bramleyrhino wrote:
Without wanting to get into a slanging match here, the impression that comes across in my view is that the Unibond League are in the right.
The operational rules are in place. The UL are sticking to them. If FCUM don't agree with the operational rules, then they don't become a member of the Unibond League.
Like most people, I don't know the in's-and-out's of the situation and I won't pretend to. I'm forming my opinions on what I'm reading in the press but the impression that I get is that FCUM are trying to use their to become an exception and/or, thrust their ideas onto everybody else.
I'm pretty sure that the FCUM press officer can spin an issue as well as the UL but on balance, I think that the standpoint being taking Re: Curzon comes across as a small-minded spat after something that they agreed with comes back to work against them.
If I'm getting the wrong end of the stick with this then I'm happy for someone to point that out.
I don't like games being moved at the last minute as much as the next guy but I can also see TV as a necessary evil. Whilst the FCUM principles of "giving football back to the fans" is commendable, there's a very good reason (IMO), why fans aren't involved in the running of sports clubs.
The operational rules are in place. The UL are sticking to them. If FCUM don't agree with the operational rules, then they don't become a member of the Unibond League.
Like most people, I don't know the in's-and-out's of the situation and I won't pretend to. I'm forming my opinions on what I'm reading in the press but the impression that I get is that FCUM are trying to use their to become an exception and/or, thrust their ideas onto everybody else.
I'm pretty sure that the FCUM press officer can spin an issue as well as the UL but on balance, I think that the standpoint being taking Re: Curzon comes across as a small-minded spat after something that they agreed with comes back to work against them.
If I'm getting the wrong end of the stick with this then I'm happy for someone to point that out.
I don't like games being moved at the last minute as much as the next guy but I can also see TV as a necessary evil. Whilst the FCUM principles of "giving football back to the fans" is commendable, there's a very good reason (IMO), why fans aren't involved in the running of sports clubs.
The Unibond league stated no games would be moved in 2007. They stated that no games would be moved without the consent of both clubs. They've also stated that a communication was made to all league clubs that would've absolved them from any wrong-doing in this instance. FCUM never received said communication and I also received a text from a Bamber Bridge committee member yesterday stating they'd never received said communication, either. No other club has been able to produce this communication and the league can't produce any evidence of it.
John_D wrote:
In trying to rectify the situation, threats to those charged with facilitating the broadcast ain't a great way to go about it.
I'm still waiting for someone to point out just what threats have been made, by who they were made and who they were made to?
As for breaking the boycott, I was stood in the car park. So ner.
