i dont know kevin or what happened in 2006. im not in any group who is in the know so i dont know any politics from board level apart from what is passed down via media or forums.
reading the forums and bits from the media, here is the full picture from the impression i have received regarding what happened in 2006 until now. obviously details could be wrong as again im basing this on just what i have read on the forum from those involved and in the know. sorry if details are wrong.
4 people including this kevin person was asked by the board to look at ways to improve us. these 4 were also on the board of directors as well. they made the 'ROVERS AGENDA FOR CHANGE' (RAFC) which highlights all the changes they feel needed to be done to take us forward as they believed we were going backwards. exactly what they were asked to do by the rest of the board. here is that document for RAFC - (26 pages and well worth a read and a lot sounds like a very good ideas) -
http://www.roversagendaforchange.org.uk/docs/Rovers Agenda for Change.pdf
they put forward lots of ideas to the table to improve relations with the fans as this was at an all time low. a lot of the ideas looks like was to do with the clubs finances. they wanted to inject over a million of their own funds to implement these changes but one of the conditions were the board had to let these 4 run the day to day finances of the club so they can keep their changes on track and on scheduale. sounds good to me!
but it seems like the board took offense to this request and refused to look at the RAFC documents. as a result kevin and and the other 3 resigned from the board as no longer wanted to be part of that current board who they thought was taking the club backwards.
here is what was in the press at the time they resigned:
Former managing director Mike Turl says Bristol Rovers have spurned a £1.3m cash injection by rejecting his investment plans.
Turl recently quit the Pirates' board after chairman Geoff Dunford called his plans "fatally flawed."
Turl said: "The vision was about more than money, it was to provide football in a fan and community-based club. I was prepared to invest £1.3m, but I wanted to ensure I could manage the day-to-day finances."
Fellow directors Kevin Spencer and Colin Williams quit the Bristol Rovers' board at the same time as Turl.
Turl added: "There needs to be a £500,000 cash injection to cover operating losses and I as prepared to step up and meet that commitment. I was also willing to commit funds to prepare for stadium development vital to Rovers' future. But I believe it's time to draw a line under this and I'm sorry things have ended this way and we're not able to continue the work we started."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/b/bristol_rovers/5083186.stm
they even went as far as not watching rovers play again until this season as they didnt want anything to do with the club while the current board are still in place. but their love for rovers brought them back to watching games this season as fans in the stands like the rest of us paying their money to watch. fair enough.
during saturdays match with northampton, the board heard kevin was in attendance so they got another employee to escort kevin from the stadium during the game and handed him a letter confirming he was banned from ever returning. the other few 3 who resigned didnt get escorted or banned though. sounds like this kevin person done something to upset the current board for them to still that angry to ban him now after 6 years.
here is the boards statement:
The Board of Bristol Rovers Football Club has excluded Mr Kevin Spencer from attendance at all future Bristol Rovers events following his persistent unfounded criticism of the Club and its Board.
Mr Spencer resigned from the Board in June 2006 and has been consistent in his criticism which is unbecoming of an ex-director since that period, and the Board feels that the only way to move on is to exclude him from future events.
The Club intends to make no further comment.
http://www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/article/kevin-spencer-statement-413773.aspx
this kevin posts on a different forum. he has denied these claims that he has been doing what the board claims. this has angered a lot of fans who know kevin and fans in the know of what has happened. the way he was escorted and banned has angered a lot of people who dont even know kevin. there has been talk on a different forum that kevin comments on about boycotting games and saying things like they wont return until kevin is allowed back etc. kevin has issued a response to this:
Further to the event on Saturday when Dave Harper the clubs safety officer handed me a banning order after a unanimous vote by the board on the 1st of October 2012 I would like to respond collectively to what I have since read on forums, social media and personal contact from fellow supporters.
It has been suggested that protests and boycotts should take place in my name. Although flattered by the level of support I cannot support any action which takes place in my name. My 42 years as a supporter of Bristol Rovers at Eastville, Twerton Park, The Memorial Stadium and hopefully the new UWE Stadium are over. Any gatherings on a match day should be to support the manager and the team and not a fellow supporter. My criticism of the owners of Bristol Rovers has intended to be of a constructive nature as I like all other Rovers supporters have only wanted a successful club both on and off the pitch.
The events of 2006 have been well documented and should be left where they are. The clubs statement that my criticism has been consistent is a compliment and hopefully they will take one or two of the suggestions on board to help make Bristol Rovers a more successful club both now and in the future.
now i dont know who to believe.... this kevin person who denies any wrong doing or the board who has evidence that kevin has persistantly/consistantly criticised the current board over the last 6 years and feel angered enough to ban him from attending games.
whoever is correct, still to me doesnt give the board the right to ban a fan. if he has broken the law then yes fair enough but to ban him due to criticising the board once or 1000 times, shouldnt give the board the right to ban him. dennis dunford once said....
"the Board are not the owners of the club they are it's custodians and then only temporarily. The club is the fans, and free speech must be allowed at all times without fear of reprisals."
a very poor move by higgs and company. if we cannot criticise the board a number of times then i dont think there will be many fans left allowed to attend!
