Jump to content
GB65

Colin Chisholm - Talbot

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, classof2010 said:


Now you are sullying this man Kilwinning have nothing to gain from this my team is in this league and I was astonished when they called talbot as winners so I’d like to see what comes of this and il stick by my original statement why was nr Chisholm private emailing mr fyfe when there was plenty time at the future meetings to resolve this mr Chisholm has left himself open to this by getting involved his club benefits from the change from null and void so he should of excused himself from the discussion

If this is how he is behaving then he should expect mud to be thrown back by whoever. 

Club officials all over the country top to bottom look after own club interests that's life i'm afraid. 

The bottom line is he put his point of view across and the decision was made and it was rightly called. 

For a club like kilwinning who have no feeling for the junior grade anymore and said they were looking to move on they are acting very strangely constantly acting the opposite ever since the decision. 

In the process they are dragging this all into the west of scotland set up it's already got off to a horrific start with infighting and division this only makes things worse.

Well done everyone at KR 🤨

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, traffordab said:

If this is how he is behaving then he should expect mud to be thrown back by whoever. 

Club officials all over the country top to bottom look after own club interests that's life i'm afraid. 

The bottom line is he put his point of view across and the decision was made and it was rightly called. 

For a club like kilwinning who have no feeling for the junior grade anymore and said they were looking to move on they are acting very strangely constantly acting the opposite ever since the decision. 

In the process they are dragging this all into the west of scotland set up it's already got off to a horrific start with infighting and division this only makes things worse.

Well done everyone at KR 🤨

What is it I’m supposed to have done? 
reading this in the paper like everyone else, was asked to comment by the paper and didn’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, parkcircus said:

was asked to comment by the paper and didn’t.

So you could have put it bed pretty rapid but didnt? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Killiepiyo said:

So you could have put it bed pretty rapid but didnt? 

How would I even answer that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think John Fyfe commenting would have put it to bed quicker that someone that isn’t on the management team.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, parkcircus said:

How would I even answer that?

Eric have you misinterpreted and drawing conclusions from a few select documents? In fact where did you get these documents and emails?  What could be someones motivation in giving you these? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



...In fact where did you get these documents and emails?  What could be someones motivation in giving you these? 


That is the question you and traffordab should be asking instead of firing random scatterguns at somebody whose club is not represented on the West Region SJFA management team.

These emails were only sent to members of that team, so who has leaked it and what was the motivation ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont have all the information to make that judgement, if your alluding to their being more information to support the article then surely we the fans need to be able to see that? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Killiepiyo said:

I dont have all the information to make that judgement, if your alluding to their being more information to support the article then surely we the fans need to be able to see that? 

So it’s on for you to not make a judgement with no info but I’ve to put it to bed with the same info?

lots of cardboard lawyers on here, all opinion, zero facts 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, parkcircus said:

So it’s on for you to not make a judgement with no info but I’ve to put it to bed with the same info?

lots of cardboard lawyers on here, all opinion, zero facts 

Have the finalised minutes been sent out? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a minutes a minute, a record of the meeting.

you can’t change it to suit yourself, or “destroy” them because it doesn’t fit an agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, parkcircus said:

a minutes a minute, a record of the meeting.

you can’t change it to suit yourself, or “destroy” them because it doesn’t fit an agenda.

I spend most my life in meetings sadly and minutes being amended to reflect discussions or something missed isn't that uncommon. said I think the word destroy is a throw back to the typewriter days but based on what's in the article they want them to reflect the full discussion?

Far be it from me being a expert in conspiracies but if I attempting one I wouldn't want said minutes to contain even further info?? Looks like it might provide more context which I'd have wanted personally before publishing. 

I think if the finalised minute didnt reflect the full discussion or contained obmissions then that might offer more but you can clearly read they want more people to have more information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should probably talk to the person on the management team that send them around.

theres not much I can add to this.

We’d previously stated we’d have been happy for null and void and even went along with the Talbot getting the win, albeit after the foot stamping tantrums

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, parkcircus said:

You should probably talk to the person on the management team that send them around.

theres not much I can add to this.

We’d previously stated we’d have been happy for null and void and even went along with the Talbot getting the win, albeit after the foot stamping tantrums

If I was the reporter I probably would have confirmed the story was actually a story but even on here you can gather it's not reportings finest hour.  Talbot dont even have directors 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Killiepiyo said:

Would it not be more competent to wait until you have the finalised minutes? 

Yeah give them a chance to get their story straight and destroy any incriminating evidence (minutes). That’s really competent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t think any club at our level have directors, by the rules the clubs have to be setup as committees, although that’s no longer a rule in the WOSFL.

Anyway, enjoy your day, just wanted to find out what I’d supposedly done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jerry Macguire said:

Yeah give them a chance to get their story straight and destroy any incriminating evidence (minutes). That’s really competent. 

Minutes require to be finalised, that's not a conspiracy as I'm sure anyone who has any involvement in meetings can tell you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Killiepiyo said:

Minutes require to be finalised, that's not a conspiracy as I'm sure anyone who has any involvement in meetings can tell you. 

Aye because the Management Committee discussed and agonised over null and voiding the season which they eventually agreed to do...............and then they didn't, and wanted the minutes destroyed and to hold more meetings.

That isn't correcting spelling mistakes, or amending interpretation before they're finalised. That's burying what was discussed and agreed at the meeting and pretending it never happened.

Your spin is quite somethjing to behold.

Edited by Burnieman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone that absented themselves from a  discussion (he was at meeting according to the 14/4 minute) due to conflict of interest then raised a concern about a conclusion drawn from said meeting (original minute and email questioning it). The conclusion potentially affected his club negatively and the revision benefited his club.

Argue that please.

 

Edited by cmontheloknow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Aye because the Management Committee discussed and agonised over null and voiding the season which they eventually agreed to do...............and then they didn't, and wanted the minutes destroyed and to hold more meetings.

That isn't correcting spelling mistakes, or amending interpretation before they're finalised. That's burying what was discussed and agreed at the meeting and pretending it never happened.

Your spin is quite somethjing to behold.

My spin? Read what you just posted again. 

Share this post


Link to post
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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...