| David Hall |
As mentioned in answer to question 2, I think WISA has played and continues to play a useful role in challenging the whole approach to 'franchising'. My feeling is that any response to MK's inclusion in the 2018 World Cup bid should best be left to WISA and the DT focus on the issues that are facing it and the club in the future. We have enough on our plate! |
| |
|
| Mark Davis |
My own preference is for the Trust's Board to make a short, dignified statement about its views on the subject (as indeed it did). You could take issue that that should be put to the membership first, but arguably "published and be damned" is the line to take. I don't think the Trust or the Club should divert too much of its energy into this, and I think it's something on which WISA can usefully take up the cudgel. |
| |
|
| Nicole Hammond |
This would seem to fall very much within what I see as WISA’s remit. I thought WISA’s letter was fantastic, but I was also very cheered to see the Dons Trust's response. Had I been on the board, I would have supported writing that letter to the FA. |
| |
|
| Kate Terriere |
The Trust should absolutely maintain a diplomatic silence on such issues. The Trust is a professional body and should operate in a professional way. Other commercial organisations would not openly criticise each other so the Dons Trust should not do so. We also need to make sure we have a good relationship with the FA and therefore make sure we do not do anything to jeopardise that. |
| |
|
| Kris Stewart |
I think AFC Wimbledon should adopt a clear stance, and not hide behind WISA. |
| |
|
| Lee Willett |
On anything to do with the Frannies, the Trust - and any other organization associated with AFC Wimbledon and with all true football fans - should do everything within its power to ensure that they disappear off the face the earth. |
| |
|
| Stephen Cooles |
On issues such as this, I think that whoever is the most appropriate to respond should lead, but of course in consultation with other interested parties. For instance on the England 2018 World Cup bid, I felt it was appropriate for this to come from the Dons Trust & Club, however with the patrimony negotiations, this was best for WISA to lead on. I would like to believe all 3 bodies could work together for the collective good. |
| |
|
| Tom Adam |
I supported the Trust Board’s decision to campaign for a change to the stadiums selected for the World Cup. We should do this with great care because any actions that reduce the chances of the World Cup coming to England are likely to lose us the sympathy and support of many football fans who currently admire us and support our aims. This could alienate the council and the government, both of which need to be on our side of we are to get a new stadium.
Our campaign needs to be discreet and clever and it needs to recognise that the FA and government can never admit publicly that a decision to exclude anyone from the bid was the result of our protests.
WISA should also continue its work which can be more public than the Trust’s.
|
| |
|
| Simon Bath |
I do, I think that the club should take a publically vocal stance to anything MK based, after all that's why we're here. To add to this WISA's contributions have been invaluable and must continue to do so. |
| |
|
| David Growns |
As I answered in Question 2 - I believe this is something that WISA can be vociferous about - it's a more powerful message when it comes from the fans. |
| |
|
| Damian Woodward |
Tough one – heart says yes – we should fight anything to do with Milton Keynes. Head says; imagine the backlash from ‘football’ if we lost the overall bid because of it. We still have tremendous good will out there and people genuinely look with admiration at what we have achieved. This is probably a good example of where WISA steps in to ensure we make the point, but without compromising the football club or Trust. |
| |
|
Christopher Gibbs |
I think The Dons Trust should focus on regaining its league place in an affordable manner while retaining its Trust-owned structure. |