SOS - More Harm Than Good

[Chrono]

The problem is that the idea of a 'fans voice' tends to assume that we all think the same things and care about the same issues. Obviously the idea of cheaper coaches to away games is a good one and I'm pretty sure that SoS have been involved in other positive things too. The problem is that on issues like ownership where sadly fans have little knowledge they seem to stick their oar in without any great knowledge of the way things work or if they do seem to do things to gain publicity rather than to help fans in any way.

I really resent the idea that on a broad set of issues we should always be 'speaking with one voice'. It just looks like an attention seeking clique to me. They need to jettison a lot of their in group/out group nonsense and condescension of fans who disagree with them before I would consider giving them any real respect.

The problem is that why would SoS do differently when the club behave in the same manner?

[Darkon]

Personally, I have always thought they were born of arrogance. The belief that they, the select few, can represent the true meaning of LFC as they understand it most. I don't like people making arguments in my name, especially ones I don't agree with. I have no issues with pressure groups of people who hold the same views, but SOS have gone too far, claiming they represent 'the fans', i.e all real fans, trying to position themselves as the unofficial supporters club and be the people who the club must address for fan related issues. It's like the very worst aspects of the militant trade-union movement that was in Liverpool in the 80s, which I suspect many of those involved hanker back to.

They have no legitimacy whatsoever IMO, it is a select group of people claiming to represent all.

I am happy that they try to oust our current owners, but the methods they use and the way they try and represent us all is ridiculous.

I don't mind grassroots organizations, but they shouldn't try and sell themselves for more than they are - which is basically one small group of fans with their select opinion. You don't see greenpeace, WWF, OXFAM or what not stating to represent everyone.

[dww]

The problem is that why would SoS do differently when the club behave in the same manner?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Surely there is only a point in an organisation like SoS as long as it works for the good of the fans - therefore you would think it would aim to be a/ inclusive and b/ fight for fan rights rather than pretending to be their mouthpiece on all issues?

In all honesty I'd rather they did nothing than have an organisation of super fans purporting to decide what it means to be a Liverpool fan.

[dom9]

I hate Unions.

[Exiled_red]

When you look at Shanks007's post above you can see what they stand for and I feel the majority of people would support these principles. The problem for me has always been the way they've gone about things. Firstly you're never going to have a body that represents everyone, so I was a little put out by this claim. I also found the "spade in the ground" episode embarrassing to be honest and have been dubious about them since then.

The RBS thing shows they don't know what they're doing, and this is downright embarrassing. As they claim to represent us (whether we like it or not) they are giving all of us a bad name with other groups of fans and the public in general. Secondly as the club were consulting them about various things, the club will (hopefully and rightly so) distance themselves from SoS, but are unlikely to consult any other fan groups on club issues in future. They are definately doing more harm than good!

[redstaralex]

I hate Unions.

I don't, they saved me from being redundant, but this is not a union and not based on socialist principles when at the start they decided to pick and choose who could join them

Shankly would be turning in his grave at this lot

[Neil Young]

I don't, they saved me from being redundant, but this is not a union and not based on socialist principles when at the start they decided to pick and choose who could join them

Shankly would be turning in his grave at this lot

I didn't know that. Can you elaborate please?

[Leyton388]

Like all unions or people who get a taste of power the will become corrupt and get what they can for themselves.

When SOS was first formed i was all for it but as time has gone by and with the current events they are nothing more than an embarrassment to our club.

[RoadEnd]

It will be interesting to see if Karen Gill makes any comment about the video.

First I would like to thank each and everyone of you for honouring my grandfather's name by calling this Union 'The Spirit Of Shankly'. For me though it's more than just honouring his name. In these times of corporate gluttony I am truly heartened to discover that there are still so many people who embody my granddad's spirit. It's an Olympic spirit: passionate pure and true. It's a dream of greatness and glory which comes from dedication, hard work and integrity. In this dream, money is only a means to an end, it's not the end itself. My granddad had a dream for Liverpool Football Club and you are all helping to keep that dream alive. It's the people with dreams who achieve things in the end because they have a vision which drives them on.

We know Bill Shankly "made the people happy", but I know that you would have all made him happy were he alive to see this legendary support today. I speak on behalf of the Shankly family when I say that we are wholeheartedly behind The Sprit Of Shankly.

Karen Gill, March 2008

[Vermilion]

It will be interesting to see if Karen Gill makes any comment about the video.

Aye, that's the 'ringing endorsement' i spoke of earlier in the thread, then a week or so later we have their idiotic behaviour plastered everywhere.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot eh.

[MrMichael]

thats pretty much the stance i took straight from the start - i don't need some self appointed bigwig to tell me how too support my club, if any remembers it i went on a big rant at the time comparing the whole set up to the judeas peoples front sketch from monty python

I remember that!

The problem, as ever with these things, is that good intentions and a willingness to actually get off your arse/away from your keyboard and actually try to do something to change things are one thing, but translating that to the real world is something else entirely. Its also not uncommon for causes to get hijacked or mindless minorities to end up giving everyone a bad name, you only have to look at any "fringe" group in any sphere from animal rights to football fans to see that in action.

[Neil Young]

It was obvious from the start they were a pretty insensitive bunch. "Sons of Shankly" - what f*cking century were they living in, thinking such a gender-specific name would be a wise move? The ridiculous non-apology apology is further proof they're run by people who don't have a clue about presenting themselves.

Now while all this could appear admirable to some extent, in the sense that they could be painted as people who aren't versed in the spin of PR and marketing, I don't think that applies any more. They just look like they don't know what they're doing which makes me very suspicious of their motives and tactics and even more dissatisfied that they claim to be speaking for us all and that the Club has been talking to them on that basis.

Anyway, will someone please explain a comment above that they restrict membership? What are the criteria?

[PTP]

It was obvious from the start they were a pretty insensitive bunch. "Sons of Shankly" - what f*cking century were they living in, thinking such a gender-specific name would be a wise move? The ridiculous non-apology apology is further proof they're run by people who don't have a clue about presenting themselves.

Now while all this could appear admirable to some extent, in the sense that they could be painted as people who aren't versed in the spin of PR and marketing, I don't think that applies any more. They just look like they don't know what they're doing which makes me very suspicious of their motives and tactics and even more dissatisfied that they claim to be speaking for us all and that the Club has been talking to them on that basis.

Anyway, will someone please explain a comment above that they restrict membership? What are the criteria?

I believe u need to have a skinhead, be prepared to have SOS 666 branded across ur back, and sing "you don't get me I'm part of the union" 12 times a day. thats what i heard?

[dww]

I believe u need to have a skinhead, be prepared to have SOS 666 branded across ur back, and sing "you don't get me I'm part of the union" 12 times a day. thats what i heard?

Does this information come from the 'other' site?

[PTP]

Does this information come from the 'other' site?

you would have to ask reece about that!