Often Partisan

Blog News

There’s been quite a bit swished around in the Birmingham Mail the last few days about Often Partisan, the Supporters Trust and Blues and with this in mind I thought it best to clear a few matters up.

Firstly there is no spokesperson for Often Partisan. Often Partisan is me, and me alone. No one else; thus if “Often Partisan” said it, it’s me saying it. I’ve said this many times in this blog and I’ll repeat it here – I speak for no one else but myself; I am not a spokesperson for the fans and I never will be.

Secondly, when the Birmingham Mail asked me what I would ask Carson Yeung/BIH for this article, I directed them to this piece I wrote back in January – as I felt the comments I made then are still applicable now. Despite what was first published on the website, those questions were from Often Partisan only; not from the Supporters Trust – something that was happily corrected by the Birmingham Mail once I contacted them.

Thirdly, this error was compounded by this article which has now linked intrinsically Often Partisan and the Supporters Trust. I had pledged myself on here that I had no plans to stand for the Supporters Trust Board when it is elected, and I continue to do so. Not only am I unable to stand anyway due to the rules, I felt there was a massive conflict of interest as I would like Often Partisan to remain impartial with regards to the trust. With this in mind and the continued confusion between Often Partisan and the Supporters Trust I have sadly decided to step down from any further meetings with the steering group and withdraw the help I had been giving, with immediate effect. I am sorry that it has to come to this but it is important to me that I keep Often Partisan independent of the trust so it can comment on the trust objectively. I will continue to support the idea of the Supporters Trust but I can no longer be involved on anything more than an observer basis.

I’d like to thank everyone who reads this blog for their support and I only hope I can continue to keep you reading in the future.

Tags: ,

9 Responses to “Blog News”

  • BowThai says:

    Supporters Trusts loss our contiual gain.Too much swishing around ,if you ask me.I think what you do for us supporters on your site does and will surpass what you may do in any other direction.you will only gain readers and thier support for the insight and info you give us.K.u.t.g.w and KRO

  • Oldbluenose says:

    What a sorry state of affairs it is getting to be now, eh,!!. People attribute things to someone without checking if they are accurate or not,!!!. We all would like answers but the amount of guesswork that abounds these days, serves little purpose at all,!!.
    You are correct in stating that you stand alone as purely a Blues supporter and not a ” mouthpiece ” for anyone else, !!.
    Peter Pannu, if able to, is the only guy who has ” insider ” information, but wether his hands are tied, or merely politics, by the board, or even constraiints by the legal system from H,K. We will just have to wait to see events unfold in due course, — Galling, but fact,!!!!.

  • AR says:

    What a terrible thing it is that there is so much destructive criticism of The Supporters’ Trust voiced by a few on SMA. The Trust may not achieve anything but on the other hand it may; so it is worth while giving it a chance. There seems to be a feeling that it exists to boost someone’s ego, but it is purely negative to denigrate it at this stage. It hasn’t claimed to speak for ALL supporters, but at least some people are getting up off their backsides & TRYING to do something. We should be applauding those people not casting snide remarks.

  • Atahualpa is a BlueNose says:

    Well done Almajir.

    Must have been quite a decision to remain on the sidelines whilst the Supporters Trust is gaining momentum. You’re right, by remaining independent and impartial, you will keep a hawk’s eye on matters concerning the club, and that is a good and solid check and balance in place to keep transparency.

    For whatever reasons, the non – committal answers that emanated from the club in response to your questions, did not really offer much in the way of reassurance. Regardless of the stock exchange rules and regulations pertaining to the HKSE, why oh why does nobody from the club come out and state whether we will remain a going concern after the financial results are published? Of course it seems inconceivable that the club may not be able to convince or evidence how we will be financed for the next 12 months and why there seems to be an oddity or two which
    is causing / caused concern for the auditors.

    Can only say that it seems that CY is finding it difficult to raise credit and this is obviously a problem regarding cashflow – something vital for a football club. BIH’s problems are BCFC’s problems. Sooner or later someone somewhere is going to make their move for the club – believe they will also be Far Eastern / Asian – it simply cannot continue as at present for much longer. CY at some stage will have to acknowledge the situation and make some hard hard business decisions. The silence from other BIH major shareholders has been something to behold as well. Could be out of loyalty / respect / business – plan in the making towards CY. Whatever the scenario, CY can’t try and blag it until his trial. The situation needs to be resolved in the summer regardless of whether we are PL or Championship. Of course our position for next season will affect many things and determine our future direction, but overall for CY it may not make much of a difference.

    Keep writing because we are going to keep reading.

  • Bluehobba says:

    Just shows how the media can report on an article and put 2 & 2 together and get it wrong.I am sure the supporters trust will still benefit and so will Often Partisan but still a shame that One misplaced article can spoil the party. Keep up the excellent work and this is still a good outcome for supporters reading this site. KRO

  • Dirty Bertie says:

    Late again but:

    I have 5 questions:

    1. Are you a reporter or a supporter?
    2. Considering your blog’s name can you be objective?
    3. Why should you want to be?
    4. Isn’t it better to aim for intelligent, reasoned, human comment (such as we have known to date) and rely on your readership’s good sense in accommodating your, quite natural and completely understandable, biases?
    5. Why should the Blues Trust lose your valuable support, knowledge, experience and skills when it is not responsible for the uncomfortable position you seem to feel you’re in?

    As you know, the Blues Trust represents the only real prospect for ensuring that the owners of BCFC are influenced and the future of the club be made more transparent and secure with a fully involved supporter base.

    I hope you will reconsider your decision regarding the Blues Trust. Why on earth do you feel you wouldn’t be able to comment impartially on the Trust? Where is the conflict of interest? It’s not a Stalinist party where members have to follow the official line and you have no pecuniary interest (other than a £5 membership fee) Your opinions are independent and separate and you are nobody’s spokesman but your own – that is clear. What is done with comments is out of your hands to a certain extent, though you can, as you have done ask for corrections or respond, robustly on your blog. (There’s even an ugly rumour that a reporter at the Sun is a member of the Labour party, but I wouldn’t read too much into that, it’s mostly pictures, har, har)

    Or, are you in a Ferguson/BBC situation where source/s will only to talk to you if you don’t say things they don’t like, albeit objectively? In which case I would tell them where to shove their self serving information.

    Well known Blues motto: Illegitimi non carborundum. (Noli was wrong, apparently). Publish and be damned.

    As the kids say, whatever, KRO Almajir.

    • almajir says:

      Okay

      1) Both. I’m a supporter of the team in that I’m a season ticket holder and I go and support the club; but I’m also a reporter of sorts. I write about what’s going on, and to do that (in my mind anyway) I have to be objective, fair and balanced.
      2) That’s just a name from a song.
      3) Why should I be objective? If I’m to be taken seriously I have to be fair in what I write; I have to see it from as an unbiased standpoint as I can and I have to admit where I may have personal prejudices.
      4) To satisfy my own sense of propriety and what is right, I have to be objective.
      5) The blues trust are losing nothing. I’m still in support of the concept, they can still ask me for advice but I cannot be seen to be a spokesperson for it or a front for it. There may come a time when I don’t agree with what they’re doing and I have to be able to say that.

      The fact is I don’t feel comfortable wearing several hats; it’s obvious that people are interchanging them in their own minds and thus I have to remove that to ensure that the Trust is seen to be a fair, democratic entity and that I’m an objective person.

      • Dirty Bertie says:

        Thanks for the considered reply. It’s a shame you can’t combine the two but, there you go. Keep up the excellent work you do on this site and help the Blues Trust as much as you can to get going. Something has to be done to control these idiots who think they can run a football club.


Personalised Gifts for a Bluenose
Haircuts and League Cups
Open Tax Services
Corporate Solutions UK
PJ Planning
Rodal Heating

Archives