Kmcalpin Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Most of the fans aren't interested.... A dangerous trap to fall into Lip but one into which we've all fallen into at some time. We have all shades of opinion and none in our support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I just wanna say, This standing issue is a fucking joke! if i'm in the third back row standing told to sit, that's not gonna fucking happen, you have to sit, it's the fucking rules, i don't mind standing, i would prolly prefer it, but "the back two rows" is only gonna cos more problems than it solves, a lot of fucking shite, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 A dangerous trap to fall into Lip but one into which we've all fallen into at some time. We have all shades of opinion and none in our support. True, but I would say it's a safe bet that most fans would want to know what was happening without all the officialdom and red tape. What i'm suggesting is dispensing with the rigmarole and advising the fans promptly and succinctly. Frazzle has said that, while at the Wellboys meeting last Monday, the Well Trust made a couple of suggestions which would be very significant for the fans. He neither explained what they were nor offfered any clue as to their significance. I can't see any reason for keeping it a secret, but if that's the type of organisation we are dealing with why would anyone want to be a member. The Trust has to be upfront and open, not just with it's members but with the fans it claims to represent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faddyisgod Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Forgive me, but what is the Malcolm Rose question? I take it this was the guy that used to run the trust? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaag Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Martin Rose - he is the current Chairman of the WellTrust and there are many people out there that are in strong disagreement with his place there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faddyisgod Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 woops, cheers Gaag! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yosemite sam Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 The reason I left the Trust was Martin Rose. I'm afraid I believe he is in it for himself, and not the fans. He doesn't come across as someone who listens to other people's opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzie Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I don't think it would be appropriate for me to comment further on Martins position. However, I do acknowledge that people have the opinion that, given his position on the clubs board, he should not be our chairman. Anyone who has that opinion is perfectly entitled to it, but it's very easy to point to an issue, criticise it and offer no alternative or solution. There is one issue from the meeting that must be kept under wraps for the timebeing. I realise it's not what anyone wants, but when it does come out, I'm sure the majority of people will understand why that is the case. It would not be helpful to our relationship with the club if we were to publicly post what could be perceived as an attack on said club. Our aim is to assist the club, not cause them problems. One issue from the meeting that I haven't mentioned (was going to wait to see if it happened first) was the suggestion that, when the Old Firm play at Fir Park and the club continue to allow them access to the Cooper Stand, the away fans are kept in for 15 minutes after the game. Obviously the 'Well fans are very much against them being in the Cooper Stand in the first place, and I believe that part of the reason for this is the feeling of intimidation not only inside the ground, but in the street afterwards, particularly coming out of the East Stand and having their fans at both sides of you. This suggestion was taken on board and I expect it to be implemented. If it is, I would hope it would go a small way towards making the 'Well fans feel safe in and around their own ground and perhaps tempt back a few fans who stay away on such occasions for these reasons. Frazzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mon_da_well Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I don't think it would be appropriate for me to comment further on Martins position. However, I do acknowledge that people have the opinion that, given his position on the clubs board, he should not be our chairman. Anyone who has that opinion is perfectly entitled to it, but it's very easy to point to an issue, criticise it and offer no alternative or solution.There is one issue from the meeting that must be kept under wraps for the timebeing. I realise it's not what anyone wants, but when it does come out, I'm sure the majority of people will understand why that is the case. It would not be helpful to our relationship with the club if we were to publicly post what could be perceived as an attack on said club. Our aim is to assist the club, not cause them problems. One issue from the meeting that I haven't mentioned (was going to wait to see if it happened first) was the suggestion that, when the Old Firm play at Fir Park and the club continue to allow them access to the Cooper Stand, the away fans are kept in for 15 minutes after the game. Obviously the 'Well fans are very much against them being in the Cooper Stand in the first place, and I believe that part of the reason for this is the feeling of intimidation not only inside the ground, but in the street afterwards, particularly coming out of the East Stand and having their fans at both sides of you. This suggestion was taken on board and I expect it to be implemented. If it is, I would hope it would go a small way towards making the 'Well fans feel safe in and around their own ground and perhaps tempt back a few fans who stay away on such occasions for these reasons. Frazzle Change your chairman. Is that a solution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzie Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Change your chairman. Is that a solution? Are you volunteering for the job? Would hate to think you were all talk and no trousers.... Frazzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe_Green Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I don't think it would be appropriate for me to comment further on Martins position. However, I do acknowledge that people have the opinion that, given his position on the clubs board, he should not be our chairman. Anyone who has that opinion is perfectly entitled to it, but it's very easy to point to an issue, criticise it and offer no alternative or solution. Very good Frazzle, your remarks regarding peoples opinion of the position Martin Rose holds within the Trust and the club board are astounding, the man is in a position which no one should hold, how can you or other Trust board members be comfortable discussing Trust business with a member of the club board present. I'm pointing right at the issue, I am criticising but I am offering an alternative, ask Martin Rose to resign his postion within the Trust forthwith. Throughout the existance of the Trust since Mr Rose was appointed to the Club board, this has been a stumbling block for new members and reason for existing members to leave the trust, and yet, no one on the board of the Trust see this as an issue that should be dealt with. I was quite happy to watch and see what improvements would be made to the Trust with the appointment of the new guys, but alas, the more things change the more they stay the same. Either your being niave Frazzle or you dont understand the depth of feeling, but as I have stated before, as long as M Rose is on the board of the Trust, I will never join and I'm afraid there are many more like me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev IM Jolly Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I acknowledge the validity of your opinion Moe, in that Martin Rose's dual position is an un-workable conflict of interest, however I think Frazzle's stance that as a fellow board member it would be unfair to comment further on a public messageboard on that particular issue is entirely reasonable. The Trust is a legally formed entity with paying members and due process et al to go through, which is also the reason for minutes of meetings to be formally recorded and press releases to be issued. It is frustrating at times that communications have to be handled in such a formal manner, but it is nonetheless often a requirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzie Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 And as I've said, I absolutely understand your position. I held the exact same view before I joined the Trust. However, regardless of his perceived conflict of interest, there is no-one better qualified for the position who wants it. I genuinely could not even tell you the last time he had to be elected as Chairman, or if, indeed, he ever has. If there's as many people as you say who are against the Trust because of Martin Rose then he could be very easily ousted if you all joined up. The only difficult part would be finding someone to stand for the position. I would imagine that anyone who reads this forum and sees the grief board members get would run a mile from it. Frazzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe_Green Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I agree totally with what you say Rev, the point i am trying to get across is the Trust has been in existence for 5 years, with various board members being appointed over that time, why has none of the board during that period seen fit to question the position and conflict of Mr Rose, perhaps no one will stand up to him, or as I said, they dont understand the depth of feeling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe_Green Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 And as I've said, I absolutely understand your position. I held the exact same view before I joined the Trust. However, regardless of his perceived conflict of interest, there is no-one better qualified for the position who wants it. I genuinely could not even tell you the last time he had to be elected as Chairman, or if, indeed, he ever has. If there's as many people as you say who are against the Trust because of Martin Rose then he could be very easily ousted if you all joined up. The only difficult part would be finding someone to stand for the position. I would imagine that anyone who reads this forum and sees the grief board members get would run a mile from it. Frazzle So in essence Frazzle, despite the conflict, you are quite happy to see him as the chairman, you suggest if all the Rose detractors joined we could see him ousted, I would ask you in turn, what changed your opinion on Mr Rose and saw fit to let you ignore the conflict of interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev IM Jolly Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I think it's perhaps somewhere between the two Moe. In an ideal world I personally believe it's conflict of interest which shouldn't exist, however I can also sympathise with the position that Frazzle has highlighted in that who else would take it on? As you have said yourself, it's been going for a number of years now and I don't believe there has been a credible alternative at all. Rome wasn't built in a day so to speak, the new blood on the board should be afforded time to try and change the direction of the Trust and perhaps build on the membership number's through their own new initiatives. If they achieve that then perhaps a year or more from now a real alternative for the chairmanship may exist. Until then I can't see what good it does to take pot shots at the new guys who quite frankly can't do a damn thing about that particular problem at this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe_Green Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I'm not taking Pot shots Rev, Frazzle has stuck his head above the parapet and offered his views and opinions and for that alone I applaude him (too long the Trust has been Faceless). I have already in this topic asked for them to be given time to bring in their own ideas and initiatives and hopefully things will improve, but for me the idea of giving a tenner to an organistion in this position is a deal breaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mon_da_well Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Are you volunteering for the job? Would hate to think you were all talk and no trousers.... Frazzle Yes, I am volunteering for the job. Although I think my opinions of the Trust may hold me back, I am officially volunteering Is there no one better suited to it already in the Trust? You have to resort to asking me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev IM Jolly Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I'm not taking Pot shots Rev... Indeed Moe, I should qualify that that was not directed at you specifically, more a general comment that throughout this thread there has been numerous accusations levelled at Frazzle of hiding behind flannel or shying away from specific issues for instance, whilst at the same time some people have merely been taking shots at him on very general terms such as the Trust does nothing etc etc without really making any viable comment or posing any pertinent questions. I also credit Frazzle - and you yourself have obviously just highlighted it - that it is far harder to stand up and open yourself up to these debates than it is to hide behind general sniping without offering credible alternatives or indeed be prepared to stand up and make a contribution themselves. Again, I can understand and to an extent agree with your position Moe, but I think it would be reasonable to give Frazzle the benefit of the doubt and acknowledge that he has taken the difficult step of mucking in and trying to change things from the inside rather than only dissent from the outside. I myself couldn't even contemplate getting involved in the running of the Trust due to lack of time, however I applaud these guys who are giving it a go, and certainly to me at least, they seem genuine enough in their intentions and aspirations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JohnnyDefault Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Good post Rev. Conflict of interest is a difficult one - i don't know enough about the particulars of the performance of the individual in the role to comment on that specifically. However - i can see the merit of a supporters voice on the board - so long as it was an active role - where the person continually championed the fans views and continually sought out those views and fed back that he / she had strongly represented that view during discussions at boardroom level. I believe that role has worked successfully elsewhere in a few English lower league clubs. The stumbling block right now is that for whatever reason - any work that the trust do is by and large invisible to the Motherwell support at large - and that's the main thing that any of their members on here should be worried about and addressing. I mean, on here we talk about stuff in the minutest detail about what goes on at our club - yet on this fans forum there are many that are not aware of the work that the trust do. The second point - which fuels the 'conflict of interest' situation is that their is a distinct 'them and us' situation with the board and the support and it's well documented why). They're seen as the enemy and being a trust member on 'the inside' is not a good place to be. The trust as far as I can see - made a great contribution during our troubled period but for some reason have struggled to become recognised by our support since then and hence have suffered with a fairly low profile. Like I mentioned on another thread - there may be a role moving forward in co-ordinating the fundraising for stadium development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzie Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I agree with what you're saying Johnny. If and when the time ever comes that we are given an elected place on the board, I will vote for whoever I think will do exactly what you've said there. I would be very wary that it would be easy for someone elevated to club board level to become accustommed to cucumber sandwiches and hospitality treatment that they allowed that to cloud their judgement. With regards to someone coming in from outside the Trust with their own views standing against Martin Rose, I would be absolutely all for it. Regardless of who the chairman is, I think it is healthy for there to be some opposition to him, much in the same way I think it is important for the Trust to get feedback such as this, from members and non-members alike, even if it's negative. I don't think there's any other board members who want to be chairman - I certainly don't - so maybe someone brand new is the answer. Frazzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mon_da_well Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Fuck it, I'll do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motherwell Seagull Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I'm not taking Pot shots Rev, Frazzle has stuck his head above the parapet and offered his views and opinions and for that alone I applaude him (too long the Trust has been Faceless). I have already in this topic asked for them to be given time to bring in their own ideas and initiatives and hopefully things will improve, but for me the idea of giving a tenner to an organistion in this position is a deal breaker. Decent post Moe From reading this thread alone, it is quite plain to me that the Trust needs to change. New initiatives on their part are not what's needed right now - re-organisation and rebranding is required. In business terms, they first require to do some market research (perhaps a thread on here entitled 'What needs to change before I join the Trust' would be a decent start). The difficult part for any organisation will then be to listen and act on the feedback. The consensus may in fact be that there is no demand from the fans to have an organisation to represent them! Existing for the sheer hell of it should not be an option, and other movements (even this board) can fundraise. I think and hope that there is a role for the trust to play. The Club can only be stronger with Fans and Ownership talking to each other on a completely different level to where we are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JohnnyDefault Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 Fuck it, I'll do it Go For It! Start the campaign to get the new stadium built in Shotts just behind the Torbothie Club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airfinz Posted January 13, 2009 Report Share Posted January 13, 2009 I still dont understand why the Trust feel that they should have a member in the Well Board? To what benefit would that be to the average fan? All I can make of it so far is that they want someone there....just cos they do! I can see no real benefit other than an egomaniac attending the Board meetings, spouting spurious pish that the Trust want to point out, before being "ignored." Can anyone tell me what they feel will be achieved? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.