Jump to content


Gold Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by rhliston

  1. 8 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    No I did not have my name on the resolution. If I had been I'd have no problem saying so.  If I was going to nominate somebody better to replace them, I'd nominate Sooty and Sweep, Basil Brush, Kermit the Frog, Statler and Waldorf and last but not least Fozzy bear.

    Wrong on checking the list of members of the Trust who supported the resolution to remove the entire Trust Board your name is listed as supporting the removal of all Trust Board members on it. 

  2. 7 minutes ago, strichener said:

    I appear to have touched a nerve.  Are you one of the people that lodged the resolution to get rid of the trust board?  If so can you give me details of who you were nominating to replace them.

    They don`t have anyone to replace the current Trust Board members, that`s where their little Plan falls down. As stated by Stuart Brown at the shareholders meeting its a tit for tat for the Trust Board calling for an EGM of the Shareholders. 

  3. 12 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    Certainly. The club board are accountable to both the membership and the shareholders of the Trust.  If people are going to say the club board has in any way refused to be accountable, it needs specifics on instances supplied, not just repeating the words not accountable.  You know as well as I do there is a procedure for removal for any board that can be proven to have been incompetent or negligent in it's duties.  Here we have an instance where the board has been slagged off for years for not finding an experienced manager and when they finally land one, they get a no confidence motion in their face.

    Your turn.  Would you like to tell us who those companies you say won't deal with the present board are?

    Wrong the Club Board is accountable to its Shareholders. Stirling Albion FC are a Private Limited Company. The Supporters Trust are the major Shareholder in the Club owning 83% of the Shares. The Supporters Trust Board are accountable to its members. 

    "if people are going to say the club board has in any way refused to be accountable it needs specifics on instances supplied, not just repeating the words not accountable! Can you tell me then why Stuart Brown and John Daly refused to attend a meeting with the Trust Board unless a Trust Director Ian Doyle was not present. ? Does that not suggest that.  ? 

    5 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    The Club directors did not have their names on the resolution to remove the Trust board. Individuals do not have to be instigated to act of their own volition.  I want the Trust board out because I believe them to be incompetent and unreasonably combative with the club board. I was not told to have that opinion by anybody. So who the hell are you to accuse the people who lodged the resolution of being instigated to?  Do you know them? Have you spoken to them? 

    If you check the resolution submitted to remove the entire Trust Board, you will find the names of every Club Director are on these resolutions, some to be fair have only asked for the removal of 3 of the Trust Board members. 

  4. 3 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    My real name is indeed Hugh Hanlon. The crap you post is not accurate. One person did not vote 50 times. The Trust board couldn't make that stick and neither can you. So since you have already named him, you are once again slandering him.  Whether to sue you or not is of course his decision, not the Trust board's.

    We don't have the opportunity to vote them out, because if they held the AGM your resolution would have to go ahead. If you lost they'd be screwed. So don't hold your breath waiting for an AGM date.

    Once more, more twisting of the facts. Let me ask you a question then WC BOGGS if the person did NOT vote 50 times, are you saying the Trust Board lied to its members by saying this. Indeed it was stated on Tuesday night at the meeting that a Trust Board member phoned the person concerned and asked him about the voting, his response was " all 71 coaches are in the room with me" This was stated at the meeting or are you saying that the Trust Board member is lying. ? 

  5. 12 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    What a fascinating thing to say.  So what you are saying is that the names on a resolution aren't really the people putting forward the resolution.

    OK I'll buy it. So who's really behind the names we are to ignore on your resolution then?  Come on, it's your theory, fess up?

    More facts being twisted. The fact is I know who was behind my resolutions to remove Stuart Brown and John Daly, ME no one else WC BOGGS. Can the same be said for the resolutions proposed by the Gang of 74 ? don`t think so. Their is an old saying You can fool all the people some of the time but not all the people all of the time. 

  6. 45 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    You are making the mistake of believing Liston's habitual twisting of other people's words.  The chairman may well have said the people who lodged the resolution did it as a tit for tat.  You can bet money on it  he did not say the board lodged it as Liston implied. The chairman is not that stupid.  Liston is that twisted.

    I could not be more open that I side with the club board 100%. Make it 200% if you like. What I have denied is that I am following a script provided by the chairman.  The accusations of that are just the usual methods of those who want to bring him down.  Dodge the issue, try to discredit the man who brings it up.  In response to the attempt to remove the chairman and him alone, fellow board members stood by him as any decisions made are group decisions.  The people who yell about accountability  got pissed off at them declaring, hey we're accountable too. Only at Stirling Albion is standing with a colleague out of integrity seen to be a heinous crime. 

    I consented to let my daughter submit my vote along with hers on her email account.  There is no rule against that. That is what happened with the director. The difference being he had appealed to a lot of people to join the membership and with their consent submitted their votes via his email email account.  I agree doing it that way with 50 of them was not wise, but the Trust board had accepted those people and their membership fees and they still entitled to vote just the same.  Despite investigating the submissions to date the Trust board have not come up with a single person who did not consent to their vote being submitted that way So gerrymandering?  Utter crap!

    Peter Reid fae Peterheid is deid. Volvo for sale.

    My My so I am that twisted you clearly cannot see the wood for the tree`s WC BOGS or your real name is Hugh Hanlon is it not. The facts I have posted are accurate and no amount of twisting them to suit the agenda from your master can disguise the facts. 

    Yes as members they are allowed to vote,, but as it states in the Trust Constitution "one person one vote " NOT one person 50 votes. 

    No amount of twisting the facts on your posts will alter the fact that the Trust Board were right to intervene in this matter, it is up to them to decide what to do. If the members are not happy with their decisions they have at least the option to vote them out. Unlike the Club Board who appear to be unaccountable to anybody including the owners of the Club the Supporters Trust. 

  7. 7 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

    God knows what he means. 20% is not a majority holding.  Unless a majority holding communicated consent by mental telepathy, there had to be a vote for claims of consent to be valid.   Either there was a vote or there was not. It's a simple yes or no. 

    What I have heard is that a group of shareholders requested a joint board meeting to resolve the dispute. Something Mr Allardyce failed to mention. Too busy putting out his usual innuendo about a lack of accountability, without ever a scrap of information of what they have found to hold anybody accountable for!   Did somebody pinch his sausage roll at hospitality?  WHAT THEN?

    The Trust board kept the membership in the dark about the purpose they intended to use this EGM for.   That's unacceptable and just one more reason why they need to be held accountable.  They don't represent the people who voted them in, they represent themselves and their own agenda.  That becomes ever more clear with every action they take, every statement they put out and every secret they keep. 

    The Trust Board is ACCOUNTABLE TO THE MEMBERS, unlike Stuart Brown and Co, they put themselves up for election. If the members are not happy with them they can be voted off. Again unlike Stuart Brown and Co who seem to think that they are untouchable and have used every trick in the book to stay in power, from the Personal Statement from Colin Rowley published on the Club Website, to a failed attempt too remove the Trust Board without any reasons given. The attempt to rig the voting for the AGM by one of the Clubs Directors, Not to mention the continued decline of this Club on the playing field under the stewardmanship of Stuart Brown. 

    We had the situation in which Stuart Brown and John Daly refused to meet with the Trust Board unless one of its elected members was not present, how can this be allowed to happen. The Trust are the owners of the Club and the fact the both men refused to meet with the owners clearly is a very worrying sign. For far too long this situation has been allowed to develop and I for one am glad that the Trust Board have decided to take action to make sure that owners of the club The Supporters Trust regain control of what they OWN. 

  8. 21 minutes ago, AlbionMan said:

    It is not an unreasonable supposition given that although SB was careful not to be seen orchestrating the attack on the club's shareholders the three prime movers involved in the recruitment all enjoy close relationships with him.

    Nor is it stretching credibility to suggest that the new members were enjoined to sign up in the week immediately following the shareholders requiring the club board to explain 2021 year end financial information and then initiate a resolution to remove the shareholders representatives having the temerity to call the club board to account.

    Ask yourself cui bono?

    Indeed it was stated by Stuart Brown that the attempt to remove the entire Trust Board was Tit for Tat for the Trust Board calling for an EGM at the Shareholders meeting on Monday night. If that does not suggest Stuart Brown knew what was going on and indeed signed 3 of the resolutions backing them then I don`t know what else anyone could think. 

  9. 44 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    If it had been one man voting 50 times, the man who made that phone call wouldn't have gone on about all the "funny" post codes on the names and addresses of the submission you stupid man. That caller accusing him of voting so many times, is NOT proof that he did.  If they could prove that, they would have and we'd have  heard the evidence. So you're still at it as usual.

    I wasn't at the shareholder's meeting, so I couldn't possibly hear any appeal for confidentiality  at it.  I do know how Prudential reacted to the awful press reports 5 years ago. They get alarmed at scandal material in the press. I didn't need  to know of any email and didn't know till you brought it up, that more press speculation on scandal.  would have Prudential alarmed again. Good of you to confirm I was right about what the Trust board's actions led to though.

    As for Stuart Brown making light of it, only a clown like you would think it's even possible he would react that way.  You are one sick bunny.

    I don't need anybody pulling strings to take issue with your deliberate twisting  and misrepresentation of facts.  It's you pulling  my strings.  Who's pulling yours though? You were hinting away last night that Stuart was the 50 names man. Every time you say I wonder who?  Or you know who, the whole support knows that's who you mean.  If you knew who it actually was, why were you hinting it was your usual obsession suspect?  I'm clear about who I stand with. You aren't. Try some bravery yourself.

    Dearie Dearie me 😂 you really need to go back and read what I have written. You are talking pure pish. Fact is you were the person who brought up about the e mail from M&G not me. Stuart Brown making light of, did I say that NO, again you are making this up. 

    I`m pulling your strings 😂😂 . "Hinting away last night that Stuart was the 50 names man" Absolute nonsense 😂 I have never read such a load of absolute drivel in the many years I have been posting on Pie & Bovril. 

    As I have said in a previous post, WHO IS PULLING YOUR STRINGS WC BOGGS, I sincerely hope their is someone behind you feeding you this guff if not I suggest you seek medical help ASAP. 

  10. 10 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

    They had a duty to investigate. Not to announce to the entire membership that they have made it a police matter,  before the police had conducted an investigation and reported back.  When someone has been charged that is when you go public. No one was charged, because nothing criminal had occurred. So they endangered our sponsorship over a non case.

    One man did not vote 50 times. That is a  scurrilous and slanderous lie. Multiple votes by 50 registered members were submitted via one email address. I do know who that was. You don't.

    One man did not vote 50 times 😀 It was stated at the Trust Board meeting on Tuesday night that a Trust Board member phoned the person concerned Grant Morrice and asked him why he was voting so many times and he stated to the Trust Member that all 71 Coaches were in the room with him during this time.

    This was stated to those who attended the Trust Meeting, I am sure that this can be verified by those present. 

    Also I find it strange that Stuart Brown made light of the fact that he had received an e mail from a representative of M&G Prudential`s parent company asking what was going on at the Club. Stuart Brown also asked that any information mentioned at this meeting be kept confidential. This I have done until YOU WC BOGGS posted about the INFORMATION about the Club`s sponsors on this website. 

    Clearly someone is pulling your strings in the background and making the bullets for you to fire, I wonder who that is. 😀 Maybe you will be brave enough to tell fellow Albion supporters who that is. 

  11. 45 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

    A big concern is how our sponsors will react to this.  After the Trust board decided to tell everyone they had gone to the police, social media was rife with it.  It is hardly surprising that this resulted in the club's reputation getting trashed in the press to the alarm of Prudential.  Police action should never have been made public, before the police had even had a chance to investigate the allegations and verify any law had actually been broken.  In the end our sponsorship was endangered  for a non crime.  This was both grossly irresponsible and incompetent.   Now this!   God knows how our sponsors will react.

    The Trust Board had a duty under the terms of its Constitution to take action if it suspected fraud.. or are you suggesting they did nothing and let it go. Clearly their was an attempt to rig this vote. One man voting 50 times ! You of course know who that man was don’t you. 😀

  12. 1 hour ago, BB_Bino said:


    I don’t, I have to wait for the official announcement, but you, I believe that you know fine well what the Trust board have planned and you know exactly who is waiting in the wings to come onto an “interim board”, of that I have no doubt.

    You can say you don’t, you can say the buzz words like “we’ll wait to see who shows an interest”, but I don’t buy it and I don’t believe you.

    There has been a plan in place for months, The Trust may have had to change tact at times but we’re now getting to the nitty gritty of it. Concerned supporters like me, we just have to sit back and wait for the official announcement and have absolutely no concerns answered by anyone in the know.

    I’m not getting into tit for tat arguments on P&B because like every other every day supporter, I don’t know what the hell is going on, I have no inside knowledge, no inside info, no pal telling me the stories, hence why I have stayed out of joining in, but you are convincing no-one when you say you don’t know what the plan is!


    You can believe what you want but as I have stated I DO NOT know who the Trust Board is proposing. Like you I am in the dark, I have my suspicions but that’s all. 
    Regarding the Trust Board having a plan in place months ago, it was stated last night that the Trust Board only took action after it was stated by the Club Board that the remaining fixtures could be in jeopardy. They then started the search for replacements.  
    That’s the facts, if you don’t believe it fine but it’s the Truth. 

  13. 16 minutes ago, BinoBalls said:

    I think that’s the main gripe fans have and the best chairman in the world is always going to struggle to keep fans happy if it’s 10+ years of perceived underachievement. 

    However where Mr Brown also hasn’t helped himself is the long queue of people alleging he can be difficult to work with, certainly from the perspective of several people who have worked on the Trust (past and present). The paradox is that he is by accounts a very nice guy.

    Any chairman of any organisation needs to be able to manage their main stakeholders to keep them happy. In our case it’s only the Trust. You’d think this wouldn’t be too difficult but apparently it is. 

    Well he has and that`s been the problem for a number of years now. The actions the Trust Board are planning to take if they come to fruition would solve this problem once and for all. This situation has to stop and if its the only way forward then so be it. Its ridiculous that this nonsense has been allowed to carry on for so long. 

  14. 2 hours ago, BB_Bino said:


    Well after what I believe was said at the meeting last night, we’re soon to find out!! My guess, current TB members and maybe a few blasts from the past.


    We shall have to wait and see what the Trust Board is planning. You may be right or you may be wrong, but one things for certain this nonsense that the Club Board has refused to co-operate with the Trust Board and owners of the Club has to be rectified asap. If this is the way to go then so be it. 

  • Create New...