It's a reference to making the club more attractive to sponsors. Thought that was pretty obvious TBH.

Also, attempting to denigrate someone by using the diminutive form of their first name is a pretty cheap shot, wouldn't you say? Particularly someone who has drastically improved the marketing of the club during his tenure.

It's stuff like this:



It all seems a little manufactured to me.

I'm willing to accept, however, that my view may be [islightly[/i jaundiced by other events...

Calling him Jimmy Rule is a cheap shot?



And I'm quite aware that brand market leadership involves sponsorship opportunities thanks, do you not agree that successful teams get better sponsorship deals?

We have some of the best sponsorship deals in SL. So maybe not.

What makes a club attractive to sponsors are the number of fans, demographics of those fans, opportunities for media exposure, and of course association with a successful brand. On-field success is a factor but nowhere near as important to sponsors as it is to fans.

Why do you need to 'reserve the right' to express anything ? No one is stopping you nor would anyone bother even if they could.

You asked about the fan's blog .......



Are you asking will it be a critical "Agar out" style view or a pro club view ? We both know the answer to that - why would the club put material on it's website that would fly in
the face of its policies reagrding the running of the club ? They would be totally stupid to do so. And when you say "the actual view from the terraces" would that be the view of the 6 banner heros from Sunday or the huge majority who shouted them down ?

My point was this. If you know fine well that material on the official club website will be pro-club and you disagree with it then why bother with it ? It's just like Airlie night was - get that program on a Wednesday and there were pages and pages on here of disgruntled comment with the usual suspects talking about "spin" and alike. But they were all tuned in for some reason. People can and will hold whatever views thay like. Some will agree with you, whereas others will enjoy reading the website and other peoples opinion - even if that 'propaganda' as you see it doesn't fit with your view.

Yes we maybe do at the moment, but all the factors you mention are dependent to a large extent on on-field success. It's not that long ago that Jimmy Rule could still say '3 finals in 4 seasons' and we no doubt did well with the sponsors off the back of it. If we carry on performing on the field like we have been lately for much longer, I think that it's inevitable that sponsorship will fall regardless of how good at his job Mr James Rule is.

No, they just post silly little eye-rolling emoticons and say that I should simply not read the website rather than reading it and commenting (negatively) about it.



Yes. My question is what's known as a 'rhetorical' one. I wasn't actually seriously enquiring as to whether the 'view from the terraces' would contradict the club's view. I posed the question to highlight what I perceived as the pointlessness of the blog.



We both know that a large proportion of fans are unhappy with our performances under Agar. What was being disputed on Sunday was the method they chose to express their views and the timing of it, not the views themselves.



I don't disagree with [iall[/i of it. But your point is rather like me saying that if you don't agree with my posts, you should not bother reading them and you certainly shouldn't bother to respond to them.



I never listened to Airlie Night, but from what I gather, the objections were to the fact that callers with anything remotely controversial to say were never allowed on air, or were cut off abrubtly if they did manage to sneak through. I might be off the mark, as I didn't pay a lot of attention to the threads, but that was the gist I got.



Indeed. But I don't see why if someone posts something negative about an aspect of the club's site your default response is a rather glib "don't read it then".

Talk about spin , do you do anything other than argue every single point raised on here FFS, work maybe??

I wonder if DDD's blog will 'tow the party line' as they say? It might be an interesting read......

Expro you've been warned about your insults once already today, but since you brought it up...

garry brindley average posts per day: 7.81

THEICECREAMMAN average posts per day: 13.76

Thanks for the update MOD wannabe , however your inability to read the posts stated again show your lacking somewhere from the neck upwards, I wasnt warned personally we all were !!!anyway its all immiterial to you because you dont support the club anymore like you said

Reads like it was written by someone from the club pretending to be a fan and is so cliched it's laughable. It's as real as dick van dyke's cockney accent.

Surely they can't expect people to believe it's real. If it was real why not use the person's real name? Wonder if next week's will be by Les Forward or Stan Doff?