A Message to All Stirling Albion Trust Members

[AlbionMan]

49 minutes ago, TheWestStand said:

I'm starting to think this is an obsession to have 2 people removed and 'scapegoating' them for poor team performances. Nothing more, nothing less

 No doubt the team's abysmal season has contributed to the dissatisfaction, but it's very far from that, What did start as private member's motion for the Trust AGM has forced trust members to think that after 5 years of hanging on with the 'devil you know' this may not be the case. There have been several discussions on the supporters' bus along the lines of 'how can he be got rid of'. There are better devils around.

After the departure of the old trust board 5 years ago, its replacement was over conciliatory in attempting to restore calm to the club. This merely paved the way for the executive committee to further marginalise the Trust Board and destroy any balance in the club structure. The executive committee's continued actions would indicate they do not even acknowledge that they represent a subsidiary of the Trust and are accountable to its members through the Trust Board. 

I hope, that if anything this furore will bring the Trust Board's mind to bear on the adoption of protocols under which the executive committee will have the limits of their responsibility set for the day to day running of the club's operating and the Trust Board's level of authority as the principal to scrutinise their subsidiary's activities. Whoever the individuals are, roles, responsibility, accountability and authority need to be clearly set out and followed.

 

 

 

[rhliston]

23 minutes ago, AlbionMan said:

 No doubt the team's abysmal season has contributed to the dissatisfaction, but it's very far from that, What did start as private member's motion for the Trust AGM has forced trust members to think that after 5 years of hanging on with the 'devil you know' this may not be the case. There have been several discussions on the supporters' bus along the lines of 'how can he be got rid of'. There are better devils around.

After the departure of the old trust board 5 years ago, its replacement was over conciliatory in attempting to restore calm to the club. This merely paved the way for the executive committee to further marginalise the Trust Board and destroy any balance in the club structure. The executive committee's continued actions would indicate they do not even acknowledge that they represent a subsidiary of the Trust and are accountable to its members through the Trust Board. 

I hope, that if anything this furore will bring the Trust Board's mind to bear on the adoption of protocols under which the executive committee will have the limits of their responsibility set for the day to day running of the club's operating and the Trust Board's level of authority as the principal to scrutinise their subsidiary's activities. Whoever the individuals are, roles, responsibility, accountability and authority need to be clearly set out and followed.

 

 

 

At last a voice of reason in this whole sorry mess. As you say lets hope something positive comes out of this. 

[rhliston]

2 hours ago, TheWestStand said:

I'm starting to think this is an obsession to have 2 people removed and 'scapegoating' them for poor team performances. Nothing more, nothing less

Bottom line is the performances on the park have been poor for a number of years now. This Club under the stewardmanship of Stuart Brown has gone downhill. How many managers has this man appointed and then fired a few of them after giving them new contracts. ? 

The Bottom Line is the BUCK STOPS AT STUART BROWN AS CHAIRMAN. 

[headthebaw]

I've really got mixed feelings. It's very difficult for anyone not directly involved with the club at any level to come to a decision on the best way forward. Yes, we are all hacked off at the lack of success on the pitch and the Club Board have to accept some of the blame for this. But I am unhappy with the proposal to remove Stuart Brown. I believe that he has a plan to step down soon and hopefully a succession plan is in place to ensure a smooth transition. I think the resolution to remove him is short sighted and could do more harm than good.

[BinoBalls]

59 minutes ago, rhliston said:

Bottom line is the performances on the park have been poor for a number of years now. This Club under the stewardmanship of Stuart Brown has gone downhill. How many managers has this man appointed and then fired a few of them after giving them new contracts. ? 

The Bottom Line is the BUCK STOPS AT STUART BROWN AS CHAIRMAN. 

It may surprise you but I agree with all of that. He’s presided over a series of poor appointments and stuck with literally all of them for far too long. Several trust members — old and new — have said he’s unwilling to share information or treat the Trust board with respect.
 

He is by all accounts a nice guy and pours a lot into the job for no reward but I wouldn’t cry if he left and we got someone younger with new ideas into the role. I’m on the fence with Mr Brown. 

My issue is entirely the way you’re going about it. We are now left with “whoever the trust can find at very short notice” and hope they’re willing and able to replace him and know what to do. There’s so many things go into running a football club. We could have done this in a much smarter way than just sacking him & Daly and triggering other resignations which ironically will probably make us even worse on the field than we are right now.
 

A more patient approach would have got your resolution a lot more votes. But you won’t listen. 

[rhliston]

37 minutes ago, BinoBalls said:

It may surprise you but I agree with all of that. He’s presided over a series of poor appointments and stuck with literally all of them for far too long. Several trust members — old and new — have said he’s unwilling to share information or treat the Trust board with respect.
 

He is by all accounts a nice guy and pours a lot into the job for no reward but I wouldn’t cry if he left and we got someone younger with new ideas into the role. I’m on the fence with Mr Brown. 

My issue is entirely the way you’re going about it. We are now left with “whoever the trust can find at very short notice” and hope they’re willing and able to replace him and know what to do. There’s so many things go into running a football club. We could have done this in a much smarter way than just sacking him & Daly and triggering other resignations which ironically will probably make us even worse on the field than we are right now.
 

A more patient approach would have got your resolution a lot more votes. But you won’t listen. 

Problem is where is this patient approach coming from. ? The Trust Board seemed to me be unwilling to act and from what I gathered from posts by a former chair of the Trust Board, Steve Kaney he resigned after trying to get him to cooperate with the Trust. So where to you go from their ? 

[gmca]

2 hours ago, AlbionMan said:

 No doubt the team's abysmal season has contributed to the dissatisfaction, but it's very far from that, What did start as private member's motion for the Trust AGM has forced trust members to think that after 5 years of hanging on with the 'devil you know' this may not be the case. There have been several discussions on the supporters' bus along the lines of 'how can he be got rid of'. There are better devils around.

After the departure of the old trust board 5 years ago, its replacement was over conciliatory in attempting to restore calm to the club. This merely paved the way for the executive committee to further marginalise the Trust Board and destroy any balance in the club structure. The executive committee's continued actions would indicate they do not even acknowledge that they represent a subsidiary of the Trust and are accountable to its members through the Trust Board. 

I hope, that if anything this furore will bring the Trust Board's mind to bear on the adoption of protocols under which the executive committee will have the limits of their responsibility set for the day to day running of the club's operating and the Trust Board's level of authority as the principal to scrutinise their subsidiary's activities. Whoever the individuals are, roles, responsibility, accountability and authority need to be clearly set out and followed.

 

 

 

Decent post Albion Man.

I agree entirely with the bolded part, and wondered if that had been part of the problem. If the respective roles and responsibilities have not been clear or adhered to, and/.or the protocols you set out have not been in place, that would suggest a level of incompetence that concerns me.

[Eric's Cantina]

wrong thread

Edited March 28, 2022 by Eric's Cantina

[AlbionMan]

13 hours ago, gmca said:

Decent post Albion Man.

I agree entirely with the bolded part, and wondered if that had been part of the problem. If the respective roles and responsibilities have not been clear or adhered to, and/.or the protocols you set out have not been in place, that would suggest a level of incompetence that concerns me.

When the club was bought and the Trust Board was setting up the executive everyone was pals in the new situation, and a divergence of opinion between the two bodies was not foreseen,  which by stages has led us to this, partly by the Trust Board's failure to act earlier, partly by the executive's manoeuvring.

For the past few years the chief operating officer and chairman has banged a drum claiming fan ownership doesn't work. Fan ownership by itself is neither a good or bad thing. However, in the case of Stirling Albion, it can't work as the "fans" running the club on the executive do not believe in fan ownership and have been actively trying to change our status. Thanks to the removal, by the chairman, from the executive and company board of every dissenting voice none of the "fans" currently running the club believe in fan ownership.

An individual with any integrity would have resigned his membership of the trust and stood down from his appointments when he found he no longer supported the aims and objectives of Stirling Albion Supporters' Society. That individual however, would not be our chief operating officer and chairman.

[cowdenbeath]

As an outsider to this why did the trust set up a separate board to run the club and not just the trust board themselves.

[AlbionMan]

21 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said:

As an outsider to this why did the trust set up a separate board to run the club and not just the trust board themselves.

At the time it must have made sense to have an executive committee running the day to day operating of the subsidiary and a Trust taking an arm's length role as the owner.

[gmca]

3 hours ago, AlbionMan said:

When the club was bought and the Trust Board was setting up the executive everyone was pals in the new situation, and a divergence of opinion between the two bodies was not foreseen,  which by stages has led us to this, partly by the Trust Board's failure to act earlier, partly by the executive's manoeuvring.

For the past few years the chief operating officer and chairman has banged a drum claiming fan ownership doesn't work. Fan ownership by itself is neither a good or bad thing. However, in the case of Stirling Albion, it can't work as the "fans" running the club on the executive do not believe in fan ownership and have been actively trying to change our status. Thanks to the removal, by the chairman, from the executive and company board of every dissenting voice none of the "fans" currently running the club believe in fan ownership.

An individual with any integrity would have resigned his membership of the trust and stood down from his appointments when he found he no longer supported the aims and objectives of Stirling Albion Supporters' Society. That individual however, would not be our chief operating officer and chairman.

Sounds like we've reached an impasse.

If the Trust Board feel the working relationship with some or all of the executive board has broken down, is there not some requirement for the directors of the executive to put themselves up for re-election every so often (think it's every 3 years for limited companies), allowing them to be removed that way by the shareholders, presumably the Trust members in our case. I did wonder why Rhilston put forward his resolution for removal if there was already a mechanism in place.

I seem to remember there was talk of possibly changing the constitution following John Neil's aborted attempt to inject funds a few years back. I assume we're still in a position where we aren't legally allowed to accept outside funding If we were, that might satisfy our current executive in accepting a sort of hybrid fan ownership model. Apologies if I'm way off the mark and/or covering old ground.

It seems to me that something fairly drastic needs to happen for things to work more smoothly behind the scenes. Perhaps Rhilston's resolution proposal to merge the Trust and Executive Boards is the way to go. 

[Binos]

2 hours ago, gmca said:

Sounds like we've reached an impasse.

If the Trust Board feel the working relationship with some or all of the executive board has broken down, is there not some requirement for the directors of the executive to put themselves up for re-election every so often (think it's every 3 years for limited companies), allowing them to be removed that way by the shareholders, presumably the Trust members in our case. I did wonder why Rhilston put forward his resolution for removal if there was already a mechanism in place.

I seem to remember there was talk of possibly changing the constitution following John Neil's aborted attempt to inject funds a few years back. I assume we're still in a position where we aren't legally allowed to accept outside funding If we were, that might satisfy our current executive in accepting a sort of hybrid fan ownership model. Apologies if I'm way off the mark and/or covering old ground.

It seems to me that something fairly drastic needs to happen for things to work more smoothly behind the scenes. Perhaps Rhilston's resolution proposal to merge the Trust and Executive Boards is the way to go. 

And of course this is not the first time this has happened 

The last time the entire trust board resigned and here we are again 

Stuart should have resigned the last time for a fresh start for all

[Flybhoy]

On 28/03/2022 at 17:08, rhliston said:

I have explained this before, perhaps you should go back and read what I have said. 

I've read what you have said here, and on the various social media channels connected to the club, officially and unofficially, and I have reached the conclusion you are an absolute weapon mate.

[rhliston]

10 hours ago, Flybhoy said:

I've read what you have said here, and on the various social media channels connected to the club, officially and unofficially, and I have reached the conclusion you are an absolute weapon mate.

Well that`s quite a statement coming from a Celtic Supporter. Have you ever been to Forthbank to support the Albion ? Do you have a season ticket at Forthbank or is it Parkhead ? 

Are you a member of the Supporters Trust of this Club  like me ? Have you been a supporter of over 40 years of this Club ? Are you a Shareholder in the Club like me. ? 

If the answer to those questions is NO then why are you on this site talking about the Albion, ?  Are things that boring on the Celtic sites that you  come on here to give us your immense knowledge ? 

[Mattie1880]

47 minutes ago, rhliston said:

Well that`s quite a statement coming from a Celtic Supporter. Have you ever been to Forthbank to support the Albion ? Do you have a season ticket at Forthbank or is it Parkhead ? 

Are you a member of the Supporters Trust of this Club  like me ? Have you been a supporter of over 40 years of this Club ? Are you a Shareholder in the Club like me. ? 

If the answer to those questions is NO then why are you on this site talking about the Albion, ?  Are things that boring on the Celtic sites that you  come on here to give us your immense knowledge ? 

Doesn’t take someone to follow the Albion every week to realise that you have put forward a resolution that could absolutely cripple the club. 
 

I think most people think Stuart brown should be removed. Due to his stewardship of years of failure but more importantly due to his awful relationship with the trust. If this club is going to properly move forward, the two boards need to work together.

However, voting to sack a man, who is not only the chairman but someone who runs every bit of the day to day runnings of the club, Is suicide. Who is going to clean the kits? Who is going to book the team bus? Who is going to decide the managers budget? Who is going to organise volunteers for turnstiles on matchdays? 
 

Not only this, but who in their right mind is going to vote to remove him with no one lined up to replace him? How will replacing him work? Will the trust pick one of their pals? And no I won’t accept your pathetic attempt of an answer ‘that is for the owners to decide’
 

You may not be the source of the problem Rliston, but you have thrown petrol on the fire.

[Boris Badenov]

22 hours ago, AlbionMan said:

When the club was bought and the Trust Board was setting up the executive everyone was pals in the new situation, and a divergence of opinion between the two bodies was not foreseen,  which by stages has led us to this, partly by the Trust Board's failure to act earlier, partly by the executive's manoeuvring.

For the past few years the chief operating officer and chairman has banged a drum claiming fan ownership doesn't work. Fan ownership by itself is neither a good or bad thing. However, in the case of Stirling Albion, it can't work as the "fans" running the club on the executive do not believe in fan ownership and have been actively trying to change our status. Thanks to the removal, by the chairman, from the executive and company board of every dissenting voice none of the "fans" currently running the club believe in fan ownership.

An individual with any integrity would have resigned his membership of the trust and stood down from his appointments when he found he no longer supported the aims and objectives of Stirling Albion Supporters' Society. That individual however, would not be our chief operating officer and chairman.

Do you know for a fact that the chairman and his fellow directors are against fan ownership.

If they are, its to their advantage to have all this nonsense going on in the background. They can turn round and say the lack of success is down to an unreasonable Trust holding them back.

I still say,  get round the table. If not its not going to end well. It should never be about any individual, it should be about the Club.

[BB_Bino]

Doesn’t take someone to follow the Albion every week to realise that you have put forward a resolution that could absolutely cripple the club. 
 
I think most people think Stuart brown should be removed. Due to his stewardship of years of failure but more importantly due to his awful relationship with the trust. If this club is going to properly move forward, the two boards need to work together.
However, voting to sack a man, who is not only the chairman but someone who runs every bit of the day to day runnings of the club, Is suicide. Who is going to clean the kits? Who is going to book the team bus? Who is going to decide the managers budget? Who is going to organise volunteers for turnstiles on matchdays? 
 
Not only this, but who in their right mind is going to vote to remove him with no one lined up to replace him? How will replacing him work? Will the trust pick one of their pals? And no I won’t accept your pathetic attempt of an answer ‘that is for the owners to decide’
 
You may not be the source of the problem Rliston, but you have thrown petrol on the fire.

My hunch, and it is just a hunch, is that people are working behind the scenes and there are already people in place to fulfil such roles. They’ll probably not put their head above the parapet just now, or until they know for certain they can win, but something is going on as people are desperately quiet.

Some people have accused Rliston of being a mouthpiece for others, maybe he is, maybe he isn’t, but if he is it would come as no surprise and if he isn’t, and he is indeed a genuine fan that submitted a notion to the Trust board like he claims, then he has just played into the hands of a Trust board that everyone suspects, wants the Exc committee removed anyway.

We’ll find out in time what the plan is, but I do not believe for 1 minute that everyone is sitting around twiddling their thumbs, a plan is being engineered and being put in place out of sight, we’re just not privy to all the information just yet, but one day we will.

I’m old enough and bold enough to know that these things don’t just happen, something is going on and people will be waiting in the wings.

[rhliston]

1 hour ago, BB_Bino said:

 

My hunch, and it is just a hunch, is that people are working behind the scenes and there are already people in place to fulfil such roles. They’ll probably not put their head above the parapet just now, or until they know for certain they can win, but something is going on as people are desperately quiet.

Some people have accused Rliston of being a mouthpiece for others, maybe he is, maybe he isn’t, but if he is it would come as no surprise and if he isn’t, and he is indeed a genuine fan that submitted a notion to the Trust board like he claims, then he has just played into the hands of a Trust board that everyone suspects, wants the Exc committee removed anyway.

We’ll find out in time what the plan is, but I do not believe for 1 minute that everyone is sitting around twiddling their thumbs, a plan is being engineered and being put in place out of sight, we’re just not privy to all the information just yet, but one day we will.

I’m old enough and bold enough to know that these things don’t just happen, something is going on and people will be waiting in the wings.

 

I shall state for the numerous time, I am NO mouthpiece for anybody, I am a fan with over 40 years of  following this club. Given the decline of this Club under Stuart Brown I chose to put forward 3 resolutions to the Trust AGM. 

My intentions were very clear on 2 of them to remove 2 men from the Club Board. My other resolution was to have both Boards merge into one. 

At the end of the day it is up to Trust members to either vote Yes or No to these resolutions. Clearly from the shitstorm that has been created, (Personal Statements on the Club Website by Colin Rowley, Voting Iregularities which prompted the Trust Board to call in the Police and a statement from the Stirling Albion Junior Academy) that its clear that their is a problem with the way this club is run. We appear to have a situation in which the owners of the Club the Supporters Trust and those voted by   Trust Members to run the Supporters Trust, the Trust Board appear to have NO say. The Club Board appears to have stuck 2 fingers up at the owners of the Club. 

This problem NEEDS to be fixed ASAP. Clearly it needs both the Club Board and the Trust Board to sit round the table and thrash out a solution. Until that happens nothing is going to change. 

[Mattie1880]

2 hours ago, BB_Bino said:

 

My hunch, and it is just a hunch, is that people are working behind the scenes and there are already people in place to fulfil such roles. They’ll probably not put their head above the parapet just now, or until they know for certain they can win, but something is going on as people are desperately quiet.

 

 

If that is the case and they have decided on a replacement. Every member of the trust, should be made aware of who it is before this vote takes place.