Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

Why can’t a FSS member not be a Patron? 

 

I don’t understand why this would be an issue either? Why shouldn’t a fan be allowed to invest in both groups. A big part of the whole idea behind it for me is that it isn’t a closed shop and any fan prepared to invest should be welcomed with open arms into either group. If they then prepared to put themselves forward as a candidate to be elected to take one of the BOD positions then good on them provided it’s democratic amongst the membership as it has/will be. 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Shadwell Dog

    7446

  • Back Post Misses

    5313

  • Marshmallo

    3150

  • Bairnardo

    4834

1 hour ago, Baxters Wynd said:

 

This is ludicrous.  The Supporters Society should be electing two reps who are entirely independent of the Patrons 

 

I think this is interesting.  Can see both sides, but for this 'three legged chair' or whatever the term is to work,it's got to be a range of Supporter voices being heard.

I'd like to think that FSS members would elect non Patrons to represent their group (the Patrons also members of FSS of course being entitled to seek board roles via the Patrons 2 slots) but that's up to them I guess.

(Great post BTW in general)

Edited by FalkirkBairn2021
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Back Post Misses said:

Why can’t a FSS member not be a Patron? 

 

No reason at all.  There is a huge difference of a Patron being a FSS member and that person then being elected by the FSS to the board.  I think that most people would recognise the potential for there to be a conflict of interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Baxters Wynd said:

No reason at all.  There is a huge difference of a Patron being a FSS member and that person then being elected by the FSS to the board.  I think that most people would recognise the potential for there to be a conflict of interest.

Not going to outright disagree here but what potential conflict of interest do you envisage? Considering the FSS directors are going to be democratically elected by the membership in the same way the patrons group directors are/will be, it does seem to be a bit of nit picking on your part.  I am pretty sure however that both groups would be more than happy to put something in place where by a member of both groups can’t then put themselves forward for a position as director (if the wider memberships indicated they wanted this) but to be honest it does seem a bit pointless and could discourage investment from a fan prepared to pay into both groups forcing them to choose. We need to remember both groups are essentially just a bunch of fans handing over there own hard earned cash to the club in the hope of making a difference, it’s not like we have opposing factions trying to aggressively take over some multi national corporation here. 

Edited by LatapyBairn.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Baxters Wynd said:

I would simply have hoped that the society would have clear articles of association.  These would include a stipulation that someone who is a Patron and can be elected to the board by that group cannot stand for election by the supporters association.  

obviously, you are entitled to post whatever you want in relation to the team.  Personally, I don’t think posts which circulate rumours based on people claiming they are in the know are very helpful.

 

Thanks for the comments about FSS interim directors.  We explained the process in our FAQ, which I've pasted below. 

The other point I'd make is that we’re keen that this isn't about factions. You're right about the numbers of patrons v directors.  I'd also say that they've likely all signed up to be FSS members too, so it goes both ways. 

We don't have a rule that excludes members of the patrons’ group from becoming FSS directors. I think it'd be a shame if we went down that route as it’d act as discouragement for those people to get involved with FSS. But you, or anyone else, are welcome to make the case from within the organisation and when we have elections next year. 

I'd be happy to discuss in more detail if you're at the AGM tonight, or any other time. 

 

The board asked FSA to nominate two directors following the four resignations in November. The ethos is to establish the “three legged stool” model of governance at the club, where no single group – major shareholders/external investors, medium-sized shareholders (eg patrons) or small shareholders/ordinary fans – had overall control.

As the FSS was in the process of launching, we could not credibly run elections in the few short weeks before the AGM. The current FSS committee has not been elected by a membership, so committee members have decided for ethical reasons not to put themselves forward as candidates. The tight timescale means that we would not be able to build a membership and run an election process in the few short weeks before the AGM.

We didn’t want to miss the opportunity to accelerate fans’ representation on the board, so decided to appoint interim directors who have the skills and experience to help improve the club and establish the supporter-director model while FSS gains a membership and has time to organise democratic elections for both the committee and supporter directors. The positions will last from the AGM until around June 2022, when we would conduct an election from the new FSS membership.

 

Edited by StuartA
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bairn in Exile said:

Sheerin is gone.

Get rid of Holt. He has to go, no self-respecting manager will come here to work under that pr*ck.

Combine their salaries and ADD in something extra to get somebody of real quality in. I don't care if we have to beg, borrow or steal the money to make this happen.

Desperate times call for desperate measures.

 

That's the spirit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the score with Holt? A mate of mine has messaged me to say he's been put on gardening leave but haven't heard any confirmation from other more reliable sources

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shadwell Dog said:

You'll be lucky if he's on 30k a year at Raith.  We could easily double that if it was only about money. Unfortunately that's not the case and he has a safe secure job at Raith.

Is the suggestion here that Falkirk would pay off Sheerins contract, Holts contract, pay Mcglynn at least £60k per year (also factor in an assistant manager)whilst playing in League 1, with no real certainty of being out of the league next season?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Baxters Wynd said:

No reason at all.  There is a huge difference of a Patron being a FSS member and that person then being elected by the FSS to the board.  I think that most people would recognise the potential for there to be a conflict of interest.

As Stuart A says it is not about factions. I think we are all in this together. The club is on its knees. 3 of the 4 directors who have resigned have done very little I believe since they tendered the resignations. The club needed both investment and hands on the pump. At least give things 5 minutes to settle. I am sure the structure will settle down in time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, FalkirkBairn2021 said:

I'm absolutely fine with Rice. He's an actual manager .

Is he? Didn't take on a managerial job until he was 55 having spent about 20 years as an assistant or coach, and in that one job he got relegated then left the club in another relegation battle a division down. Paul Sheerin has twice as much experience as a manager as Rice does.

If it's going to be an appointment from the obvious merry go round names rather than someone left field then Morton and Falkirk are probably looking at all the same candidates and Rice is the one I'd want the least. If Falkirk get him ahead of us I'd be chuffed tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

McDonaugh did very well with Ed City, I'd take him or McIntyre I think. Maybe even McCann.

(all from that list).  No thanks to Rice please.

McDonough didn’t fancy being manager so went upstairs at Edinburgh. Why would you want someone like that as manager? It’s well known he didn’t fancy it in the end! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...