It seems like a long time ago but some of those who shout loudest against the Allams now (on here and beyond) were leaping in front of the bullets back then.
Coca Cola. Apple. Quality football.
The ballot...
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
It seems like a long time ago but some of those who shout loudest against the Allams now (on here and beyond) were leaping in front of the bullets back then.
Coca Cola. Apple. Quality football.
The Allamites gradually faded away as the Allams got progressively more twattish.
Hope? Really? The vote is divisive and needless. Is this really the basis for supporting it: Hope?
If you might not believe your source then don't mention it and stop trading in tittle-tattle.
'Vicky Beercock seemed a bit offended by the suggestion.' You seem surprised; why? She has been brought in as the way forward, she doesn't represent Vicky Beercock, she represents the Allams - it's not an act of faith, it's an act of paid subservience. You doubt her master you doubt her too. Not to see this is more than a tad naive.
Of course there is a way for the vote not to be to your liking, but that looks unlikely. Landslide? What's your prediction for the number of votes cast - possible limit of circa 15000?
Not in the post you quoted; the conversation reads like the post acknowledging the request for a vote might have been later and overlooked; only TOM knows that. Although when replies are peppered with 'might' from a declared director who should be saying 'did', it does leave plenty of room for scepticism.
True but I think us falling out of the realms of quality football was the main instigator.
I fear if we were still reasonably PL, their support levels would be similar to what they were despite their actions
Just clicked on the link in the vote for more information for disabled supporters and spotted this gem:
"Supporters Under 14 are not allowed to enter the KCOM Stadium without a qualifying adult (Over 18). As a result, and in-line with reasonable adjustments, the parent/guardian who attends with the disabled supporter (Under 14) is required to pay the prevailing rate for both seats. In the interest of fairness, we do not provide the adult with a free Membership or match ticket."
In the interest of fairness if you have a disabled child you have to pay for both of you to go. Nice.
"Supporters Under 14 are not allowed to enter the KCOM Stadium without a qualifying adult (Over 18). As a result, and in-line with reasonable adjustments, the parent/guardian who attends with the disabled supporter (Under 14) is required to pay the prevailing rate for both seats. In the interest of fairness, we do not provide the adult with a free Membership or match ticket."
In the interest of fairness if you have a disabled child you have to pay for both of you to go. Nice.
Probably the fault of those pesky supporters pretending to be disabled so they could get their mate in for free.
The more I see, the more our owners just get more ****ish. I don't know of any club in the country that doesn't give a free ticket concession to a carer of a disabled supporter.
Other clubs, along with the EFL and the FA, should really be taking these ****s to task.
I'm not voting in this **** fest of a ballot.
Then I must've misread treehuggers post
They do give free tickets to carers of adults, not to carers of Under 14s.