice than the Titanic and more misinformation than a James Bond movie.

Last edited by lifesanocean (25/1/2017 12:27 pm)

TheShed · 25/1/2017 12:43 pm

lifesanocean wrote:
I know that the club Associate Director said this. However, no fucking way should he be saying this, regardless of whether it is true or not. Unprofessional doesn't even cover it, it is also treating the fans who obviously will take this to heart with utter contempt. If things are that bad the club should be making a statement asking fans to get the buckets out. Not getting a club lackey to throw a hand grenade in and then step back and pretend it never happened, thereby leaving other fans to question the sincerity of the people who heard it and dividing the fans.

The same person said at the Arabtrust AGM that there was absolutely NO budget for players this season and we'd be going with a team of youths and yet we've signed about 11 players including one we paid a significant amount of money for.

You either say it through official channels to everyone, or you keep your puss shut and say fuck all. There are more leaks in Tannadice than the Titanic and more misinformation than a James Bond movie.

The most accurate thing I've read in a while.

Tangy · 25/1/2017 12:48 pm

Trap_6 wrote:
Cool bud. You crack on with your real problems - whether or not everyone is taking a sufficiently sympathetic tone with the chairman.

And we'll crack on with ours.

Ha. Great attempt at patronising... and you wonder why the board won't come near you?

What's next? Send the chairman abuse via text and email? Naw - thats already been done, eh

blackandtangerine · 25/1/2017 12:51 pm

Goodie Conway 2 wrote:
Trap_6 wrote:
Cool bud. You crack on with your real problems - whether or not everyone is taking a sufficiently sympathetic tone with the chairman.

And we'll crack on with ours.
So how do you expect to get the answers to your questions if you won't change your approach?

It's clearly not working and you can't control what ST does. The only thing in the Fed's control is how they communicate.

I'm quite happy now just to wait and see how last seasons accounts come out. I think we'll get all the answers we need there.

blackandtangerine · 25/1/2017 12:53 pm

Tangy wrote:
Trap_6 wrote:
Cool bud. You crack on with your real problems - whether or not everyone is taking a sufficiently sympathetic tone with the chairman.

And we'll crack on with ours.
Ha. Great attempt at patronising... and you wonder why the board won't come near you?

What's next? Send the chairman abuse via text and email? Naw - thats already been done, eh

Abuse haha. You don't know the full story of that. Only what he fed to the sun.

Tangy · 25/1/2017 1:20 pm

Trap_6 wrote:
Tangy wrote:
Put aside the blame game just for 2 minutes.

Doesn't matter if ST is a wee ginger pr!ck or has lashes of flowing auburn hair. Doesn't matter if he has single handedly ruined the club or is leading us to a new dawn along a v bumpy path.

What's matters (according to some of the fed members on here - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is that communication between the fed and the board are somewhere between zero and none.

So how do you get communication from somebody/ an organisation which is reluctant. Do you verbally batter them and offer them loaded questions with the possibility of follow up battering or do you go in with a more measured approach. Try to gain their trust and show you are both working to the same ends?

As long as the lynch mob are baying for blood, then you are getting NOTHING from the board. All you are then left with is a wierd sense of entitlement and a massive amount of resentment.

What's the worst that can happen?

It's a fair point. But the club themselves proposed the format of the meeting, namely that they would answer a set of pre-submitted questions from our members.

We can't control what questions are submitted. Nor can we rewrite, censor or edit them. We've no right to do that, even if we wanted to.

If it came as any surprise to the chairman that a large percentage of the questions came across as angry, then he's more detached from reality than I thought.

I take your point to an extent here.... I believe you are there to represent the man on the street - your average fan - but I do think you carry a burden of channeling their feelings correctly.

You maybe have me down as a ST sympathiser - im really not - i want answers the same as you guys do - but feel the approach is further alienating the chairman, rather than looking for resolution.

There's not a lot else I can add to this thread that I've not said before so will leave it for just now.

Good luck in your pursuit of answers - I'll wait with baited breath

Foo Kin Twat · 25/1/2017 5:29 pm

Canadian Arab wrote:
Tangy wrote:
I take your point to an extent here.... I believe you are there to represent the man on the street - your average fan - but I do think you carry a burden of channeling their feelings correctly.

You maybe have me down as a ST sympathiser - im really not - i want answers the same as you guys do - but feel the approach is further alienating the chairman, rather than looking for resolution.

There's not a lot else I can add to this thread that I've not said before so will leave it for just now.

Good luck in your pursuit of answers - I'll wait with baited breath
This is it, for me.

I don't happen to agree that the Fed have "no right" to re-word people's questions. Of course they do. Re-word them in such a way that they are not confrontational or accusatory. The end goal is to get the information from the club that the questioner is asking for. If re-wording a question - maybe quite significantly - achieves that then mission accomplished.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WzdyVmw6Bw0

Trap_6 · 25/1/2017 6:01 pm

To be clear, the meeting wasn't cancelled because of the content or tone of the questions. They had been sent and acknowledged by the club some weeks before.

It was cancelled when the committee emailed a couple of questions seeking clarity on the exact nature of the meeting.

That was a bridge too far it seems.

Affshore · 26/1/2017 12:54 am

Tangy wrote:
Alright sweary pete. Calm yerself down.

You gave an opinion, chum but talk with the authority of somebody giving out facts.

Ever tried meditation? Could help to work out some of those knots of anger....

'talk with the authority of someone giving out facts' ? saying that guys are wasting their time, aye fucking sure...