I owe you an apology as I was talking at cross-purposes and that the "chatter" you referenced was the Chair of the Trust as a multi rather than broader views on the adequacy of the Trust.
That said, I have no idea what you are referring to about posters like me having access to why people are banned. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning.
For my two-pennyworth on the broader issue.
Perhaps we need to define a common goal. Let's say "A financially viable and stable progressive football club where fans views have appropriate weight in club decision making".
It is a legitimate view whether that goal will be achieved whilst Tan is in control. The chatter appears to be that the Trust is not forceful enough in pushing for Tan's departure so the Leadership needs to step aside for those who will.
The difficulty I have with that suggestion is that those making it seem to have sufficient avenues for that to be heard already. Key advocates have been pushing that line via Petitions, Fans Parliament and the SLO meetings. Indeed Canton Stand Blue appears to have direct access to Ken Choo for private chats where these points are being made. Yet the dial has not quivered.
In all of this we have not heard anything about what the Trust should look like and what its future priorities should be under a change of Leadership. The chatter seems to focus on a distaste for the Chair and vague assertions about a "closed shop".
It was a shame that having marched the troops up to the top of the hill that those potential new leaders were unable to follow through with their resolution. Hopefully at the meeting there will be greater clarity on the points above and people are able to rally around a positive agenda for change rather than the rather negative "chatter" we have seen to date.





Reply With Quote