A Message to All Stirling Albion Trust Members

[rhliston]

4 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

This situation and  entire chain of events was kicked off by YOU, not the, club board.

The 73 members you dismiss as a gang, has virtually every volunteer and employee of the club within it,  you stupid man.

 Everybody from the ladies who work the turnstiles, the hospitality team, through to the club doctor has signed up .

 

The Trust board has had to be forced by the membership to hold a vote, to counter an attempted coup led by them and a handful of shareholders.  You might see Lions when you look at Kim Jong Thompson, Emslie, Allardyce and the rest of them.  I just see  DINNER.

Once again its NOT the Club Boards fault  When are you going to realise that this situation is the Club Boards doing, if you ignore the OWNERS of the Club isn`t obvious that they are going to take action you silly man. 

As for the gang of 73, many of whom have shown no interest in joining the Trust over the years they suddenly develop an interest to join just when they friends on the Club Board are in trouble. They made a mess of the last resolution they put forward wanting to get rid of the Trust Board without any reasons being given and now they try to play the Democracy card. Lets hope the other Trust members see it for what it is an attempt by the clique to cling onto power no matter what the cost to the Club. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

Stirling Hamlet FC

[RateofKnots]

4 hours ago, rhliston said:

Once again its NOT the Club Boards fault  When are you going to realise that this situation is the Club Boards doing, if you ignore the OWNERS of the Club isn`t obvious that they are going to take action you silly man. 

As for the gang of 73, many of whom have shown no interest in joining the Trust over the years they suddenly develop an interest to join just when they friends on the Club Board are in trouble. They made a mess of the last resolution they put forward wanting to get rid of the Trust Board without any reasons being given and now they try to play the Democracy card. Lets hope the other Trust members see it for what it is an attempt by the clique to cling onto power no matter what the cost to the Club. 

I mean, he is right, the reason the club board have done this is a direct consequence of your resolutions.

[rhliston]

3 hours ago, RateofKnots said:

I mean, he is right, the reason the club board have done this is a direct consequence of your resolutions.

Have to correct you on this, but its nothing to do with my resolution. Before my resolution was received by the Trust Board, 2 Club Directors Stuart Brown and John Daily both refused to meet with the Trust Board at a pre arranged meeting to discuss things. Their has been rumblings between both Boards for a couple of years. now. I wont go into the history but its well documented and well known to most Albion fans. 

What then followed was an attempt by the Club Board with help from the gang of 74 (Friends of the Club Board who decided to join the Trust on mass to influence the voting at the AGM, despite many of them not being previous members of the Trust) solution signed by every member of the Club Board. 

After it was discovered by the Trust some issues with voting by one individual linked to the Club Board, I`m sure most Albion fans know who I am talking about. The Trust cancelled the AGM and reported the matter to the Police. 

That lead to the gang of 74 putting forward their own resolution to remove the ENTIRE Trust Board without a reason being given. This resolution was rejected by the Trust Board as it did not comply with the rules laid down in the Trust Constitution. 

A resolution signed by all the Club Board. I could go on and on with other facts but I feel I would bore you. 

So as I have already stated it was not my resolution was kicked this. I hope I have not bored you with the facts its long and messy. 

[RateofKnots]

59 minutes ago, rhliston said:

Have to correct you on this, but its nothing to do with my resolution. Before my resolution was received by the Trust Board, 2 Club Directors Stuart Brown and John Daily both refused to meet with the Trust Board at a pre arranged meeting to discuss things. Their has been rumblings between both Boards for a couple of years. now. I wont go into the history but its well documented and well known to most Albion fans. 

What then followed was an attempt by the Club Board with help from the gang of 74 (Friends of the Club Board who decided to join the Trust on mass to influence the voting at the AGM, despite many of them not being previous members of the Trust) solution signed by every member of the Club Board. 

After it was discovered by the Trust some issues with voting by one individual linked to the Club Board, I`m sure most Albion fans know who I am talking about. The Trust cancelled the AGM and reported the matter to the Police. 

That lead to the gang of 74 putting forward their own resolution to remove the ENTIRE Trust Board without a reason being given. This resolution was rejected by the Trust Board as it did not comply with the rules laid down in the Trust Constitution. 

A resolution signed by all the Club Board. I could go on and on with other facts but I feel I would bore you. 

So as I have already stated it was not my resolution was kicked this. I hope I have not bored you with the facts its long and messy. 

Not bored me in the slightest.

As I've said before, I've no skin in this particular game, but neither side comes out of this looking great IMHO.

[WC Boggs]

12 minutes ago, rhliston said:

Have to correct you on this, but its nothing to do with my resolution. Before my resolution was received by the Trust Board, 2 Club Directors Stuart Brown and John Daily both refused to meet with the Trust Board at a pre arranged meeting to discuss things. Their has been rumblings between both Boards for a couple of years. now. I wont go into the history but its well documented and well known to most Albion fans. 

What then followed was an attempt by the Club Board with help from the gang of 74 (Friends of the Club Board who decided to join the Trust on mass to influence the voting at the AGM, despite many of them not being previous members of the Trust) solution signed by every member of the Club Board. 

After it was discovered by the Trust some issues with voting by one individual linked to the Club Board, I`m sure most Albion fans know who I am talking about. The Trust cancelled the AGM and reported the matter to the Police. 

That lead to the gang of 74 putting forward their own resolution to remove the ENTIRE Trust Board without a reason being given. This resolution was rejected by the Trust Board as it did not comply with the rules laid down in the Trust Constitution. 

A resolution signed by all the Club Board. I could go on and on with other facts but I feel I would bore you. 

So as I have already stated it was not my resolution was kicked this. I hope I have not bored you with the facts its long and messy. 

 

8 hours ago, rhliston said:

Once again its NOT the Club Boards fault  When are you going to realise that this situation is the Club Boards doing, if you ignore the OWNERS of the Club isn`t obvious that they are going to take action you silly man. 

As for the gang of 73, many of whom have shown no interest in joining the Trust over the years they suddenly develop an interest to join just when they friends on the Club Board are in trouble. They made a mess of the last resolution they put forward wanting to get rid of the Trust Board without any reasons being given and now they try to play the Democracy card. Lets hope the other Trust members see it for what it is an attempt by the clique to cling onto power no matter what the cost to the Club. 

I always find it fascinating that you repeatedly use caps for emphasis when typing the word OWNERS. Is that to make yourself feel more important?  Or to rub it in how little importance you attach to any mere ordinary member?  You revel in seeing the Club dragged through the gutter, based on half truths fed by the Trust board. Half truth expanded into full on allegations by their supporters and chucked around social media like confetti.  Half truths that turn into outright lies. Lies like "money was removed from the club to an account that has nothing to do with the club."  The social media coward's way of implying fraud or embezzlement  hoping to further trash the club's reputation. Why?  Why claim money was spent illicitly with no evidence it was ever spent.?  Why claim the account money was lodged in, had nothing to do with the club, when they knew the club controlled it and the account originated from the former owners of the club?  

WHY???  Because the trust board feeds  half truths with bugger all concern what ends up flying around social media or ultimately in the press.  WHY???  Because they think it helps justify a coup d' etat and to hell with the reputation damage.  It's got so out of hand and so normalized for these trust board fed malcontents, that you've even got Redwatch suggesting the SPFL investigate his own club. Why?  Because he heard Elgin were under investigation for allegedly fielding an ineligible player.  The insanity of that doesn't even cross his mind.  Any excuse to trash Stirling Albion in public and to hell with the damage. How poisonous against your own club do you have to be to suggest shit like that?  How fucked up do you have to be to revel in it?   

As for you rhilston. Don't under rate the achievements of just 2 of you.  You've kicked off a civil war.   A  coup d' etat for executive power by a Trust board that has no constitutional right to executive powers.  A trash the club's reputation campaign that you personally have revelled in and contributed to.  Last, a final forced  confrontation between the membership and the men who binned democracy.  Don't be shy, step up on July 26th and take a bow for all you set in motion.

[WC Boggs]

13 minutes ago, RateofKnots said:

Not bored me in the slightest.

As I've said before, I've no skin in this particular game, but neither side comes out of this looking great IMHO.

No neither side does come out of it untarnished. There's no getting away from that.  Both sides are now painted in corners they can't back out of too.  There was only ever one way to bring all this to a conclusion and move on and it wasn't a coup of executive functions  by the Trust board. Supported by a handful of cooperative shareholders who surprise surprise, are Trust board nominees for an interim board.  Salaried or not?  Wouldn't it be nice to be told.  

There always had to be a debate and a vote. It shouldn't have taken this long to get it and it shouldn't have to have been forced out of unwilling Trust board paws.   This time we need to make sure it is a conclusion.  No endless replays.  Executive functions do not exist to be usurped, or sought chunks of by Trust board members. Attempts to do this wrapped up in packaging of accountability and transparency with please eat me on it need to stop.  It's long past time any Trust board pulling that crap was automatically turfed out and permanently kept out.  

[WC Boggs]

10 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Stirling Hamlet FC

Alas poor rhliston. I knew him well.  C'est la vie said the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell.

[rhliston]

1 hour ago, WC Boggs said:

 

I always find it fascinating that you repeatedly use caps for emphasis when typing the word OWNERS. Is that to make yourself feel more important?  Or to rub it in how little importance you attach to any mere ordinary member?  You revel in seeing the Club dragged through the gutter, based on half truths fed by the Trust board. Half truth expanded into full on allegations by their supporters and chucked around social media like confetti.  Half truths that turn into outright lies. Lies like "money was removed from the club to an account that has nothing to do with the club."  The social media coward's way of implying fraud or embezzlement  hoping to further trash the club's reputation. Why?  Why claim money was spent illicitly with no evidence it was ever spent.?  Why claim the account money was lodged in, had nothing to do with the club, when they knew the club controlled it and the account originated from the former owners of the club?  

WHY???  Because the trust board feeds  half truths with bugger all concern what ends up flying around social media or ultimately in the press.  WHY???  Because they think it helps justify a coup d' etat and to hell with the reputation damage.  It's got so out of hand and so normalized for these trust board fed malcontents, that you've even got Redwatch suggesting the SPFL investigate his own club. Why?  Because he heard Elgin were under investigation for allegedly fielding an ineligible player.  The insanity of that doesn't even cross his mind.  Any excuse to trash Stirling Albion in public and to hell with the damage. How poisonous against your own club do you have to be to suggest shit like that?  How fucked up do you have to be to revel in it?   

As for you rhilston. Don't under rate the achievements of just 2 of you.  You've kicked off a civil war.   A  coup d' etat for executive power by a Trust board that has no constitutional right to executive powers.  A trash the club's reputation campaign that you personally have revelled in and contributed to.  Last, a final forced  confrontation between the membership and the men who binned democracy.  Don't be shy, step up on July 26th and take a bow for all you set in motion.

Well I am a shareholder as well as a member of the Trust, so I am an owner as well but don`t have any many shares as the Supporters Trust. Money ? what are you talking about man, Never mentioned Money must be confused and mixing me up with someone else posting on here. Your poor brain has got the facts confused like most of the posts you regularly post on here full of INACCURACIES. 

Didn`t kick off any Civil War so you claim, I`m quite sure the Club Board have done more than enough by themselves  to point the blame to 2 Trust Members who are concerned the way this Club is being run. Maybe if the Club Board had screwed the nut and talked to the OWNERS instead of refusing to meet them and trying unsuccessfully to get rid of them by their gang of 74, then they might have not been in this situation NOW. ISN`T THAT A FACT. 

[WC Boggs]

17 minutes ago, rhliston said:

 Maybe if the Club Board had screwed the nut and talked to the OWNERS instead of refusing to meet them and trying unsuccessfully to get rid of them by their gang of 74, then they might have not been in this situation NOW. ISN`T THAT A FACT. 

Naw that ISN'T A FACT.  The board refused to sit down at 1. ONE meeting due to member Doyle's behaviour and presence.. Do you understand the meaning of the word and number ONE. 

[WC Boggs]

1 minute ago, WC Boggs said:

Naw that ISN'T A FACT.  The board refused to sit down at 1. ONE meeting due to member Doyle's behaviour and presence.. Do you understand the meaning of the word and number ONE. 

Doyle resigned shortly after. In fact there were meetings after that. Meetings where the Trust board were pushing to get involved in manager selection and firing. Pushing without any consent from their members. Pushing to increase their own remit under the old Thompson pretexts of accountability and transparency.  

IN FACT. The club board conceded to the Trust board fearing another board war if they didn't.  A deal was made under pressure. A deal the Trust board has never revealed to it's members. A deal that went out the window in mere day's,  when Liston and Dick's resolution to remove the chairman went in. That's where making concessions to the Trust board gets the club board. Absolutely no peace at all.  The club board tried to arrange  meetings with the Trust board, but chairman Emslie didn't bother his arse answering the emails. 

It wasn't the club board refusing to speak with the representatives of the owners. It was the other way around.  The Trust taking the huff, because the club board withdrew their agreement to concessions, in the belief that the Trust board had instigated Liston's move.  That's how we got to the Trust board crying because a board member had a go at one of them using official channels.

To read the Trust board version of that event, you have to believe that a board member just woke up one morning and thought, by Jove. What a scrumptious day for having a go at Emslie for absolutely no reason at all.  That's the level of  context absent guff the Trust board  constantly churns out.    They had a go at Emslie because HE was the one refusing to communicate.  The club board repeatedly tried to arrange meetings with your representatives, but YOUR REPRESENTATIVES wouldn't show up on your behalf. All the way through, the Trust board have fermented a false narrative that the club board wouldn't talk and concealed their own refusal to talk. On the 26th, show up and join me for dinner.  I'm having an order of stuffed roast Trust board myself.  

[Flybhoy]

14 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Stirling Hamlet FC

Eminem loves the Binos 

[Sergeant Wilson]

11 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

 by Jove. What a scrumptious day for having a go at Emslie for absolutely no reason at all. 

 

[Red Watch]

12 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

Doyle resigned shortly after. In fact there were meetings after that. Meetings where the Trust board were pushing to get involved in manager selection and firing. Pushing without any consent from their members. Pushing to increase their own remit under the old Thompson pretexts of accountability and transparency.  

IN FACT. The club board conceded to the Trust board fearing another board war if they didn't.  A deal was made under pressure. A deal the Trust board has never revealed to it's members. A deal that went out the window in mere day's,  when Liston and Dick's resolution to remove the chairman went in. That's where making concessions to the Trust board gets the club board. Absolutely no peace at all.  The club board tried to arrange  meetings with the Trust board, but chairman Emslie didn't bother his arse answering the emails. 

It wasn't the club board refusing to speak with the representatives of the owners. It was the other way around.  The Trust taking the huff, because the club board withdrew their agreement to concessions, in the belief that the Trust board had instigated Liston's move.  That's how we got to the Trust board crying because a board member had a go at one of them using official channels.

To read the Trust board version of that event, you have to believe that a board member just woke up one morning and thought, by Jove. What a scrumptious day for having a go at Emslie for absolutely no reason at all.  That's the level of  context absent guff the Trust board  constantly churns out.    They had a go at Emslie because HE was the one refusing to communicate.  The club board repeatedly tried to arrange meetings with your representatives, but YOUR REPRESENTATIVES wouldn't show up on your behalf. All the way through, the Trust board have fermented a false narrative that the club board wouldn't talk and concealed their own refusal to talk. On the 26th, show up and join me for dinner.  I'm having an order of stuffed roast Trust board myself.  

How long have you suffered from verbal diarrhoea?  Has your GP given you any medication for it? 

[WC Boggs]

14 minutes ago, Red Watch said:

How long have you suffered from verbal diarrhoea?  Has your GP given you any medication for it? 

Oh look it's the ding dong who tries to think up dumb reasons for the SPFL to investigate his own club.  Did someone  summon you with a light shone on the sky?  Look, look  up there ............  it's  ..........it's .........  Yes .........it's the   TWAT SIGNAL

[vikingTON]

On 13/07/2022 at 04:08, WC Boggs said:

The 73 members you dismiss as a gang, has virtually every volunteer and employee of the club within it,  you stupid man.

 Everybody from the ladies who work the turnstiles, the hospitality team, through to the club doctor has signed up.

...all under the same email account to show just how independent their view really was. 

[WC Boggs]

1 minute ago, virginton said:

...all under the same email account to show just how independent their view really was. 

No they were not smart ass.  Go fuckin lie to your own  club's supporters.

[Burnsythebinman]

as much as i thought this was interesting to begin with, its getting embarassing now. are you 2 or 3 not better bickering elsewhere? as funny as it was to start with, i'm actual starting to feel sorry for the club and fans

[Dunning1874]

On 09/07/2022 at 17:50, WC Boggs said:

Typical you. I ask you to enlighten me on how the account was located and proof it isn't true and you duck it. The truth being you know f**k all beyond what these lying board hunters are feeding people. They say the account doesn't belong to the club, yet neither they or you can say who it does belong to, or who set it up, or when.  Go on, you're so informed, tell me who's account that is. That should be  easy for somebody as well informed as the great you. 

 

On 09/07/2022 at 12:17, WC Boggs said:

The number of allegations you shit out without context or evidence is laughable  "the deliberate removal of £4000 of club money to an account that is not a club account."   Context. What is the name of the account?  Who can access the account? Who set the account up and when?  That's context. Without context there's just a bunch of man babies trying to make a gotcha out of nothing. Money was deposited in an account club officials have control of. It is a total lie to claim that is not a club account. To claim it is not you require proof that someone other than club officials control it and of course you don't have that because it doesn't exist. Go on, tell the plebs who originally set the account in question up. Or do I have to do it?

It's a bit rich to go off on one demanding proof of an issue, deriding anyone with an alternative view of it as "man babies" who "know f**k all" having "hysterical hissy fits", when you have yourself made factual statements on that issue while providing no proof of them.

On 09/07/2022 at 01:47, WC Boggs said:

What I do know is that the deposited money was plain to see in the audited accounts.

This is a statement of fact on your part, with the only reasonable interpretation of it being that you have seen the audited accounts yourself and could see this money plainly within them. And yet, you've later said that you know nothing about the accounts, haven't seen them and are just making assumptions.

I have no dog in this fight, merely an interested observer as someone whose club is also fan owned with the football club and fan organisation having their own boards, and looking for lessons to learn that would stop things ever deteriorating to the mess Stirling are in off the park right now. I have absolutely no idea of the truth of any allegations or counter-allegations flying around from both sides and I'm therefore totally incapable of spotting any lies or hidden agendas, but even with that lack of background knowledge it's still pretty evident who's guilty of hypocrisy and routinely needing to backtrack or contradict themselves in this thread.

[WC Boggs]

2 hours ago, Dunning1874 said:

 

It's a bit rich to go off on one demanding proof of an issue, deriding anyone with an alternative view of it as "man babies" who "know f**k all" having "hysterical hissy fits", when you have yourself made factual statements on that issue while providing no proof of them.

This is a statement of fact on your part, with the only reasonable interpretation of it being that you have seen the audited accounts yourself and could see this money plainly within them. And yet, you've later said that you know nothing about the accounts, haven't seen them and are just making assumptions.

I have no dog in this fight, merely an interested observer as someone whose club is also fan owned with the football club and fan organisation having their own boards, and looking for lessons to learn that would stop things ever deteriorating to the mess Stirling are in off the park right now. I have absolutely no idea of the truth of any allegations or counter-allegations flying around from both sides and I'm therefore totally incapable of spotting any lies or hidden agendas, but even with that lack of background knowledge it's still pretty evident who's guilty of hypocrisy and routinely needing to backtrack or contradict themselves in this thread.

There are times when things you thought or assumed to be true, are shown not to be and you have to accept that.  I'll admit to an error when I know it was one.  As I have explained before, I made that particular error knowing that  this matter arose after  the Trust board had demanded to examine the audited accounts. I was wrong that it must have been plain to see in there, but that was hardly an outlandish assumption to make in those circumstances.  I assumed that was the source of this matter arising. That was apparently not the case.  I acknowledge my errors.  It's a pity those with no dog in the fight, seem to have no problem with those who won't.  EG, claims that money was removed from the club with no evidence of that. Claims that the account in question had no connection with the club, when that is not true.  Not one of those making those claims making a retraction, or able to supply any evidence that their claims were true.