Latest Fan Advisory Board (FAB) Meeting

[Globalfox]

22 minutes ago, David Lowe said:

Well this is all very good and it is correct that these issues are being discussed if raised by fans. But should these really be the main discussions when most fans are asking what on earth is happening to this club on the field and how this decline is going to be stopped!

I understand David and yes as fans we moan but if you read the Fan Engagement Framework those topics are considered out of scope. Very few clubs engage openly about playing details and it is a little unmanageable as we all have opinions about performance etc how do they respond?  You mention BDCR as an example and my wife and myself are incredulous with rage  in milliseconds but others defend him. The same applies to executives I personally think the Trust continually calling out Rudkin to be fired stops them doing anything just to spite us.  We work the battles and issues we can but I can assure you discussions in dealt about the playing side are firmly off topic. Do I agree no but I kinda understand.listen to James McCarron he supports this style and my reaction is god help us.

[David Lowe]

38 minutes ago, Globalfox said:

I understand David and yes as fans we moan but if you read the Fan Engagement Framework those topics are considered out of scope. Very few clubs engage openly about playing details and it is a little unmanageable as we all have opinions about performance etc how do they respond?  You mention BDCR as an example and my wife and myself are incredulous with rage  in milliseconds but others defend him. The same applies to executives I personally think the Trust continually calling out Rudkin to be fired stops them doing anything just to spite us.  We work the battles and issues we can but I can assure you discussions in dealt about the playing side are firmly off topic. Do I agree no but I kinda understand.listen to James McCarron he supports this style and my reaction is god help us.

I wasn’t really suggesting discussion of individual players, just the overall situation. How are the club looking to go about putting out a better product on the pitch & how can a club of this size survive if it slips into non-league which is where we look to be heading.

[Robo61]

1 hour ago, lestuhfox said:

Now whos insulting.

Passing an observation on a comment made is not and never had been a personal insult. 

[fox_favourite]

They need to start a Foxestalk Advisory Board. That'll be entertaining. We nominate someone from here for each meeting and they have to post the results here. 

[lestuhfox]

1 hour ago, Robo61 said:

Passing an observation on a comment made is not and never had been a personal insult. 

Fans wanting ID checks are in the minority at all clubs.

That is a fact.

[Robo61]

1 minute ago, lestuhfox said:

Fans wanting ID checks are in the minority at all clubs.

That is fact.

Oh I must have missed that vote

[Freeman's Wharfer]

26 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Oh I must have missed that vote

You did. The Trust asked about in an End of Season Survey completed by thousands and the data showed a trend against it.

 

But I guess if you and a handful of others (many of whom don’t even go away regularly) at a poorly attended Your 90 Minutes session liked the idea and thought it was good then that’s ok.

 

If the club had anything about them, they’d canvass opinions of those are most affected by it and give more weighting to their opinion than those who just like the idea but aren’t going to be inconvenienced.

[Freeman's Wharfer]

3 hours ago, Globalfox said:

I understand David and yes as fans we moan but if you read the Fan Engagement Framework those topics are considered out of scope. Very few clubs engage openly about playing details and it is a little unmanageable as we all have opinions about performance etc how do they respond?  You mention BDCR as an example and my wife and myself are incredulous with rage  in milliseconds but others defend him. The same applies to executives I personally think the Trust continually calling out Rudkin to be fired stops them doing anything just to spite us.  We work the battles and issues we can but I can assure you discussions in dealt about the playing side are firmly off topic. Do I agree no but I kinda understand.listen to James McCarron he supports this style and my reaction is god help us.

Interesting take (but not one I agree with).

 

Some tell you the Trust has no impact and affects nothing, others now think it’s keeping Rudkin in a job!  

[Robo61]

18 minutes ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

You did. The Trust asked about in an End of Season Survey completed by thousands and the data showed a trend against it.

 

But I guess if you and a handful of others (many of whom don’t even go away regularly) at a poorly attended Your 90 Minutes session liked the idea and thought it was good then that’s ok.

 

If the club had anything about them, they’d canvass opinions of those are most affected by it and give more weighting to their opinion than those who just like the idea but aren’t going to be inconvenienced.

Then I apologise,  though the popularity or otherwise of this idea was never my argument and I only came on hear to answer a question.  Do we know how many of those voting against in the Trusts survey attend away matches.   can assure you all of those that attended the your 90 minutes session attend away games,  some more regularly then others.   The session was poorly attended yet no one spoke against identity checks,  if you and others have strong views then why are you not attending these fan engagement sessions.  

 

I can't say I particularly like the idea and it will effect me,  as one who occasionally gets my nephew a ticket for away matches,  adversely. But I do recognise it as the only current way of policing abuse of whatever away ticket loyalty system comes next.  Perhaps you have a better idea,  or you are happy  for the abuse to continue.     

[Freeman's Wharfer]

18 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Then I apologise,  though the popularity or otherwise of this idea was never my argument and I only came on hear to answer a question.  Do we know how many of those voting against in the Trusts survey attend away matches.   can assure you all of those that attended the your 90 minutes session attend away games,  some more regularly then others.   The session was poorly attended yet no one spoke against identity checks,  if you and others have strong views then why are you not attending these fan engagement sessions.  

 

I can't say I particularly like the idea and it will affect me,  as one who occasionally gets my nephew a ticket for away matches,  adversely. But I do recognise it as the only current way of policing abuse of whatever away ticket loyalty system comes next.  Perhaps you have a better idea,  or you are happy  for the abuse to continue.     

Yes, the data could be cut to look at how those who attended away games most regularly felt and it was still against (even more so if I recall correctly).

 

I’ve been to these sessions as a representative of the Trust. My personal opinion is that you get a lot of the same types at them (very similar demographic) and the nature of how they run appeals to those who are naturally a bit more interested in what the club have to say rather than those who are more disillusioned/distrusting of the club.

 

This is what makes me even more frustrated when the club’s response to an open survey of thousands is scepticism or puzzlement at how the findings aren’t in line with the small scale sessions they put on. And this type of stance only reinforces that the club don’t really care what fans think, so why make the effort to go to their sessions?

 

Two years in, the FEF has proved a helpful tool for the club to do what they want and just get the cursory nods they need from the same types to push it through. Anything they didn’t want to do before these sessions it’s taken away, can kicked down the road and hope no one ever mentions it again.

There’s also something with how things are brought to the table. The club doesn’t come to these sessions and say “there’s a problem with tickets ending up in the wrong hands, how can we fix it?”. They come and say “we want to introduce ID checks to solve a problem with away tickets going to the wrong hands” - minimal evidence, working from the basis that even one instance is one too many and likely something (ID checks) that they want to do for reasons other than just the one presented at face value.

 

I understand the point of “go along and change it” in theory but, honestly, I’ve seen enough evidence already in reality that this isn’t going to change without something drastic.

[Freeman's Wharfer]

Following on from my post above, here is a write up (the club don’t take minutes or publish a record of what’s said at Your 90 Minutes so the Trust did it) from the Your 90 Minutes on Home Atmosphere on September 2025.

 

What’s actually been delivered as a result of people taking their time to go along and share this feedback/these ideas?

[fox in the sox]

1 hour ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

Following on from my post above, here is a write up (the club don’t take minutes or publish a record of what’s said at Your 90 Minutes so the Trust did it) from the Your 90 Minutes on Home Atmosphere on September 2025.

 

What’s actually been delivered as a result of people taking their time to go along and share this feedback/these ideas?

It is interesting that pre-match is discussed a lot but half time is not. It was good fun for many years but they seem to have given up on it now.

[Freeman's Wharfer]

39 minutes ago, fox in the sox said:

It is interesting that pre-match is discussed a lot but half time is not. It was good fun for many years but they seem to have given up on it now.

Half time was covered by the club on the night and it was very much “there’s an exciting program coming”. I’ll let you judge if that followed through.

 

My sense, and this is quite wild, is that pre-match and at half-time they don’t want to do anything that could be interpreted by Birch as him being replaced. No one seems to have sat down with him and got the blessing they clearly feel they need to do anything that doesn’t involve him. Just my read.

[fox in the sox]

18 minutes ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

Half time was covered by the club on the night and it was very much “there’s an exciting program coming”. I’ll let you judge if that followed through.

 

My sense, and this is quite wild, is that pre-match and at half-time they don’t want to do anything that could be interpreted by Birch as him being replaced. No one seems to have sat down with him and got the blessing they clearly feel they need to do anything that doesn’t involve him. Just my read.

I think you could be right - but there’s no need to banish him from the club altogether. In any line of work when somebody becomes unable to do it they have to be replaced - and if they used a popular former player it might actually help the atmosphere.

[Paninistickers]

31 minutes ago, Freeman's Wharfer said:

they don’t want to do anything that could be interpreted by Birch as him being replaced

One of the earliest moves by KP was to sack Birch, wasn't it? Followed by a rapid reversal when it was clear (even to KP) that it was grossly misjudged.

 

 

 

 

Edited 17 hours ago by Paninistickers

[Freeman's Wharfer]

11 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

One of the earliest moves by KP was to sack Birch, wasn't it? Followed by a rapid reversal when it was clear (even to KP) that it was grossly misjudged.

 

 

 

 

There was something along those lines and a lifetime contract then being dished out.

 

The same type of Hokey Cokey as when Top (allegedly) tried to sack Pearson and then Vichai had to reinstate him.

[Wymsey]

2 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

One of the earliest moves by KP was to sack Birch, wasn't it? Followed by a rapid reversal when it was clear (even to KP) that it was grossly misjudged.

 

 

 

 

Was he so?

[Vlad the Fox]

8 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

One of the earliest moves by KP was to sack Birch, wasn't it? Followed by a rapid reversal when it was clear (even to KP) that it was grossly misjudged.

 

 

 

 

As much as I want KP out my memory of it seems to be that it was Mandy who wanted him out and it was Vichai who gave him the lifetime job not long after they came in. 

[Voll Blau]

If anyone with a vested interest in this ridiculous ID scheme is getting their hopes up about it, remember any security system is only as good as the people implementing it.

 

I got my Bruges away ticket by pretending to be my mate's brother. I'm white with fair hair, he's brown. The club staff who were there know him.

 

Enjoy inconveniencing yourselves and making your fellow fans' days slightly less enjoyable. I'm sure it'll help you sleep better at night.

[Milo]

1 hour ago, Globalfox said:

I understand David and yes as fans we moan but if you read the Fan Engagement Framework those topics are considered out of scope. Very few clubs engage openly about playing details and it is a little unmanageable as we all have opinions about performance etc how do they respond?  You mention BDCR as an example and my wife and myself are incredulous with rage  in milliseconds but others defend him. The same applies to executives I personally think the Trust continually calling out Rudkin to be fired stops them doing anything just to spite us.  We work the battles and issues we can but I can assure you discussions in dealt about the playing side are firmly off topic. Do I agree no but I kinda understand.listen to James McCarron he supports this style and my reaction is god help us.

Surely any argument/discussion can be supported by a few facts - we don’t need speculation on players quality or style of play because, as you mentioned, they are completely subjective, 

 

However:

1. Three relegations in four seasons.

2. From Premier League football to League One in four years.

3. Just six Premier League wins in 2024/25.

4. Twenty-five defeats in one Premier League season.

5. Eighty goals conceded in 38 matches.

6. Nine consecutive home league games without scoring — a top-flight record.

7. Relegated from the Premier League with five games remaining.

8. Over £180 million in pre-tax losses across three financial years.

9. Six-point deduction for financial rule breaches.

10. Season-ticket renewal rates falling from 97.6% to 79.1% over two years

11. £89.5m loss in 2022/23, the first relegation season.

12. £19.4m loss in 2023/24, despite winning the Championship.

13. £71.1m loss in 2024/25, despite returning to the Premier League.

14. Staff costs reached 116% of revenue in 2022/23 and 101.6% in 2023/24.

15. An independent commission found a breach of the applicable financial rules, resulting in a six-point deduction in February 2026. The club subsequently lost its appeal

     

     

    And in League One…just two wins from the opening eight matches, including a 4–0 home defeat to Oxford and a 3–1 defeat to Peterborough.

    This is not simply a run of poor results. It is a sustained failure of footballing and financial management.

     

    Please feel free to add the Kevin Bacon ‘These are the facts of the case and they are undisputed’ meme

     

     

     

     

 

[fox in the sox]

17 minutes ago, Milo said:

Surely any argument/discussion can be supported by a few facts - we don’t need speculation on players quality or style of play because, as you mentioned, they are completely subjective, 

 

However:

 

1. Three relegations in four seasons.

2. From Premier League football to League One in four years.

3. Just six Premier League wins in 2024/25.

4. Twenty-five defeats in one Premier League season.

5. Eighty goals conceded in 38 matches.

6. Nine consecutive home league games without scoring — a top-flight record.

7. Relegated from the Premier League with five games remaining.

8. Over £180 million in pre-tax losses across three financial years.

9. Six-point deduction for financial rule breaches.

10. Season-ticket renewal rates falling from 97.6% to 79.1% over two years

11. £89.5m loss in 2022/23, the first relegation season.

12. £19.4m loss in 2023/24, despite winning the Championship.

13. £71.1m loss in 2024/25, despite returning to the Premier League.

14. Staff costs reached 116% of revenue in 2022/23 and 101.6% in 2023/24.

15. An independent commission found a breach of the applicable financial rules, resulting in a six-point deduction in February 2026. The club subsequently lost its appeal

     

     

     

    And in League One…just two wins from the opening eight matches, including a 4–0 home defeat to Oxford and a 3–1 defeat to Peterborough.

    This is not simply a run of poor results. It is a sustained failure of footballing and financial management.

     

    Please feel free to add the Kevin Bacon ‘These are the facts of the case and they are undisputed’ meme

     

     

     

     

 

Exactly, but it appears they can only discuss subjects such as tickets and fan experience.