Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[Melbourne Cobbler]

A process made easier by the recent decision to reduce the maximum number of sitting board members.

Jesus, make that 50 years for them all to have influence. Seems fair.

[Tabasco Kid]

With all due respect Melbourne, Terry, you have completely misunderstood the point I'm trying to make.

You both seem utterly incapable of separating the argument from the poster. At no point in my posts did I at any point defend the recent decisions of the Supporters' Trust, yet you've both elected to interpret my post as a defence of them and an attack against their critics. I'd appreciate your direction towards any points I've raised that have done this.

However, for the benefit of you both. I didn't agree with the decision for them to partner with Cilldara, and at the very least I would have liked a vote on it. I'd like them concentrate on some issues other than just the East Stand. In that respect, we're almost completely aligned, so I'm surprised at the hostility towards my post.

I've made these points before, but I don't feel the need to constantly bleat on about it as it achieves nothing.

I'll respond to your separate points in further posts.

You didnt get a vote either? I was fuming about that decision being taken without being informed or asked my opinion. That was what broke any faith that I had in this current board to represent its members. You carry on helping your dad out mate, you could have a long old morning.

[Peter Frost]

With all due respect Melbourne, Terry, you have completely misunderstood the point I'm trying to make.

You both seem utterly incapable of separating the argument from the poster. At no point in my posts did I at any point defend the recent decisions of the Supporters' Trust, yet you've both elected to interpret my post as a defence of them and an attack against their critics. I'd appreciate your direction towards any points I've raised that have done this.

However, for the benefit of you both. I didn't agree with the decision for them to partner with Cilldara, and at the very least I would have liked a vote on it. I'd like them concentrate on some issues other than just the East Stand. In that respect, we're almost completely aligned, so I'm surprised at the hostility towards my post.

I've made these points before, but I don't feel the need to constantly bleat on about it as it achieves nothing.

I'll respond to your separate points in further posts.

Fez,  no hostility on my part and I understand the sentiment on you original post - I agree with the principle that in life you do get a lot of people who just complain and never do anything about it but re the specific point I can only use my experience where I was very willing to devote time to the trust - I don’t want to go into details of some of the things that were said in both a meeting and in private conversations but the simple conclusion was there were some individuals that were so intransigent with their views and more significant they were the most dominant in character within the organisation - I simply reached the conclusion I couldn’t work with them.

[FezNTFC]

What from here with an 11 hour time difference. Anyway as Derek has already pointed out my geographical location renders me unsuitable as a supporter so presumably Im not welcome on his board either?

What about other members who for a variety of personal reasons are not able to do this, what's the answer to them then, tough? Alternatively if you apply to become a member of the board why not act in the manner set out in the mission statement instead of rail roading the trust down a path to satisfy your own vendetta. The way the Trustology board members round on new board members like a pack of dogs if one of their number is threatened has already been put up on here. Who the fúck would want to involve themselves in that, laughably easy, you must have had a bang on the head.

This is the same old get out of jail free card that's continually played anytime one of the number is scrutinised, a load of abuse and a 'get yourself on the board and change it' cop out. Thanks for the invite but as a life member if I see the board acting in a manner that I believe is inappropriate I'll keep holding them to account for it as is my right. Straight out of the NTFC Trust Mission Statement We commit to supporting the aims and objectives of NTFC where, in the opinion of the board, these are not in direct conflict with the needs and best interests of supporters. Apparently this to be achieved by the supporters keeping their fùcking mouths shut and keeping their needs and interests to themselves unless they are prepared to sit on the board.
Well you lot carry on nailing the lid shut on the trust coffin, at least Kelvin Thomas and David Bower will be delighted, so not everyone loses. However, if the board were to honour their obligations  then perhaps less of our fùcking time would be taken up. Unbelievable.

I don't agree with Derek's assertion that you care any less because of your geographical location, and not anywhere have I indicated that I agree with that assessment. This wasn't a post solely aimed at you after all.

With regards to people not being able to stand for personal reasons, absolutely fine, don't. But come on, 700 people signed a petition. Can we really not find 10 people that have enough time on their hands to stand and change the direction? Honestly, it's a really weak argument. And of course it's not 'tough luck' if you can't stand, of course you're still entitled to criticise the Trust - I never said that you couldn't do that!

I agree that current board members/advisers should abide by that mission statement and act accordingly, and I don't dispute that some of them are falling short on that front.

The only point I'm trying to make - and I re-iterate this - is that NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE unless someone does something about it. It might not be you, but you can't all collectively look the other way, some people are going to have to put their head above the parapet.

That's if you all want it to change. Reading the posts over the last few pages, this is seemingly what you all want. If you don't want anything to change then crack on as is.

[FezNTFC]

Isn't that what you are doing?

I'm going to stand for the board. I can't do much more.

[FezNTFC]

You didnt get a vote either? I was fuming about that decision being taken without being informed or asked my opinion. That was what broke any faith that I had in this current board to represent its members. You carry on helping your dad out mate, you could have a long old morning.

That was clumsy wording on my part. I did get sent a vote.

I wasn't happy with the amount of time I was given to vote on it, and wanted better consultation on it.

[BackOfTheNet]

In fairness, Fez has neatly summarised my position already when it comes to board involvement.

I genuinely considered putting myself forward around the time of the last AGM but between work and family commitments I just wouldn't be able to commit the time this would warrant. My attendance at home games every other week for 9 months of the year is already viewed as a massive pain in the arse by my wife!

On top of that, I wouldn't enjoy working within such a formal, old fashioned framework that the Trust seems to operate within and, in all honesty, nor would I enjoy working working with a number of the individuals currently involved.

Those were the factors that made up my mind not to put myself forward. Tom's experience in the meantime has reassured me that I made the right decision, showing how any dissenting voice trying to bring about change is marginalised and shouted down in a frankly disgusting manner.

Was there ever any response from the board to those emails Tom released, by the way? I don't think I ever saw one. Another issue swept under the carpet.

I don't think the Trust is irrelevant and they certainly shouldn't be. I DO think through their actions they have rendered themselves impotent to bring about positive change, or to hold any meaningful relationship with the club, at least not while the current incumbents are in place.

That doesn't mean to say their actions don't still do damage though; to the club, to the relationship with the council and most damningly to themselves.

Oh, and I caught up on this thread while sitting on the loo and typed this response while debugging some software that takes about 20 minutes to churn through a massive amount of data before it hits the problem I'm investigating. There's a vast difference between filling  a bit of idle time by pontificating on here and committing to being on the board of an organisation!

[FezNTFC]

And with respect to you Fez, your reasoned view is that if you want a voice and to change Trust policy stop “moaning” and get a seat on the board. I think that was your point. There are what 400 members, and according to you if the only effective way they can instigate change is to take their seat then it would take 40 years for all of them to have influence. Whilst I respect your opinion, if it’s all the same to you needless to say I disagree, so I’ll keep doing what I’m doing. But thanks for the advice.

No. My point isn't stop moaning and get a seat on the board. My point is, that if you've moaned for ages and you don't feel they have responded adequately, and they are not showing any signs of resigning, then continuing to moan isn't going to change anything.

You've all been moaning for ages, they're not going to resign, so if you want change you're going to have to do something about it.

It's LITERALLY the only point I'm making. I'm not saying at all that anyone can't criticise the Trust, I'm amazed so many of you have interpreted it in that way, and I can only come to the conclusion that my post is being judged on the fact that I used to be a board member rather than the points I'm actually making.

[Tabasco Kid]

That was clumsy wording on my part. I did get sent a vote.

I wasn't happy with the amount of time I was given to vote on it, and wanted better consultation on it.

Wow. Very clumsy of you. Im fuming even more now. Over and out.

[FezNTFC]

Fez,  no hostility on my part and I understand the sentiment on you original post - I agree with the principle that in life you do get a lot of people who just complain and never do anything about it but re the specific point I can only use my experience where I was very willing to devote time to the trust - I don’t want to go into details of some of the things that were said in both a meeting and in private conversations but the simple conclusion was there were some individuals that were so intransigent with their views and more significant they were the most dominant in character within the organisation - I simply reached the conclusion I couldn’t work with them.

You're always very reasonable Peter, so of course I wouldn't interpret anything hostile in your response, this is a forum for debate after all 

I totally understand why some people wouldn't want to work with people they've had a bad experience with.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

No. My point isn't stop moaning and get a seat on the board. My point is, that if you've moaned for ages and you don't feel they have responded adequately, and they are not showing any signs of resigning, then continuing to moan isn't going to change anything.

You've all been moaning for ages, they're not going to resign, so if you want change you're going to have to do something about it.

It's LITERALLY the only point I'm making. I'm not saying at all that anyone can't criticise the Trust, I'm amazed so many of you have interpreted it in that way, and I can only come to the conclusion that my post is being judged on the fact that I used to be a board member rather than the points I'm actually making.

Perhaps if you are unhappy with the response it’s because you didn’t express your views in the most productive manner. Pressure groups and lobbyists seem very common in the democratic process, some have been spectacularly successful even if it has taken a number of years for their activities to bear fruit. I think you underestimate the effectiveness of this approach, it may yet turn out to be the most likely way to instigate change. Still, with you working on the inside and others working on the outside we can perhaps return the Trust to the organisation it once was. Good luck with it.

[DavCobb]

TBF to all moaners (myself included), people moan about a mixture of things that they can/can't change every day.
The price of petrol, the government, their boss, their partner, the owner of their football team and supporters Trust. As this is a forum for the last two then there is bound to be repeat moaning, debate and disagreement. I rarely moan about the things I can't change, or plot a path to change the things I can if I am that unhappy about it. One in particular cost me £500k 

I don't think I've complained about the Trust much at all. I was a bit disappointed when the 'take over' fell flat as I am not sure the exact 'welcome' everyone was expecting, it was always going to be a bumpy ride requiring resilience. If anything I feel disappointed that they are a toothless and irrelevant entity these days. Whoever's fault that is it's a shame. I don't recall much noise at the time when they relinquished their seat on the board, although I know they blamed KT for that too.
I'll retire in a couple of years so may well come and have a look from the inside.

[Risdene]

So in a nutshell, we have a lot of people moaning about an organisation that they think could do something positive, but chooses not to.

All the while missing the simple fact that they could choose to do something positive about that outcome, but choose not to.

The solution to all this is so laughably easy, and I get mocked every time I make this argument, but the fact remains...

Ten people standing for the board in February could COMPLETELY change the direction and outlook of said organisation to become something more positive, but you collectively choose not to do that.

TEN people. There's about 20 of you on here who do virtually nothing else but moan about the Trust. But you choose to do nothing about it.

Hundreds of people signed a petition last year, but only three bothered to stand for the board. You all collectively chose to not do anything about it, and here we are 12 months later in exactly the same position. If this isn't the Trust you want, it's certainly the one you now deserve.

You all waste countless hours on here moaning - fill in a paper form, stand for the board and change it. It will take up less of your f***ing time.

Well said.

As someone who has been involved in junior and senior football, junior and senior golf, snooker, bowls and cricket, I say you might be surprised how much satisfaction you can have improving situations!

I hope enough people are motivated to get involved for the benefit of the Trust and eventually NTFC!

[Tabasco Kid]

Del boy alert.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

I’m amazed people put so much store in the Trust having a place on the Board of the club. I don’t know what people imagine goes on in there but take it from me, a Board meeting is a glorified press conference for people in the business to go on the record with their reports and recommendations. No one is going to say anything that they don’t want heard as a matter of record, and you only get told what people are prepared to allow you to hear. No controversial discussions or real decision making takes place in the Board room, it’s the place where they get rubber stamped. Don't get hung up on getting back in there, its fairly irrelevant in the scheme of things.

[DustonCobbler]

I don’t want to join a pack attacking Derek which I why I wrote a gentle note suggesting it was perhaps now time to back off and conserve his undoubted passion for future positive and attainable action - sadly he responded with more of the same.

It’s frustrating he doesn’t seem to realise his ideas (not all unreasonable but usually uncosted) are never going to happen with the current owners who not only have a different (yes less ambitious) agenda but also will clearly never work with the organisation he represents.

Totally agree Peter, none of our previous owners have ever really moved the club forward so I was suggesting perhaps looking for another way, thats all

We all expect a change of owners soon, just really don't want to have more of the same

As I said, us and the council are the constant and was asking supporters for their views on a long term plan

Shame some (not you), as usual, prefer just to attack myself and Trust, rather than engage with their ideas and views

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Totally agree Peter, none of our previous owners have ever really moved the club forward so I was suggesting perhaps looking for another way, thats all

We all expect a change of owners soon, just really don't want to have more of the same

As I said, us and the council are the constant and was asking supporters for their views on a long term plan

Shame some (not you), as usual, prefer just to attack myself and Trust, rather than engage with their ideas and views

What you mean like the email that didn’t get answered. Sorry, forgot, I live in the wrong country to have an opinion. You need to take a long hard look in the mirror before you play the victim.

[Carton Lid]

If anything I feel disappointed that they are a toothless and irrelevant entity these days. Whoever's fault that is it's a shame. I don't recall much noise at the time when they relinquished their seat on the board, although I know they blamed KT for that too.

Maybe that was because KT said that if the Trust wanted a seat on the board then, in his words, "It was a deal breaker"


While I'm posting, so Dale (Melbourne) are you saying that Tom Cliffe is just a puppet with no say or influence ??

[DustonCobbler]

I would be the first advocate of a more fan involved structure in league football. Unfortunately, there is no appetite for within the current structure.

I honestly think it is way past the time where we drop Exeter as a shining example. The combination of huge transfer fee input. Assistance from the University and the luxury of literally hundreds of volunteers, offers a very unique model. That example is poles away from a level playing field. Not only comparative to us. But comparative to virtually every English league club.

In terms of volunteers and encouraging investment from the support. Well, surely this is exactly where the Trust should be at the forefront. I have not seen one single obvious representation, from one Trust board member at a game since well before COVID. The current Trust set up, is one of a political arm to the support. A role that was neither asked for, or indeed needed. I can only go back to my posts dating back for several years now. You will always attract more bees with honey, than you will with vinegar. Rather than concentrating on the shortcomings of the club. And there are some. Concentrate on starting the movement and action you want from your end of the deal. There is nothing stopping the Trust dipping it's toe in the water and starting to action some of the things it wants.

Hi Nigel

Thanks and some of us are starting to do this, hence my recent posts

The one problem is that the owners do not want anything to do with the Trust, especially anything that would gain the Trust praise and support.

And that has been the case since they arrived, when they refuse to honour the previous agreement of a place ot two on the board.

There has been numberous examples of ideas, offers of help, big ideas, small ones and to my knowledge, none have ever been actioned. Ask Roger he can tell you many examples no doubt.

Yes some of the Trust has wound the club up (obviously myself a main player) and you could argue we have played into their hands, but again I ask any supporter to give me examples of something that the owners have done that they didn't want to do

Further more to that note how KT reacts when asked of something he does like, (there are a few examples in the recent open forums)

I understand fans want to blame us (and me especially) but we are now deemed of no use to the owners so we are a bit stuck at the moment

The Trust is engaging in a few small projects, Charity based.

I suggested the Trust / fans help with improving some matchday facilities, like the womens toilets for example but this was rejected.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Maybe that was because KT said that if the Trust wanted a seat on the board then, in his words, "It was a deal breaker"


While I'm posting, so Dale (Melbourne) are you saying that Tom Cliffe is just a puppet with no say or influence ??

Not at all, I’m saying you won’t be privy to anything that people don’t want you to hear, whether you are in the board room or not.