Football forum

[Playa Amodores]

10 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

That was the SC vote not the club one wasn’t it?

I think it was, I didn’t know that there’d been two lots of votes. TY

[JoeB2]

I too think that fans simply want to know too much about the club these days. The entitlement stinks. What right do we have to know, really?

It's completely wrong for any of us to ever point out things that could do with improving for the overall benefit of the football club.

Our job is to pay our £330, be quiet, and let Carol crack on, in my opinion. We must remember that we are merely paying customers and not vital stakeholders with a vested interest in the club often going back 3-4 generations. We are not an invaluable resource of people who have seen it all, having been here long before the current owners and will be here long after, and can often point out when things don't look right, even if that could be construed as 'criticism'. Offering criticism of things which are bad is a war crime under the Geneva Conventions of 1949. If thing have gone well in the past, you are not allowed to identify things going less well in the present.

We are merely the basic biscuits, the rich teas, and we must remember who the Garibaldis are in this biscuit tin.

The best thing we can all do is make positive noises on here, and then 10 people can reply 'you can't be positive in here! Admins, arrest this man!' and get 74 likes.

[JoeB2]

13 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

Spot on GR. Especially regarding football clubs some people want a piece of the action and or consider they should have a say when they have no real right to do so. Supporters, however well intentioned cannot expect to know the "Egg's arse" or everything that goes on at the club.

The club can't wash it's dirty linen in public all the time.

The Shanahan's have done a great job so far and your right, some folks do have short memories.

"Allez Carole" for me.

You can't be positive on here! 

Admins, arrest this fellow!

All joking aside... well said that man!

[Playa Amodores]

I hope I’m wrong and my only source is OVF, but it would appear that the relationship between PVFC hierarchy and the SC is breaking down, I hope I’m wrong. If this is the case then please get round the table otherwise the relationship will only deteriorate. Personally I’m happy with Carol but would like her to provide us with a little more information. PVFC is for some fans their life and they need to be treated fairly and they need to know what’s happening at the club. I always used to hate the end of season as my life came to a standstill, however it’s been like the old end of season for so much of this season. COYW

[Fosse69]

The first 4 months of 2023 have been stressful for lots of us.The month of May is a period for the club to review the situations. Kick off June with a Forum and New Home Kit Day. Players back from holidays ready to fuel the rumours, and the Sun is shining.

[MBE]

18 hours ago, Budgie_2260 said:

Dan Townley on Twitter

One of the reasons we ask supporters to pre-submit is so we don’t have 50+ of the same question.

Those in attendance will 100% have the opportunity to add further questions/question points that have been made by those on the panel.



Seems reasonabe to me......

Its follows exactly the same format of all the other meetings held by the club's fan forums. I don't give a toss if its chaired by the club, the supporters club or the King.

It's a very professional way of running an informative town hall event. 

I've asked my questions and I will ask further questions if something comes to mind on the night or I need further clarification of topics discussed.

I suggest the supporters club do the same.

 

[Granville]

I think there are faults on both sides here. The club's communication has been poor but in fairness that may be because it wasn't the best time to be coming out and making statements given what was going on behind the scenes and the sacking of a manager. I also think given how the length of contracts are now announced and other details on injuries etc there may have been a change given Clarke's departure.

But the Supporters Club must also consider if some of the actions have been just a little bit too over the top. Inviting a sacked manager to an event that had nothing to do with him just seems like certain people in the SC determined to be the centre of attention by taking credit for righting a perceived wrong by the club. As I said at the time, we didn't give Micky Adams this treatment and he took us further than Clarke did. 

The SC are a massively strong voice but I do think that on this occasion what they did was just to show off rather than it be for the good of the club. 

[Iron Curtain]

 

2 hours ago, MBE said:

Its follows exactly the same format of all the other meetings held by the club's fan forums. I don't give a toss if its chaired by the club, the supporters club or the King.

It's a very professional way of running an informative town hall event. 

I've asked my questions and I will ask further questions if something comes to mind on the night or I need further clarification of topics discussed.

I suggest the supporters club do the same.

 

One problem the club have is that those that are anti Flitcroft have made their position abundantly clear. And I see nothing to suggest they will ever change their mind. 

That puts the club in a tricky situation, they were asked for more transparency and have come forward with a solution.

The choices were:

1. Allow a free for all public interrogation of an employee by an angry mob demanding to know info such as his salary which no football club would ever release.

2. Don’t bring him to the event which would have had the pitch forks out again.

3. Manage the questions somewhat and allow some time for open questions at the end.

Reality is, the club have answered a request from the fans but the people wanted it in a different way.

It’s a tricky situation and it’s up to the individual as to whether they recognise they are trying or batter them because it not exactly what you wanted. 

Remember… intentions count.

[Jacko51]

42 minutes ago, Granville said:

I think there are faults on both sides here. The club's communication has been poor but in fairness that may be because it wasn't the best time to be coming out and making statements given what was going on behind the scenes and the sacking of a manager. I also think given how the length of contracts are now announced and other details on injuries etc there may have been a change given Clarke's departure.

But the Supporters Club must also consider if some of the actions have been just a little bit too over the top. Inviting a sacked manager to an event that had nothing to do with him just seems like certain people in the SC determined to be the centre of attention by taking credit for righting a perceived wrong by the club. As I said at the time, we didn't give Micky Adams this treatment and he took us further than Clarke did. 

The SC are a massively strong voice but I do think that on this occasion what they did was just to show off rather than it be for the good of the club. 

If you saw the reaction of the fans on the night to Clarke I think you would have to accept there was nothing wrong with the decision to invite him. 

[1]

If you have a question you think the crowd will want to have answered, just shout it out every 10 minutes or so. It will be untenable to not address it after 5 or 6 attempts.

[Granville]

16 minutes ago, Jacko51 said:

If you saw the reaction of the fans on the night to Clarke I think you would have to accept there was nothing wrong with the decision to invite him. 

I agree to a certain extent, however this is a two sided thing again, if the club had acknowledged Clarke's departure properly, and not been all cloak and dagger over it then there wouldn't have needed to be an invite. It was poorly handled and symptomatic of a club that can do great positive PR when things are going well but seems to struggle with "crisis management".

That said, I can understand the SC stance on what it feels was a poor send off for a successful manager, but I still personally felt it was a matter of sticking two fingers up to the club when they hadn't previously chosen to thank or commemorate managers in this way.

[Granville]

3 minutes ago, 1 said:

If you have a question you think the crowd will want to have answered, just shout it out every 10 minutes or so. It will be untenable to not address it after 5 or 6 attempts.

Or they'll just ask you to leave because you can't be arsed to respect the format of the evening.

[MBE]

43 minutes ago, Iron Curtain said:

 

One problem the club have is that those that are anti Flitcroft have made their position abundantly clear. And I see nothing to suggest they will ever change their mind. 

That puts the club in a tricky situation, they were asked for more transparency and have come forward with a solution.

The choices were:

1. Allow a free for all public interrogation of an employee by an angry mob demanding to know info such as his salary which no football club would ever release.

2. Don’t bring him to the event which would have had the pitch forks out again.

3. Manage the questions somewhat and allow some time for open questions at the end.

Reality is, the club have answered a request from the fans but the people wanted it in a different way.

It’s a tricky situation and it’s up to the individual as to whether they recognise they are trying or batter them because it not exactly what you wanted. 

Remember… intentions count.

I just think some Vale fans aren’t happy unless they have something to moan about, the club will never do right for wrong in some eyes. 

The SC ( if Tim’s message represents SC views) rather than thinking they have got a positive reaction by the club arranging a fans forum with Flicker they are being precious because it’s not on their terms. Schoolboy stuff, it really is.

 

 

[Vale Ball]

If you saw the reaction of the fans on the night to Clarke I think you would have to accept there was nothing wrong with the decision to invite him. 

It was still a snub to the club 2 fingers if you like, the same as inviting Colin Garlick what was their connection to the team of 93 ?

Nothing against either of them and I would have been shocked if DC had not had a good reception.

12 months ago we were winning at Wembley what's gone wrong ? If something has gone wrong the SC should be transparent ( something they accuse the club of not being) and inform everyone get it out in the open because I for one and sick of the backbiting

Sent from my SM-A217F using onevalefan mobile app

[NorthwoodValiant]

Some fans are not going to be content until they are watching AFC Port Vale playing in Burslem park on a Sunday morning against the Jolly Carter