Jump to content

A Message to All Stirling Albion Trust Members


Recommended Posts

Who in their right mind would (after reading this thread) would put themselves up for it?


Well after what I believe was said at the meeting last night, we’re soon to find out!! My guess, current TB members and maybe a few blasts from the past.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious to see how the prospective chairperson will - ahead of a vote - demonstrate their ability to hire a manager who will get us promoted, since that seems to be the criteria you live or die by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BazMac said:

Curious to see how the prospective chairperson will - ahead of a vote - demonstrate their ability to hire a manager who will get us promoted, since that seems to be the criteria you live or die by.

I think that’s the main gripe fans have and the best chairman in the world is always going to struggle to keep fans happy if it’s 10+ years of perceived underachievement. 

However where Mr Brown also hasn’t helped himself is the long queue of people alleging he can be difficult to work with, certainly from the perspective of several people who have worked on the Trust (past and present). The paradox is that he is by accounts a very nice guy.

Any chairman of any organisation needs to be able to manage their main stakeholders to keep them happy. In our case it’s only the Trust. You’d think this wouldn’t be too difficult but apparently it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BB_Bino said:

 


Well after what I believe was said at the meeting last night, we’re soon to find out!! My guess, current TB members and maybe a few blasts from the past.

 

We shall have to wait and see what the Trust Board is planning. You may be right or you may be wrong, but one things for certain this nonsense that the Club Board has refused to co-operate with the Trust Board and owners of the Club has to be rectified asap. If this is the way to go then so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BinoBalls said:

I think that’s the main gripe fans have and the best chairman in the world is always going to struggle to keep fans happy if it’s 10+ years of perceived underachievement. 

However where Mr Brown also hasn’t helped himself is the long queue of people alleging he can be difficult to work with, certainly from the perspective of several people who have worked on the Trust (past and present). The paradox is that he is by accounts a very nice guy.

Any chairman of any organisation needs to be able to manage their main stakeholders to keep them happy. In our case it’s only the Trust. You’d think this wouldn’t be too difficult but apparently it is. 

Well he has and that`s been the problem for a number of years now. The actions the Trust Board are planning to take if they come to fruition would solve this problem once and for all. This situation has to stop and if its the only way forward then so be it. Its ridiculous that this nonsense has been allowed to carry on for so long. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We shall have to wait and see what the Trust Board is planning. You may be right or you may be wrong, but one things for certain this nonsense that the Club Board has refused to co-operate with the Trust Board and owners of the Club has to be rectified asap. If this is the way to go then so be it. 


I don’t, I have to wait for the official announcement, but you, I believe that you know fine well what the Trust board have planned and you know exactly who is waiting in the wings to come onto an “interim board”, of that I have no doubt.

You can say you don’t, you can say the buzz words like “we’ll wait to see who shows an interest”, but I don’t buy it and I don’t believe you.

There has been a plan in place for months, The Trust may have had to change tact at times but we’re now getting to the nitty gritty of it. Concerned supporters like me, we just have to sit back and wait for the official announcement and have absolutely no concerns answered by anyone in the know.

I’m not getting into tit for tat arguments on P&B because like every other every day supporter, I don’t know what the hell is going on, I have no inside knowledge, no inside info, no pal telling me the stories, hence why I have stayed out of joining in, but you are convincing no-one when you say you don’t know what the plan is!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BB_Bino said:

 


I don’t, I have to wait for the official announcement, but you, I believe that you know fine well what the Trust board have planned and you know exactly who is waiting in the wings to come onto an “interim board”, of that I have no doubt.

You can say you don’t, you can say the buzz words like “we’ll wait to see who shows an interest”, but I don’t buy it and I don’t believe you.

There has been a plan in place for months, The Trust may have had to change tact at times but we’re now getting to the nitty gritty of it. Concerned supporters like me, we just have to sit back and wait for the official announcement and have absolutely no concerns answered by anyone in the know.

I’m not getting into tit for tat arguments on P&B because like every other every day supporter, I don’t know what the hell is going on, I have no inside knowledge, no inside info, no pal telling me the stories, hence why I have stayed out of joining in, but you are convincing no-one when you say you don’t know what the plan is!

 

this is exactly my position. One thing I will say though, I need to be convinced that anyone stepping forward to replace SB has the experience and ability to do the job better. If not, carry on Mr Brown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BB_Bino said:

 


I don’t, I have to wait for the official announcement, but you, I believe that you know fine well what the Trust board have planned and you know exactly who is waiting in the wings to come onto an “interim board”, of that I have no doubt.

You can say you don’t, you can say the buzz words like “we’ll wait to see who shows an interest”, but I don’t buy it and I don’t believe you.

There has been a plan in place for months, The Trust may have had to change tact at times but we’re now getting to the nitty gritty of it. Concerned supporters like me, we just have to sit back and wait for the official announcement and have absolutely no concerns answered by anyone in the know.

I’m not getting into tit for tat arguments on P&B because like every other every day supporter, I don’t know what the hell is going on, I have no inside knowledge, no inside info, no pal telling me the stories, hence why I have stayed out of joining in, but you are convincing no-one when you say you don’t know what the plan is!

 

You can believe what you want but as I have stated I DO NOT know who the Trust Board is proposing. Like you I am in the dark, I have my suspicions but that’s all. 
Regarding the Trust Board having a plan in place months ago, it was stated last night that the Trust Board only took action after it was stated by the Club Board that the remaining fixtures could be in jeopardy. They then started the search for replacements.  
That’s the facts, if you don’t believe it fine but it’s the Truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BB_Bino said:

 


I don’t, I have to wait for the official announcement, but you, I believe that you know fine well what the Trust board have planned and you know exactly who is waiting in the wings to come onto an “interim board”, of that I have no doubt.

You can say you don’t, you can say the buzz words like “we’ll wait to see who shows an interest”, but I don’t buy it and I don’t believe you.

There has been a plan in place for months, The Trust may have had to change tact at times but we’re now getting to the nitty gritty of it. Concerned supporters like me, we just have to sit back and wait for the official announcement and have absolutely no concerns answered by anyone in the know.

I’m not getting into tit for tat arguments on P&B because like every other every day supporter, I don’t know what the hell is going on, I have no inside knowledge, no inside info, no pal telling me the stories, hence why I have stayed out of joining in, but you are convincing no-one when you say you don’t know what the plan is!

 

A big concern is how our sponsors will react to this.  After the Trust board decided to tell everyone they had gone to the police, social media was rife with it.  It is hardly surprising that this resulted in the club's reputation getting trashed in the press to the alarm of Prudential.  Police action should never have been made public, before the police had even had a chance to investigate the allegations and verify any law had actually been broken.  In the end our sponsorship was endangered  for a non crime.  This was both grossly irresponsible and incompetent.   Now this!   God knows how our sponsors will react.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

A big concern is how our sponsors will react to this.  After the Trust board decided to tell everyone they had gone to the police, social media was rife with it.  It is hardly surprising that this resulted in the club's reputation getting trashed in the press to the alarm of Prudential.  Police action should never have been made public, before the police had even had a chance to investigate the allegations and verify any law had actually been broken.  In the end our sponsorship was endangered  for a non crime.  This was both grossly irresponsible and incompetent.   Now this!   God knows how our sponsors will react.

Should the chairman not have thought of that before he tried to rig the voting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Binos said:

Should the chairman not have thought of that before he tried to rig the voting?

Agree it was stated by Stuart Brown at the Shareholders meeting that the attempt to remove the Trust Board was a tit for tat for the Trust Board calling the EGM. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, WC Boggs said:

A big concern is how our sponsors will react to this.  After the Trust board decided to tell everyone they had gone to the police, social media was rife with it.  It is hardly surprising that this resulted in the club's reputation getting trashed in the press to the alarm of Prudential.  Police action should never have been made public, before the police had even had a chance to investigate the allegations and verify any law had actually been broken.  In the end our sponsorship was endangered  for a non crime.  This was both grossly irresponsible and incompetent.   Now this!   God knows how our sponsors will react.

The Trust Board had a duty under the terms of its Constitution to take action if it suspected fraud.. or are you suggesting they did nothing and let it go. Clearly their was an attempt to rig this vote. One man voting 50 times ! You of course know who that man was don’t you. 😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Binos said:

Should the chairman not have thought of that before he tried to rig the voting?

The chairman didn't release the information that allegations had been made to the police, the Trust board did.  Don't try to blame Stuart for the Trust board's stupidity.   Encouraging  new members to join a football trust sympathetic to your side of the argument, is not vote rigging under any legal definition.  Vote rigging would be as the Trust board declared their intention to investigate, examples of people voting more than once, didn't consent, or didn't actually exist. They have not come back with a single example of that.  You do not make an allegation to the police public with no evidence to base a case on. That is what they did and that was entirely inappropriate and irresponsible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, rhliston said:

The Trust Board had a duty under the terms of its Constitution to take action if it suspected fraud.. or are you suggesting they did nothing and let it go. Clearly their was an attempt to rig this vote. One man voting 50 times ! You of course know who that man was don’t you. 😀

They had a duty to investigate. Not to announce to the entire membership that they have made it a police matter,  before the police had conducted an investigation and reported back.  When someone has been charged that is when you go public. No one was charged, because nothing criminal had occurred. So they endangered our sponsorship over a non case.

One man did not vote 50 times. That is a  scurrilous and slanderous lie. Multiple votes by 50 registered members were submitted via one email address. I do know who that was. You don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

The chairman didn't release the information that allegations had been made to the police, the Trust board did.  Don't try to blame Stuart for the Trust board's stupidity.   Encouraging  new members to join a football trust sympathetic to your side of the argument, is not vote rigging under any legal definition.  Vote rigging would be as the Trust board declared their intention to investigate, examples of people voting more than once, didn't consent, or didn't actually exist. They have not come back with a single example of that.  You do not make an allegation to the police public with no evidence to base a case on. That is what they did and that was entirely inappropriate and irresponsible.

While I agree that the statement “one man voted 50 times” is bollocks, I don’t think it is at all appropriate for someone senior at the club to recruit 50 new members in order to vote the way they are told. It’s not illegal but sure as hell isn’t a good look and I’m not surprised it’s caused some disgust. Personally don’t see the need to involve the police but escalation is the name of the game for all involved in both sides. 

I don’t agree with Robert Liston but I’d sooner people who had been part of the Trust for the right reasons decided this vote, rather than a bunch of people who have been brought in, fed one side of the story, and asked to vote a certain way.

I question the judgement of whoever at the club thought mass recruitment was a good idea to win the vote. And I speak as someone who is also against the resolutions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BinoBalls said:

I don’t agree with Robert Liston but I’d sooner people who had been part of the Trust for the right reasons decided this vote, rather than a bunch of people who have been brought in, fed one side of the story, and asked to vote a certain way.

I seem to remember it was people connected to the Junior Academy that were signed up?  If so, I think that's different to just asking, say, 50 guys at your local bowling club who have never been to a game to sign up.  If the people at the Junior Academy felt like the current chairman was helping them to prosper then wouldn't it be in their best interest to vote remain (for want of a better phrase).  And, even if they weren't a member of the Trust (nor am I), isn't there just as much at stake for them as there is for your average supporter?

That said, sending all 50 in on one email was poorly judged, and probably to make a point.  It would have been far better if everyone just did it themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, BazMac said:

I seem to remember it was people connected to the Junior Academy that were signed up?  If so, I think that's different to just asking, say, 50 guys at your local bowling club who have never been to a game to sign up.  If the people at the Junior Academy felt like the current chairman was helping them to prosper then wouldn't it be in their best interest to vote remain (for want of a better phrase).  And, even if they weren't a member of the Trust (nor am I), isn't there just as much at stake for them as there is for your average supporter?

That said, sending all 50 in on one email was poorly judged, and probably to make a point.  It would have been far better if everyone just did it themselves.

Fair point that many came from the junior academy… however if you look at the list there’s clusters of several people with the same surname, I’m not convinced they’re all coaches. Think there could be a good few spouses signed up. It doesn’t sit right with me that, say, the wife of a U13 coach gets to join and have a say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, BinoBalls said:

While I agree that the statement “one man voted 50 times” is bollocks, I don’t think it is at all appropriate for someone senior at the club to recruit 50 new members in order to vote the way they are told. It’s not illegal but sure as hell isn’t a good look and I’m not surprised it’s caused some disgust. Personally don’t see the need to involve the police but escalation is the name of the game for all involved in both sides. 

I don’t agree with Robert Liston but I’d sooner people who had been part of the Trust for the right reasons decided this vote, rather than a bunch of people who have been brought in, fed one side of the story, and asked to vote a certain way.

I question the judgement of whoever at the club thought mass recruitment was a good idea to win the vote. And I speak as someone who is also against the resolutions. 

Where we can agree is that lodging so many votes however valid, from a single email address was not a smart thing to do given the fractious relationship of the two boards. It broke no law, but it was not good sense.  None of that justifies what the Trust board did with it.

There's two of you coming out with exactly the same sort of misrepresentation here that led to the press having a field day on it. I know you were just repeating what you heard somewhere, but it was dangerously untrue.  Liston's crap is a lot worse. It's obvious who he's hinting at lodged the 50 votes and he's as completely wrong on that, as he is on saying one man voted 50 times.  If the idiot wants us to lose our sponsors he's going the right way about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, WC Boggs said:

 

One man did not vote 50 times. That is a  scurrilous and slanderous lie. Multiple votes by 50 registered members were submitted via one email address. 

Well that's alright then - no foul play involved there!

It's mind-boggling that after two years of operation Morton's fan ownership group has more checks on members voting for a Player of the Season award, than Stirling's does for determining the future executive of their football club.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the issues and personalities at stake, that is an atrocious method of decision-making. No wonder it hasn't actually put the issue to bed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, BazMac said:

I seem to remember it was people connected to the Junior Academy that were signed up?  If so, I think that's different to just asking, say, 50 guys at your local bowling club who have never been to a game to sign up.  If the people at the Junior Academy felt like the current chairman was helping them to prosper then wouldn't it be in their best interest to vote remain (for want of a better phrase).  And, even if they weren't a member of the Trust (nor am I), isn't there just as much at stake for them as there is for your average supporter?

That said, sending all 50 in on one email was poorly judged, and probably to make a point.  It would have been far better if everyone just did it themselves.

If they knew they were being signed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...