josh8

On reflection there where alot more....Not only Mcdough's goal that day, but he'd hit the post before he scored that goal... Tony Caldwell's 5 goals in the Walsall massacre... that bloody fluke from Malcolm Mcdonald... and who can forget Paul Comstives 2 goals from corners against Bournmouth (I think)

I couldn't resist it as soon as the Charlton game was mentioned... haha

It was definitely the Charlton game...it was 1-1 at half time, Nat did his Churchillian speech and we smashed em 3-0 in the second half... the day and game stands alongside Frankies 'that' goal' v Ipswich... Sams bullet header against Sunderland... Chelsea fans swapping ends with us as... Frankies winner against Utd and that guy who parachutted into the lever end halfway through the Arsanal game as 5 of the most unbelievable things I've ever witnessed at Burnden...

It has been brought to my attention that I may have inadvertently used a racist comment on a previous post earlier this evening... In a reply to Ziggy stardust post, where he used the terminology 'Ching a ling' I repeated this and again used this term in a further post . I've now been informed there is a story about to break that I'm actually a racist...! I'm pretty sure that this 'breaking news' is the work of Sluffy, who spends his every waking day pouring over my every word and move, looking and hoping to find something to discredit me with ... (you really do need to get a life) and who still hasn't got over the fact I found him out all those years ago... tut..tut..tut (by the way Sluffy...it wasn't actually me who pointed that domain name similar to your forum to the 'dwarf porn' site...!) First of all...I'd never heard that term before and actually thought it meant a 'rich guy' and taken from the term 'Ca'ching' ... Secondly... I was merely referring to Ziggies 'rich buyer' and had I had any inkling that it had any racist overtones or was detrimental in any shape or form..., I would not have repeated or used it... People who know me know I don't use that kind of terminology... So I would like to take this oppotunity to apologise to all the rich bastards on here I may have inadvertently offended... However.. I supose it stops me coming on here and lets you get on with ST bashing in peace...

Its good because we don't want anybody selling the club assets off... I want the club to always own their own ground...why would we want to sell it to rent it back...would you sell your house and rent it back ?

It doesn't work like that... Ken can sell the club, lock stock and Barrell today, this minute...its only if he wants to sell off the stadium as a seperete entity where the acv comes into effect... and even then...do you honestly think the ST would stand in the way of any billionaire who wanted to invest serious money into this club...?

What a load of bollox... the ACV doesn't stop Ken from selling the club or bringing in and investment... it just makes it difficult to use the stadium as collateral to some dodgy loan shark or even worse, waking up one morning to find out the stadium has been sold ...but not to worry, we can lease it back for 2m a year....

If there was a Ching-a-ling who wanted to throw £500m at a club, They wouldn't give a toss about an ACV....

You are right Sluffy...some people do have short memories...or suffer selectivereading disorder...

Yeah...I can see it now, 'Apathy Wanderers Supporters Trust' Standing on the ticket..., moan alot and do Fcuk All It's a definite winner here....

That's like saying the Labour Party, Conservatives, Lib Dems or UKip lack validity, because the majority of the country don't support them, as only around 60% of the electorate actually vote As for only wanting to hear opinions like their own...a bit of kettle calling pot there... I've seen what happens to posters on here who don't fit into your demographic and dare to have an alternative opinion... If you believe in the concept and objectives of an ST but don't agree with the personnel involved in the running of it, you should get involved to effect the changes you want to see... If you simply don't agree with the idea of a Supporters trust..then you don't join and you argue your stance... I don't mind any of those positions, what pee's me off is when we're criticized for doing what we're set up to do or when people just make stuff up about us just because it suits their argument, or worse, because they're looking for approval and acceptance from their peers but to address that specific question...., we as a board don't all share the same opinion, but we're a democratic organization, we all have a say where we state our opinions and vote on the issues being put forward I'm also happy to meet anybody who wants an adult conversation about the ST...

What sort of action do you think the ST could take that would affect the running of this club...? We don't do anything on behalf of all supporters How do you know 75% of the average home gate doesn't want anything to do with the trust....? over 6800 supporters pledged to join the trust at its inception, with over 3000 becoming share holder and over 11,700 supporters turned out for the legends game we organised Yeah...membership slowed down last season when the team where doing well and the perception was everything was rosy in the garden... but this seasons lack of success on the pitch, along with the ownership dispute between KA and DH has seen a surge in new membership

It's only in a bad way to the few on here...I can assure you the majority of our members don't share that view.... The Board is made up of individuals who have their own opinion and ideas of how the trust should be run...they're not people who can be controlled, nor should they be... every decision that is made by the trust is done democratically and in accordance with the model rules

Share holders pay a one ff subscription for their share and ongoing subscription is on a purely voluntary basis... so as long as you don't cancel your membership and return your share, you will always receive the benefits of a shareholding member.. of which voting in the upcoming elections is one ...

The ST is creditable... It's a legal entity that is government backed and it's envisaged that all clubs will have a functional ST in the future... so if you don't like it..get involved and change it... because it's going nowhere, Proof of this comes in the shape of new members who sign up on a weekly basis, or the dozens of emails of support we get whenever we take a bashing on SM or from the club by supporters who are genuinely worried about the future of BWFC...

Yes...but we pay for it (personally) and receive nothing from the club free

Because 50% have to stay in place, if everybody stood down every year, you could have a different board every 12mths and no organsation can work like that.. so whoever is elected this year will be there for 2 years, the members who don't step down tis year will have to step down next year and so on.. which then gives continuity... Yeah... they are paid members.

I didn't try to take over the BWSA...I along with Chris Peacock and Howard Worgan where co-opted onto the bwsa board by the club after we approached the club with the idea of forming a Supporters trust, After meeting with the then Chirf Exec Alan Duckworth we where asked to get involved with the 'Independent' BWSA and try to modernise it instead of starting a brand new Supporters group (which was relatively new at that time), we agreed to this on the assurance that the club wouldn't interfere with the running of the Association and that it would remain independent.... we all resigned after it became apparent that the club was merely micro managing everything we did, they would use the power of gift ie..players attending social events, signed shirts and even function rooms to keep us in line... it became obvious the only reason we where asked to get involved was to stop us forming a trully independent Supporters trust..a supporters club Phil Gartside couldn't control... By the way...in the 9 months we where involved, we took the membership from 63 members (YES..63) to nearly 700. we secured sponsorship, built a website and increased the average attendance of monthly social events from the usual 20 something to over 120, and left the bank account with over 4k in it, from nilsh (they where living on club hand outs before that)...which I can assure you, they have never reached those dizzy heights since... So I'm pretty proud of what we did at the BWSA then...we definitely left it in a better state than we found it....

You are right Ani, the trust doesn't represent BWFC Fans, it represents the BWFC Supporters Trust, of which you can go in the website, read the model rules which sets out the aims and objectives of the Trust (As laid out by Supporters Direct and adopted by all ST's), if you agree with them, you are invited to join, if you don't, you simply don't join... (by the way, over 6000 joined and over 3000 are shareholders) Its just the same as any other club or society...if I don't like what they stand for or what their objectives are..I don't join.... As for the running of the trust, that's a different matter... like I've stated before, none of us knew each other before January 2016, we're all from different walks of life with only one thing in common, we're all avid BWFC Supporters, just like the members on this forum...and unfortunately there isn't a "How to run an ST for Dummy's" manual out there.. so, yeah, we've made mistakes, we're not the ultimate professionals, we're just fans like you lot on here who care about our club and feel supporters should have a voice, but again, you can only effect change from within, So the more people who get involved, the more representative it will be...

The BWFCST Model Rules (As laid out by Supporters Direct) state that 50% of the current board has to step down every year, Ian Bridge and George Bowers have already stepped down, I will be stepping down and putting myself up for election too, which will make up the 50%, There will be 4 elected places up for grabs which will increase the elected board from 6 to 7 members... I too think Mounts should stand for election.. he has a lot to say and understands you really do have to be in it to change it...

Would you like to point out just where I've said we as the ST want to run or help run BWFC...? I've spent all last night and most of today on here answering all your question trying to set the record straight on a few untruths and misconceptions about the ST and the board.. but I can see now the real questions are drying up so I'll take my leave.... Like I've already said...there are one or two posters on here who have known me for a long time...I'd hope they will vouch that I'm a straight talker...what you see is very much what you get...I've tried to be honest and direct and to answer all your questions... I hope its been helpful and given you a better understanding of what the trust is all about...even if it hasn't converted you.. but we really are lifelong supporters just like you...we might have different opinions...but we only want whats good for bwfc and to ensure there is still a bwfc here for our kids and grand kids when we are long gone...... I don't mind coming back here from time to time to answer your real concerns... Mounts has my number Cheers...

No personal data is held on the website... its merely a gateway... all membership details are held on a fully secured third party platform (not sure if its something like fresh books) but we still need the ssl sorting...but if you know anything about this type of thing ...its been a nightmare due to the fact Jamie registered it last yr and because someone new has done it this year we've had re-apply....

I know who you mean now...I remember his and that Simon Nightingales motions... but I don't know him..I think.he actually used a proxy to put his motions forward