BANNED FROM FINCH FARM

[Bruce Wayne]

Joking aside though, rather than writing emails in the hope of a sanitised reply, is this not a chance for one of our famed ITK's to come forward and give us the inside track?

 

[davek]

So, just to summarise the last 12 hours of posting in the thread:

• The club are still using innuendo to blacken the name of a longstanding supporter by way of giving "their side" of the story
• someone has *anonymously* been sent into the fray here to 'have a bit of a go' at the club but ultimately to muddy the water a bit and make the club's position on all this look semi-reasonable in the context of some legal mechanism
• AB is still out in the cold with his reputation in shreds

^^^ That is 'dealing' with the situation as far as our club's hired monkeys are concerned.

Pathetic, as per ****ing usual.

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

So, just to summarise the last 12 hours of posting in the thread:

• The club are still using innuendo to blacken the name of a longstanding supporter by way of giving "their side" of the story
• someone has *anonymously* been sent into the fray here to 'have a bit of a go' at the club but ultimately to muddy the water a bit and make the club's position on all this look semi-reasonable in the context of some legal mechanism
• AB is still out in the cold with his reputation in shreds

^^^ That is 'dealing' with the situation as far as our club's hired monkeys are concerned.

Pathetic, as per ****ing usual.

I don't think that they are at liberty to discuss it with any of us though Dave, we can lodge our dissatisfactions and they can acknowledge them, but they cannot and will not go into any details with anyone but AB.

They could come out with a statement that categorically removes anything from the equation, and lets be honest we ALL know what I mean by that, people making 2+2=76, and this could be done with AB's consent or whatever is needed.

 

[davek]

I don't think that they are at liberty to discuss it with any of us though Dave, we can lodge our dissatisfactions and they can acknowledge them, but they cannot and will not go into any details with anyone but AB.

They could come out with a statement that categorically removes anything from the equation, and lets be honest we ALL know what I mean by that, people making 2+2=76, and this could be done with AB's consent or whatever is needed.

Yes. That seems a reasonable solution to the damage that's been done to a reputation. The problem for them is that if they do that then there really isn't much left for them as an excuse to continue to deny him access to FF to cover games. They're in a bind of their own making.

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

Yes. That seems a reasonable solution to the damage that's been done to a reputation. The problem for them is that if they do that then there really isn't much left for them as an excuse to continue to deny him access to FF to cover games. They're in a bind of their own making.

Damage that's been done to whose reputation?

 

[davek]

Damage that's been done to whose reputation?

To ABs.

 

[Coach]

I think AB is very brave to tell his story here in public. I feel very sorry for him.

The problem he faces is that the more he / anybody kicks up a fuss the more his reputation is likely to be damaged. He is in a no win situation.

 

[nsmith1721]

I think AB is very brave to tell his story here in public. I feel very sorry for him.

The problem he faces is that the more he / anybody kicks up a fuss the more his reputation is likely to be damaged. He is in a no win situation.

If you read this thread I dont think you will find AB kicking up dust or making a huge fuss. He simply posted what happened to let the people who were accustomed to his match reports know the situation. From that point he basically backed out. AB has done nothing wrong.

 

[toffeejack]

If you read this thread I dont think you will find AB kicking up dust or making a huge fuss. He simply posted what happened to let the people who were accustomed to his match reports know the situation. From that point he basically backed out. AB has done nothing wrong.

exactly, just hope common sence prevails in the end, but i'm not holding my breath. AB has handled the situation so creditably, never spouted anything out during the club's decision making process, waited until they'd made their final decision and was very right in letting us know and everyone here on GOT will do what we can to reach the best solution. Situations like this need to be highlighted so others know just how badly our club is being run as opposed to the media love in of "isn't it great to see a fan own a top football club bollocks". We are a people's club, just not under its current regime

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

To ABs.

You're saying his reputation is being damaged based solely on his own side of events?

 

[Coach]

If you read this thread I dont think you will find AB kicking up dust or making a huge fuss. He simply posted what happened to let the people who were accustomed to his match reports know the situation. From that point he basically backed out. AB has done nothing wrong.

I never said he had done anything wrong - I said he was brave to tell his story.

 

[davek]

You're saying his reputation is being damaged based solely on his own side of events?

Well, I take him to be faithfully giving a balanced commentary here. His OP was detailed and he didn't deny anything that the club was saying he was doing in terms of activity. And that appears to have been backed up from the email correspondence from the club thus far. His side of events looks to be uncontroversial to all parties. So yes, in answer to your question, I am saying his reputation has been damaged by the innuendo in both the club's original decision he relayed in that OP and in their subsequent responses to people mailing them from this forum.

 

[Bluenose1995]

Damage that's been done to whose reputation?

thanks to the club a number of people now think Bally is a pervert shameful stuff

 

[Royal Blue Jersey]

I know mate, you misunderstand. I'm disagreeing with the reason given as it CAN'T be a safeguarding issue under FA Guidelines unless the player is Under 18.

And what do you think the reasoning is? Let's see if it's the same as what I think.

How about you just tell us instead of playing this stupid game, very annoying.

 

[Royal Blue Jersey]

I think that club has an overarching suspicion of independent sources of information about the club, ever since the Blue Union interview incident and the cancellation of the AGMs. I think they object to an independently run website of this size and influence, particularly on social media. I think they didn't want coverage of the Academy to be available independently at a much quicker speed than the official site, with the content not being ran through an official editor before publication.

That said, it just seems so ludicrous. To the normal person, the above doesn't seem anywhere near enough of a reason to ban a guy from going games he's been going to for years, but I honestly think there's something seriously wrong with the senior management setup at Everton.

I'm not a whacko conspiracy theorist; I try to look at everything rationally. If you rule out safeguarding as a reason for the ban, which I am doing, as there's nothing to back that up whatsoever and that could have been remedied by a myriad of reasons - like requesting a CRB check, for example - then you have to look at other angles, and apart from Steve shagging Irvine's wife or something there's no other reason I can conclude, unless I'm missing something.

The club should work with GOT, get together with Steve, iron out issues and sort this out like professionals and adults. There was no need whatsoever for this dirty laundry to be aired, but Everton have put themselves in this situation by apparently putting Steve in a position where he had no other option.

It's all so pointless. A stain on the club...

Blue Union behaved horribly with that