The Third Meeting.

But it would appear that it wasn’t a “harmless” scarf nor a “non-threatening” article to the Allams. And that is why it matters. It should not, but it does. Surely, you can see that?

MoH

 

I'm still going to go every match and keep my membership. Reading people on twitter telling me to quit. I'm sorry nobody tells me what to do. The owners are dickheads that's certain but so are some of the fans !

 

OK, re-written just for you .....

They are supposed to be adults, not 3 year olds running to their Mam because someone stuck their tongue out at them.
Anyone going on about the scarf and the article are simply fuelling the Allams excuse / latest delaying tactic and fuelling the apologists.
Instead surely we should all be simply focussing on how once again they have shown themselves to be utter cretins in relation to our football club.

 

We hardly ever agree but this is bang on.

 

To be fair though, we knew through past experience exactly what they were like and what they might do. The vast majority on here immediately smelt a rat when yesterday’s first statement was issued.

 

So true.

Wish the scarf had had something like " lying vindictive ****s" written on it.

 

you cant negotiate with people who don't want to negotiate - you need to develop a careful strategy to get them to move - it doesn't matter how innocuous these incidents were, they are being used as a sledge hammer by the Allams - much more careful thought required from our side - yes the Allams are acting like a pair of ****s - however we shouldn't be giving them ammunition to shoot us down - we should be using the ammunition we had to shoot them down

we need to recover the initiative now - maybe an HCST statement, reminding people that these meetings were requested by the Allams in return for an amnesty from protesting, reminding people that it was the Allams that wanted to improve relations with the fans and wanted to work with the fans groups to expedite change - reminding people that the fans were not the only people that the Allams had problems having a relationship with and their relationship with the Council was also of concern, reminding people that despite three months of meetings that the Allams had not made any movement to change anything or improve relations and remind people that we only agreed to an amnesty on the basis of the changes that they alluded to - we should be announcing that if the Allams genuinely want change, want to improve relations and want to make progress then we will continue with the meetings otherwise there is no point in further discussions - that puts it fairly and squarely back on their shoulders - that's how I'd do it anyway

 

These have been my thoughts for a while now. However, it wouldn’t surprise me if, once they’ve wrung every penny out of the club, they liquidate, or leave the club only fit for liquidation.

Gift to the city, one large white elephant!

Plus one in the eye for the council.

 

That may be true, people are commenting on the fact the Trust and Geoff shouldn't have given them the opportunity.

 

The talk of the scarf isn’t that relevant of course

The Allams were quite happy to continue negotiating 6 weeks after that ‘gift’
Why it was only a few hours before the meeting that Ehab said all the things he was going to do to resolve concessions, the name and the badge.
So he was well on track despite a scarf

So do people think the article was threatening enough to ‘put a gun to his head’ ? Because that’s the reason he gave for cancelling the meeting...not the scarf

For the record I don’t

 

Thanks Dennis. A summary of the facts, rather than a feeble attempt to hurl bricks at Geoff Bielby.

 

As I’ve said previously on this thread I think the Allams were offended by being presented with those scarves. They just simply kept their powder dry until they needed an excuse to use it. Yesterday gave them that opportunity.

MoH

 

I can see your point Ming, but they didn’t use it. They said it was cancelled because of the article

 

Given what happened yesterday, I suspect that “joviality” was a front.

MoH

 

Agreed.

The timings and recent actions/interviews are all out to use either the scarf or the article as a genuine reason for cancelling.

FFS if the veils gone from my eyes, how can anyone else defend them and try to proportion blame on the Trust/Geoff?

Bonkers situation. Or, "Typical City/Bluudy Targers" as you prefer.

 

I do approve of the liberal use of ‘****s’ on this thread.

Kudos all who partook.

 

the ONLY reason he said he was going to resolve concessions etc is because he already knew he was going to pull the plug and he'd decided he had the excuse to do it - he's put the spotlight squarely back on the fans rather than themselves - its got nothing to do with throwing rocks at people, equally no one is beyond reproach - both the reasons given by the Allams are pathetic - we all need to work together to get this back on track now without giving them any reason to take issue with our actions

 

And then promptly released a statement referring to other “inappropriate actions” that had occurred previously. Presumably in an attempt to show how conciliatory they were prepared to be i.e ignoring childish acts in an attempt to reach agreement. Yesterday, they enacted that plan.

MoH