Sending out an SOS.- Pool and its future

Spiritoftheseventies · 11-01-2010 06:49PM #1

Given the talk about Hicks Jr and Spirit of Shankley's apparent role in his subsequent demise think this subject needs further discussion given the debate on pool super thread over the past few days.

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 07:16PM

To be honest I don't see how it merits it's own thread. It can be discussed in the super thread, and anyone looking for information on the Spirit Of Shankly supporters union can find it in spades on their own website.

There are bigger issues at stake than the Hick jnr email, and a dedicated thread is just asking for other past SOS issues to get dragged up again.

CHD · 11-01-2010 07:21PM

How can you moan about Liverpool threads then set yourself up for more annoyance by starting this. Slap yourself.

Spiritoftheseventies · 11-01-2010 07:21PM

Kess73 wrote: »

To be honest I don't see how it merits it's own thread. It can be discussed in the super thread, and anyone looking for information on the Spirit Of Shankly supporters union can find it in spades on their own website.

There are bigger issues at stake than the Hick jnr email, and a dedicated thread is just asking for other past SOS issues to get dragged up again.

agree there but seeing its such a big issue at the moment I think it merits a seperate thread on its own. Will be the major debating point of 2010 Im sure.

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 07:28PM

bayviewclose wrote: »

agree there but seeing its such a big issue at the moment I think it merits a seperate thread on its own. Will be the major debating point of 2010 Im sure.

Hardly a major debating point. The son of one of the owners reacts badly to an email after having umpteen emails sent to him by people over a period of time, and he resigns after one of those who was emailing him puts the emails into the public domain and into the media. All we would need is one big purchase or one big sale for this event to become an afterthought.

Something like whether Rafa keeps his job or not come the summer is a bigger talking point, and one done to death, and when the summer finally rolls around, then we will have one of the major talking points of 2010 for LFC.

I think it is a subject that if it gets too much attention, will reflect badly on the fans as much as Hicks jnr.

Also drawing too much attention to it could backfire if the same email campaign starts with his replacement, as it will get exposed as a cheap tactic.

My main concern is that it will deflect attention away from the bigger off pitch problems at the club and cause things like the lies regarding the new stadium, plus the lies about the debt to take a back seat.

ziggy · 11-01-2010 07:29PM

This post has been deleted.

Spiritoftheseventies · 11-01-2010 07:34PM

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not sure. But they are going to play a major role I think this year. Already there is talk of a boycott and I think if Rafa is messed any further re transfer funds they will start to vote with their feet.

Bandit12 · 11-01-2010 07:46PM

How dare you start a thread on boards about LFC that does'nt belittle Rafa,his signings,zonal marking,his record etc..

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 07:49PM

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There was a peaceful but vocal protest at the ground that day.

Some people did go after a car that they thought had the owners or relatives of the owners in it. As to whether the car shakers were SOS or not is another story. A few versions of the story are floating about, so what actually happened will not doubt vary depending on who tells it. But it will not be as bad as naysayers would have you believe, nor will it be as whiter than white as some would like to think.

Some may have been members of SOS, but they would be a mindless minority that are being weeded up as time goes by, and some may have been idiots who were non members who joined in on the act of stupidity.

I know events like that do not reflect well on the SOS, but I can safely say that those who have that kind of thing in mind are becoming less in number as the months go by, as the SOS themselves will not want such actions to deflect away from the core issues.

Bandit12 · 11-01-2010 07:49PM

bayviewclose wrote: »

Not sure. But they are going to play a major role I think this year. Already there is talk of a boycott and I think if Rafa is messed any further re transfer funds they will start to vote with their feet.

I suggested a boycott of a premier league game on RAWK last season and was laughed out of the thread. Seems the idea is gathering pace on the site now. I said it then and i'll say it again, it will take the selling of Torres for the average day tripper/sofa fan to realise that the club is in huge trouble and then it will be to late. It's in all probability to late already.

hello_there_jim · 11-01-2010 07:51PM

you really need to stop makin these threads...a post whore i think..

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 07:56PM

Bandit12 wrote: »

I suggested a boycott of a premier league game on RAWK last season and was laughed out of the thread. Seems the idea is gathering pace on the site now. I said it then and i'll say it again, it will take the selling of Torres for the average day tripper/sofa fan to realise that the club is in huge trouble and then it will be to late. It's in all probability to late already.

Lack of revenue is the only thing the owners will understand to be honest. It is a tactic that will have some short to medium term pain for the fans too, as it would be a case of who cracks first.

It is also a risky tactic as it could mean even less funding for the club in the short to medium term, which would mean even less in terms of new players and could make a top four finish become a pipedream for a number of seasons.

The other side of that coin is that it could encourage the owners to cash in, and a new owner would get a club that would suddenly get extra cash coming in as the fans came back in terms of buying merchandise etc.

Spiritoftheseventies · 11-01-2010 08:04PM

hello_there_jim wrote: »

you really need to stop makin these threads...a post whore i think..

No this topic IMO deserves a discussion. A bit off topic that and hello there Jim by the way.

Chardee MacDennis · 11-01-2010 08:15PM

anfield can sell out twice over for a lot of premier league games, a boycott wont do it unless 90% of the season ticket holders arent showing and making the place look empty and even then the loss of revenue from season ticket holders alone wouldnt be enough to push the owners into any drastic decisions.

Spiritoftheseventies · 11-01-2010 08:18PM

BastardPrince wrote: »

anfield can sell out twice over for a lot of premier league games, a boycott wont do it unless 90% of the season ticket holders arent showing and making the place look empty and even then the loss of revenue from season ticket holders alone wouldnt be enough to push the owners into any drastic decisions.

Yes but its the mid week games they are struggling to fill. Will be curious to see what they get at the Reading game on Wednesday if it goes ahead.

The Muppet · 11-01-2010 08:19PM

Kess73 wrote: »

Lack of revenue is the only thing the owners will understand to be honest. It is a tactic that will have some short to medium term pain for the fans too, as it would be a case of who cracks first.

It is also a risky tactic as it could mean even less funding for the club in the short to medium term, which would mean even less in terms of new players and could make a top four finish become a pipedream for a number of seasons.

The other side of that coin is that it could encourage the owners to cash in, and a new owner would get a club that would suddenly get extra cash coming in as the fans came back in terms of buying merchandise etc.

It's suicide TBH. What sort of message will it send to sponsors and prospective investors/buyers, it'll hardly add to the appeal . It would cut revenue and permanenty tarnish the image of the club and its supporters. It's madness to even consider such action.

Protests should be focused at the Yanks and designed to get maximum media attention.

keane2097 · 11-01-2010 08:47PM

Isn't this the topic that's been talked about on the Liverpool thread for days?

Surely that's the natural place to continue the conversation rather than making everybody repeat themselves in here?

Chardee MacDennis · 11-01-2010 08:53PM

keane2097 wrote: »

Isn't this the topic that's been talked about on the Liverpool thread for days?

Surely that's the natural place to continue the conversation rather than making everybody repeat themselves in here?

we're used to repeating everything ad nauseam in the liverpool super thread...

mayordenis · 11-01-2010 08:54PM

After this weeks little entrapment episode I think I won't be renewing my membership with SOS - I support the fundamental ideal of being rid of the current owners, however I have no interest in the naivety and at times biggotry shown by the "union".

keane2097 · 11-01-2010 09:02PM

BastardPrince wrote: »

we're used to repeating everything ad nauseam in the liverpool super thread...

lol

Headshot · 11-01-2010 09:10PM

mayordenis wrote: »

After this weeks little entrapment episode I think I won't be renewing my membership with SOS - I support the fundamental ideal of being rid of the current owners, however I have no interest in the naivety and at times biggotry shown by the "union".

do you think i was a set up Denis ?

Mr Alan · 11-01-2010 09:30PM

mayordenis wrote: »

After this weeks little entrapment episode I think I won't be renewing my membership with SOS - I support the fundamental ideal of being rid of the current owners, however I have no interest in the naivety and at times biggotry shown by the "union".

wat a load of bollox.

the guy who emailed Hicks was doing so off his own back as many of our fans have over the last couple of years.

he discussed his response online on TLW a site he frequents (which would be among the LEAST militant Liverpool sites online), the union became aware of it, it became news, union demanded he resign. he did.

how can you view that as anything but good?

and wat bigotry are you refering to?

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 09:39PM

Headshot wrote: »

do you think i was a set up Denis ?

I am a member of SOS also, and I would defo agree with Denis in that it was a pretty obvious setup that Hicks jnr was to naive/stupid/arrogant to avoid.

There was a campaign of emails being sent over and over, not just by some SOS members though, and Hicks jnr eventually took the bait and responded like a fool. People may say that it was just emails being sent by concerned fans to express their fears, but no doubt Hicks jnr and others were receiving hundreds if not thousands of mails, and I would imagine not all of them were well thought out. Whether the person that Hicks replied to was totally innocent in all of this we will never know for sure, but it is fair to say that his email was the straw that broke this particular camel's back.

He still should not have reacted though. But I don't think anyone can say that the campaign of emails had no other motive other than to express concern.

Some may think it a low tactic, myself included, but it did garner a result of sorts. Whether that result will have positive or negative repercussions in the future, only time will tell.

kryogen · 11-01-2010 09:44PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

wat a load of bollox.

the guy who emailed Hicks was doing so off his own back as many of our fans have over the last couple of years.

he discussed his response online on TLW a site he frequents (which would be among the LEAST militant Liverpool sites online), the union became aware of it, it became news, union demanded he resign. he did.

how can you view that as anything but good?

and wat bigotry are you refering to?

what have you achieved with the "victory" of the guy resigning from the cushy position daddy gave him?

it wasnt exactly one email was it either? he harrased the guy and he reacted unfortunately, or fortunately i guess for those who like hollow pr victorys maybe?

do you support the people who have made death threats against the owners? who have attacked cars when they think they might be in them?
who send email after email of abuse and baiting until they get the reaction they have been looking for so much?

this whole story reminded me of a kid in from my school days who used to keep flicking the lad in front of hims ears, despite repeated polite requests for him to stop he didnt, and when the boy in front eventually turned around, and rightly flattened him with a punch, he goes crying to the teacher

EDIT: i agree with everything Kess has said above, he probably said it in a much better way then i

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 09:45PM

mayordenis wrote: »

After this weeks little entrapment episode I think I won't be renewing my membership with SOS - I support the fundamental ideal of being rid of the current owners, however I have no interest in the naivety and at times biggotry shown by the "union".

Interesting choice of words there.

When you say bigotry, are you referring to some of what has been said/done towards the owners or are you referring to what went on at an end of season SOS party?

Mr Alan · 11-01-2010 09:46PM

do we even know for sure if this fella was a member of SOS?

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 09:52PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

do we even know for sure if this fella was a member of SOS?

No idea if he is. But when the SOS got the info and ran with it and demanded the Hick jnr resign, they did so in the name of everyone who is a member, such is the way a union works, and as such I can understand why Denis is disgusted by it.

Mr Alan · 11-01-2010 09:53PM

kryogen wrote: »

do you support the people who have made death threats against the owners?

nope. but the Union has never done anything like this? it seems anything negative that happens involving Liverpool fans is attributed to them.

kryogen wrote: »

who have attacked cars when they think they might be in them?

attacked? no dont support that.

do however support them blocking the lads entrance to Anfield as happened within the last couple of weeks.

kryogen wrote: »

who send email after email of abuse and baiting until they get the reaction they have been looking for so much?

it wasnt email of abuse after abuse, it an email of an article followed by an innocent question. do you not think if this lad was threatening Hicks Jnr, the union would have ran with it (they recd screen shots & copies of all emails before they released their statement or forwarded it to the media), or indeed Hicks & Co. would have not just released the threatening emails this guy sent them to discredit him & justify Hicks Jnr response.

loads of fans email Hicks & Co. have done so myself in the past.

Spiritoftheseventies · 11-01-2010 09:58PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

do we even know for sure if this fella was a member of SOS?

Without a ball being kicked, a section of Liverpool's fans will remember Jan 10 as the date of yet another famous victory in Anfield's long, illustrious history. As one put it: "One down. Three to go."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/liverpool/6969370/One-down-three-to-go-say-angry-Liverpool-fans-after-Tom-Hicks-Jnr-resigns-from-board.html

Spirit of Shankly - One down, three to go, say angry Liverpool fans after Tom Hicks Jnr resigns

Even in an era when supporters are left feeling like little more than cash-cows, milked by remote foreign owners, with no say in their club's future, the departure of Tom Hicks Jnr from Liverpool's board after sending an obscene email to a fan which read, "Blow me, ----face. Go to hell. I'm sick of you", the general public can have an effect, it seems.

Just as the Premier League has given rise to a sense of impotence among supporters, so it has mobilised them as never before. Fans left feeling isolated from increasingly distant clubs have organised themselves. The internet has spawned volumes of rebel groups, none more so than at Anfield.

It is here that some distress enters the equation. Hicks Jnr's departure was not engineered by a mass show of strength from the stands. Rather, it emanated from Spirit of Shankly, the club's supporters' union, a highly organised group who picked up Hicks Jnr's slip of the thumb, alerted the media, prepared statements and quickly brewed the storm. Within hours, the fans had spoken.

Or so it appeared. To many Liverpool fans, SOS no more speak for them than knee-jerk callers to television and radio phone-ins. They are the mouthpiece for the vocal minority. They only presume to echo the thoughts of the silent majority. Their leaflets are ignored. Their protests attract, at most, a few thousand.

At Elland Road this season, the travelling fans cheerfully baited Leeds fans with the name of Peter Ridsdale. The irony was lost on them. The majority of fans, like Liverpool's owners, dismiss SOS as an extremist hard-core, unelected, unaccountable, and one that has no mandate to demand the resignation of directors or the departure of owners. All that matters to most, as elsewhere, is what happens on the pitch. Anyone who disagrees is viewed as an obsessive crank.

That is always the perception of fans' groups, whether at Newcastle, Brighton, Leeds or Manchester United. All of those clubs, though, would attest that, sometimes, the vocal minority needs to be heard. Long after the prospectors, trying to mine the seam of gold supposed to run beneath all clubs, depart, the fans endure. SOS and their ilk simply seek to ensure they do not need to endure more than necessary.

This an interesting article here and again asks the question just how popular SOS are. What is clear is they ran a very effective campaign. Hicks and Gillette Im sure will have their PR working overtime to avoid another repeat of what happened in terms of the E mail but dont see any let up from SOS to be honest.

Kess73 · 11-01-2010 10:01PM

bayviewclose wrote: »

Without a ball being kicked, a section of Liverpool's fans will remember Jan 10 as the date of yet another famous victory in Anfield's long, illustrious history. As one put it: "One down. Three to go."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/liverpool/6969370/One-down-three-to-go-say-angry-Liverpool-fans-after-Tom-Hicks-Jnr-resigns-from-board.html

Spirit of Shankly - One down, three to go, say angry Liverpool fans after Tom Hicks Jnr resigns

This an interesting article here and again asks the question just how popular SOS are. What is clear is they ran a very effective campaign. Hicks and Gillette Im sure will have their PR working overtime to avoid another repeat of what happened in terms of the E mail but dont see any let up from SOS to be honest.

One word describes the bit in bold.

Hyperbole.

Mr Alan · 11-01-2010 10:02PM

Are people really trying to say that Hicks Jnr, who is one of the directors of LFC should be allowed to send a correspondance to a fan with that content? if i did that in work i'd be sacked. and so should he have been.

Sending out an SOS.- Pool and its future

Comments