Newcastle United Supporters Trust (NUST)

[wormy]

2 minutes ago, LFEE said:

I get your point but the major difference being the group of people you are referring to in one instance are highly paid and it’s there job. Whereas the group of people you are comparing them too are volunteering their own limited time around their jobs and families.

 

Thats why any criticism of them should be measured with that in mind along with the knowledge there is nothing stopping yourself and other critics from stepping forward if they think they can do a better job of it.

 

Isn't this the whole reason they're facing this level of criticism, though? The whole reason @Geordie2302 is digging so deep is it seems they've barely co-operated with a single query and it looks like @Heron felt he had no choice but to pack in his role because his attempts to bring a different view to the board was so readily dismissed.

[Geordie2302]

I understand where people think that it's sad or disproportionate but I think  it comes down to some basics for me in terms of communication, visibility and following the rules.

 

For four months I tried to mitigate several risks to the Trust (in my own time and not as a board member) but was met with resistance, challenge and failure to follow their (not mine) rules. They've wasted more of my time than the whole board attending a meeting per month for a 12 month period when they could have just followed the rules and not wasted anyone's time (accounts still haven't been provided despite the FSA advising they were in breach of their rules). Somewhere, someone (or someone's) made a conscious decision to basically say "fuck you" - that's fine but there's a consequence to that. 

 

I didn't stand previously because I didn't have time to commit to it as I know what's required - it's basically like being a director of a company - and let's be clear, they did volunteer. They want this responsibility. Unfortunately if you're going to be responsible then you have to be accountable per not just the rules but the regulations (laws) which  govern being a Trust board member. 

 

But ultimately I'm a member. I pay my subs and it's me (and every other member) they are accountable to. If I don't do it I don't see anyone else doing it and as a club why the fuck would they engage with an organisation with little credibility amongst their membership who can't get the basics right. 

 

If good men sit idly by and all that...

 

 

Edited February 3, 2022 by Geordie2302

[Dr.Spaceman]

I think you're over-valuing the NUST, personally, as a lot of people do.

 

They're not the Millenium Group from the X-Files ffs  

[Geordie2302]

1 hour ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

They're not the Millenium Group from the X-Files ffs  

 

I watched the x-files and don't remember the millennium group (i was youngish tbf) 

 

You're probably right in terms of the "value" of the Trust right now, which is kind of my point - imagine how valuable it should be (and not in a financial context although as the richest club in the world...).

 

It should be regularly engaged with members (and the wider community), it should liaise with the club and feedback to fans, it should be leading and communicating on issues like the crush at Leeds, safe standing i.e., all the things that fans want which are proactive as well as reactionary.

 

And this is before any footballing reforms - imagine the current Trust board sitting opposite the club  with a "golden share" or equivalent. We'd never know, have any confidence or understand what was going on - well I doubt that I would.

 

 

[LFEE]

Have to agree with @Dr.Spacemanon this. I’ve read the responses to my last post and they come across lacking in any tolerance for people giving up their own time to turnaround what the NUST was to what it is slowly forming. Some people clearly struggle to separate the old NUST and the new NUST which is still in an embryonic phase I feel.

 

”I didn't stand previously because I didn't have time to commit to it as I know what's required - it's basically like being a director of a company - and let's be clear, they did volunteer. They want this responsibility. Unfortunately if you're going to be responsible then you have to be accountable per not just the rules but the regulations (laws) which  govern being a Trust board member.”

 

This one for example encapsulates the main issues quite well…

 

You assume those who took it upon themselves to volunteer to have a load of time on their hands or know what they were getting themselves into. The answer most likely is no on both accounts but they volunteered anyway and are doing quite well and have come a long way in a couple of years. Baring in mind mostly under an Ashley ownership it will be interesting to see how they progress under what seems a far more receptive ownership so maybe the time for judgement should be in the coming couple of years not the previous ones. 
 

I may remember incorrectly but out of the thousands of fans who could’ve put themselves forward for election I only seem to recall a grand total of around a dozen people who offered to try their best which was put to a vote and reduced to around half a dozen if I recall. (Personally I would’ve let everyone on and share the load and see where the first 12 months got you with each other’s strengths and weaknesses but they didn’t and no one raised it as an issue so a mute point perhaps but maybe something that might be considered in the future as people offering to help freely should never be dismissed).

 

So on that note you can still volunteer and offer what time you do have spare to either officially or unofficially to assist the NUST. Reading into your intentions and contrary to what you state it comes across that you might have a bit too much time on your hands to be honest. Let it be known if you were to stand I’ll happily vote for you but with no expectation of your overall time sacrificed and contribution only for any to be a positive one for its members. I’m sure I’ll get my ten pounds worth over the rest of my lifetime.

 

As for the @Heronsituation before commenting on it I’d like to make it clear I see him as a friend of mine along with @Greg so when I got wind @Heronhad quit the NUST my only concern was if he was ok and his friendship with @Gregwas ok which they both confirmed so. That’s because I see both these individuals for what they. Two fans of a club they dearly love and two absolute gentlemen always trying their best with whatever I’ve been involved with them in, wether it be SackPardew.Com, AshleyOut.Com and to a far far lesser extent from myself WorFlags and NUST.

 

Ive seen first hand the great sacrifices they’ve made and continue to make for the greater good of this club of ours and for that alone I guess I write this defence of both along with the agreeing with @Dr.Spacemanthat the level of expectation from the NUST is unrealistic and genuinely wonder if some think it’s this big powerful organisation. Maybe one day it might become that but it certainly is a long way from that currently.

 

I personally from the outside wished as a friend I would’ve had chance to speak to @Heronbefore he quit NUST as I would’ve encouraged him that it’s easier to make change within an organisation than from outside one. I thought his spell was far too short to expect great change and maybe give balance to a vision of the NUST he represents among the fan base alongside the vision of the NUST perhaps @Gregrepresents. His decision however to quit I’ve never once criticised as it was his choice and only he knows how he felt at the time but not only that it was his personal time he was giving up unpaid. The same goes for @Greg. I never took up the Pledge 1892 scheme as personally without any hint of hindsight felt it was clear to me it was going to end the way it has. However it was still a positive incentive with a lot of hard work put in freely again and I had no issues with it and hoped even for them to prove my scepticism unfounded and even though it didn’t it’s going to still have a massive positive effect on the local area if not the club itself directly. Those suggesting it distracted them for the real task in hand also may want to remind themselves of the stone wall which was the ownership at the timeframe this took form under. No one really cared about loyalty points or season ticket sale dates etc then.

 

“If good men sit idly by and all that...”

You might want to reflect on that statement and hopefully see the irony of the juxtaposition reflect back at you.
 

Anyway, together stronger… 

 

 

 

 

[Guest HTT II]

4 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Have to agree with @Dr.Spacemanon this. I’ve read the responses to my last post and they come across lacking in any tolerance for people giving up their own time to turnaround what the NUST was to what it is slowly forming. Some people clearly struggle to separate the old NUST and the new NUST which is still in an embryonic phase I feel.

 

”I didn't stand previously because I didn't have time to commit to it as I know what's required - it's basically like being a director of a company - and let's be clear, they did volunteer. They want this responsibility. Unfortunately if you're going to be responsible then you have to be accountable per not just the rules but the regulations (laws) which  govern being a Trust board member.”

 

This one for example encapsulates the main issues quite well…

 

You assume those who took it upon themselves to volunteer to have a load of time on their hands or know what they were getting themselves into. The answer most likely is no on both accounts but they volunteered anyway and are doing quite well and have come a long way in a couple of years. Baring in mind mostly under an Ashley ownership it will be interesting to see how they progress under what seems a far more receptive ownership so maybe the time for judgement should be in the coming couple of years not the previous ones. 
 

I may remember incorrectly but out of the thousands of fans who could’ve put themselves forward for election I only seem to recall a grand total of around a dozen people who offered to try their best which was put to a vote and reduced to around half a dozen if I recall. (Personally I would’ve let everyone on and share the load and see where the first 12 months got you with each other’s strengths and weaknesses but they didn’t and no one raised it as an issue so a mute point perhaps but maybe something that might be considered in the future as people offering to help freely should never be dismissed).

 

So on that note you can still volunteer and offer what time you do have spare to either officially or unofficially to assist the NUST. Reading into your intentions and contrary to what you state it comes across that you might have a bit too much time on your hands to be honest. Let it be known if you were to stand I’ll happily vote for you but with no expectation of your overall time sacrificed and contribution only for any to be a positive one for its members. I’m sure I’ll get my ten pounds worth over the rest of my lifetime.

 

As for the @Heronsituation before commenting on it I’d like to make it clear I see him as a friend of mine along with @Greg so when I got wind @Heronhad quit the NUST my only concern was if he was ok and his friendship with @Gregwas ok which they both confirmed so. That’s because I see both these individuals for what they. Two fans of a club they dearly love and two absolute gentlemen always trying their best with whatever I’ve been involved with them in, wether it be SackPardew.Com, AshleyOut.Com and to a far far lesser extent from myself WorFlags and NUST.

 

Ive seen first hand the great sacrifices they’ve made and continue to make for the greater good of this club of ours and for that alone I guess I write this defence of both along with the agreeing with @Dr.Spacemanthat the level of expectation from the NUST is unrealistic and genuinely wonder if some think it’s this big powerful organisation. Maybe one day it might become that but it certainly is a long way from that currently.

 

I personally from the outside wished as a friend I would’ve had chance to speak to @Heronbefore he quit NUST as I would’ve encouraged him that it’s easier to make change within an organisation than from outside one. I thought his spell was far too short to expect great change and maybe give balance to a vision of the NUST he represents among the fan base alongside the vision of the NUST perhaps @Gregrepresents. His decision however to quit I’ve never once criticised as it was his choice and only he knows how he felt at the time but not only that it was his personal time he was giving up unpaid. The same goes for @Greg. I never took up the Pledge 1892 scheme as personally without any hint of hindsight felt it was clear to me it was going to end the way it has. However it was still a positive incentive with a lot of hard work put in freely again and I had no issues with it and hoped even for them to prove my scepticism unfounded and even though it didn’t it’s going to still have a massive positive effect on the local area if not the club itself directly. Those suggesting it distracted them for the real task in hand also may want to remind themselves of the stone wall which was the ownership at the timeframe this took form under. No one really cared about loyalty points or season ticket sale dates etc then.

 

“If good men sit idly by and all that...”

You might want to reflect on that statement and hopefully see the irony of the juxtaposition reflect back at you.
 

Anyway, together stronger… 

 

 

 

 

tl;dr

[Sean]

People don't have to want to run for a position on the Trust to give their view that it is not being run properly. 

[LFEE]

21 minutes ago, HTT II said:

tl;dr

You were one of my inspirations when writing it ?

[Guest HTT II]

1 minute ago, LFEE said:

You were one of my inspirations when writing it ?

I can see two sides of the debate personally!

[christ]

I don’t think the Trust is perfect by any stretch, but there’s a not insubstantial section of our fanbase that’s populated by hypercritical dickheads who wouldn’t bother their arse to ever try and improve anything. Fuck em.

[LFEE]

23 minutes ago, HTT II said:

I can see two sides of the debate personally!

As long as you just see it and not post it otherwise it will be twice as long ?

[Geordie2302]

I can see both sides of the debate too and I attempted for four months to appeal to the board's better judgment (in private) before frustration got the better of me. Not lacking in tolerance but hugely frustrated - it's not like I didn't give the whole board a solid rationale (and point them to the exact rules repeatedly).

 

I raised some issues, followed the process, tried to follow the next bit of the process, asked for information entitled to etc etc.

 

I don't assume anything about anyone's time commitments, however they volunteered and upon understanding the role I would have thought the path of least resistance would be the one to follow (i.e. compliant with the rules) as opposed to pushing back on every little thing every time which ultimately exacerbated the issues. 

 

I haven't got a problem with any of the individuals and appreciate the role they do, although I disagree with the way in which they are doing it and attempted to affect change (at a time when election nominations had closed).

 

The risks and failure to follow the rules are genuinely significant enough to get the Trust struck off the FCA's register and anyone with malicious intent could have easily gone down that route. I didn't and whilst I informed the FCA and FSA I set out some mitigations to them also. 

 

I can't comment on the previous Trust as didn't know one existed until 2019 when I joined. I'm obviously aware of some of those who were on it through social media and research. I mean the secretary has been in place for more than 10 years so should know what is required...

 

If / when the opportunity arises I may run and endeavour to ensure the rules are followed and that members are engaged (my two fundamental criticisms). I only flagged the issue as I'd volunteered to be part of the council. 

 

The thing is, when you actually take the time to read the rules the Trust has the potential to be structured like a business and should operate as such - the board doesn't have to do everything and can appoint sub-groups at any time - the board is about signing things off. 

 

I mean as an example I emailed them when I noticed the date error and highlighted they werent giving members time to make a resolution because of the notification - got a response that said 14 days notice is required (which is a genuine conflict in the rules) - I was making an observation in the hope it might affect change but get nothing in response.

 

As much as I enjoy this debate I'm not a fan of typing after a full day's graft so will bow out for now - maybe let's get a pint and have a proper chat about it at some point in the future (and then I can secure your vote  )

[LFEE]

1 hour ago, Geordie2302 said:

I can see both sides of the debate too and I attempted for four months to appeal to the board's better judgment (in private) before frustration got the better of me. Not lacking in tolerance but hugely frustrated - it's not like I didn't give the whole board a solid rationale (and point them to the exact rules repeatedly).

 

I raised some issues, followed the process, tried to follow the next bit of the process, asked for information entitled to etc etc.

 

I don't assume anything about anyone's time commitments, however they volunteered and upon understanding the role I would have thought the path of least resistance would be the one to follow (i.e. compliant with the rules) as opposed to pushing back on every little thing every time which ultimately exacerbated the issues. 

 

I haven't got a problem with any of the individuals and appreciate the role they do, although I disagree with the way in which they are doing it and attempted to affect change (at a time when election nominations had closed).

 

The risks and failure to follow the rules are genuinely significant enough to get the Trust struck off the FCA's register and anyone with malicious intent could have easily gone down that route. I didn't and whilst I informed the FCA and FSA I set out some mitigations to them also. 

 

I can't comment on the previous Trust as didn't know one existed until 2019 when I joined. I'm obviously aware of some of those who were on it through social media and research. I mean the secretary has been in place for more than 10 years so should know what is required...

 

If / when the opportunity arises I may run and endeavour to ensure the rules are followed and that members are engaged (my two fundamental criticisms). I only flagged the issue as I'd volunteered to be part of the council. 

 

The thing is, when you actually take the time to read the rules the Trust has the potential to be structured like a business and should operate as such - the board doesn't have to do everything and can appoint sub-groups at any time - the board is about signing things off. 

 

I mean as an example I emailed them when I noticed the date error and highlighted they werent giving members time to make a resolution because of the notification - got a response that said 14 days notice is required (which is a genuine conflict in the rules) - I was making an observation in the hope it might affect change but get nothing in response.

 

As much as I enjoy this debate I'm not a fan of typing after a full day's graft so will bow out for now - maybe let's get a pint and have a proper chat about it at some point in the future (and then I can secure your vote  )

Well I sincerely hope you do run for NUST and would happily vote for you as it clear to me and I’m guessing others you know your stuff in specific areas which could only be beneficial to the NUST going forward. 
 

As I stated earlier the more people to share the load and offer different strengths the better. 
 

It’s never going to be easy to please all  it’s members but as long as everyone involved has the best intentions to that is the main thing. Those that don’t  will hopefully be voted off democratically.

 

In the meantime don’t forget it’s membership is only 13000 which is big as that is its under 20% of the match going crowd and even a smaller fraction of the fan base as a whole. It’s in its infancy in more ways than one.

[Fantail Breeze]

You lot all care way too much about the Trust, you sad bastards.

[NE27]

[Joey Linton]

22 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

You lot all care way too much about the Trust, you sad bastards.

Yep. The defence of them, the way it's been run, the numerous errors made always ends with the same main point too, "because they are my mates". 

[Geordie2302]

14 minutes ago, NE27 said:

Just wait till I rock up at the AGM with my briefcase ? ? ? 

[Heron]

Appreciate the comments made with reference to me again folk.

 

I hope certain individuals on the board have the patience and tolerance to outlive current methods and mentalities, but only time will tell. I commend them all for their dedication irrespective. However, I walked into a house with what I thought had a repairable smashed window and found the foundations were entirely sinking. Hence my departure.

 

That's my view. Rightly or wrongly.

 

What is important now is that they get the fundamentals right and ride the wave of positivity the club is now generating. 

[Joey Linton]

9 hours ago, Heron said:

Appreciate the comments made with reference to me again folk.

 

I hope certain individuals on the board have the patience and tolerance to outlive current methods and mentalities, but only time will tell. I commend them all for their dedication irrespective. However, I walked into a house with what I thought had a repairable smashed window and found the foundations were entirely sinking. Hence my departure.

 

That's my view. Rightly or wrongly.

 

What is important now is that they get the fundamentals right and ride the wave of positivity the club is now generating. 

The idea that you were wrong to leave when not being listened to and should have stuck around is as stupid as when someone on here told me that if I disagree with what they are doing I should sign up.

 

On a separate note, still don't get why they haven't put a tweet out on their account about the AGM. People can easy miss an email. 

[Sima]

17 minutes ago, Joey Linton said:

The idea that you were wrong to leave when not being listened to and should have stuck around is as stupid as when someone on here told me that if I disagree with what they are doing I should sign up.

 

On a separate note, still don't get why they haven't put a tweet out on their account about the AGM. People can easy miss an email. 

 

That's what they are banking on.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by Sima

[LFEE]

1 hour ago, Joey Linton said:

The idea that you were wrong to leave when not being listened to and should have stuck around is as stupid as when someone on here told me that if I disagree with what they are doing I should sign up.

 

On a separate note, still don't get why they haven't put a tweet out on their account about the AGM. People can easy miss an email. 

Who said he was wrong to leave? 

[Geordie2302]

I'm expecting them to tweet out on Monday a "reminder" to the one email notification.

 

I confirmed with Greg my motion of no confidence is in and will be heard. Had an interesting chat with him about it and a few other things yesterday.

 

Anyone who is a member and can't go tuesday but still wants a vote on any issue (including the motion of no confidence) can dm me and I can tell you what needs to be done. I'll probably give a more detailed account in here or on twitter than they do so probably won't miss much.

[Geordie2302]

apparently this is the last day to ask for a proxy (despite the method not being advertised anywhere and this being contrary to the rules). 
 

form here. DM me for my email / number 

 

anyone miss it and you can email them and I’ll give you my details and I’ll argue it tomorrow. 
 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdwPtaKXQiP35iKz0E5yIM26vISl4vtUa0QlDq6zFLNGpECsw/viewform 

 

[Fantail Breeze]

Totally bizarre they have an AGM tomorrow and haven’t posted about it anywhere, not a single tweet.

[Joey Linton]

On 21/02/2022 at 23:21, Fantail Breeze said:

Totally bizarre they have an AGM tomorrow and haven’t posted about it anywhere, not a single tweet.

Par for the course and entirely predictable. 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Joey Linton