Calling on the Trust

Come on guys I know you are probably busy but, there is an orchestrated campaign to steamroll these plans through at the earliest opportunity, meetings are being disrupted, the local paper is deleting comments made by objectors of the plans and the feeling of the general Argyle fan is that there is no point objecting because it is a done deal.
I am asking that you lead the fight for us, I think that too many people have too much respect for JB, everybody is worried that he will throw his toys out of his pram if asked the wrong questions, he probably will but why not do it and show the people of Plymouth what a petulant little tw@t he is. If he refuses to talk to the trust then what have we lost? Ask questions of JB and if he refuses to speak to you ask the questions through the media. The clock is ticking we have until July 2nd to get objections in, so come on guys, you have the associate director of Argyle making false accusations about your aims and motives and we get a small piece refuting it on your website, FFS if this was the other way round then Akkerons elite fighting unit would have it all over the local rag, why don't you?
I am asking to Trust to get a bit more public, fight fire with fire and please please show the general public of Plymouth and especially Argyle fans the dirty tricks campaign that is being used here.

Iggy wrote:

Come on guys I know you are probably busy but, there is an orchestrated campaign to steamroll these plans through at the earliest opportunity, meetings are being disrupted, the local paper is deleting comments made by objectors of the plans and the feeling of the general Argyle fan is that there is no point objecting because it is a done deal.
I am asking that you lead the fight for us, I think that too many people have too much respect for JB, everybody is worried that he will throw his toys out of his pram if asked the wrong questions, he probably will but why not do it and show the people of Plymouth what a petulant little tw@t he is. If he refuses to talk to the trust then what have we lost? Ask questions of JB and if he refuses to speak to you ask the questions through the media. The clock is ticking we have until July 2nd to get objections in, so come on guys, you have the associate director of Argyle making false accusations about your aims and motives and we get a small piece refuting it on your website, FFS if this was the other way round then Akkerons elite fighting unit would have it all over the local rag, why don't you?
I am asking to Trust to get a bit more public, fight fire with fire and please please show the general public of Plymouth and especially Argyle fans the dirty tricks campaign that is being used here.

I agree totally Iggy. If this battle is lost, the Trust is dead in the water and will never recover. 

It's now or never for the Trust.

As said, if the Trust don't make a stand now - it will wither, it's now or never!!

No more platitudes.

Say what you mean and mean what you say. Stop making excuses and getting dragged down by the nodding and often self interested supporters of the plans.

The trust should be stating clearly and loudly why it opposes the development in its current shape and form.

It should be pointing out the inadequacies of Akkeron's current proposals and promoting the alternative plans.

It should be lobbying its membership, other groups and the press.

Stand and fight for what is right, or wither and die.

Take legal action against Ian Newell for the defamatory comments made against Andy and the libellous comments he posted last night.

Tringreen wrote:

No more platitudes.

Say what you mean and mean what you say. Stop making excuses and getting dragged down by the nodding and often self interested supporters of the plans.

The trust should be stating clearly and loudly why it opposes the development in its current shape and form.

It should be pointing out the inadequacies of Akkeron's current proposals and promoting the alternative plans.

It should be lobbying its membership, other groups and the press.

Stand and fight for what is right, or wither and die.

This is about the Jist of it for me.
If the Mini-stand gets built the club is condemned to life for a future of obscurity.
This should be the "last stand" everything or nothing,but in a careful way to remain credible, after last night Newell, s outburst can only have strengthened the resolve. Cheers Nooly

I think the Trust is between a rock and a hard place here. There are fans who are very concerned about these proposals and fans who think JB can do no wrong and will believe everything they are told. These fans will support the proposals even if they don't understand them.

There are fans who don't know the first thing about what is going on. As long as they can turn up, have a pint and pasty ( somewhere) and watch a game of football, they are happy.

All these different types of fans are likely to be members of the Trust. So how does the Trust represent all these different views? I'll predict that if the Trust held a survey of it's membership, only up to half the membership would bother to reply in the first place. The ones that do reply will be completely split. Some will be vehemently against the plans and will have done quite a bit of research and write long letters. Some will support the plans quoting some good reasons and some reasons that don't make sense. The rest will be somewhere in between, wanting a new stand but not liking certain aspects of it.

I'll also guarantee that a lot will quote information that is wrong. They will be quoting 'Pasoti, ATD, Herald and mate down the pub' facts.

What ever the Trust did is likely to be wrong in the eyes of some fans. Outright opposition will result in more aggro for the Trust board members and it's volunteers from the usual sources. There are too many fans who back the proposals even if they don't fully understand them. In my opinion it is very difficult for the Trust to back or support the development. They can't be seen to outright support the scheme because there are far too many reasonable intelligent fans who have serious concerns about the benefits to the club and it's future.

The Trust and it's working group have responded to some fans concerns and examined the plans as best they could with the limited information available to them and reported their findings to Argyle fans. I would imagine coming up with an alternative without knowing what criteria Akkeron were working to, was like building something without knowing what you were going to be building on.

It's my opinion that it's now down to individual fans to object or support the proposals as they see fit. Information on how to is freely available all over the internet and some knowledgeable fans are doing their best to provide information. There is a lack of information about certain aspects of the scheme. Why is that? I'll let you make your own minds up.

In my opinion the PR campaign from Akkeron was a disaster. They gave enough information thinking fans would fall over themselves in adulation at the wonderful plans. They misread the situation completely, failing to recognise that some fans are well qualified to look at plans and spot the deficiencies in them immediately. They thought fans would buy the ' we can extend the horseshoe later' line. Some fans have! A lot of fans saw straight through it immediately. The drip feeding of information was very poor and hiding the more contentious issues until the last minute even worse. The lack of scale models for both Argyle fans and citizens of Plymouth to examine is again at best very poor. At worst deliberate to hide aspects of the development.

I'm very sorry if the friends and colleagues of Mr Brent find this post to be very cynical but as an Argyle fan of over 40 years it is very difficult not to be. Every previous owner(s) has let us down in some way and just because JB is a nice man doesn't mean I'm gullible enough to take as gospel everything he says.

A lot of fans concerns could have been placated if Akkeron provided detailed, costed plans of how the options to extend the horseshoe could be achieved. Including how new or different routes for roads would be built without encroaching on yet more green parkland.To suggest the road could be moved without any idea of how, is an insult to my and other fans intelligence. The fact no attempt has been made to do this, says it all for me.

In my opinion this development is half built and it's now up to those with genuine objections, the planners and councillors to weed out or amend the worst parts of the development. I hope that the safe standing campaign is successful and Argyle can increase it's capacity that way when needed, but I do have my doubts as to who would pay for that.

This is my own opinions and not the Trust's.

Good post Richard and one that I broadly agree with. Rock and a hard place sums it up quite well.

Webby had a letter printed In the paper where he was coming out with all the usual guff in support of the scheme, the Trust could still ask questions of what was said there. They could also send out a stronger message in defence of claims made my Nool and the Gang, I am intelligent enough to realise that they as a body represent all fans not just those anti the proposals but I still think that a little more press action, a little more response is needed.
Ps. Where do you think the detail is deliberately lacking in the plans?

Whilst a realistic appraisal RB, unless the trust fight now, what is the point of the Trust at all?!! I'm afraid it has to take a side just like the rest of us!! Brent is destroying this club - the football club's fans are split, not what was needed at all.

What Bandy said, if it's true that you have to have support of 100% of the membership to act on a matter then nothing will ever get done, let Nool and the Gang get control of the Trust and see how worried they would be of upsetting everybody.
The more I see written in support of this scheme it makes me realise how thick some people are, do they not think or don't they want to?

Iggy wrote:

Webby had a letter printed In the paper where he was coming out with all the usual guff in support of the scheme, the Trust could still ask questions of what was said there. They could also send out a stronger message in defence of claims made my Nool and the Gang, I am intelligent enough to realise that they as a body represent all fans not just those anti the proposals but I still think that a little more press action, a little more response is needed.
Ps. Where do you think the detail is deliberately lacking in the plans?

Iggy,

I may have missed some things because I don't get the Herald here but a lot of detail appears to be only available to those who can read and interpret plans. Or indeed be bothered to. Things I'm thinking of, are, the new road junction at Outland Rd. Has anybody seen pictures or diagrams of exactly where this will be or what it will look like? How will this affect local residents and traffic flow? In my opinion, I don't see why the current junction in and out of the park and ride by the vets isn't altered or improved. The road could then go around where it goes now to the new road going down past the Lyndhurst. Or as Stuart C. suggested, to a small tunnel going up past the Devonport End, using the topography of the land going into the car park There would be no need for the 6 trees to be ripped out at the other end of the car park then and no need for the road going down the side of the Lyndhurst. That junction at Segrave Rd. is busy enough as it is.

Alterations / demolition of parts of Gilbert Lane have been mentioned. Anybody seen any reference to this outside of the planning application? How are HGV's getting to and from the service yard on the south side of the complex? Are they going past the front of the Life Centre? If so then why not do what the Trust's WG suggested regarding the road in the first place? Or is this traffic going up past the back of the Devonport and turnstiles? Apart from on these forums has it been explained anywhere else?

How about what exactly is inside the stand for the use of Argyle fans on match days? Several people have commented that there doesn't appear to be anything for ordinary fans. How do fans get to and from the shelf?  These things will probably get sorted later but fans are asking now. Surely those questions are not that difficult to answer.

Will the school be available for the use of Argyle fans on match days? I'm sure there's more but you get my drift.

As I understand it, a petition or group letter counts as one pro or anti vote, no matter how many signatures it contains.  So individuals have to write for themselves in order for their views to count.  So even if the trust decided to oppose or recommend the current proposal, it would still only be one view.

Iggy wrote:

What Bandy said, if it's true that you have to have support of 100% of the membership to act on a matter then nothing will ever get done, let Nool and the Gang get control of the Trust and see how worried they would be of upsetting everybody.
The more I see written in support of this scheme it makes me realise how thick some people are, do they not think or don't they want to?

The point I'm making is the Trust have to be very careful in what they decide to do or not do. If their membership that bothers to express an opinion is split 50/50 ish, what do they do? Abstain? They have already pointed out what they think is wrong with it and most people I've spoken to would agree with them. A lot of those people wouldn't go as far as trying to stop the development though. As I said, rock and a hard place.

Dingle is also quite correct.

Edited. to add, I have no idea what the AFT boards current thinking is on this. They may even be split themselves.

Richard I do see the problem I would just like them to be chipping away a bit more with regards to answering the constant drip of half truths from Akkeron.
As someone able to read plans I will look at the road layouts, I think that they are still discussing with highways the possibilities, but they won't find them as easy as PCC to deal with. I am finding it harder to fathom why JB will not compromise on the slightest thing, I am hoping it will be his undoing, I also think that he controls people with his softly spoken politeness whilst checking how sharp the flick knife is in his pocket or as my Gran would say the iron hand in the velvet glove.

Richard Blight wrote:

Iggy wrote:

What Bandy said, if it's true that you have to have support of 100% of the membership to act on a matter then nothing will ever get done, let Nool and the Gang get control of the Trust and see how worried they would be of upsetting everybody.
The more I see written in support of this scheme it makes me realise how thick some people are, do they not think or don't they want to?

The point I'm making is the Trust have to be very careful in what they decide to do or not do. If their membership that bothers to express an opinion is split 50/50 ish, what do they do? Abstain? They have already pointed out what they think is wrong with it and most people I've spoken to would agree with them. A lot of those people wouldn't go as far as trying to stop the development though. As I said, rock and a hard place.

Dingle is also quite correct.

Trust members who can't be bothered to vote have no right of complaint if the outcome of said vote is not to their liking. In a democratic voting system the majority (even if it's only 51%-49%) should win the vote and their points of view acted upon. I feel the trust needs to grow a pair of b@ll@cks, question their members on where they stand on the various aspects of the ministand/HHP plans, take the vote/s and then act on them whether they are for or against the development. Silence and inaction will achieve nothing, the fight will be lost and the trust may as well disband.

How many people - trust members or not - would want to see the whole of the development fail?  Many fans and residents probably have concerns about certain aspects, and be fully supportive of others.  It is up to individuals to express their views to the planning department.  I don't see how a statement from a group such as the trust would be taken seriously by PCC or any other body.

Richard Blight wrote:

Iggy wrote:

What Bandy said, if it's true that you have to have support of 100% of the membership to act on a matter then nothing will ever get done, let Nool and the Gang get control of the Trust and see how worried they would be of upsetting everybody.
The more I see written in support of this scheme it makes me realise how thick some people are, do they not think or don't they want to?

The point I'm making is the Trust have to be very careful in what they decide to do or not do. If their membership that bothers to express an opinion is split 50/50 ish, what do they do? Abstain? They have already pointed out what they think is wrong with it and most people I've spoken to would agree with them. A lot of those people wouldn't go as far as trying to stop the development though. As I said, rock and a hard place.

Dingle is also quite correct.

Edited. to add, I have no idea what the AFT boards current thinking is on this. They may even be split themselves.

Well that's that then - honestly, just disband the chocolate teapot of no use in our time of need and thats now!! I realise you are being pragmatic mind:D

Time for the trust to stand up to nool and his brentshirts, tell the developer we don't want his ambition killing overdevelopment or his lets push the footbal club out of homepark long game he's playing, accept this shite and the club will always be crap.i can say all this because i dont want to sit in the directors box next to jimmy,i dont want a parking space next to jimmy, and like jimmy i dont want a south american walking holiday for chariteeeee.