Hi Shoemaker,
The Trust didn't vacate a board seat, it was part of the new owners' stipulations that supporters should not be involved. They were prepared to walk away from the takeover if the council insisted on fan representation. There is no "historic position" to "give up" - it was removed by DB and KT during takeover negotiations.
Now from that anti-supporter position (you perhaps don't like research, but I suggest you look into their relationship with Oxford supporters when they owned that club) we have seen an extremely sudden and massive turnaround. The initiative happened very suddenly, was very vaguely described on the Cobblers Show and in the in-house video put out by the club, and KT couldn't provide any detail about what the role might encompass. For someone who said they'd been thinking about it for a while, there weren't many thoughts!
What do you think has led to this simply indescribable reversal in attitude from the owners? It couldn't possibly have been the Trust, could it?
The Trust made it clear very early on through a statement that whilst it considered this a welcome move it would not put forward an official candidate for the role because Kelvin Thomas had said the fan representative should be independent. Andy and Derek from the board were on the Cobblers Show last week explaining this too. So yes, the Trust has communicated this - several times - to everyone, not just members.
Regardless of my cynicism, I do think this is potentially a step in the right direction. KT has previously stated that board meetings don't happen at the Cobblers because everything is done over the phone. With JW and a fan rep there they will presumably have to hold meetings, which may well be a good thing. So perhaps something right will happen even though in my opinion it has been done for the wrong reasons.
The supporter rep will have a tough job. The trust has over 700 members, a website, a dedicated email address, 12+ dedicated volunteers who all know a lot of other supporters, go to pretty much every match, sit in the stands and talk to people, a constitution, a clear mission, a 30 year history which involves being the first of its kind and close involvement in saving NTFC - twice! And it still attracts a load of criticism from people saying it's not representative etc. It may be a lonely job at times if the supporter rep expresses any kind of opinion, ever!
There is and always will be a really important place for the Trust, regardless of people who choose to forget (or perhaps never to know) their history - and that place is not in this role on the NTFC board at this time.
I’m sorry I only bothered reading the first couple of lines and that was enough.
The trust did give up their seat on the board
They decided to give it up when KT asked them too and have regretted it ever since
You can’t rewrite history.
They had a seat on the board under David Cardozo and KT made it part of his takeover that the trust were excluded from the board.
They had a choice
They could have said we do not agree to that request or yes we agree to that request.
They chose the latter option.
They DID relinquish their seat on the board.
Now deny that
