I think the lady who has led on it all has been pulled in all directions around where it should go and I bet at times she wished she had not bothered.

Most of us on here have the same views, including what the money as it stands should have covered, but she has made her choice and ensured it covers the bill off directly. All we can do now is support the Trust fundraising and hope people get behind that in the same way they did with Rachel’s.

But nobody is talking about boycotting games or not spending money in the ground . People want to know if there is a genuine buyer in the pipeline, and the answer seemed to be no. They also wanted to know who would be paying the wages in 2 weeks time and the answer seemed to be that the fans and local businesses would need to raise the money. This was a club run event and they told us nothing other than keep giving us your money. having paid so much to get in I was expecting a lot more than we got !

There's been many posts about boycotting games and not buying anything in the ground so as not to give the owners another penny! If not on here then certainly elsewhere.

Your expectations of the evening were way off, it was always going to be Jeff giving some anecdotes, something to eat, an auction and a comedian - it was a sportsman's talk-in, not a club board meeting!

£30 for a pie and pea supper with Jeff a good comedian and a crap ex ref wasn’t good value for money to be fair


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I will be spending a pound, for a half time lottery ticket next week, but to be fair that is all I usually spend each home game, as I can't be arse to queue for 15 minutes to get a pint I have no time to drink and don't really fancy having anyway on a cold miserable day at Pools.

I posted suggesting it more than once to be fair but even though Jeff’s stance is probably right a lot of my posts right now are tinged with genuine anger, frustration and an overiding feeling that whatever we do won’t make a difference.

Whatever you think about what Jeff is saying there are a number of certainties in this:

1: he is not to blame for any of this.
2: he is saying what he believes to be in the best interests of the club long term.

I disagree with him in some aspects but no one can seriously question his commitment.

I can see the logic of keeping the club ticking over if a new buyer is in the pipeline. If not, we're giving the kiss of life to a frozen chicken.
As long as we're paying the landlord's bills, the landlord will be our constant 'companion'.

Apparently there is one iron left in the fire:

"Telegraph Sport understands that there is one interested party currently in the process of due diligence ahead of a possible takeover, but the size of the club’s debts, which are already around £2m, have scared everyone else off."

We may as well see how that plays out (actually, we have no choice) as it can only be a matter of days till the endgame is reached. If a new buyer is found after all this, Rachel is entitled to think that her actions played an important part in saving the club and all the people who got on that particular bandwagon can pat themselves on the back too.

If it all comes to nothing and liquidation is the end result there will be a big round of 'I told you so's' on here and the reality of starting a community club kicks in. Nobody should pretend that will be as easy or straightforward as some people (not those who will end up doing 90% of the work) make it sound. Couldn't help noticing that when the spotlight was on Newport because of their cup run, their board were saying that if they'd gone down instead of us last season they were facing liquidation again.

As always you have to consider the source. In the case of the nationals its the mail or the club.

at the end of the day i would give something to pay wages etc. but only to another party and not to the club.

What is the rest of the fund going to pay then?