Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Giggler are you OK? Are you OK Giggler?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Giggler
    replied
    Bury FC SS, some of whose directors were present when fireworks were let off on the Gigg Lane pitch when the No vote was confirmed, are now seeking a second vote with a recommendation for a yes vote.

    https://www.buryfcss.co.uk/bfcss-statement-20-12-22/

    Will it ever end?

    Leave a comment:


  • NHH
    replied
    Fucking hell. If 15 people vote differently, the result goes the other way. I'd go for an Maastricht referendum and rerun the bloody thing

    Leave a comment:


  • Artificial Hipster
    replied
    Yeah, no doubt. I see the crowing voices on social media since the vote seem convinced that a Bury FC will be playing at Gigg next season anywhere from the NWCL to the National League North. Delusional doesn't begin to describe them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    Originally posted by Artificial Hipster View Post
    The council has already spoken.
    With my partner being on the Labour-controlled council (and her having to reject an amendment from a Tory councillor, now the Tory MO for Bury North, for the council to plough £4m in immediately after the expulsion) and me being a vocal, media savvy pro-AFC fan, we get a lot of shit on social media. It’ll only intensify when she’s mayor of Bury from May 2023 onwards.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sean of the Shed
    replied
    Originally posted by Giggler View Post

    Yes. This was the representative attitude of the 286 tonight at Gigg Lane.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/liamalexanderj/status/1586101997618462722
    There's not a chance any of those lot are going to get BFC off the ground. They would struggle to run a bath, never mind a football club.

    Leave a comment:


  • Artificial Hipster
    replied
    The council has already spoken.

    Statement from Bury Council following tonight's Bury football merger vote.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ray de Galles
    replied
    Originally posted by Sean of the Shed View Post
    So BFCSS are now going to try and set up a club and run Gigg Lane, even though over 60% of their membership is opposed?
    The sheer raw numbers of those pro-merger as to those against (around 1500 to 300) make it seem even more absurd.

    Commiserations Giggler, though you and the vast majority are on the right side and I have to believe that will win out in the end.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sunderporinostesta
    replied
    Absolute lunacy.
    Seems like a mixture of pigheadedness, embarrassment that AFC got their act together faster, jealousy that AFC got their act together faster and yer basic childish not wanting to share their toys. The council would be foolish to throw their lot in with the hold outs.

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    Originally posted by Satchmo Distel View Post
    I don't see how BFCSS are going to get investment or fans. Are the no-voters just intent on having a separate club for vanity purposes because they can't accept that AFC got their act together before they did?

    Is it possible that the 63% who voted in favour will switch their allegiance to AFC?
    In relation to your last point, possibly. Some may just walk away from football altogether. That said, I’ve heard more than a couple of people with no prior interest in AFC signing up as members last night.

    Leave a comment:


  • Satchmo Distel
    replied
    I don't see how BFCSS are going to get investment or fans. Are the no-voters just intent on having a separate club for vanity purposes because they can't accept that AFC got their act together before they did?

    Is it possible that the 63% who voted in favour will switch their allegiance to AFC?

    Leave a comment:


  • Foot of Astaire's
    replied
    An ex colleague has been anti merger and very vocal about it all over social media. His, and others stance on this just leaves me utterly perplexed. Feels like a footballing equivalent of Brexit and no good can come from it as far as Bury FCSS are concerned.

    Hopefully AFC continue to build on their great early work and go from strength to strength.

    Leave a comment:


  • Capybara
    replied
    Really sorry to hear this news Giggler

    Leave a comment:


  • DCI Harry Batt
    replied
    Real shame, Giggler . Sorry that a small number have spoiled it for the overwhelming majority.

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    Originally posted by Sean of the Shed View Post
    So BFCSS are now going to try and set up a club and run Gigg Lane, even though over 60% of their membership is opposed?
    Yes. This was the representative attitude of the 286 tonight at Gigg Lane.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/liamalexanderj/status/1586101997618462722

    Leave a comment:


  • Sean of the Shed
    replied
    So BFCSS are now going to try and set up a club and run Gigg Lane, even though over 60% of their membership is opposed?

    Leave a comment:


  • Artificial Hipster
    replied
    Idiots. Sorry to hear this Giggler. Hopefully there'll be a big crowd at your game tomorrow and we'll see where things stand a few months down the line. As you've said yourself this is by no means the end of the story.

    Leave a comment:


  • Third rate Leszno
    replied
    Feels like a huge opportunity missed. I wonder where those who've voted against this are expecting a re-formed Bury to be allowed to start playing? Surely they'd have to apply to go into the NWCFL and are most likely to have to start where AFC started?

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    Bury FC SS did not get enough votes to support the merge. It’s off.

    https://twitter.com/buryfcss/status/1586068423687143426?s=46&t=bL0QCkL8SK9T-5E2uCCEwA

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    https://twitter.com/officialburyafc/status/1586064070666604544?s=46&t=bL0QCkL8SK9T-5E2uCCEwA

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    It's been an odd one. As I said in the thread about weekend matchgoing, even if this is a clean split and there's no merge, this isn't the end of the story at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Discordant Resonance
    replied
    Seems rather out of spite by the Bury FC lot, when they've no active team to actually support.

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    It's the merging of the two community benefit societies (CBSs).

    AFC has one and Bury FC SS (which took ownership of the ground, the 'history' of Bury FC and some social media assets) has one, so the potential is for an interim CBS made up of people from both.

    If more than a third of voters in either ballot vote no, though, which there has been a concerted social media campaign for them to do so on the Bury FC SS side, then it's all irrelevant and there'll be no merger.

    Leave a comment:


  • Discordant Resonance
    replied
    The legal shell is still extant, and is owned by the "other" Bury supporters group, so AFC would essentially be voting for the right to play at Gigg Lane.

    Leave a comment:


  • Patrick Thistle
    replied
    Giggler I was going to text you. I don't really understand what AFC might be merging with. Is it some version of Bury FC that has hung on despite everything that has happened?

    Leave a comment:


  • Giggler
    replied
    Bigger. It’s all about image for him. I wrote to him to request an interview (no reply, naturally) and of course looked it up on Rightmove. Just shy of a million.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X