Response to Argus/Crawley FC

[Girl Friday]

REPLY

I am not exactly sure that this correspondent is in the mood to listen to reason.Here are some of his/her recent points on North Stand Chat.

The Albion are the architects of their own downfall.

They (from which plural form I assume he means The Argus - or the Anus as he calls it) are a bunch of freeloading parasites.

I have been created by the Argus as a device to minimise "the legal basis for redress" (!).

I am an ignorant bitch.

I have a funny name.

I should also point out that he/she has indulged in sexual innuendo in his website comments - you may feel that this demands a certain level of response from The Argus.




Anyway, let's assume the best and take the letter you forwarded to me at face value. Please feel free to forward any of these points, or indeed the
entire message, to the correspondent.

Any criticism, such as it was, in my column was of the council, not the football club. In fact, I went out of my way to say warm things about Crawley FC.

The writer says that the criticism appears to be two-pronged:

a) The Council rejected a groundshare

b) They allowed the Palace reserve team to use the ground.

Taking the second point first, I can only wonder where he got the reference to Palace from. I have never mentioned Palace. I am sorry, but I just
don't know what he is talking about.

Turning to the council rejection, the fact is that the council did reject the Albion's approach.You could argue that they were right to, or that they were wrong to. What you cannot argue is that they did.

Similarly, you could argue that the council was correct to tell residents that the Albion would not be allowed to share the ground.You could also
argue that when it later became apparent that the Albion had been rendered homeless and pushed to the brink of closure, the council was correct in
choosing not to discuss this development with residents. They are both valid arguments.

Alternatively you could argue that the council could have tried harder. And that is a valid argument too.

What is not valid is the wild invention of facts which the writer has indulged himself in. In his letter to Steve, he refers to:

my inflammatory views
my diatribe that you should automatically hate all local rivals

For goodness sake! I would be amazed if many people would regard a light-hearted line about a football club I then went on to praise as being inflammatory and as for my demand that we should hate all local rivals - well I am afraid he is just making this up.

Taking these points together and adding them to the five listed at the top of this note - not to mention the rather odd reference to Crystal Palace - I am bound to take the view that this is a wind up.

 

[Wozza]

What?

 

[ben andrews' girlfriend]

sorry, pass that by again

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Anna -

Consider yourself lucky that you aren't

(a) Andrew Hawes;

(b) A Swindon Town supporter.

People would only cause trouble with your surname.

 

[Albion Dan]

I asume this is Anna Swallow on her Column where she attacked Crawley for not letting us play there?

 

[fatboy]

So.....

Do you spit or swallow?

 

[Wozza]

I asume this is Anna Swallow on her Column where she attacked Crawley for not letting us play there?

Yes, I guessed that but what it's a reply to?! What letter?

And wasn't this all, like, two weeks ago? Haven't we moved on?

So.....

Do you spit or swallow?

Ha ha. Clever.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Anna

I tend to agree the piece was a well intended report to highlight yet again the groundless Albion.

I can't see what the big fuss was about.

I don't care about Crawley, good luck to them for promotion but I have never watched and probably never will watch Crawley ( except when Albion beat them 5-0 in the cup ).

Having said that Steve Foster is the greatest ever Albion player.

 

[Brovion]

Where's the rest of the thread gone? Girl Friday's response starts with 'Reply'. Reply to what and/or to whom?

 

[FG aka Football Genius.]

what the fvck is this all about sorry regulars but even being a genius i cant decide what the fvck this is on about

 

[bobbyzee]

what the fvck is this all about sorry regulars but even being a genius i cant decide what the fvck this is on about

My words exactly!

 

[aftershavedave]

i hope your column is better written than that garbage!

 

[Everest]

I think what she's trying to say is...






Pub anyone?

 

[Albion Dan]

So.....

Do you spit or swallow?

can we have a seperate forum for 18 and unders please?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Where's the rest of the thread gone? Girl Friday's response starts with 'Reply'. Reply to what and/or to whom?

She is responding to a letter sent by a Crawley supporter called Thad (sent to Stephen Hollis, who covers CTFC for the Argus):-

Dear Stephen

I know that it was all before your time, but...the Argus has been *beep*-stirring again...
Anna Swallow has mentioned the fact that she finds it hard to be nice to Crawley Town FC as she remembers when BHA went crawling to Crawley councillors for a groundshare....

The facts:

In the bad old days when BHA had a ground but were lots in debt..the crooks that ran them had a priority of selling the dilapidated ground (to themselves for the value of BHA debts, but no profit) in order that they could then sell it as prize retail land and make lotsa money...

In the interim Crawley Council approached them to see if they would be interested in the new development at Crawley, where the council would produce a stadium for CTFC and would make it league standard with associated infrastructure if BHA paid the difference.

I knew people at BHA at the time and worthies such as Hinshelwood said "it was so nice to talk to a council in Sussex who felt that a successful football club is an asset to the community" as every other council in Sussex thought that football was a convention of the barbarian hordes!

To cut a long story short, the *beep* at BHA could not do a deal and so the council went back to it's original priority of providing a smaller scale community stadium. At the public consultation local residents raised the sceptre of BHA playing there and were given assurances that they would
not be allowed to...

The stadium was built and (of course) "the Anus" started a campaign demonising Crawley Councillors and by association the football club, very very unfair as they were the only council to try and help and it was the board of BHA who gave the original snub!

Crawley council should be commended for showing Brighton and Hove councils how it should be done and the Argus should show some balance and desire for the truth in it's reporting. I would also like to know how they would have reported it if the council had reneged on it's original assurances ?

In summary the bad guys were:
The old board of BHA and the councils of Hove and Brighton who abandoned the supporters of the club

The good guys were:
Crawley Council for trying to help BHA and for giving positive support to the football club in their community.

I suppose there is no chance of these ever getting mentioned or even some sort of redress in the interest of truth ? Or how about the press complaints authority having a look at the reporting and comment ?

I will be interested in your reply and will publish it on the CTFC forum

regards
Thad





Stephen Hollis responded to this with the following:-

Thad,

I understand why you are upset with what Anna Swallow said in her column and I have passed your complaint on to the sports editor.
Although you, me and a lot of other people might not agree with what she said the fact that it is her column means she can pretty much say what she likes, within reason.
I take on board all the points you made and I hope you agree from the way I have reported the club this season that I have no grudge to bear against Crawley Town. As you say, the stadium issue was well before I arrived at The Argus and therefore has not clouded my judgement in any way.
Finally, may I pass on my congratulations on completing a magnificent double and as a result of the club's success you can expect more of my words of wisdom on the Reds in the pages of The Argus next season.

Steve


The whole issue blew up on The Crawley Town Message Board.

North Stand Chat debated the issue here and here.

 

[Brovion]

Thanks Lord B, I hadn't seen the Thad or Hollis letters before. Bit of a storm in a teacup though isn't it?

 

[looney]

Isn't their a boycott of the arsgas in progress?

 

[tedebear]

goodness the use of the english language, or more to the point grammatical writing, by journalists sometimes amazes me...

 

[Everest]

She could have condensed her original post to this

I have been created by the Argus as an ignorant bitch with a funny name.

There. That's a lot neater, isn't it?

 

[Faldo]

She is responding...

The whole issue blew up on The Crawley Town Message Board.

North Stand Chat debated the issue here and here.

Wow - thats a lot of links...