Despite living in Cornwall now, I continue to follow the Club's interests very closely, my wife and I subscribe to the 200 club, and I follow Twitter updates in real time on match dates. I had a real sense of excitement in making my first visit to the Pilot Field for a year and a half last Monday, and left with huge misgivings for the reasons articulated by the posting this week.
I regularly follow the Forum, but rarely post, but have been struck by the tone of recent supporter comments and heard these directly on Monday night. There is clearly huge concern about the downward direction the club is following and a strong belief that radical changes are needed throughout the club if there is to be an improvement in fortunes. it is clear to me that in addition to stability there needs to be a marked improvement in man management/human relationships in order to stem the regular exodus of managers. They can't all have been the wrong choice or worthy of dismissal. Supportive and nurturing relationships from the Board assist managers in difficult times
It is clear to me that effective outward facing partnerships are essential in order to tap into new ideas, creativity and energy as well as the financial resources that others want to give, if there is finally a recognition that the club is truly a community entity and not solely a business interest. As a business interest its worth in financial terms is spiralling radically downwards.
Effective partnerships must include the Council, local Business, volunteers ( or those that have not left in a disgruntled state, or limit their attendance to away matches only, local schools and colleges). Clubs which are democratically run and practice participative processes have a lot to teach us if we are willing to listen.
I left reflecting on the difficult position that Pat now finds himself in. As a club appointed Supporters Liaison Officer is there not a conflict of interests for him if the views expressed by some supporters, which need to be articulated to the Board, may not be welcomed by those who appointed him. What mechanisms are there for him to formally raise the concerns that he has been asked to raise, without fear for his position and then reporting back to show what he has done with those concerns, and what the response has been?
Perhaps the time has come for this role to be change to one which is formally up for election through the Supporters Club and open to voting members. This would demonstrate that there is a mandate from Supporters for the issues raised in this liaison role, as well as ensuring a transparent process for reporting back to those who are articulating so much concern.
I fear decline will continue unless there is a radically new approach throughout the club
How right you are Roger but its got to the stage where there is nothing else we as fans can do. It is very sad but there are quite a few of us just living in hope.
I'm not sure why pat would feel in an awkward position imo pat is a great man who is loved and respected by all supporters he Gives a lot of time to the club and for you to bring pat up in this subject is imo a joke and I feel that most of the supporters will agree!!!!
This is not a comment about Pat at all. it relates to the governance and role conflict issues that occur, at a time of unrest, to the position of a club appointed Supporters Liaison role. This might require him to raise critical issues on behalf of disgruntled fans and it could create difficulties for the post holder. The model that would overcome this is for Supporters to elect their Liaison person to speak in an unhindered way on their behalf
In addition to the work that Pat does in the role of S.L.O though Isn't Steve Thorpe as Supporters Club chairman by his job role already an additional fan elected liason figure who can pass on supporters club members concerns etc?
Steve's well respected by fans, decades of watching the team, very much his own man and very much listened to by DW as well?
Hi Roger, I hope life in Cornwall is treating you well and I am sorry not to have seen you for a chat on Monday.
The Supporters' Liaison role was established with a couple of aims in mind. The principal objective was to give supporters a conduit for any questions or comments they might have for the Board, be that during a game of otherwise. I understand that Pat has fielded a relatively small number of enquiries in that respect over the last couple of years, including some from contributors to this forum, and where these have been received by email, the supporters' comments, and the board's replies, have always been forwarded verbatim for the avoidance of any doubt as to the authenticity of the exchange.
Far from being a hindrance, Pat's relationship with the Board, and the fact that he was appointed to the role by the Board, is such that he can pose awkward questions without fear of reproach, so I am unclear as to where any conflict of interest would lie. If any supporter feels that that cannot trust Pat to raise a particular concern, I can only encourage them to have faith in the process and to judge him on the outcome, rather than on a perceived notion that a conflict might exist.
Pat has also made himself available on numerous occasions for supporters who simply wished to chat with him personally, or to air a particular grievance, but without necessarily putting their comments or concerns to the Board directly. He has also helped to arrange three Fans' Forum events, at which supporters have been able to question the Board directly.
The other main objective of the role is to provide welfare support to travelling supporters on away matchdays, and I believe that you may be familiar with that aspect yourself.
-- Edited by Sean Adams on Thursday 2nd of October 2014 12:51:06 PM
-- Edited by Sean Adams on Thursday 2nd of October 2014 01:02:00 PM
Couldn't agree more Sean. Pats role is invaluable to both supporters and the board and always carried out unbiasedly and with no clash of interests at all.
I have great respect for Pat a we have a continuous dialogue about things at the club that we both love with a passion. I can tell you that Pat is his own man and will always be honest and above board. I am privileged to have worked with Pat as a volunteer for the club and to consider him a trusted friend and colleague.
That's funny because he told me he hates you Steve!
Can we not get back onto on the pitch things? this is very boring.
You mean the praise Pat is receiving ?
Reading the books Roger has written with great pleasure, i can imagine after an absence of a long time to visit TPF he
has certain doubts. I think the majority of us all have but in this case it seems obvious reading the comments other posters made that Pat is a well respected and a very objective person. And in my own experience i can tell he is also a very nice guy who is excellent in playing the drums.
I don't think anyone questions Pats role and integrity, what it has done is deflect the real issues and where the club is heading which is many of our concerns not just Roger.
To be absolutely clear, at no time did I believe that Roger was doubting Pat's integrity, but he did question his role as Supporters' Liaison Officer, which was the basis of my reply on behalf of the Club.
I am really not certain that it is plausible to sensibly discuss the wider aspects of his initial post on here, as there are just so many intertwining strands to the debate. Your simple comment there, Chris, as to "where the Club is heading" would lead in all sorts of different direction, and your view as to what constitute the "real issues" will perhaps differ wildly from someone else's opinion.
Well Sean the real issues are carry on in current vein we will end up in the county league, we cant get a manager to stay for 2 seasons, players are not all giving it their best. I cant see how anyone can argue those 3 points aren't fact.
If we continue to lose every game, we will of course be relegated. Nigel Kane was the last manager to see out more than two years and I will grant you that 2007, when he left, is quite a while ago now. Your third point is entirely subjective though, I would suggest, but if that is your perception, it is not for me to argue.
Roger has mentioned only one of those three things in his original post, and it seems perfectly clear that his "real issues" include a number of off-field matters. I suspect that you might share some, if not all, of his views, but my earlier point was simply that we all have varying opinions about which are the more critical at this juncture.
Shall we pause there and let Roger add his further thoughts?
I feel very reluctant to join this thread; but equally loathe to stay silent. On the aspect regarding Pat's role, I'm sure enough has been said - he is held in great regard by all; and I'm sure we are all in no doubt that Roger's initial comment and subsequent ones on that aspect have been made in absolute good faith.
The other issues Roger posed are difficult. Sean's comment that the strands are intertwined is obviously true; but I can't accept that that should place an embargo on discussion on fundamental matters to do with the club's future. What is the point of a forum if it is implausible to discuss such matters? Supporters have a right and entitlement to express a view even if that view might be unwelcome to some.
That said, the club itself is a limited liability company - it is not a mutual association, a community project, or some kind of debating society. Unless and until it goes into liquidation it is for the Board to act as an executive and for the shareholders to sanction decisions the executive makes. So any comments supporters might make on this forum or anywhere else about the club's future are just that; they might or might not influence decisions the Board might wish to take; but they cannot substitute for the Board. In that context, for supporters to call - overtly or by implication - for 'regime change' is to my mind futile and counter productive.
What I would see as much better is for those on this forum who are so inclined to make constructive suggestions as to what the club might usefully do to turn matters round. Roger, in his initial post, made an entirely reasonable suggestion that the club needs to develop partnerships with others - such as the Council, businesses, schools, and so on. That is indeed vital. I'm sure the club has tried to act in that way; but it clearly needs to do very much better. The club needs to be identified with the town and vice versa. That is not easily achieved; it really does need all of those who love and support the club to act together as best we can, avoiding sniping and carping wherever possible.
I was certainly not seeking to deny anyone the right to discuss the matter Geoff, and was merely expressing the view that it would be a very difficult matter to debate with clarity on an internet forum due to its complexities. It is always interesting to read such a balanced and open-minded point of view as that which you have expressed though.
Thank-you Sean. You're right the issues are very difficult; but that to my mind makes it important to discuss them - always provided that that discussion remains within the bounds of rationality and civility and that no-one mistakes the forum for a decision making body.
