The FSF are non biased...
Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Write to them lads...I just did, told them what I thought of it and resigned my membership. Bunch of Mugs. Where's the lady that comes on here to promote their cause....She can **** right off if she expects any support from me in future.
- Gerblatz
- Posts: 5079
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:16 pm
- Location: In a Gadda Da Vida
- Has liked: 70 likes
- Total likes: 27 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
The FSF...fighting for the rights of the small supporter and no doubt angling for a substantial funding opportunity courtesy of the Hearn Levy love in.
This utter trash is a f**king joke and the people at the FSF have done a massive disservice to our supporters....but not all of them perhaps
This utter trash is a f**king joke and the people at the FSF have done a massive disservice to our supporters....but not all of them perhaps
- the pink palermo
- Huge noggin
- Posts: 45147
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
- Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
- Has liked: 804 likes
- Total likes: 3018 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Well, I for one don't need to .Romford wrote: I can smell a very bad odour coming from the direction of a few posters on here...you need to have a good hard look at yourselves :evil:
Consistent from day 1, I've argued my case on two points :
1.The lack of consultation with the fans by the owners who railroaded this through after a mere 53 weeks ownership of the club .
2. The viewing distance being too great because of the track - tacitly acknowledged by the revelation that the areas behind the goals in the upper tiers will not be used for fans due to the distance .
So, no, I don't feel I need to have a look at myself , and nor do many posters on this board .The original poll was just about us and our wishes .Once the Tottenham Hotspur angle came into the argument a number of fans on here took that as a signal that anything that kept them off our patch was a good thing .
Now that the FSF is essentially applying the same logic to defending Leyton Orients turf some of our fans are upset .
Now , FWIW, I don't think this is one for the FSF - were it to be so , they should have been more vocal about Spurs potentially moving onto our patch ( and Orients for that matter) , but they were strangely silent , and the reult of that silence is our owners got a 57% approval rating on the second ballot on KUMB.com .
If they were silent before, they should be silent now .
My gripe with the FSF is their silence when Spurs were all over this story .Oh and as for Orient , I feel sorry for their fans - not becasue we will kill them off - Christ we've been trying for nearlly 100 years and failed - but because Hearn is going to kill them off and use us as the excuse .We can all see what Hearn is, and what he is about , it's disappointing the FSF is unable to do likewise .
But I don't feel the need to have a look at myself for the views I've expressed .The FSF should be looking a little harder at Hearns credentials though .
Re: The FSF are non biased...
What a lot of bolloocks. We haven't been trying to kill them off ever. loads of us used to go over there regularly till all the banned Spurs started turning up and they started their.." we hate West Ham" thing.
The bottom line here is that Hearn wants a bung, he wants to move the O's into the Hockey stadium, and he wants Brisbane road to sell to the property boys...he's only there for the cash and don't ever think anything else. The bloke is a total crook.
The bottom line here is that Hearn wants a bung, he wants to move the O's into the Hockey stadium, and he wants Brisbane road to sell to the property boys...he's only there for the cash and don't ever think anything else. The bloke is a total crook.
- richneal
- Posts: 3444
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:33 am
- Location: Vancouver, British Columbia. 5,000 miles from goal.
- Has liked: 3 likes
- Total likes: 12 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Not a matter of bias. FSF is just doing what it's meant to do -- responding to supporters concerns. Whether or not we agree/disagree with the FSF or their position is irrelevant. It's responding to the concerns of O's fans and questioning the validity of the process of complying with Premier League rules. Seems fair to me.
We've had quite a few discussions on this forum re. consultation on the move, or rather, the complete lack of consultation.
TSF seems quite reasonable when it states
"Regardless of FSF members’ representations, or polls on fans’ forums, there is only one way the club can claim to have the backing of supporters – proper consultation needs to take place and take place now, ending in a properly organised and overseen vote of all supporters. FSF policy is that any stadium move should only take place after a full, free, and fair vote by the club’s supporters in favour of such a move.
However, on this occasion the FSF must also oppose West Ham’s bid (although we would still argue the club’s hierarchy has a duty to consult Hammers fans). It is FSF policy that ground moves should only take place when they have both the majority of fans’ support – which West Ham have not yet shown – and do not breach Premier League/Football League rules."
|http://www.fsf.org.uk/news/Hammers-win- ... d|desc|20|
We've had quite a few discussions on this forum re. consultation on the move, or rather, the complete lack of consultation.
TSF seems quite reasonable when it states
"Regardless of FSF members’ representations, or polls on fans’ forums, there is only one way the club can claim to have the backing of supporters – proper consultation needs to take place and take place now, ending in a properly organised and overseen vote of all supporters. FSF policy is that any stadium move should only take place after a full, free, and fair vote by the club’s supporters in favour of such a move.
However, on this occasion the FSF must also oppose West Ham’s bid (although we would still argue the club’s hierarchy has a duty to consult Hammers fans). It is FSF policy that ground moves should only take place when they have both the majority of fans’ support – which West Ham have not yet shown – and do not breach Premier League/Football League rules."
|http://www.fsf.org.uk/news/Hammers-win- ... d|desc|20|
- Me ol china
- Posts: 850
- Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:14 pm
Re: The FSF are non biased...
We have gone from being the good ol "Hammers" & everyone's 2nd favourite club to being hated around the country & i for one ****ing love it :twisted:
f*** em all i say
f*** em all i say
Re: The FSF are non biased...
The FSF are just a bunch of interfering w*nkers,i wouldnt even bother reading their ****ing drivel.So FSF do us all a favour and **** off.
Re: The FSF are non biased...
just read my favourite quote on the petition
By David Bently Birmingham City
By David Bently Birmingham City
Barry Hearn once touched me as a child. He gently caressed my balls before giving me a hum-ball for this reason alone Leyton Orient should have justice! He charged me a fiver though... typical Baz!
- SirStoneyOfBow
- Posts: 7880
- Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:50 pm
- Location: Feelin’ the Zeel, brutha
- Has liked: 21 likes
- Total likes: 35 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
While I shook my head reading it, the irony of it all just made me laugh more than anything.
Never cared for the FSF in any case, and this is all laughable. It will soon dour down.
Never cared for the FSF in any case, and this is all laughable. It will soon dour down.
- GideaParkHammer
- Posts: 6283
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:23 pm
- Location: Ich Bin Ein Berliner
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Issues facing Football Fans.
Safe terraces at all football grounds
To be treated decently
To be given respect from the Police
To be treated like an adult in the stadium and allowed to have a beer whilst watching the game.
So I ask, what have the FSF ever done for us? (I know the Life of Brian nature of that lol)
Safe terraces at all football grounds
To be treated decently
To be given respect from the Police
To be treated like an adult in the stadium and allowed to have a beer whilst watching the game.
So I ask, what have the FSF ever done for us? (I know the Life of Brian nature of that lol)
- Billydinho
- Posts: 17295
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:18 pm
- Location: Piss Making.
- Has liked: 174 likes
- Total likes: 769 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
GPH, I'm playing devil's advocate here but:
Why should you be allowed a beer in the stands?
Why should you be treated with respect by the police when the feeling is not mutual?
Most football fans are utter moron c****. For this reason alone these precautions must stay in place. It's not much to ask to stand for 45 minutes without drinking an alcoholic beverage is it?
Why should you be allowed a beer in the stands?
Why should you be treated with respect by the police when the feeling is not mutual?
Most football fans are utter moron c****. For this reason alone these precautions must stay in place. It's not much to ask to stand for 45 minutes without drinking an alcoholic beverage is it?
-
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:45 pm
Re: The FSF are non biased...
tbh I`m actually behind this, and I have just signed the petition.
Simply because of the running track
Simply because of the running track
- cockney farmer
- Posts: 10684
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 12:52 pm
- Location: Devons capital
Re: The FSF are non biased...
E mail them and show your disgust , I have the only tough decision an O fan will face is with his own conscience , if they dont want to watch a premier game for £15 and prefers to spend 50 quid to travel away to Hartlepool away then good luck to them (as long as he lets his kids come over to the OS while he,s up norf) then everyones happy
- The Rebirth
- It's all about the confidence
- Posts: 6704
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:59 am
- Location: Always censored, never quiet
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Haha you liked that.. god knows what was going through my mind when I typed that out.coyi_1992 wrote:just read my favourite quote on the petition
I think I went intot he mind of Wayneo
- the pink palermo
- Huge noggin
- Posts: 45147
- Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
- Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
- Has liked: 804 likes
- Total likes: 3018 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Interesting .
Would people rather win a debate on the merit of their argument or just dispense with the inconvenience of debate in the fast place ?
If we believe our position is rock solid why would people feel the need to sabotage an online poll ? It will fail or succeed on the merit of the argument .
Why would people feel the poll would not show overwhelming apathy or even support for our position ?
Would people rather win a debate on the merit of their argument or just dispense with the inconvenience of debate in the fast place ?
If we believe our position is rock solid why would people feel the need to sabotage an online poll ? It will fail or succeed on the merit of the argument .
Why would people feel the poll would not show overwhelming apathy or even support for our position ?
- Matt of iron
- Posts: 14524
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 9:14 pm
- Location: Studying Duckernomics with Chuck D.
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Very hard to take the high ground when people are getting the facts completely wrong.
- The Rebirth
- It's all about the confidence
- Posts: 6704
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:59 am
- Location: Always censored, never quiet
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Most online polls are sabotaged.the pink palermo wrote:Interesting .
Would people rather win a debate on the merit of their argument or just dispense with the inconvenience of debate in the fast place ?
If we believe our position is rock solid why would people feel the need to sabotage an online poll ? It will fail or succeed on the merit of the argument .
Why would people feel the poll would not show overwhelming apathy or even support for our position ?
We did win the Olympic Stadium fair and square we have no reason to worry about Leyton Orient and a load of deluded fans who clearly have no idea what they are talking about.
Also the FSF should not be getting involved in this.Patrick Caldwell Burnley It's a disgrace that a team in so much debt, can move into a stadium they could never afford, and on another teams patch. There only chance of filling the ground would be by giving away tickets on the cheap, which would further undermine Orient. The whole idea is a disgrace to the game of football.
- Believer
- Posts: 9227
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:35 pm
- Has liked: 1425 likes
- Total likes: 761 likes
Re: The FSF are non biased...
Absolute disgrace. It is painfully clear that Hearn & Levy are in this together and will try every trick in the book to get their own little slice from the Govt. As has been suggested elsewhere, us moving to the OS is a done deal. We know this, the OPLC know this, the Govt know this, Spurs and Orient know this.
What is not yet a done deal is Spurs getting assistance from the Govt for their stadium upgrade. I expect that Levy has approached Hearn and asked that he kicks up a stink so much so that one of the new enterprise zones will be set up in Tottenham, thus reducing the monies that they need to spend improving the surrounding areas. On completion of this, Orient will probably agree a tie in with spurs to have "x" amount of friendlies with them and "x" amount of players from their academy spending time at Orient.
Barry Hearn is a greedy twonk. He doesn't appear to be the sharpest knife in the drawer and perhaps regrets making his support of spurs so vocal. I suspect that will be what kills his claims.
For the FSF to get involved in something like this sums them up for me. Not a peep when spurs were swapping Haringey to Newham. Not a mention of Orient moving within spitting distance of us years ago. Same old WHUFC bad guys spoiling everyone's fun. Fairness in football ? Don't make me laugh !!
What is not yet a done deal is Spurs getting assistance from the Govt for their stadium upgrade. I expect that Levy has approached Hearn and asked that he kicks up a stink so much so that one of the new enterprise zones will be set up in Tottenham, thus reducing the monies that they need to spend improving the surrounding areas. On completion of this, Orient will probably agree a tie in with spurs to have "x" amount of friendlies with them and "x" amount of players from their academy spending time at Orient.
Barry Hearn is a greedy twonk. He doesn't appear to be the sharpest knife in the drawer and perhaps regrets making his support of spurs so vocal. I suspect that will be what kills his claims.
For the FSF to get involved in something like this sums them up for me. Not a peep when spurs were swapping Haringey to Newham. Not a mention of Orient moving within spitting distance of us years ago. Same old WHUFC bad guys spoiling everyone's fun. Fairness in football ? Don't make me laugh !!
- The Rebirth
- It's all about the confidence
- Posts: 6704
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:59 am
- Location: Always censored, never quiet
Re: The FSF are non biased...
One of the Business areas is planned for Tottenham mate and also Croydon.
This will boost Spurs I don't think Levy is in on this also it's funny that the two clubs who were part of the Olympics and Athletics Palace (near Croydon) and Tottenham are the areas picked out by Boris for Enterprise and New Business Hubs.
The only losers are Orient.
f*** em
This will boost Spurs I don't think Levy is in on this also it's funny that the two clubs who were part of the Olympics and Athletics Palace (near Croydon) and Tottenham are the areas picked out by Boris for Enterprise and New Business Hubs.
The only losers are Orient.
f*** em