L. Brilliant Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 Ignore list getting pretty crowded off this whole episode 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 29 minutes ago, Rob1885 said: 45 minutes ago, Double Jack D said: So it is just anti-rovers pish you're interested in? Thanks for confirming, I'll treat your input to this accordingly. Just a neutral party calling it how I see it. Take the blinkers off. I'd suggest your blinkers are preventing you from seeing the significant change in circumstance that has allowed the Raith TV boys to return. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Algorithms Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 The club have seemingly held meetings with the Raith Trust yesterday, Andy Mill this morning and one with Rovers Down South next week. Each person is capable of making their own decision as to what constitutes sufficient change or progress. For plenty of people, forcing the club to never play Goodwillie is enough at least initially. Probably speaks volumes that Pars fans are left kicking the arse out of this. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanStarko Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Rob1885 said: So what's changed at board/management level since they took their stance? I'll answer that. Nothing. What were you expecting to happen exactly? McGlynn to be sacked? The current board can't really sack McGlynn given they're just as culpable for the signing as he is, would be a tad hypocritical. Even if they did sack him, you'd then have the board who signed off on us signing Goodwillie now appointing the new management team, that's not going to go down well. The board and Chairman to all step down immediately? Given Sim owns the club and stadium, then he's not going to just disappear, and if does then the club is completely screwed. Plus even if the board and chairman could and did all quit immediately and walk away, that would just mean whoever comes in as the new board are the ones now responsible for paying off Goodwillie, great idea, that'll really bring in potential board members and investors. Short of somebody winning the Euromillions and being happy to invest a few million to get rid of everybody in one go, and buy the club and ground off Sim, then any change is going to take time unfortunately. More than likely, nothing is going to change until Goodwillie has been paid off, ideally with the board members responsible footing the cost. Edited February 16, 2022 by SanStarko 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raith Against The Machine Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 It's very telling that the two or three "neutrals" weighing in are supporters of our biggest rivals, I agree. And on a wider point, it's very easy to pontificate when it's a theoretical exercise and you've nothing at stake. To lesser and greater degrees, a lot of people connected to the Rovers stood up and made sacrifices last week. For the majority (but not all) the red line was Goodwillie's continued involvement. That battle, in effect, was won. The majority who were opposed to the Goodwillie signing would also like to see the removal of those who made the decision, but it's not exactly that simple. We're talking about the entire ownership and leadership of the club that's still in place. There are two options there. Engage, or walk away. I'm completely comfortable with people who made that decision to walk away, particularly those who are giving themselves some time and space before returning. But quite simply, if everyone did that, there wouldn't be a club to go back to. At a certain point (and personally, I'd argue that point was the second the U-turn was announced) where energies have to be focused on the rebuild. That rebuild should absolutely involve the ousting of the decision makers who led us here, and a change to decision making processes within the club to ensure it could never happen again, but that can't happen overnight, or without engagement from as wide a range of stakeholders as possible. For those who walked away permanently, good luck. I'm sorry it came to this, and I respect your decision entirely. For everyone else, it's a case of rebuilding a club that is fit for purpose, that's a force for good in its community, and that we can be proud of. It's no use burning the club down just to build from the ashes when we can rebuild from here. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Tiel Burn Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 hour ago, Rob1885 said: I've not said it's their fault just pointed out that their moral stance folded like a deck chair. Nice narrow viewpoint beautifully allowing more reasoned posters to show some maturity. TV folk withdrew on the basis of the player representing the club. Many would argue their withdrawal was a key point in the turnaround. Player won't play, they seem to have had dialogue with the club and note they are returning to be part of a rebuild. Rebuild suggests change though obviously we won't know what that means to them till they tell us. The other option they had is stay away and withdraw access to all fans who can't make the game. We are all clear the board ain't walking soon so I think it's better they are engaged with fans as they are doing. What happens if they stay away? Trust me fans are fickle and they will get targetted as being on a moral high horse that has outlived its stated course (player related) We've seen bits of pretty poor output from the club in the last week. That suggests if RTV aren't on the ground then they will be replaced and we as fans will have some generic company replacing something we feel is our own. For me there was strong action then a will to get round the table. Would be different if they were reading the teamlines with GW listed, only then would the "folding like a deckchair" argument hold any credence beyond someone stirring the pot. Unlike you I am amazed and bouyant about how much fans have achieved, of course a long way to go. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beachbum Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 hour ago, Rob1885 said: So what's changed at board/management level since they took their stance? I'll answer that. Nothing. RaithTV were quite clear when they took their stance that they wanted the reversal of the board's signing of Goodwillie. It's on RaithTV's Twitter account if you'd like to read it for yourself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob1885 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 I must have imagined the widely held viewpoint that fans/volunteers wouldn't be back at Starks until those responsible moved on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beachbum Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 5 minutes ago, Rob1885 said: I must have imagined the widely held viewpoint that fans/volunteers wouldn't be back at Starks until those responsible moved on. To quote RaithTV from February 2 since it's them you're having a go at at the moment: If the club reconsider this decision, and provide a pathway to repairing some of the damage this has caused we will be willing to consider returning to help the long path of recovery. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob1885 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 So what pathway has been provided then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raith1974 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 hour ago, Rob1885 said: 1 hour ago, Double Jack D said: So it is just anti-rovers pish you're interested in? Thanks for confirming, I'll treat your input to this accordingly. Just a neutral party calling it how I see it. Take the blinkers off. Neutral my arse. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob1885 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 Neutral my arse.no thanks. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael W Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 minute ago, Rob1885 said: So what pathway has been provided then? The player won't play for the club, isn't training either and negotiations to terminate his contract are ongoing? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da_no_1 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 So is there a list of people that can comment/be involved in this debate? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da_no_1 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 (edited) 1 minute ago, Michael W said: The player won't play for the club, isn't training either and negotiations to terminate his contract are ongoing? What about the management team and specifically the manager who was quoted as saying that he didn't give a f**k about the guy being a rapist as long as he could score goals (or something along those lines...) Oh, he can stay as long as he says sorry a few times & wins us a few games. Edited February 16, 2022 by da_no_1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raith1974 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 hour ago, Rob1885 said: 1 hour ago, Double Jack D said: So it is just anti-rovers pish you're interested in? Thanks for confirming, I'll treat your input to this accordingly. Just a neutral party calling it how I see it. Take the blinkers off. Just a neutral party, we're you neutral when he signed for Clyde, were you neutral when he was made club captain, were you neutral when he trains kids in his own time or dis you do what most people done on here and say nothing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob1885 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 The player won't play for the club, isn't training either and negotiations to terminate his contract are ongoing? And they thinks that's good enough? [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 13 minutes ago, Rob1885 said: I must have imagined the widely held viewpoint that fans/volunteers wouldn't be back at Starks until those responsible moved on. Perhaps you're blinkered by your opposition to the club in the same way you are trying to accuse us of being in support of it. It's a pity because some of your earlier opinion was quite inciteful. Now you're coming across as being a bit bitter and hostile just for the sake of it. It is making it more and more difficult to take your credible points seriously. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Algorithms Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 It's worth mentioning, there are still plenty of people who have stated they're still not going back. Even on social media when we've announced the most recent statement, you have people saying they're still unhappy and not going back. That's not even factoring in former hall of famer Stephen McAnespie saying the statement didn't go nearly far enough. Or the other sponsors like Val and TAG games who have walked away. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoBNob Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 12 minutes ago, Against The Machine said: At a certain point (and personally, I'd argue that point was the second the U-turn was announced) where energies have to be focused on the rebuild. That rebuild should absolutely involve the ousting of the decision makers who led us here, and a change to decision making processes within the club to ensure it could never happen again, but that can't happen overnight, or without engagement from as wide a range of stakeholders as possible. How do the fans plan to put pressure on the decision makers to leave? Unless the fans somehow have a controlling interest in the club fan power is pretty limited to withdrawing there services, it was that after all which brought about the clubs decision to not play Goodwillie. This was the board and manager that not only made the decision to sign him, but doubled down with that Rovers family nonsense. Sim seems so intertwined with the club that he's not going anywhere, any chairman appointed is still going to be answerable to him, another director has taken the opportunity of Tag Games leaving to put his company on your shirt for the biggest sponsorship opportunity of the season, fans are chanting John McGlynns name... I can't imagine the two directors who left will rejoin while the current incumbents are there, but how are the fans planning on ousting them? I fully appreciate the train of thought that you can't withdraw too much because the worry is you cause longer term damage which would reduce the footballing fortunes so much that hurts the club, but likewise with every service and volunteer that returns there's less pressure for change. Good luck, if the directors didn't have the integrity to leave after the mess they made you can't see them relinquishing power easily. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.