|
|
Post by rovers78 on May 6, 2024 8:46:59 GMT
x.com/bristolroverssc/status/1787078704423698899?s=46Referring to those who aren’t disabled as ‘normal’ people. Absolutely disgusting. And what does our fearless leader TG come out with as an explanation?? “This was a private conversation and shouldn’t have been made public”. Now deleted the tweet. A new way to really embarrass ourselves even more. Disgrace
|
|
|
|
Post by gasify on May 6, 2024 10:16:21 GMT
x.com/bristolroverssc/status/1787078704423698899?s=46Referring to those who aren’t disabled as ‘normal’ people. Absolutely disgusting. And what does our fearless leader TG come out with as an explanation?? “This was a private conversation and shouldn’t have been made public”. Now deleted the tweet. A new way to really embarrass ourselves even more. Disgrace Completely agree that the wording was incorrect and it should have been said differently. There is probably two things that doesn't excuse it but maybe explains it: 1) Translation from their native language. 2) Cultural differences. Let's not forget that not that long ago (20-30 years?), that phrase would have been acceptable in the UK. The paralympics has got a lot to do with wider acceptance in sport. We should be proud of the Woke and Snowflakes for making us all realise that this is unacceptable language. |
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on May 6, 2024 10:19:46 GMT
x.com/bristolroverssc/status/1787078704423698899?s=46Referring to those who aren’t disabled as ‘normal’ people. Absolutely disgusting. And what does our fearless leader TG come out with as an explanation?? “This was a private conversation and shouldn’t have been made public”. Now deleted the tweet. A new way to really embarrass ourselves even more. Disgrace Trying to shift the blame onto the Supporters Club then? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2024 10:26:20 GMT
Absolutely no surprise as the clubs back office recruitment standards are pathetic.
If this response however did come from a Senior Official they need a wake up call - Sadly I am not surprised by this lack of awareness !
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 6, 2024 11:15:34 GMT
Absolutely no surprise as the clubs back office recruitment standards are pathetic. If this response however did come from a Senior Official they need a wake up call - Sadly I am not surprised by this lack of awareness ! Sounds to me that it was a typical "private" email sent by TG, baffling why the SC thought it was OK to post it on their website whoever it was from. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on May 6, 2024 11:18:41 GMT
x.com/bristolroverssc/status/1787078704423698899?s=46Referring to those who aren’t disabled as ‘normal’ people. Absolutely disgusting. And what does our fearless leader TG come out with as an explanation?? “This was a private conversation and shouldn’t have been made public”. Now deleted the tweet. A new way to really embarrass ourselves even more. Disgrace Trying to shift the blame onto the Supporters Club then? They are all part of the same club, you'd expect them to ask if it was OK to publish it on their website before just going ahead and publishing it. Particularly when there's usually a wall of silence from them of other matters. |
|
|
|
Post by The Equaliser on May 6, 2024 11:22:51 GMT
Trying to shift the blame onto the Supporters Club then? They are all part of the same club, you'd expect them to ask if it was OK to publish it on their website before just going ahead and publishing it. Particularly when there's usually a wall of silence from them of other matters. I found it strange they posted the question and response to this, not like their usual silence. As an example I’ve not seen a question/answer posted to our stadium toilets situation which supporters have been hugely vocal about the last few seasons, which in my opinion is absolutely disgusting and needs immediate attention. |
|
|
|
Post by madgas on May 6, 2024 11:37:31 GMT
I blame the SC here. It is there tweet clearly wrong. Whether they are directly relaying a club message is a separate issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by gasandelectricity on May 6, 2024 11:41:37 GMT
I blame the SC here. It is there tweet clearly wrong. Whether they are directly relaying a club message is a separate issue. How is it? If the club don’t want it posted tell the SC they want to comment off the record. If they want to control the discourse, release a statement yourself and control the wording. At the very least consider that the comment may be shared with others and that it needs to be worded appropriately in case. Or simply don’t behave like dicks in the first place by leveraging a charge this season after the renewal window has been and gone without any mention of said charge. |
|
|
|
Post by rovers78 on May 6, 2024 13:16:54 GMT
Absolutely no surprise as the clubs back office recruitment standards are pathetic. If this response however did come from a Senior Official they need a wake up call - Sadly I am not surprised by this lack of awareness ! Sounds to me that it was a typical "private" email sent by TG, baffling why the SC thought it was OK to post it on their website whoever it was from. If that is the language he used to describe the disabled, it’s yet another reason why it’s so baffling that he hasn’t been sacked immediately |
|
|
|
Post by mariobalotelli on May 6, 2024 14:09:15 GMT
I would argue the SC shouldn’t have tweeted it but at the same time it is absolutely appalling.
The SC should have the clubs best interest at heart and should have asked the club for a new statement for them to release as they didn’t agree with the wording.
Either way, absolutely unable to defend the club itself here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on May 6, 2024 14:14:06 GMT
Surely the "normal" in that statement refers to tickets and not people.
But let's not let that get in the way of giving the Tommy Gulag a kicking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2024 14:40:11 GMT
Did anyone proof read this? What an awful way to refer to fans.
Also, the entire piece is awfully written. There are so many free tools available that can improve writing.
Just completely amateur, but sadly it’s not at all surprising.
|
|
|
|
Post by phillistine on May 6, 2024 14:47:57 GMT
it was wrong of the supporters club to directly tweet the reply without at least asking the club if it was ok to do so. Hardly going to strengthen the trust between the two is it? The resonse is very informal in its tone - referring to " Clare" and uses general terms rather than using the terminology on the website and the only people who take exception will be people looking to do so . - of which there will no doubt be a few
|
|
|
|
Post by The Equaliser on May 6, 2024 14:53:24 GMT
it was wrong of the supporters club to directly tweet the reply without at least asking the club if it was ok to do so. Hardly going to strengthen the trust between the two is it? It does strike me as “we asked a question, and just look at the response everyone” the supporters club admin looking for a drama imo. But don’t take that as me not being totally appalled at the football club itself for this whole situation. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on May 6, 2024 14:56:45 GMT
Can blame whomever you want, argue whatever you want, but it happened
Given it happened, how come there is no apology for any offence caused from the club? Like that is a 2 second job
|
|
|
|
Post by phillistine on May 6, 2024 15:05:09 GMT
Can blame whomever you want, argue whatever you want, but it happened Given it happened, how come there is no apology for any offence caused from the club? Like that is a 2 second job Bearing in mind that people are waiting to pick holes in any apology that is offered , they are probably being sensible and carefully choosing their words in response. Years ago we were taught to write a letter as if you are speaking to someone - sadly that is no longer the case. |
|
|
|
Post by Tilly's Thighs on May 6, 2024 15:26:01 GMT
Surely the "normal" in that statement refers to tickets and not people. But let's not let that get in the way of giving the Tommy Gulag a kicking. Very poorly worded then, referring to "disabled fans", "normal fans" and "older fans". |
|
|
|
Post by gassince1957 on May 6, 2024 15:30:21 GMT
I'm not sure I can understand the fuss about this - what exactly IS the correct expression for people who are not disabled? The way I read it is that disabled cards will be free to users and normal - all other? cards will cost £15. Strikes me this is yet another "let's have a go at TG" type of post. As it happens, I talked with a disabled fan and asked if the reply was offensive and he laughed his socks off!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on May 6, 2024 15:32:29 GMT
Surely the "normal" in that statement refers to tickets and not people. But let's not let that get in the way of giving the Tommy Gulag a kicking. Very poorly worded then, referring to "disabled fans", "normal fans" and "older fans". That wasn't how I read it. I think the intention was to say concession tickets and normal tickets. I can understand how it's been misunderstood, but I don't think that was the intention and frankly, I don't believe the SC do either. The sensible course of action would have been to double check the intent (if there was any ambiguity) not just publish it knowing it made someone look a twat. Unless the intention was to make someone look a twat. I'm no Gorringe fan, but I think he's been deliberately misrepresented here. |
|
