Frankie 8,562 Posted September 3, 2009 Author Share Posted September 3, 2009 But which of the sites that were invited actually turned up and participated? All apart from the GersForum admin who had to call off on the day due to illness. However, they are still interested in working within the project. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 But which of the sites that were invited actually turned up and participated? I believe that they all turned up apart from Gersforum, who had to pull out at the last moment. I'm sure Frankie could confirm this....which he just did. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 All apart from the GersForum admin who had to call off on the day due to illness. However, they are still interested in working within the project. In which case I take my hat off to you all because that in itself is quite an achievement .... and a very positive one too. In your OP, you say...... "........the Assembly has now submitted a summary response regarding the issues within the STS report and is in broad agreement with its findings" ......do you mean they submitted it to the club and, if so, I'd love to understand the point of engagement within the club itself. Or do you mean they submitted it for internal review by the Assembly committee? Also, do you have a sense of the possible timeframe going forward? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 In which case I take my hat off to you all because that in itself is quite an achievement .... and a very positive one too. In your OP, you say...... "........the Assembly has now submitted a summary response regarding the issues within the STS report and is in broad agreement with its findings" ......do you mean they submitted it to the club and, if so, I'd love to understand the point of engagement within the club itself. Or do you mean they submitted it for internal review by the Assembly committee? Also, do you have a sense of the possible timeframe going forward? The Assembly replied to Frankie but they haven't submitted their reply to the club, but hopefully they will do so. Not sure about the timescale as a lot of things have been thrown up in the air following the "change" at the top, but there will be continued dialogue with the Assembly to try and ensure that things move forward. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 The Assembly replied to Frankie but they haven't submitted their reply to the club, but hopefully they will do so. Not sure about the timescale as a lot of things have been thrown up in the air following the "change" at the top, but there will be continued dialogue with the Assembly to try and ensure that things move forward. Thanks BD. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannochsidebear 2,405 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 One thing to remember that I haven't seen elsewhere is that the club were actually represented at the meeting through Jim Hannah, who was very positive about both the report and trying to move things forward. He also made it clear that, in his opinion, the club were very open to taking forward sensible and practical recommendations, and this was reiterated when discussing media relations. Stopping short of an outright assurance (not his remit) he indicated in the strongest possible terms that the club were ready to back any fans initiatives regarding media boycotts etc, and what I read out of that is that while the club wont come out and attack any media person or organisation, it will behind the scenes back the Assembly should they wish to do so. Of course this meeting was before Murray stepped down, and we have no idea if the new regime will take a more proactive stance in this regard. I am assuming the Assembly has already sent a letter to the new Chairman asking for his thoughts on this and other matters. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 That's an incredibly encouraging post Tannoch. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 Yes, I thought Jim Hannah handled himself very well, and put forward the club's view in a way that could be appreciated by those attending, and not in a "we know better" kind of way that can often be the case when "the club" are talking to the support. I didn't agree with everything he said, but both him and Andy Kerr did well at the meeting. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Spliff 0 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 One thing to remember that I haven't seen elsewhere is that the club were actually represented at the meeting through Jim Hannah, who was very positive about both the report and trying to move things forward. He also made it clear that, in his opinion, the club were very open to taking forward sensible and practical recommendations, and this was reiterated when discussing media relations. Stopping short of an outright assurance (not his remit) he indicated in the strongest possible terms that the club were ready to back any fans initiatives regarding media boycotts etc, and what I read out of that is that while the club wont come out and attack any media person or organisation, it will behind the scenes back the Assembly should they wish to do so. Of course this meeting was before Murray stepped down, and we have no idea if the new regime will take a more proactive stance in this regard. I am assuming the Assembly has already sent a letter to the new Chairman asking for his thoughts on this and other matters. I suppose it's all about interpretation and mine was slightly different tbh. What I liked about what JH said was that he suggested that the club would privately be quietly pleased if there was some sort of fan-driven action. On the flip-side I got the impression that the club would remain distinctly in the background and not take any part. That's how I interpreted it anyway. When all's said and done, I don't believe it's good enough for RFC to abdigate responsibility for sticking up for RFC to the fans. Maybe Alastair Johnston will have a different inclination - let's hope so. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 (edited) I'm afraid I just don't get it. Why is the club so unwilling to get involved in such matters? What is it that they see as a threat if they get involved. They must believe there is a conflict of interests but I can't see what it could possibly be. If they are prepared to offer clandestine support for a supporter-led campaign against elements of the media, do they honestly think this would remain a secret for long? The only conclusion I can reach is that the interests of the club and those of the people running it are not aligned. It's this dilemma that has always made me dubious about initiatives like the STS project. No matter how well done they are, if the club remains at odds with the interests of the supporters then I find it difficult to see how unity and strength can ever be achieved. On the other hand, if the club would align itself with the fans, there is no limit to what could be achieved. Edited September 3, 2009 by maineflyer 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.