I was at the forum and I could see that the club weren't particularly happy with the Craven article after the Celtic game. However they were quite diplomatic given that he was in the room with 300 fans. I suspect there was a more frank exchange between the club and Craven when the article came out.
there is an element of that (as there is at every local paper in the land, quite rightly), but the point af was making (I think) was that the piece after the Celtic game was not that. It was an accurate reflection of the prevailing mood of some following the club and it was a decent piece of journalstic licence, not provided by the club, quite obviously. So when the club outline a lot of issues in the background at the club at an open forum that definatley did turn some opinion/attitudes towards the club, on here at least...why did he not exercise the same licence and print/expand on some of the issues raised and how the club are addressing each and every one? other than the Lynch resigning which he did report.
