Stourbridge Football Club-Unofficial Forum

The latest views on the Glassboys


You are not connected. Please login or register

Kyle Haynes to Worcester City?

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 5 of 5]

101 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 21:54

PhilC wrote:Fair dos DA, but I think there is a difference between passing scrutiny and taking every advantage to have a pop, at people who i think are doing a bloody good voluntary job at running our club. We'll never all like everything they do, but when I think where we were the phrase be careful what you wish for springs to mind.,

I think everyone on here agrees that Clive was wrong to post what he posted, but I don't see why the point has to be raised over and over again.

Maybe if he'd come back on and held his hand's up it'd have been different Phil.

Like i said,i respect your position,your family's club history and all that but a forum is what it is,nobody makes anybody read it or forces anybody to reply,i think once you sign up to any site you have to expect that people will take issue with things and that's their prerogative.

Mary Whitehouse never grasped the concept of there being an off button on her TV,some on here are the same,if people don't like the "vibe" then don't get involved,it's not rocket science.

I think i'll start a thread about today's match,we seem to be letting another poor defeat avoid our gaze Shocked

View user profile

102 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 22:04

Devil's Advocate wrote:
PhilC wrote:Fair dos DA, but I think there is a difference between passing scrutiny and taking every advantage to have a pop, at people who i think are doing a bloody good voluntary job at running our club. We'll never all like everything they do, but when I think where we were the phrase be careful what you wish for springs to mind.,

I think everyone on here agrees that Clive was wrong to post what he posted, but I don't see why the point has to be raised over and over again.

Maybe if he'd come back on and held his hand's up it'd have been different Phil.

Like i said,i respect your position,your family's club history and all that but a forum is what it is,nobody makes anybody read it or forces anybody to reply,i think once you sign up to any site you have to expect that people will take issue with things and that's their prerogative.

Mary Whitehouse never grasped the concept of there being an off button on her TV,some on here are the same,if people don't like the "vibe" then don't get involved,it's not rocket science.

I think i'll start a thread about today's match,we seem to be letting another poor defeat avoid our gaze Shocked


Yet......surely, if you take the stance "if you don't like what the forum says, then don't read it".......then the same logic would suggest "if you don't like the way the club is run, then don't follow it" ??

View user profile

103 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 22:11

Is it that simple?
You can't just change your club because it's not run how you like!!
A bit too black and white for my liking.

View user profile

104 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 22:22

Grassboys wrote:
Devil's Advocate wrote:
PhilC wrote:Fair dos DA, but I think there is a difference between passing scrutiny and taking every advantage to have a pop, at people who i think are doing a bloody good voluntary job at running our club. We'll never all like everything they do, but when I think where we were the phrase be careful what you wish for springs to mind.,

I think everyone on here agrees that Clive was wrong to post what he posted, but I don't see why the point has to be raised over and over again.

Maybe if he'd come back on and held his hand's up it'd have been different Phil.

Like i said,i respect your position,your family's club history and all that but a forum is what it is,nobody makes anybody read it or forces anybody to reply,i think once you sign up to any site you have to expect that people will take issue with things and that's their prerogative.

Mary Whitehouse never grasped the concept of there being an off button on her TV,some on here are the same,if people don't like the "vibe" then don't get involved,it's not rocket science.

I think i'll start a thread about today's match,we seem to be letting another poor defeat avoid our gaze Shocked


Yet......surely, if you take the stance "if you don't like what the forum says, then don't read it".......then the same logic would suggest "if you don't like the way the club is run, then don't follow it" ??


What an concept,give up watching my local side,a side i started following in 1974 as a 12 year old!

I think not.

I've been around Amblecote for 41 years this coming spring,30 years or more before most people now involved in running the club had set foot in the place.

As long as i don't "pop my clogs" in the near future i'd like to bet i'm still here many years after most have departed for pastures new.

With respect GB,i think participation in social media ( or not as the case may be ) is a totally different dynamic to that of actually watching your team.

View user profile

105 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 23:06

I respect the fact that you've been a supporter for a very long time (although you do bang on about the fact fairly frequently Very Happy )......

With regards to people moving on to pastures new...............are you passively waiting for that to happen or actively encouraging it? .........because if I was an unpaid club official (AKA volunteer), I'd be wondering if it was worth the effort.

View user profile

106 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 23:12

Devil's Advocate wrote:...its a natural reaction for you and TRM to be pissed when you hear the moans.

I have followed Stour since 74,your dad has been part of the club all of those years and for many years before then,in my humble opinion he is "Mr Stourbridge" and one day a statue should be erected to him, his service to Stour is truly amazing, I have the greatest respect for everything he has done for our club and added to that,a nicer man it would be hard to find,Stour owe a great debt to the old boy.

For this reason I understand why you and Rich really feel it when people are having a moan but to balance that it surely is right that on a forum fans have the right to pass scrutiny on the club?

No.

You don't.

I will tell you what I am pissed off about.

I have known you for a while now. I have always enjoyed reading your posts analysing matches and performances. I have respected your views and opinions on the team, the faults and failings, the good days and the bad. You have, over the years, praised and criticised in a fair, balanced and reasonable manner - even though your criticism has occasionally been more in terms more "forthright" than I would use!. I have (broadly) agreed with you far, far more often than you probably realise.

A year ago tomorrow it was just the two of us behind the far goal at Truro watching Rowey slot in that equaliser and Ben miss that chance for all three points.

On 19th December (way, way before Clive posted anything on this forum - and for the record I, like Phil and others, feel it was an error of judgment on his part to do so. I shall have to run the risk of a visit from Andy P's heavies for having the nerve to express such a thought) you posted the following:

Devil's Advocate wrote:personally i don't like this "thought police" attitude where people tell people what they should think or discuss,it reached laughable proportions before the meeting with club official's when it was suggested as to what questions should be asked and that the questions should "focus on the future" and that the past should be "left behind",if you know who i am GBP then you'll be aware that i wasn't allowing that "guidance" to affect my choice of questions.

This is not the only comment on these lines that you have made.

I have read back through the thread that preceded and followed the Open Evening. Only two people "connected with the club", as it were, posted on that thread before the meeting. One was me, and the other was Brain Handy (matchday steward and programme seller), whose only post was to express sympathy with Nath over his Nan's illness.

Therefore your comments above are aimed at me.

My posts on the thread relating specifically to the Open Evening, it's format, set-up, etc were as follows:

The first post was to draw attention to the piece on the website announcing the Open Evening. It was purely a link to the article with no additional comment from me.

Following some queries as to why questions had to be submitted in advance I posted this:

TRM wrote:Questions DO NOT have to be submitted in advance. That is for the benefit of people who cannot make it on Thursday but are still keen to have their say. I worded it badly and will amend in the morning.

Turn up and ask whatever you want.

I amended the article the next morning and that seemed to satisfy everybody. Sadly the article is now removed from the website - once the meeting was done and dusted it no longer needed to be there - so I can't refer back to it.

Then I posted that the time had been brought forward, and answered a question about the format of the night.

And then I decided to make a personal plea. Only I stupidly left out the word "personal"...

TRM wrote:One final plea...

I would urge supporters who are going along on Thursday night (or who are intending to email any comments if they cannot be there) to focus on the FUTURE.

You all have your views on the past, whether good, bad, indifferent, or a mixture of all three. The past is what it is, and cannot be changed.

The future can be shaped and moulded, starting from now.

This set the house alight with all sorts of accusations about not being allowed to ask questions about the past and such like, so I tried to clarify things with this...

TRM wrote:Alright, STOP!

Let me clarify.

ASK WHATEVER YOU WANT. That has always been Andy's intention. If the air needs clearing on things that have gone on then so be it. In fact, it's vital that that happens otherwise clearly the Club and the supporters will never move forwards.

My "plea" last night wasn't meant to confuse that. It was just a PERSONAL view that somehow, somewhere, a line needs to be drawn and we have got to look forwards instead of backwards. Thursday night may not be that "line" but it should be the beginning of the future.

I hope that's clear enough, but if not let me say it again.

Thursday night is an OPEN discussion evening. Talk about anything and everything. NOTHING is off limits.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE try to take this damn thing in the spirit it is intended, and embrace it!

And finally, when the club was then accused of a lack of clarity - left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing, or some such - I posted this...

TRM wrote:It's not lack of clarity in communication from the club, it's me not choosing my words carefully enough!

Go back to the piece on the website, and my earlier posts and I hope I 've made it as clear as possible that there are NO BOUNDARIES to what you can raise on Thursday.

And then this...

TRM wrote:All I want is what's best for the future of this Club. I don't care about politics or personalities. I've tried to promote Thursday night as a "good thing" and a positive move, and that's my opinion both personally and as a "spokesman", if you want to call me that.

Perhaps I've tried too hard, but it breaks my heart (bit of an exaggeration, but you get my drift) to read some of the things on here.

I've said enough.

You are an intelligent man, Mick. Intelligent enough to run your own business successfully, and intelligent enough to read and understand all of those posts in their entirety, rather than "cherry-picking" the bits that suit your agenda (yes, that word, and I make no apology for using it).

However, you have chosen to interpret them in a way that does not bear relation to what you KNOW to be my true intention. That misinterpretation CAN ONLY BE deliberate, willful and, in my opinion, malicious. It is also a personal insult to me, let alone other people at the club.

As I said at the beginning, I had respect for you and you opinions. I now have none.

View user profile

107 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 23:44

TRM wrote:
Devil's Advocate wrote:...its a natural reaction for you and TRM to be pissed when you hear the moans.

I have followed Stour since 74,your dad has been part of the club all of those years and for many years before then,in my humble opinion he is "Mr Stourbridge" and one day a statue should be erected to him, his service to Stour is truly amazing, I have the greatest respect for everything he has done for our club and added to that,a nicer man it would be hard to find,Stour owe a great debt to the old boy.

For this reason I understand why you and Rich really feel it when people are having a moan but to balance that it surely is right that on a forum fans have the right to pass scrutiny on the club?

No.

You don't.

I will tell you what I am pissed off about.

I have known you for a while now. I have always enjoyed reading your posts analysing matches and performances. I have respected your views and opinions on the team, the faults and failings, the good days and the bad. You have, over the years, praised and criticised in a fair, balanced and reasonable manner - even though your criticism has occasionally been more in terms more "forthright" than I would use!. I have (broadly) agreed with you far, far more often than you probably realise.

A year ago tomorrow it was just the two of us behind the far goal at Truro watching Rowey slot in that equaliser and Ben miss that chance for all three points.

On 19th December (way, way before Clive posted anything on this forum - and for the record I, like Phil and others, feel it was an error of judgment on his part to do so. I shall have to run the risk of a visit from Andy P's heavies for having the nerve to express such a thought) you posted the following:

Devil's Advocate wrote:personally i don't like this "thought police" attitude where people tell people what they should think or discuss,it reached laughable proportions before the meeting with club official's when it was suggested as to what questions should be asked and that the questions should "focus on the future" and that the past should be "left behind",if you know who i am GBP then you'll be aware that i wasn't allowing that "guidance" to affect my choice of questions.

This is not the only comment on these lines that you have made.

I have read back through the thread that preceded and followed the Open Evening. Only two people "connected with the club", as it were, posted on that thread before the meeting. One was me, and the other was Brain Handy (matchday steward and programme seller), whose only post was to express sympathy with Nath over his Nan's illness.

Therefore your comments above are aimed at me.

My posts on the thread relating specifically to the Open Evening, it's format, set-up, etc were as follows:

The first post was to draw attention to the piece on the website announcing the Open Evening. It was purely a link to the article with no additional comment from me.

Following some queries as to why questions had to be submitted in advance I posted this:

TRM wrote:Questions DO NOT have to be submitted in advance. That is for the benefit of people who cannot make it on Thursday but are still keen to have their say. I worded it badly and will amend in the morning.

Turn up and ask whatever you want.

I amended the article the next morning and that seemed to satisfy everybody. Sadly the article is now removed from the website - once the meeting was done and dusted it no longer needed to be there - so I can't refer back to it.

Then I posted that the time had been brought forward, and answered a question about the format of the night.

And then I decided to make a personal plea. Only I stupidly left out the word "personal"...

TRM wrote:One final plea...

I would urge supporters who are going along on Thursday night (or who are intending to email any comments if they cannot be there) to focus on the FUTURE.

You all have your views on the past, whether good, bad, indifferent, or a mixture of all three. The past is what it is, and cannot be changed.

The future can be shaped and moulded, starting from now.

This set the house alight with all sorts of accusations about not being allowed to ask questions about the past and such like, so I tried to clarify things with this...

TRM wrote:Alright, STOP!

Let me clarify.

ASK WHATEVER YOU WANT. That has always been Andy's intention. If the air needs clearing on things that have gone on then so be it. In fact, it's vital that that happens otherwise clearly the Club and the supporters will never move forwards.

My "plea" last night wasn't meant to confuse that. It was just a PERSONAL view that somehow, somewhere, a line needs to be drawn and we have got to look forwards instead of backwards. Thursday night may not be that "line" but it should be the beginning of the future.

I hope that's clear enough, but if not let me say it again.

Thursday night is an OPEN discussion evening. Talk about anything and everything. NOTHING is off limits.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE try to take this damn thing in the spirit it is intended, and embrace it!

And finally, when the club was then accused of a lack of clarity - left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing, or some such - I posted this...

TRM wrote:It's not lack of clarity in communication from the club, it's me not choosing my words carefully enough!

Go back to the piece on the website, and my earlier posts and I hope I 've made it as clear as possible that there are NO BOUNDARIES to what you can raise on Thursday.

And then this...

TRM wrote:All I want is what's best for the future of this Club. I don't care about politics or personalities. I've tried to promote Thursday night as a "good thing" and a positive move, and that's my opinion both personally and as a "spokesman", if you want to call me that.

Perhaps I've tried too hard, but it breaks my heart (bit of an exaggeration, but you get my drift) to read some of the things on here.

I've said enough.

You are an intelligent man, Mick. Intelligent enough to run your own business successfully, and intelligent enough to read and understand all of those posts in their entirety, rather than "cherry-picking" the bits that suit your agenda (yes, that word, and I make no apology for using it).

However, you have chosen to interpret them in a way that does not bear relation to what you KNOW to be my true intention. That misinterpretation CAN ONLY BE deliberate, willful and, in my opinion, malicious. It is also a personal insult to me, let alone other people at the club.

As I said at the beginning, I had respect for you and you opinions. I now have none.


Considering what i said earlier this evening in a reply to Phil about the pair of you and your dad i'm dumfounded at this tirade aimed at me,you talk of losing respect,well join the club.

You come on and snipe with words like "agenda" etc,you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

I'm not going to go into full detail's on this open forum Richard but there are things that have happened that you do not know about,i've let these things get to me,i'll admit that and if you knew what they were then i don't think you'd have written what you did.

If we bump into each other at a match i'm more than willing to speak to you "one to one" and to put you in the picture,if you then can't understand my feeling's then that's up to you.

I'm not going to slate you in the way you have me,yes,i think you were wrong to even try to set out the way the questions should be asked at that meeting and i made it quite clear what i thought of that but i didn't think it was a shooting offence.

I made it clear earlier,i understand how close Stourbridge is to your heart and to the heart of your family and the club owe's a debt of gratitude to your dad in particular,i'm disappointed that you felt it necessary to tear into me personally in this way.

View user profile

108 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sat Jan 10 2015, 23:57

Can you put this on another topic cus it's taking fu** ing ages to scroll down the pages

View user profile

109 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 00:14

Nothing against you jack, you do a good job...........I think it's about time we had another unofficial forum

View user profile

110 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 00:22

Just to reiterate what DA has said in his last message, without quoting the entire article again, yes, I think people would react differently and not call us 'stupid' if they knew of certain things that have been said and heard over the last couple of years. Nobody on here really wants to be negative about the club for the sake of it,they wish there was no need to be, it's just that some people know of certain facts and bits of information that are making them feel a bit concerned about the club at present and it is entirely within their right to express their concern and negativity given their knowledge.

View user profile

111 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 00:28

TRM...let fans make comments about the club the way they see fit and you stick to doing what you do for the club, surely that would be best.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

View user profile

112 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 01:19

The saga continues. As far as I'm aware, TRM is a fan of Stourbridge so his opinion is as valid as anyone else's

I get along with most people on here (I don't know them all), but it's all getting very niggly.

I know it won't happen, but perhaps it's time a line was drawn under this and move on. It's not been about Kyle Haynes since about page 2.

View user profile

113 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 08:41

Baggiestour wrote:Nothing against you jack, you do a good job...........I think it's about time we had another unofficial forum

Why do we need another forum mucka?
As you say,Jack does a good job,don't agree with a lot of what he puts but each to their own.
Keep up the good work Nory.

View user profile

114 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 08:46

Nath wrote:Just to reiterate what DA has said in his last message, without quoting the entire article again, yes, I think people would react differently and not call us 'stupid' if they knew of certain things that have been said and heard over the last couple of years. Nobody on here really wants to be negative about the club for the sake of it,they wish there was no need to be, it's just that some people know of certain facts and bits of information that are making them feel a bit concerned about the club at present and it is entirely within their right to express their concern and negativity given their knowledge.

Very true Nath....
In my relatively short time of supporting stour I've been made aware of certain things that really shouldn't have been said or happened and I applaud Devil for not making one of these things common knowledge.

Other people on this forum are also aware of said occurrence and it amazes me how they don't believe the club are against this forum.

View user profile

115 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 09:10

Jack

avatar
Admin
Baggiestour wrote:Nothing against you jack, you do a good job...........I think it's about time we had another unofficial forum

Create your own then.

View user profile http://glassboys.the-talk.net

116 Re: Kyle Haynes to Worcester City? on Sun Jan 11 2015, 09:14

Jack

avatar
Admin
This thread has gone on long enough and is achieving nothing. So it's going to be locked. Any further threads that continue the same theme will alse be locked.

Cheers, Jack

View user profile http://glassboys.the-talk.net

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 5 of 5]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum