If HCST is not supportive of the owners then say it's not. Why pussyfoot around with it. Otherwise Chazz is right and it's all just bollocks politics and smacks of disingenuous lipservice which I for one dislike and I'm sure I'm not alone. Call a spade a spade and be done with it.
You're jumping the gun a bit, you seem to be assuming from my comments that I'm saying HCST is an Allam Out organisation, we're not. I just said there's a lot of what the owners have done in the past year that we're not supportive of, I would have thought that was obvious from much of our recent output.
I'm not sure which "we" you're refering to but, are you now claiming you're no longer supportive of the evictions to the north?
I'll bet you can't. It'd be a whole can of worms if you tried to explain away that U turn. Best just hope it slides under the radar eh?
You know perfectly well what my opinion of the away fan move was, but that was my opinion, not the trust's opinion, the trust didn't even exist at the time. As I said above, there's a committee that run the trust and that committee has differing views on different issues, some others were more bothered about the move than I was.
I haven't done any U turn. You just reminded me why I can't be answered to answer your twattish posts.
So you're not saying you're an Allam Out organisation but you're not fully or at all supportive of him? So just what stand does your trust have on Allam?
Would it be fair to say then, that HCST is "Fully supportive of the owners if they comply with all of our demands"? No matter which way you try to paint it, HCST is not supportive of the owners. They might not be openly Allam Out, even if some key committee members are, but they are also not Allam in either. You could say they're sitting on the fence in fact.
If Allam wanted to bin all the nonsense and engage with the fans, then we'd still be happy to talk to him. Unfortunately, he won't and he's likely to keep digging himself deeper into the **** and making himself progressively more unpopular until he feels he has no option but to leave.
They've kept that ****er quiet. So what are the committee planning to do about it on behalf of those affected a year ago?
Would that be because you can't dodge between claiming you speak for the trust when it suits, and for yourself when it doesn't? I reckon you've just reminded a lot of people why they don't want to be associated with the trust when any questions are met with bollocks like that. What was it you said, they'll whinge for a bit and it'll all die down?
Don't ask awkward questions. Just accept what he/they* says. If he/they* get it wrong, another version will be along shortly. *delete as appropriate.
Dutch, you're doing your best to blame a trust that didn't exist last summer, for my opinion on the away fans being moved. I realise your keen to criticise the trust at every opportunity, but even for you, this is scraping the barrel.
Whoah, hold up there, don't try that one. I'm pointing out you claiming the trust is now against the evictions. You raised it, not me. I simply queried it and you got prickly. Now, as you've raised it as a committee member keen on keeping people informed, what are the trust planning to do about unlocking the stable door now it seems to be more than just the one affected as originally claimed?
I am well pleased we are in the North Stand and from were i stand in N4 the views great and others around me really like being in the north stand.. Apart from that a great post
Would You like it if it affected your juniors to such a degree they didn't want to go anymore, ending 17 years of shared weekends?
