Away Members

[essex canary 495]

Just now, Greavsy said:

Eh? 

One away member isn't denying others of going. Or am I being dim?

The Club elected for a reduced ticket allocation thereby preventing some fans who wanted to go from going. Therefore another supporter could have replaced this one. Perhaps it is the same clown who elbowed my wife in the face at Watford and was oblivious to it?

Insults are not for me. Just the facts.

[GMF 736]

12 minutes ago, essex canary said:

...When other supporters were denied the opportunity to go.

Any possibility of some influence on my previous posting in response to Shef?

I realise it is challenging when the Club operates without a Chairman etc. but clearly a Corporate Governance issue.

There’s no obligation on the part of the club to take whatever the maximum allocation is for each away game. No one was denied 

[Greavsy 2,412]

The person GMF mentioned, obviously had an away membership, that had been paid for and utilized, I dont get how that is stopping anyone else. 

Edited July 12, 2022 by Greavsy

[Greavsy 2,412]

14 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Perhaps it is the same clown who elbowed my wife in the face at Watford and was oblivious to it?

I guess he was aiming for you? 

 

15 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Insults are not for me. Just the facts.

And yet you called them a clown. Not the worst insult ill agree but still an insult. Just stating the facts......

[Greavsy 2,412]

16 minutes ago, GMF said:

There’s no obligation on the part of the club to take whatever the maximum allocation is for each away game. No one was denied 

I'm sure if they took the full allocation and it didn't sell out, people would moan about that, for wasting money......they can't win. 

[GMF 736]

5 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I'm sure if they took the full allocation and it didn't sell out, people would moan about that, for wasting money......they can't win. 

There were plenty of away games that went to general sale, where we didn’t sell out our taken allocation, but no one is moaning about those either. 🤷‍♂️

[essex canary 495]

31 minutes ago, GMF said:

There were plenty of away games that went to general sale, where we didn’t sell out our taken allocation, but no one is moaning about those either. 🤷‍♂️

Objection to the scheme maybe a contributory reason. I know other people like me who have been regularly in the past but have equally decided to vote with their feet on the scheme because we don't get a vote with our hands. Hence the charity idea which has the potential to reinstate those people.

If you haven't received preference for other matches you may still decline General Sale even when you can go and perhaps receive less favourable seats.

 

Edited July 12, 2022 by essex canary

[essex canary 495]

42 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I guess he was aiming for you? 

 

And yet you called them a clown. Not the worst insult ill agree but still an insult. Just stating the facts......

Perhaps I will take that one on the chin. At least I would have done if he hadn't been as wayward as our strikers last season. I guess he was just overexcited that Watford was an uplifting experience in comparison and maybe he wasn't the same guy in which case I should cut him some slack.

[Greavsy 2,412]

25 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Perhaps I will take that one on the chin. At least I would have done if he hadn't been as wayward as our strikers last season. I guess he was just overexcited that Watford was an uplifting experience in comparison and maybe he wasn't the same guy in which case I should cut him some slack.

@essex canary I think your account may have been hacked!

[Greavsy 2,412]

35 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Objection to the scheme maybe a contributory reason. I know other people like me who have been regularly in the past but have equally decided to vote with their feet on the scheme because we don't get a vote with our hands. Hence the charity idea which has the potential to reinstate those people.

If you haven't received preference for other matches you may still decline General Sale even when you can go and perhaps receive less favourable seats.

 

Is that not a bit akin to tail wagging the dog? 

There is no way on earth the club will donate anything from the away membership revenue away from the club, however good the cause. 

[essex canary 495]

18 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Is that not a bit akin to tail wagging the dog? 

There is no way on earth the club will donate anything from the away membership revenue away from the club, however good the cause. 

It could be a choice between £100k for them or £200k for Glenn's charity with some goodwill reinstatement to the fan base regarding this absurd scheme. If we still had staff of the calibre of Andy Cullen, the Club would know what to do.

Besides as has been proven on here today the rules have been applied differentially to shareholders.

Edited July 12, 2022 by essex canary

[Greavsy 2,412]

48 minutes ago, essex canary said:

It could be a choice between £100k for them or £200k for Glenn's charity with some goodwill reinstatement to the fan base regarding this absurd scheme. If we still had staff of the calibre of Andy Cullen, the Club would know what to do.

Besides as has been proven on here today the rules have been applied differentially to shareholders.

If they support Roeders charity then why not some in memory of Mike Sutton, or Duncan Forbes, or any of the other former players who have suffered from Dementia - John Deehan springs to mind too. Where would they stop? 

Have you ever thought of supporting Liverpool, I think you would fit in well! 😉

[TIL 1010 4,737]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

You’re supposed to carry it with you to away games, but the only time I’ve seen one “in action” was last season, at Chelsea, in the gents toilet, to align white powder on the back of a mobile, just prior to a snorting activity, allegedly 😉 👃

Well one thing is for sure we know who it was not.

[essex canary 495]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

You’re being dim @Greavsy, 😜 everyone knows that the Club didn’t consult Essex prior to taking a reduced allocation! 😜

They certainly didn't. In relation to the scheme in general BK's consultations were perhaps a little OTT.

Now though we appear to know there have been some consultations but don't know the extent, content or coverage of them. A middle way would be helpful.

[essex canary 495]

1 hour ago, Greavsy said:

@essex canary I think your account may have been hacked!

OK. Maybe I have cut him too much slack. He was persistently standing adjacent to a seat he hadn't been allocated aided by the empty seats. He was breaking ground regulations. As Dean Smith alluded to recently it may not have been fair to expect the Watford stewards to deal with. 

The blanket brigade I sat next to at Leeds didn't break ground regulations. Which is worse?

'clown' is a term of endearment for Boris Johnson. Oops! That could be the ultimate insult.

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

It could be a choice between £100k for them or £200k for Glenn's charity with some goodwill reinstatement to the fan base regarding this absurd scheme. If we still had staff of the calibre of Andy Cullen, the Club would know what to do.

Besides as has been proven on here today the rules have been applied differentially to shareholders.

Are you a Shareholder then Ethics?

[Greavsy 2,412]

15 minutes ago, essex canary said:

They certainly didn't. In relation to the scheme in general BK's consultations were perhaps a little OTT.

Now though we appear to know there have been some consultations but don't know the extent, content or coverage of them. A middle way would be helpful.

i think you mean a way that you agree with, rather than a middle way.........

[Greavsy 2,412]

Just now, wcorkcanary said:

Are you a Shareholder then Ethics?

Great question Corkio - I dont recall it being mentioned this week yet. It is only Tuesday though!  

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

Just now, Greavsy said:

Great question Corkio - I dont recall it being mentioned this week yet. It is only Tuesday though!  

I'm new to this, but this Ethics guy really sounds like the real deal. The Gordon Ghecko of Carrow Rd... A real go getter, no nonsense, tough guy at the negotiating table, uncompromising, yet charitable and not in the least in it for himself, his children and his children's children. 

Maybe the other side of the Delia Out quilt cover could bear the slogan ' Ethics In' .. just a thought, and when he is the new boss, he'll take great delight in travelling Club Cabbage as he's never lost that common touch... Imagine all those disillusioned City fans that would flock, so many , that some may miss out on tickets now and again... Now who's gonna sort that out ?if only we had someone with all the credentials.

[essex canary 495]

4 hours ago, Greavsy said:

If they support Roeders charity then why not some in memory of Mike Sutton, or Duncan Forbes, or any of the other former players who have suffered from Dementia - John Deehan springs to mind too. Where would they stop? 

Have you ever thought of supporting Liverpool, I think you would fit in well! 😉

The first sentence is fair enough. Doesn't have to be to one charity only.

[Greavsy 2,412]

7 minutes ago, essex canary said:

The first sentence is fair enough. Doesn't have to be to one charity only.

So whilst you agree, do you see the problem the club has? What happens if you (or someone else) wants a different but equally deserving charity? If it was down to me I personally would choose a totally different charity to those mentioned, for personal reasons, but they have no relevance to the football club. Maybe the club would be slightly more interested if it was the CSF, their own charity.

and that's before its backdated to the start of the season for people who have already purchased. 

The system, rightly or wrongly (that's a different conversation) was brought in to bring funds into the club. They aren't going to just change their mind, and donate that money to a non club associated charity just because an opinionated shareholders is raging on his keyboard. 

Deluded as well as tedious. Its just not happening. 

[essex canary 495]

Probably indirectly to the Webber charity.

[Greavsy 2,412]

37 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Probably indirectly to the Webber charity.

I think you need be very careful what you say. 

I thought you only dealt with facts........

8 hours ago, essex canary said:

Just the facts.

Edited July 12, 2022 by Greavsy

[essex canary 495]

32 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I think you need be very careful what you say. 

I thought you only dealt with facts........

I did cover myself with words like 'probably' and "indirectly" perhaps I should downgrade that to "'possibly or 'highly unlikely'. Pure speculation on my part in this case. 

I wonder if there is now a replacement Chairperson of the Audit Committee or even just a Chairperson who can relieve us of our nightmares.

Sleep tight.

[Greavsy 2,412]

21 minutes ago, essex canary said:

I did cover myself with words like 'probably' and "indirectly" perhaps I should downgrade that to "'possibly or 'highly unlikely'. Pure speculation on my part in this case. 

I wonder if there is now a replacement Chairperson of the Audit Committee or even just a Chairperson who can relieve us of our nightmares.

Sleep tight.

Tedious.  Consistently tedious.

[essex canary 495]

14 hours ago, Greavsy said:

i think you mean a way that you agree with, rather than a middle way.........

I am not a referee and,, as we know, even those that are can have different opinions.

Nonetheless to me that is your third yellow card offence in one day for personalising something that has no relevance to the quote. One of them was a red.

If you want to reflect tedium that is fine but I doubt whether you have any qualifications in mind reading beyond your own mind.

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

31 minutes ago, essex canary said:

I am not a referee and,, as we know, even those that are can have different opinions.

Nonetheless to me that is your third yellow card offence in one day for personalising something that has no relevance to the quote. One of them was a red.

If you want to reflect tedium that is fine but I doubt whether you have any qualifications in mind reading beyond your own mind.

I'm sure he will be mortified at falling foul of your stringent disciplinary system.

On my rap sheet, you have accumulated 247 yellow cards this month alone for repetition of the terms 'chairperson' and 'shareholder'.

[Greavsy 2,412]

29 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

I'm sure he will be mortified at falling foul of your stringent disciplinary system.

On my rap sheet, you have accumulated 247 yellow cards this month alone for repetition of the terms 'chairperson' and 'shareholder'.

I am indeed mortified Fred, as you say. That's going to stick from me now. 

But just think how much worse id feel if it was a judgment from someone who was relevant Abe whose opinion mattered. 

That said to get 3 yellows without trying is some achievement. 

[Feedthewolf 4,846]

1 minute ago, Greavsy said:

I am indeed mortified Fred, as you say. That's going to stick from me now. 

But just think how much worse id feel if it was a judgment from someone who was relevant Abe whose opinion mattered. 

That said to get 3 yellows without trying is some achievement. 

He's chucking them around like confetti! Reminds me of Graham Poll at World Cup 2006...

[Greavsy 2,412]

3 minutes ago, Feedthewolf said:

He's chucking them around like confetti! Reminds me of Graham Poll at World Cup 2006...

I feel like Joey Barton.