|
Post by Pugsley on Oct 1, 2015 9:02:15 GMT
Ange you would like to think this forum could be used for decent debate but it has not been so for many awhile.Thanks for your efforts,but remember,just because the free away travel is favoured by many but not by Pugsley,it should really be scrapped. So ends many threads on this board by a few simply shouting louder than others. Well you've really read and understood what I was saying haven't you? Where have I said I'm not in favour? All I have done is stated that it isn't FAIR for all supporters WHICH IS A STONE COLD FACT and asked the question about the PL money and why the club can't subsidise tickets. After pushing the CHAIR of the Supporters Council I got an answer, along with a load of defensive waffle. I'm sorry but if you can't stand a few questions then you shouldn't have put yourselves up for the job. For the record I would never put myself up for this type of thing, especially with this regime running Stoke City. Getting anything done is virtually impossible - they are bone idle. I'm convinced Scholes just sees it as a ticking boxes exercise and pays it lip service.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 1, 2015 10:29:36 GMT
I don't count apparently. Pretty appalling comments from Ange. Being fair though Bayern if you posted constructive criticism or well thought out ideas rather than just saying it's shit, pointless and resign you might have an argument but I'm afraid on this subject you don't. It was constructive, it was utterly stupid thing to say and they should have a pre-meeting to nip things like that in the bud. Having more seniors playing in the U-21's to draw a crowd just defies the point of the development squad and shows how little these people actually know.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 1, 2015 10:31:12 GMT
To clarify Bayern, my comment was in relation to yours referring to the direct e mail procedure, at no time have I mentioned that anyone' doesn't count, nor do I think that. The smiley face and comment was an attempt to inject a little light relief into a "debate" in which you feel it is fair to label Council members idiots. No it wasn't Ange. And it was fair as it was a real idiotic thing to say and shows the understanding some of your members have.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 1, 2015 10:32:56 GMT
Being fair though Bayern if you posted constructive criticism or well thought out ideas rather than just saying it's shit, pointless and resign you might have an argument but I'm afraid on this subject you don't. And in addition to this, I would imagine its a tough enough job lobbying the powers that be at the club to change things. The way I see it is that crticism, for the sake of it, just doesn't get anybody anywhere A genuine question for bayern - did you put yourself forward to be considered for the Supporters Council or whatever it is? And don't give me the comeback of "I wouldn't want to, its shit etc etc" Why would I? The council do no good and it serves no purpose so what's the point? If you can't make a real difference and they don't, why bother? It's a closed shop where the club do what they want anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 1, 2015 11:04:21 GMT
And in addition to this, I would imagine its a tough enough job lobbying the powers that be at the club to change things. The way I see it is that crticism, for the sake of it, just doesn't get anybody anywhere A genuine question for bayern - did you put yourself forward to be considered for the Supporters Council or whatever it is? And don't give me the comeback of "I wouldn't want to, its shit etc etc" Why would I? The council do no good and it serves no purpose so what's the point? If you can't make a real difference and they don't, why bother? It's a closed shop where the club do what they want anyway. And getting time off from the Oatcake to attend meetngs can be difficult.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 11:09:44 GMT
Being fair though Bayern if you posted constructive criticism or well thought out ideas rather than just saying it's shit, pointless and resign you might have an argument but I'm afraid on this subject you don't. It was constructive, it was utterly stupid thing to say and they should have a pre-meeting to nip things like that in the bud. Having more seniors playing in the U-21's to draw a crowd just defies the point of the development squad and shows how little these people actually know. Sorry mate I must have missed something because I can't see anywhere on this thread any ideas or constructive points from a couple of members, all I can see is people being personal about another fan who uses her time and effort to try and make things better for all of us. It's not a paid position, none of the council work for the club and yes the club have the final say on how things are. That is the prerogative of the owner and his CEO because he owns the club lock stock and barrel. If it's pointless and teeth less why do you care and why are you and one or two others so critical of them ? at least they are putting themselves out there and trying which is a lot more than can be said for any of us. Can they get things done maybe not is it still worth trying yes it is 100% it's the old cliché don't moan if your not prepared to stand. You want change get elected and fight on the inside it's easy to sit on the outside and moan.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Oct 1, 2015 12:14:48 GMT
Yes campaign is definitely the wrong word! So you would prefer no free travel at all because it doesn't benefit everyone? Your comment said the supporters too, not all the supporters. We will just have to disagree on this point . Why can't you answer the point about the PL? Just what else were they considering with the money? Why didn't you push for subsidised tickets across the board? Something that would benefit EVERY SINGLE AWAY FAN. When I was on the Supporters Council I did argue for the fund to be used on ticket prices because that is the only thing which benefits all fans, and that is still my view. There were certainly some SC members who agreed with me ( can't remember now exactly how many) but the Club had a clear view that they wanted to spend it on the free coach travel. That said, I don't want to be too critical of the club on this, because I think that compared with many other clubs Stoke City have a fairly good record on prices, certainly on season ticket prices, and I know that within PL meetings Stoke city have been a leader on pushing for action to help away fans in particular. Indeed, I think it's probably true to say that the £0.25m commitment from all clubs to help away fans ( the fund which is used to pay for the free travel) would not have existed at all without this action from Stoke.
|
|
openg
Youth Player
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Posts: 264
|
Post by openg on Oct 1, 2015 12:51:14 GMT
I wonder what the "reciprocal" arrangements are? And also, as there are bound to be those here who follow SCFC and Newcastle under Lyme FC, referring to "Newcastle" isn't very helpful a reference point. Is this "reciprocal" local or not?
On a boring note, £5.79 + VAT is quite good value for money for the shipping they state they offer - especially as these will be mainly to residential addresses.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Oct 1, 2015 13:26:02 GMT
I wonder what the "reciprocal" arrangements are? And also, as there are bound to be those here who follow SCFC and Newcastle under Lyme FC, referring to "Newcastle" isn't very helpful a reference point. Is this "reciprocal" local or not? I'm sorry ( and surprised) if it was unclear. It was a reference to the reciprocal arrangement between Stoke City FC and Newcastle United FC which was announced and promoted by Stoke City FC last week. Link below www.stokecityfc.com/news/article/club-strike-reciprocal-deal-with-newcastle-2704233.aspx
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Oct 1, 2015 14:29:36 GMT
Why can't you answer the point about the PL? Just what else were they considering with the money? Why didn't you push for subsidised tickets across the board? Something that would benefit EVERY SINGLE AWAY FAN. When I was on the Supporters Council I did argue for the fund to be used on ticket prices because that is the only thing which benefits all fans, and that is still my view. There were certainly some SC members who agreed with me ( can't remember now exactly how many) but the Club had a clear view that they wanted to spend it on the free coach travel. That said, I don't want to be too critical of the club on this, because I think that compared with many other clubs Stoke City have a fairly good record on prices, certainly on season ticket prices, and I know that within PL meetings Stoke city have been a leader on pushing for action to help away fans in particular. Indeed, I think it's probably true to say that the £0.25m commitment from all clubs to help away fans ( the fund which is used to pay for the free travel) would not have existed at all without this action from Stoke. Thank you Malcolm.
|
|
openg
Youth Player
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Posts: 264
|
Post by openg on Oct 1, 2015 14:34:23 GMT
I wonder what the "reciprocal" arrangements are? And also, as there are bound to be those here who follow SCFC and Newcastle under Lyme FC, referring to "Newcastle" isn't very helpful a reference point. Is this "reciprocal" local or not? I'm sorry ( and surprised) if it was unclear. It was a reference to the reciprocal arrangement between Stoke City FC and Newcastle United FC which was announced and promoted by Stoke City FC last week. Link below www.stokecityfc.com/news/article/club-strike-reciprocal-deal-with-newcastle-2704233.aspxSorry, been off the grid for a fortnight.
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 1, 2015 14:36:19 GMT
Sorry, been off the grid for a fortnight. Spoon whittling?
|
|
openg
Youth Player
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Posts: 264
|
Post by openg on Oct 1, 2015 14:47:17 GMT
Sorry, been off the grid for a fortnight. Spoon whittling? Hah! No holidays, increasing my stomach girth.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 1, 2015 14:48:14 GMT
People's lack of faith in the Supporters Council is not so much aimed at them personally (although they seem very cosy, cosy with the club for genuine independence) it stems from the bitter experience of dealing with the autocratic clown in charge. He will not be cajoled or persuaded from his course by any input from fans groups, democratically elected or otherwise. You can tell from the level of sneering from the club in the latest minutes.
Coates himself has never been an advocate of fan influence (the thought of board representation physically making him vomit) and his attack chimpanzee on the Council is just the same.
It's a complete exercise in futility
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 15:08:24 GMT
The only thing that I'd like bought up, is the astronomical prices at the food/drink stalls throughout the concourse. Not sure if it's Stoke pricing or contractors pricing, but I'm considering taking a second mortgage so I can have a coffee, and the young lads can have a burger and a Coke at half time. It grates me that just because we're there, and there's no other option, they charge whatever they like. Call me a tight bar stweward, but I pay for 4 season tickets every year, travel too and from the ground every home match, program and an Oatcake, then I have to trade one of my kidneys for a bit of food and drink. Doubt it can be changed as it's the norm throughout the entire country for any live event. Piddling in the wind. Piddling in the wind indeed when you consider this is the club that once offered a Burger and Chips Deal that was equal in price to the two items bought separately
|
|
|
Post by slpmarc on Oct 1, 2015 15:08:20 GMT
People's lack of faith in the Supporters Council is not so much aimed at them personally (although they seem very cosy, cosy with the club for genuine independence) it stems from the bitter experience of dealing with the autocratic clown in charge. He will not be cajoled or persuaded from his course by any input from fans groups, democratically elected or otherwise. You can tell from the level of sneering from the club in the latest minutes. Coates himself has never been an advocate of fan influence (the thought of board representation physically making him vomit) and his attack chimpanzee on the Council is just the same. It's a complete exercise in futility I get the impression you won't be sending Mr Scholes a Christmas card then
|
|
|
Post by ange1 on Oct 1, 2015 16:06:02 GMT
Pugsley, I have nothing to be defensive about. I answer any questions that I can and what might be waffle to you may be a perfectly reasonable answer to someone else.
I agree with Malcolm's comments namely " I think it's probably true to say that the £0.25m commitment from all clubs to help away fans ( the fund which is used to pay for the free travel) would not have existed"
I would love the costs of all matches to be less and will continue to see what we can achieve
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 1, 2015 16:10:51 GMT
People's lack of faith in the Supporters Council is not so much aimed at them personally (although they seem very cosy, cosy with the club for genuine independence) it stems from the bitter experience of dealing with the autocratic clown in charge. He will not be cajoled or persuaded from his course by any input from fans groups, democratically elected or otherwise. You can tell from the level of sneering from the club in the latest minutes. Coates himself has never been an advocate of fan influence (the thought of board representation physically making him vomit) and his attack chimpanzee on the Council is just the same. It's a complete exercise in futility I get the impression you won't be sending Mr Scholes a Christmas card then Not necessarily.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Oct 1, 2015 16:14:45 GMT
Looking through the minutes I have a few other questions to ask our colleagues who sit on the Council about the 3 items I asked the Council to consider with the club
1. The club has committed itself to paying the "new" living wage by 2016. Someone higher up the thread asked which "living wage" which is a pertinent question. The use of the word "new" suggest that it may be the Government's already announced requirement ? What is actually required is a commitment to become an accredited living wage employer as some other clubs have done, which is not the same as the Govts proposal, and also applies to sub-contractors after existing contracts have expired. It would be helpful to know exactly what the club have committed themselves to.
2. Club support for the proposal that the unused £24m Norwich parachute payment money, which clubs couldn't have budgeted for, will be used to lower ticket prices rather than just returned to the clubs with no strings attached ( about £1.2m per club). This does not appear in the minutes
3. The astonishingly absurd price of £300 + VAT for a ticket to the end of season awards evening which seems designed to ensure that it's only attended by corporates, and not 'ordinary' fans. Again this does not appear in the minutes.
One other comment on the standing issues at away games. It is good that the club is trying to encourage 'sitters at the front, standers at the back' for obvious reasons, which is something I advocated when i was on the SC, and that this now appears as on-line advice. Well done to the club for that. That said, the focus of the discussion as reported in the minutes appears to be around trying to make people sit down, which is not going to work, and hasn't worked, rather than supporting the campaign for a change in legislation to allow clubs to have separate properly designed standing areas for those who want to, and will, stand. What is the SC and the club's position on publicly supporting a change in the law ?
|
|
|
Post by scfcsc on Oct 1, 2015 16:16:41 GMT
Many thanks for the suggestions and comments on this thread. We will discuss all of your observations with the club. If you wish to discuss any matter away from this forum the e mail address is chair@scfcsc.co.uk
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 1, 2015 16:23:52 GMT
2. Club support for the proposal that the unused £24m Norwich parachute payment money, which clubs couldn't have budgeted for, will be used to lower ticket prices rather than just returned to the clubs with no strings attached ( about £1.2m per club). This does not appear in the minutes I'd prefer the greed league to repeal their heinous change to the rules and let the Championship clubs and ideally the whole 72 league clubs keep the money in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by scfcsc on Oct 1, 2015 16:28:03 GMT
Malcom the Premier League agreed that all clubs meet the living wage and the club were awaiting further details.
Items 2 and 3 will be addressed at the next meeting. (Time constraints came into play of which you are aware) On item 3 however, we firmly agree that the price is excessive but the event is still a sell out which doesn't help us as a Council or fans.
Re supporting a law change: We will ask the club's position at the next meeting and clearly at this time without speaking to other members we cannot state what the general consensus of Council members is.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 1, 2015 17:18:47 GMT
It was constructive, it was utterly stupid thing to say and they should have a pre-meeting to nip things like that in the bud. Having more seniors playing in the U-21's to draw a crowd just defies the point of the development squad and shows how little these people actually know. Sorry mate I must have missed something because I can't see anywhere on this thread any ideas or constructive points from a couple of members, all I can see is people being personal about another fan who uses her time and effort to try and make things better for all of us. It's not a paid position, none of the council work for the club and yes the club have the final say on how things are. That is the prerogative of the owner and his CEO because he owns the club lock stock and barrel. If it's pointless and teeth less why do you care and why are you and one or two others so critical of them ? at least they are putting themselves out there and trying which is a lot more than can be said for any of us. Can they get things done maybe not is it still worth trying yes it is 100% it's the old cliché don't moan if your not prepared to stand. You want change get elected and fight on the inside it's easy to sit on the outside and moan. If they're suggesting completely stupid things (which she is) they need to be bought to task. I care because I don't want Scholes getting an easy ride and that's exactly what he gets and I bet he laughs his tits off when they're coming with suggestions like that where they just look clueless. And it's not a cliche, it's a get out of jail free card that they peddle far too often as an excuse for their incompetence.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 1, 2015 17:23:58 GMT
Here's a suggestion or two about U-21's games.
Adding to what Mark Mills suggested, do that but advertise it as a family day. They do it in Spain. Have a series of games throughout the day so in this instance you could have the U-21's 11-1, first team 3-5 and in between have events around the ground aimed at kids. Tenner for adults, kids for a quid.
Another would have been contest having games in Macclesfield something which doesn't seem to have cropped up (God only knows why).
And then having them at the Brit on a Sunday or midweek at 7 but with tickets actively given away at schools.
3 ideas all without the stupidity of trying to devalue the U-21 side.
|
|
|
Post by scfcsc on Oct 1, 2015 17:36:38 GMT
Thanks for your suggestions Bayern, we will see what the club says at the next meeting. Re Macclesfield, the matter was raised, the answer most suitable available venue
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 1, 2015 17:39:17 GMT
Thanks for your suggestions Bayern, we will see what the club says at the next meeting. Re Macclesfield, the matter was raised, the answer most suitable available venue I thought that was Nantwich? I hope you said that to see Scholes' face.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Oct 1, 2015 20:44:59 GMT
Malcom the Premier League agreed that all clubs meet the living wage and the club were awaiting further details. Items 2 and 3 will be addressed at the next meeting. (Time constraints came into play of which you are aware) On item 3 however, we firmly agree that the price is excessive but the event is still a sell out which doesn't help us as a Council or fans. Re supporting a law change: We will ask the club's position at the next meeting and clearly at this time without speaking to other members we cannot state what the general consensus of Council members is. Thanks, Ange. On 1 - the same question arises but if the PL have not agreed to go for full accreditation ( I will check from the FSF end, but it would be a most pleasant surprise if they have) there is nothing to stop Stoke doing that, as some other clubs have. 2 - the ship has probably sailed on the Norwich money but the point of policy remains for if and when this situation arises again 3 - as I'm sure you agree, the fact that it is a sell-out does not justify the present charge. It should be an event to which non-corporate fans should be able to afford to go. As a matter of interest could you ask how many individual purchases there were ? It would be very disappointing, to put it mildly, if the SC did not support a change in the law on all-seater. It is bizarre that football clubs vigorously oppose government intervention or the threat of it in the way the game is run but then support this law. Of course any new standing areas would have to comply with Green Guide safety standards to be licensed so its not a safety issue.
|
|
|
Post by johnsmithsupper on Oct 1, 2015 21:58:36 GMT
I'd be surprised if the majority of football supporters would want to return to any form of standing tbh.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Oct 1, 2015 22:17:59 GMT
I'd be surprised if the majority of football supporters would want to return to any form of standing tbh. Every survey of supporters which has been conducted on this topic has shown a majority in favour of standing areas, in most cases a very large majority. Of course, that doesn't mean that the majority of supporters would themselves choose to stand. It's quite logical for someone who wants to sit to vote for some standing areas both because they recognise that not everyone wants to sit, and also because they don't want their own view blocked by someone standing in a seated area, which was the context in which the Supporters council was discussing the issue. It's about choice, within of course the safety regulations.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Oct 1, 2015 22:40:42 GMT
As an aside, are the U-21s also having an international break? Bizarre.
|
|