Torquay United Official Supporters Club (TUOSC)

[tomogull]

Okay, okay - I can now see that TUST and this new Supporters Club have different priorities although whilst TUST does not officially support the Players Fund, I am sure that, like myself, many TUST members support the Fund on an individual basis. However, I am still not persuaded to join TUOFC at present. I will wait to see how it pans out.

As for "Doubtless as soon as the TUOFC has attracted sufficient interested parties, it will hold an inaugural meeting to agree a formal constitution and rules". That is arse about face, Gullscorer. Do you expect fans to join when there is no constitution or rules? I repeat - TUOSC should have been launched at a public meeting where officers were elected and a constitution agreed. It seems to me that Bernard Noble has appointed himself as chairman. As for supporting the Players Fund - how? Makers of Christmas Cards say they are supporting charities when they donate 5p per box of cards sold and yes, you can't dispute their claim. It remains to be seen what level of support Mr Noble and the committee (when elected) have in mind.

Anyway, we are entitled to our various views on here and I'm trying to keep an open mind on TUOSC but I feel they haven't got off to an auspicious start.

[hector]

If you were, say, the owner of a tinpot Cornish football club and you had your eye on the potential for being involved in a TUFC departure from Plainmoor and the development opportunities that might provide, the last thing you would want was your influence and hold over those at Plainmoor, being negated by a fan-owned club or a fan-owned stadium. Especially - when running your own tinpot club - you had never really displayed anything other than contempt for your own supporters, to the extent of using the same man - I don't know, say, someone like Bernard Noble - that some Northern club, trying to get noisy, disgruntled fans in line, had used when forming an Official Supporters Club. So with the Northern club and a tinpot Cornish one, how could you retain your hold, your influence over a club like TUFC in the face of a watchful, vigilant TUST?

The best way would be to try and discredit them - or even better - set up a parallel organisation, that because it has the word 'Official' in it, makes some think this is the proper organisation to join, even though its committee has already been chosen, without any supporters having a say and essentially just wants free labour.

Where is a precedent for this? Oh, funnily enough at some tinpot Cornish club where fans are almost emotionally blackmailed into working voluntarily at the club so that matches can even take place. If they don't, well, it's the fault of the fans.

This confusion is only compounded by the likes of Chris Roberts mate, Alpine Joe, with his aversion to anything remotely resembling ordinary people not meekly standing in line, trying to portray TUST as militant and trouble-makers. A handy image for the Cornish guy to allow to flourish, so as to weaken the prospect of fans ever having a say in how THEIR club is run.

If you want Peter Masters out of OUR club, then the best thing any supporter can do is join TUST.

[chardie]

If you were, say, the owner of a tinpot Cornish football club and you had your eye on the potential for being involved in a TUFC departure from Plainmoor and the development opportunities that might provide, the last thing you would want was your influence and hold over those at Plainmoor, being negated by a fan-owned club or a fan-owned stadium. Especially - when running your own tinpot club - you had never really displayed anything other than contempt for your own supporters, to the extent of using the same man - I don't know, say, someone like Bernard Noble - that some Northern club, trying to get noisy, disgruntled fans in line, had used when forming an Official Supporters Club. So with the Northern club and a tinpot Cornish one, how could you retain your hold, your influence over a club like TUFC in the face of a watchful, vigilant TUST?

The best way would be to try and discredit them - or even better - set up a parallel organisation, that because it has the word 'Official' in it, makes some think this is the proper organisation to join, even though its committee has already been chosen, without any supporters having a say and essentially just wants free labour.

Where is a precedent for this? Oh, funnily enough at some tinpot Cornish club where fans are almost emotionally blackmailed into working voluntarily at the club so that matches can even take place. If they don't, well, it's the fault of the fans.

This confusion is only compounded by the likes of Chris Roberts mate, Alpine Joe, with his aversion to anything remotely resembling ordinary people not meekly standing in line, trying to portray TUST as militant and trouble-makers. A handy image for the Cornish guy to allow to flourish, so as to weaken the prospect of fans ever having a say in how THEIR club is run.

If you want Peter Masters out of OUR club, then the best thing any supporter can do is join TUST.

[Alpine Joe]

Just say you were one of the leading TUST militants, and last season, just for example you seemed to have
little interest in Torquay United or attending games at Plainmoor, in fact, if anyone wanted to speak to you
they'd be better off going to Sandy Park at Exeter where they'd have more chance of bumping into you watching the rugby.

Yet at the same time your importance was such that a fellow TUST member advocated that the Football club (an organisation
currently with only 3 full time employees, not attached with the playing side, remember) should dispatch a member of staff
to your home, probably the best part of an 70-80 mile round trip from Plainmoor, in order to plead with you to start attending
matches again. That sort of thing clearly not only leads to a massive sense of self importance, explaining why you'd feel able to
look down your nose at the hard work, time and investment Peter Masters and the Truro fans have put into growing their little club
and getting ever closer to having a new modern stadium for themselves, while you casually dismiss it all as 'tinpot'.


Now let's just say, that when a growing number of supporters seem to be having concerns that increasingly extreme outbursts
from TUST militants might just be designed to frighten off any new purchasers of the club, or new owners, so that, surprise,
surprise....there'll then be no one left other than the TUST's hands for the club to fall into, even more evidence starts to
stack up revealing your tactics. Let's just pretend that the 'My feeling is that fans should NOT pay into the Players Fund'
wasn't damaging enough on it's own in highlighting the 'let's starve them out, until they give in to us' approach that the
militants appear to take towards the club. Let's also just imagine that a few days later, further evidence came to light of
you advising a top TUST official that 'I think TUST need to be a little more guerrilla in their outlook'.

The fact is that the Torquay fans aren't as thick (with the possible exception of chardie) as you're hoping. And even if they
do google 'guerrilla' and immediately read 'a member of a small independent group taking part in irregular fighting'. What
indication does that give ? Well we all know what small irregular group you're a member of....and it's clear as day that it's
fighting the club until they give in to you, rather than helping them, that is what the TUST's militant wing is advocating.

It's bad for recruitment, it's an uncomfortable truth, it won't sit well with TUST hierarchy, but at the same time you can't
deny it's true, because the evidence exists. If at long last the TUST is seen to make some efforts to rein in it's militants
then it can perhaps start to undo the damage their confrontational tone is likely to cause.

So if you can't deny the message (as the evidence exists) what do you have to do ? That's right...you attack the messenger !
But seemingly without considering that by using bare faced lies such as labelling me a 'mate' of Chris Roberts, when I've never
met, spoken to, or expressed an opinion on the guy, you are at the same time, dragging the reputation of the organisation
to which you belong (TUST), through the mud with you.

The average fan would far prefer you to provide some evidence for your claims, rather than just resort to dishonest mud-slinging.
For instance, is it true or not that one of the TUST's top men, Chris Fleet, is highly involved in setting up TUOSC ? And why, if TUOSC is
a Pete Masters creation as you tell us it is, designed as a parallel organisation to help discredit TUST, then whatever is Chris Fleet doing
by arranging for a Company of which he is a Director to sponsor this new supporters club ??

If TUST are sending out their attack dogs in an attempt to silence anyone who dares question them, it's a tactic that won't work.
The light of transparency obviously doesn't sit well with the militants. But if they want sauce for the club goose, then they won't
succeed in stopping us from applying it to the TUST gander also.

[PhilGull]

Just say you were one of the leading TUST militants, and last season, just for example you seemed to have
little interest in Torquay United or attending games at Plainmoor, in fact, if anyone wanted to speak to you
they'd be better off going to Sandy Park at Exeter where they'd have more chance of bumping into you watching the rugby.

Yet at the same time your importance was such that a fellow TUST member advocated that the Football club (an organisation
currently with only 3 full time employees, not attached with the playing side, remember) should dispatch a member of staff
to your home, probably the best part of an 70-80 mile round trip from Plainmoor, in order to plead with you to start attending
matches again. That sort of thing clearly not only leads to a massive sense of self importance, explaining why you'd feel able to
look down your nose at the hard work, time and investment Peter Masters and the Truro fans have put into growing their little club
and getting ever closer to having a new modern stadium for themselves, while you casually dismiss it all as 'tinpot'.


Now let's just say, that when a growing number of supporters seem to be having concerns that increasingly extreme outbursts
from TUST militants might just be designed to frighten off any new purchasers of the club, or new owners, so that, surprise,
surprise....there'll then be no one left other than the TUST's hands for the club to fall into, even more evidence starts to
stack up revealing your tactics. Let's just pretend that the 'My feeling is that fans should NOT pay into the Players Fund'
wasn't damaging enough on it's own in highlighting the 'let's starve them out, until they give in to us' approach that the
militants appear to take towards the club. Let's also just imagine that a few days later, further evidence came to light of
you advising a top TUST official that 'I think TUST need to be a little more guerrilla in their outlook'.

The fact is that the Torquay fans aren't as thick (with the possible exception of chardie) as you're hoping. And even if they
do google 'guerrilla' and immediately read 'a member of a small independent group taking part in irregular fighting'. What
indication does that give ? Well we all know what small irregular group you're a member of....and it's clear as day that it's
fighting the club until they give in to you, rather than helping them, that is what the TUST's militant wing is advocating.

It's bad for recruitment, it's an uncomfortable truth, it won't sit well with TUST hierarchy, but at the same time you can't
deny it's true, because the evidence exists. If at long last the TUST is seen to make some efforts to rein in it's militants
then it can perhaps start to undo the damage their confrontational tone is likely to cause.

So if you can't deny the message (as the evidence exists) what do you have to do ? That's right...you attack the messenger !
But seemingly without considering that by using bare faced lies such as labelling me a 'mate' of Chris Roberts, when I've never
met, spoken to, or expressed an opinion on the guy, you are at the same time, dragging the reputation of the organisation
to which you belong (TUST), through the mud with you.

The average fan would far prefer you to provide some evidence for your claims, rather than just resort to dishonest mud-slinging.
For instance, is it true or not that one of the TUST's top men, Chris Fleet, is highly involved in setting up TUOSC ? And why, if TUOSC is
a Pete Masters creation as you tell us it is, designed as a parallel organisation to help discredit TUST, then whatever is Chris Fleet doing
by arranging for a Company of which he is a Director to sponsor this new supporters club ??

If TUST are sending out their attack dogs in an attempt to silence anyone who dares question them, it's a tactic that won't work.
The light of transparency obviously doesn't sit well with the militants. But if they want sauce for the club goose, then they won't
succeed in stopping us from applying it to the TUST gander also.

The evidence exists? Show it.

[Rjc70]

He can't. It doesn't. Militant wings are something alpine creates in his imagination, usually with good dramatic effect to be fair. The most telling part of the post for me was the brief eulogising of that nice man, Pete Masters.

[fred disley]

This thread is getting far too personal, I do not have to agree with Alpine Joe to support his right to submit his comments to this forum, however if at all possible can we keep it factual. I do not say this in any head mastery way but if people who read this and there are many, are trying to decide what if any supporters organisation they wish to support through statements made by various people on this site then god help them.
I heard someone say, my friend told me, the word on the street, the facts speak for themselves , no these are not actual events, they are opinions however honestly held, they muddy an otherwise cloudy pool.
I support the TUST, are they good for the club, I do not know, have they a hidden agenda, I do not know, but they communicate honestly with me, they have over twenty thousand pounds of supporters money on account to use as they best see fit.If that means trying to buy a seat on the board so be it.
TUOSC are a new kid on the block,why have they come into existence now, who are behind them, what are their motives, who are their officers,who are advising them, until someone can tell me, how can I or anyone else make a decision whether to support them or not.
The likes of Roberts,masters etc will always circle stricken organisations like vultures,trying to make a quick buck so why should we be exempt from their attentions, but we have been bitten by these people in the past, I would like to think we are somewhat wiser second time around.

[Plainmoor78]

Alpinejoe's opposition to TUST appears to be based on purely politically ideology. Like all ideologies it is the means and not the outcome that is important. If the club is saved by collective means he will not be happy, although he claims to be a supporter.
The point about TUST militancy. If you read the October TUST email there is no expressed opposition towards the new supporters club, in fact TUST have agreed to disband the future gulls and hand over those responsibilities to the new supporters club. The shrill opposition to the new supporters club comes from individual TUST members speaking only for themselves, and not the TUST. Those individuals are the ones who are doing the TUST's image and reputation harm.

[Rjc70]

Plainmoor 78, I agree with most of what you are saying and certainly how you portray the TUST and their most recent newsletter. Hector and AJ argue accross various forums, to be fair. And I've sparred with AJ myself a few times on other outspoken political matters he has raised on another forum. Europe mainly, but I ain't going there on here. We're all big boys and come back after licking our wounds.

Any supporter organisation will be a broad church in terms of members in many ways, including politically, as we are connected simply by our love of TUFC. It would be so sad if supporters were ever split in the way it has happened at Hull City and Truro, though. We are neither Cornish nor do we have enough supporters for that in difficult times.

There is a link with Masters and Noble and Truro and Hull. We know that. Or at least I have read same elsewhere. I hope that some form of Future Gulls baton can now be taken up, as mentioned in that newsletter, as that too is vital long term for us, whatever anyone's politics.

[Southampton Gull]

Surely it's a matter of preference? I prefer to speak for myself rather than risk someone else using my commitment to aid their own agenda. That's not a criticism of TUST, I'm just not keen on others speaking for me whether it be as a Torquay fan or any other subject matter I follow.

If the time comes and the right moves are made that require us to unite to keep the sharks away then I will happily fall in line. Until then I prefer to watch with interest from the outside while all the squabbling goes on.

[gullpower]

Just say you were one of the leading TUST militants, and last season, just for example you seemed to have
little interest in Torquay United or attending games at Plainmoor, in fact, if anyone wanted to speak to you
they'd be better off going to Sandy Park at Exeter where they'd have more chance of bumping into you watching the rugby.

Yet at the same time your importance was such that a fellow TUST member advocated that the Football club (an organisation
currently with only 3 full time employees, not attached with the playing side, remember) should dispatch a member of staff
to your home, probably the best part of an 70-80 mile round trip from Plainmoor, in order to plead with you to start attending
matches again. That sort of thing clearly not only leads to a massive sense of self importance, explaining why you'd feel able to
look down your nose at the hard work, time and investment Peter Masters and the Truro fans have put into growing their little club
and getting ever closer to having a new modern stadium for themselves, while you casually dismiss it all as 'tinpot'.


Now let's just say, that when a growing number of supporters seem to be having concerns that increasingly extreme outbursts
from TUST militants might just be designed to frighten off any new purchasers of the club, or new owners, so that, surprise,
surprise....there'll then be no one left other than the TUST's hands for the club to fall into, even more evidence starts to
stack up revealing your tactics. Let's just pretend that the 'My feeling is that fans should NOT pay into the Players Fund'
wasn't damaging enough on it's own in highlighting the 'let's starve them out, until they give in to us' approach that the
militants appear to take towards the club. Let's also just imagine that a few days later, further evidence came to light of
you advising a top TUST official that 'I think TUST need to be a little more guerrilla in their outlook'.

The fact is that the Torquay fans aren't as thick (with the possible exception of chardie) as you're hoping. And even if they
do google 'guerrilla' and immediately read 'a member of a small independent group taking part in irregular fighting'. What
indication does that give ? Well we all know what small irregular group you're a member of....and it's clear as day that it's
fighting the club until they give in to you, rather than helping them, that is what the TUST's militant wing is advocating.

It's bad for recruitment, it's an uncomfortable truth, it won't sit well with TUST hierarchy, but at the same time you can't
deny it's true, because the evidence exists. If at long last the TUST is seen to make some efforts to rein in it's militants
then it can perhaps start to undo the damage their confrontational tone is likely to cause.

So if you can't deny the message (as the evidence exists) what do you have to do ? That's right...you attack the messenger !
But seemingly without considering that by using bare faced lies such as labelling me a 'mate' of Chris Roberts, when I've never
met, spoken to, or expressed an opinion on the guy, you are at the same time, dragging the reputation of the organisation
to which you belong (TUST), through the mud with you.

The average fan would far prefer you to provide some evidence for your claims, rather than just resort to dishonest mud-slinging.
For instance, is it true or not that one of the TUST's top men, Chris Fleet, is highly involved in setting up TUOSC ? And why, if TUOSC is
a Pete Masters creation as you tell us it is, designed as a parallel organisation to help discredit TUST, then whatever is Chris Fleet doing
by arranging for a Company of which he is a Director to sponsor this new supporters club ??

If TUST are sending out their attack dogs in an attempt to silence anyone who dares question them, it's a tactic that won't work.
The light of transparency obviously doesn't sit well with the militants. But if they want sauce for the club goose, then they won't
succeed in stopping us from applying it to the TUST gander also.

Exactly what is a "TUST militant"?