The FSF are non biased...

An archive of news, events and discussion leading up to and post West Ham United's historic move from Upton Park to Stratford in 2016.

Moderators: Gnome, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Locked
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45056
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 759 likes
Total likes: 2939 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by the pink palermo »

Romford wrote: You are missing the point...the FSF are getting involved in something they shouldn't.
Haven't missed the point at all .
the pink palermo wrote:
Whatever your views on whether the FSF should be involved in this or not ( and my view is not) , this isn't the right answer .

I can't help but feel the FSF would be better served highlighting the behaviour and motives of Hearn rather than attacking us .In the same way I think we should focus on Hearn and not the O's .It's a decent club with real fans .
One of 3 comments on this very thread where I haven't missed the point .
User avatar
hammers1954
Posts: 609
Joined: Tue May 18, 2004 10:37 pm
Location: Stratford - host to 2012 Olympics

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by hammers1954 »

I hav'nt gone to the FSF site to see the petition and judging by the reports in this thread I don't intend to (don't want to risk my blood pressure!). I would agree that the FSF should not have got involved here. It's not a case like Wimbledon moving to Milton Keynes. I don't see how the petition could have any impact with so much ill informed opinion in the signators posts.

In case any of them may be reading this post West Ham are moving from one part of the London Borough they were founded in to another part of the same borough, in fact closer to their original roots much like the Orient moving back to Clapton which is nearer White Hart Lane!.

I think we can all agree what we think about Mr Hearn. He seems get his facts mixed up rather too often poor soul, but we should reserve our anger for him and not Leyton Orient Football club. In the 60's and 70's like many West Ham fans I used to go to watch the O's and see the early career of Tommy Taylor and the twilight of the career of Peter Brabrook. There was a good atmosphere then and West Ham fans were welcomed, sadly it does not seem to be the case today.

Hearn seems keen to take on all and sundry in his efforts to 'get a drink' out of this including the Premier League. The statement on the PL website clearly states that both West Ham AND Spurs applied for permission to move to the OS site and the PL agreed that either club could move, subject to OPLC and relevant authorities permission. They took into account Hearns complant and his support for Spurs moving. They said in response to Hearn that they had not intention looking at their decision again. Now let's just say he is succesful in his appeal to the PL and they reverse their decision this would also mean that Spurs could not move because of the equal impact on West Ham. Would this not result in the white elephant of the OS we all feared and Hearn and the Orient become responsible for £500m of public money being wasted.

Barry. it ain't gonna happen!
User avatar
AJ
Posts: 7626
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:20 pm
Location: Dreaming dreams, scheming schemes, building castles high

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by AJ »

Look at some of the comments on the FSF signatures list, comedy gold.
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
Posts: 9992
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: On my computer trying to keep up with the Sky fixture changes
Has liked: 11 likes
Total likes: 8 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by hadleighhammer »

The Rebirth wrote:The only losers are Orient.

f*** em
Ah right, but lets bitch and moan about Hearn trying to make up for that then.
User avatar
Romford
Big X
Posts: 39027
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 1:16 pm
Location: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYyxdmHogLU
Contact:

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Romford »

The only thing made up is Hearns statements ...as The FA right said :thup:
bejeezus
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:07 pm

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by bejeezus »

I've already had a major row with the fsf over misrepresenting our fans to the OPLC and now this really takes the biscuit. As someone who used to promote the fsf within non-league clubs this is a little galling!

I would have cancelled my fsf membership already but despite emailing them and scouriing the fsf site for a cancellation link it seems impossible to do and they keep sending me their crap - I'm sure that this is breaking some law or another?
User avatar
Babooshka
Posts: 216
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Hornchurch

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Babooshka »

Although most of the petition entries are a joke and I have no axe to grind with the FSF, I will never accept the OS with the running track as a proper football stadium - not negotiable.
:crest:
Malcolm Clarke
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:24 am

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Malcolm Clarke »

I am the Chair of the FSF, and would like to comment on some of the points raised. When this issue first arose, we published a news story on it, and asked for reaction from the 3 clubs involved - the Os, the Hammers and Spurs. The majority of the hammers fans who responded to us were against the move to the Olympic Stadium. But it's always difficult to assess how representative such responses are. That's why we think that any football club should only take a major decision on a ground move after a thorough, neutral survey of its supporters.

On this issue we have supported the Orient fans when the two FSF affilaites at that club asked us to do so. We did so because it appears to us that the WHU move to the stadium breaches both Premier League and Football League rules, because of its close proximity to the Os ground.

Granted, the Boleyn Ground is also quite close to the new stadium and in the same Borough, which makes these issues not straightforward. but what is beyond doubt, is that it would bring WHU much closer to the Os than at present.

It is not true that we did not oppose Spurs move. I was personally contacted by David Lammy, MP for Tottenham, who asked for support in opposing that move, and we readily gave it, as we did to Spurs fans who opposed the move. It would have been absurd for us to do otherwise.

We are supporting our affiliates at Orient, not Mr.Hearn. We do not support his actions, motivations or behaviour in supporting the Spurs move, which was deplorable. The fact that we used one quote of his does not mean that we support what he has done in this matter. Quite the reverse.

His action in supporting the Spurs move undermined any chance of the PL enforcing its rules on this matter. They could not refuse a move of either WHU or Spurs on the grounds of the harm it would do to another club, when that Club's own Chairman was supporting the Spurs move. A classic own goal by Mr.Hearn. We are supporting the fans not their Chairman.

We are a democratic, members organisation. Two of our affiliates asked us to support on them on a matter which is in line with FSF policy, so we did so.

The FSF Council meets in London on April 10th. I will be very happy to invite a couple of representatives of both the Os and WHU fans to discuss this with Council. We have a slight problem in that we do not currently have an affiliate at WHU, so I am not sure who has legitimacy to represent our members at WHU. But if the moderators of this Board can sort out someone who can express the concerns of some WHU fans on what we have done, I will happily invite them. Dialogue is always important on these difficult issues.

Malcolm Clarke
FSF Chair
User avatar
sanchoz
Posts: 12445
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch
Total likes: 11 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by sanchoz »

and after this episode I don't see why there should be a West Ham United group affiliated with a glorified talking shop like the FSF
Persil Tickets
Posts: 428
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 2:05 pm
Has liked: 19 likes
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Persil Tickets »

Malcolm Clarke

Thanks for coming on here and giving your views.
Just so I know for future reference how much closer can we move to Orient without it impacting on them?
User avatar
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...

Post by The Rebirth »

Malcolm Clarke wrote:
The FSF Council meets in London on April 10th. I will be very happy to invite a couple of representatives of both the Os and WHU fans to discuss this with Council. We have a slight problem in that we do not currently have an affiliate at WHU, so I am not sure who has legitimacy to represent our members at WHU. But if the moderators of this Board can sort out someone who can express the concerns of some WHU fans on what we have done, I will happily invite them. Dialogue is always important on these difficult issues.

Malcolm Clarke
FSF Chair
Romford :thup: Good job for you.

Besides if we're already offering cheaper tickets 2 miles away what difference will it make to the O's is we're less than 1 mile away?

Our fan base comes from mainly Essex and the South East not East London.

I'm not sure where most Orients fans live as I've only ever met one and that was in Milton Keynes
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45056
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 759 likes
Total likes: 2939 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by the pink palermo »

Malcolm Clarke wrote:It is not true that we did not oppose Sp*rs move. I was personally contacted by David Lammy, MP for T*ttenham, who asked for support in opposing that move, and we readily gave it, as we did to Sp*rs fans who opposed the move. It would have been absurd for us to do otherwise.
Fair point then - all I wanted was consistency . :thup:

However, I feel the FSF should be digging a little deeper into Barry Hearns motives - he's just trying to hustle some cash .Hearn is far more likely to be the death of Orient than any move by West Ham into Startford .

To be frank , by moving to Startford I personally have more fears concerning the long term viability of West Ham than I do Orient .

Has anyone considered Orient may gain fans by our relocation ?
Malcolm Clarke
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 10:24 am

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Malcolm Clarke »

palermo - I suspect that's exactly what Hearn is doing. :evil: My only regret on this is that by using a quote of his, we inadvertently gave the impression that we were supporting all his actions on this, which we most certainly don't. This type of issue of defining "territories" is not easy in a connurbation - but the people who you need to convince on this if you think the move is justified, is not so much the FSF, as the Os fans themselves. It was they who asked for our help. We didn't initiate this. And what would they have (rightly) said if we turned them down when what they are asking for is in line with our policy and what they are opposing is against PL and FL rules. The offer for a couple of people to come on 10th April from both the Os and our critics on this board very much stands and I hope the moderators can sort this.
User avatar
York Ham(mer)
Posts: 9644
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 6:15 am
Location: In exile up north
Has liked: 111 likes
Total likes: 149 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by York Ham(mer) »

Utterly wrong for the FSF to get involved in this. Extremely poor judgement and reflects badly on them. These kind of stunts leads to no one taking them seriously. The first thing you should do, Malcolm, do is pull that petition.
Persil Tickets
Posts: 428
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 2:05 pm
Has liked: 19 likes
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Persil Tickets »

Malcolm

If you are still reading this thread would you mind answering my earlier question. I.E How much closer can we move to Orient without it impacting upon them?

cheers
Monkey Spanner
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:26 am
Location: England

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Monkey Spanner »

We're moving to West Ham. Our support comes from the whole of the East End, Essex and beyond. The FSF have made a big mistake.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45056
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 759 likes
Total likes: 2939 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by the pink palermo »

Malcolm Clarke wrote:the people who you need to convince on this if you think the move is justified, is not so much the FSF, as the Os fans themselves. It was they who asked for our help. We didn't initiate this. And what would they have (rightly) said if we turned them down when what they are asking for is in line with our policy and what they are opposing is against PL and FL rules. The offer for a couple of people to come on 10th April from both the Os and our critics on this board very much stands and I hope the moderators can sort this.
Malcolm

Don't misunderstand me - I'm not in favour of the move - nowt to do with the O's fans - they are big enough to fight their own battles - I just believe it to be a bad move for us .

My original comments were on what I believed was your inactivity with regards to Spurs seeking to move, which you asure us was not the case, so for me fair enough .

I'm sympathetic towards the O's fans , but feel Hearn will cause them real harm .A half decent executive would be marketing the game at Brisbane road as the place to see a game in a proper football ground , and boosting support , not meekly waving the white flag just so he can sell the ground whilst cadging a freebie .

Hearns an opportunist , the O's fans deserve better .
User avatar
Benfleet Pete
Posts: 641
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 9:17 am
Location: See if you can guess.

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Benfleet Pete »

Gets my vote. I've signed.
Monkey Spanner
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:26 am
Location: England

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Monkey Spanner »

I'm staggered that a West Ham supporter can have sympathy for Leyton Orient fans just because we're moving closer to West Ham.
Persil Tickets
Posts: 428
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 2:05 pm
Has liked: 19 likes
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: The FSF are non biased...

Post by Persil Tickets »

Granted, the Boleyn Ground is also quite close to the new stadium and in the same Borough, which makes these issues not straightforward. but what is beyond doubt, is that it would bring WHU much closer to the Os than at present.

To Malcolm Clarke - re your quote above

I have asked twice now for you to specify how close we can move to Orient without it impacting upon them and you have failed to respond. I am guessing this is because you cannot come up with an answer. Yet despite the fact you cannot provide an answer you still feel justified in supporting this petition, accordingly you lose all credibility in my book.
By my own rough calculations we will be just over one and half miles closer to Orient than we are now, once we move to the OS. Why should this impact upon Orient? We already offer discounted tickets and these are taken up by our existing fanbase. Are you suggesting that we should not be allowed to grow because we are now 1.5 miles closer to Orient?
Locked