Fan Rep Interview - Rangers Statement & Loyalty Points

[weecounty hibby]

So, devils advocate time, Petrie while building the stadium and HTC also backed the managers with the 5th highest wage bill in Scotland. Who's to blame for signing pish players? Was it the managers or was it Petrie? 3 major trophies in 21 years, two relegations, two championship wins, a number of cup finals, and even bigger number of semi finals. It's never been boring!! I think he has done ok overall and we as a club are now in a position that every other outside the OF would take in a minute. Maybe even der Hun would swap as well. Onwards and upwards

[BSEJVT]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of the top of my head £10m came from player sales, £4m still to pay, some of it was forgiven by the bank.
The actual wage budget was always 5th highest yet we rarely were. Maybe if we hadn’t built it then our wage bill could have climbed to 4th highest some years but the evidence shows we would have not spent it well anyway so building was the best thing we could have done with the money while Petrie was there. For that we should be grateful to him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That mistakes were made there is no doubt.

I would say those mistakes involved recruiting the wrong managers who needed replaced far earlier than they should have.

Those managers were to various extents given their head in signing players that their successors then moved on at huge cost.

Not many of the managerial appointments were widely criticised at the outset, indeed most if not all looked visionary.

Its just a shame football isn't played on paper :-)

We are also not alone in the difficulty of regular duff managerial appointments and the subsequent revolving door of player trading that those involve.

Hearts, Rangers & Dundee United immediately spring to mind

Whether by luck or improved process we have seen managerial stability through Stubbs & Lennon which has led to player stability and not accidentally improved performances.

Hopefully it is improved process but it would be greatly ironic if when Lennon moves on it had proved to be luck

It will be painful viewing for all if Leanne's status is transformed from Messiah to pariah after a few iffy managerial appointments.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That mistakes were made there is no doubt.

I would say those mistakes involved recruiting the wrong managers who needed replaced far earlier than they should have.

Those managers were to various extents given their head in signing players that their successors then moved on at huge cost.

Not many of the managerial appointments were widely criticised at the outset, indeed most if not all looked visionary.

Its just a shame football isn't played on paper :-)

We are also not alone in the difficulty of regular duff managerial appointments and the subsequent revolving door of player trading that those involve.

Hearts, Rangers & Dundee United immediately spring to mind

Whether by luck or improved process we have seen managerial stability through Stubbs & Lennon which has led to player stability and not accidentally improved performances.

Hopefully it is improved process but it would be greatly ironic if when Lennon moves on it had proved to be luck

It will be painful viewing for all if Leanne's status is transformed from Messiah to pariah after a few iffy managerial appointments.

I personally think it’s improved structure at the club. The manager no longer has to run everything down at east Mains.
Leeann Dempster managed to make Mark McGee, Craig Brown and Stuart McCall all look like good managers while she was at Motherwell. The minute they left they went back to being failures.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NAE NOOKIE]

I think the one thing the The Rangers debate shows is that folk had / have unrealistic expectations of what the fans reps can actually deliver. Its the job of the directors of any company to do what's right for the business and that includes them, if I read the situation correctly it was the opinion of the board based on ( according to them ) legal advice that any attempt to pursue this matter would be a waste of not only time, but more importantly, money with absolutely no prospect of a successful outcome.

I presume it wouldn't have taken the presence of fans reps at board meetings about this subject for the club to be aware that it was the opinion of the fans that Rangers 2012 be stripped of any honours they claim to be owners of prior to 2012 or at the very least honours won during the EBT period and that the SFA needed taken to task for what they allowed to happen, with robust structures put in place to ensure such a situation never arises again.

Now, from my POV that didn't mean Hibs couldn't have released a strong statement making it clear that in the clubs opinion removal of these honours if it was legally possible to do so was what we wanted and that its also the clubs opinion that the SFA and SPFL need to recognise that a situation where they are apparently powerless to strip a club of honours they claim to have won in competitions owned and administered by both bodies is ridiculous ..... I find it unfathomable that as the governing bodies of Scottish football they are apparently legally powerless to strip a participant in a competition they own and run of a win if it is subsequently found they did so while breaking the rules. Lance Armstrong can only dream that the SFA / SPFL ran professional cycling.

This once again brings us back to fan ownership of Hibs. What appears to be happening here is folk saying that if the club was run by the fans the fan run board would have been happy to piss away £50,000 or whatever in the fruitless pursuit of an action the clubs legal advisors had already told them was 'bound to fail' ...... If that's how Hibs would be run by 'the fans' then I for one hope it never happens.

That's not bending over to take it up the ass from The Rangers or the SFA ....... Its protecting the interests of the club in the real world where no matter how unpalatable or unfair something clearly is wasting the clubs human resources and money on it with absolutely no prospect of changing it would only be detrimental to the clubs finances and ability to compete on the park.

Celtic are the main movers and shakers in this situation and are held up as the poster boy for pursuit of the Rangers and the SFA, including by a few folk on here.
For all their hot air can anybody tell me how much of their mega wealth they have committed to a legal challenge against either SEVCO or the SFA / SPFL so far? My bet is not a bloody penny because they have had the same legal advice as Hibs.

In this case it wouldn't have mattered a rats ass if the two reps had the casting vote on the Hibs board, they would still have had no choice but to listen to the legal advice they were given, any other action would have laid them open to accusations of negligence as club directors ... so IMO the flack they are taking over this is not only totally unfair, its totally unjustified.

What I want to hear is what the SFA and SPFL are putting in place NOW to ensure that this situation never arises again and that measures are taken to ensure that they can legally remove honours where appropriate and stop a club ( by court action if necessary ) from claiming them, either in its club literature or by putting 5 bloody silly stars on their shirt.

[WestStandWillie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm in the 'wanted Petrie punted the second we got relegated' camp, there's no doubt his ( as it turns out ) inspired decision to appoint Leann Dempster has saved his bacon and in calmer waters even folk like me can look back with hindsight and see that his tenure hasn't been all negative with the stadium and training facilities we now have being mostly his work.

So yes, RP has been both good and bad for this club ..... I missed the bit where he committed "fraud" though, that sound like something the fans should be told about, perhaps you could enlighten us?

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Rod the fraud??

What you getting at here?

The man's fake.

Happy to take the credit when everything's good, disappears when the going gets tough. He even had the audacity to fine Riordan for speaking out about the state of the pitch.

Poisonous and looks after HIMSELF.

And dinnae get me started on his waterworks during the DVD.

As long as he's daeing his thing, board members are puppets.

[Velma Dinkley]

The stripping of titles wasn't the issue. An investigation needed to take place to reveal the extent of the cheating, how it was allowed to happen, why it went unpunished and who was responsible for what. Then anyone responsible for wrongdoing could have been taken to task and Scottish football would have been in a position to progress.

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The stripping of titles wasn't the issue. An investigation needed to take place to reveal the extent of the cheating, how it was allowed to happen, why it went unpunished and who was responsible for what. Then anyone responsible for wrongdoing could have been taken to task and Scottish football would have been in a position to progress.

Exactly. If they had a full investigation and at the end of it said because of decisions made earlier we can’t now strip titles then that’s fair enough. We still could have had full transparency and put proper checks and balances in to prevent it happening again.
Frank said in the interview that nothing would have been achieved? How about knowing the truth and improving governance of the game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Exactly. If they had a full investigation and at the end of it said because of decisions made earlier we can’t now strip titles then that’s fair enough. We still could have had full transparency and put proper checks and balances in to prevent it happening again.
Frank said in the interview that nothing would have been achieved? How about knowing the truth and improving governance of the game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He also said he started off wanting Rangers punished but didn't know why? I replayed it a few times to make sure.

[NAE NOOKIE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The man's fake.

Happy to take the credit when everything's good, disappears when the going gets tough. He even had the audacity to fine Riordan for speaking out about the state of the pitch.

Poisonous and looks after HIMSELF.

And dinnae get me started on his waterworks during the DVD.

As long as he's daeing his thing, board members are puppets.

Is Leeann Dempster acting like "a puppet" to you? Does she give the impression that she is a yes woman? She could walk into another job tomorrow based on what she has achieved at Hibs and Motherwell and IMO there's no doubt she would if she thought she was just a front for Petrie.

Petrie's failing was always that he couldn't bring himself to see the correlation between success on the pitch and a successful 'business' .... bricks and mortar are tangible assets, as is the value a player has in the transfer market. Paying for the right player or appointing the right manager are based on gut feeling, instinct and knowledge of the game, not to mention the ability to face up to the fact that when you do so you are always to an extent taking a risk, things that are clearly not Petrie's strengths.

What you are suggesting is that Petrie's failings as a chairman are down to the fact that he doesn't care about the club and I think that's far from the truth. I watched the 30 minutes after the cup final recently and listened to the Sportsound after match coverage. Petrie spoke of the fans during one of these programmes and his voice broke when he was talking about us then .... IMO his emotion on the DVD was genuine.

Petrie is many things, but a fraud he is not .... as for fining Riordan for his pitch statement, if DR had been moaning about it but was told by the club to keep it 'in house' what exactly was Petrie supposed to do?

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He also said he started off wanting Rangers punished but didn't know why? I replayed it a few times to make sure.

I must admit I was surprised by how ill prepared they were for the interview given they knew the questions.
He kept repeating the ‘those who bothered to turn up line’ when talking about the meetings but there was only one I could have attended and that was the working together meeting. Unfortunately I was down south that week. The meeting in the Hibs Club was a closed meeting for members only and the surgeries he talked about were, I think, in the Hibs club on match days (members only) and anyway matchdays for me are with my 11 year old son and I’m not going to drag him to a meeting about football governance.
I was disappointed I could not attend the working together meeting.
I now fully accept the decision even though I disagree with it and think it reflects badly on the club.
I’m more interested in the clubs position on FFP going forward now but they refuse to engage on that subject as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BSEJVT]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The man's fake.

Happy to take the credit when everything's good, disappears when the going gets tough. He even had the audacity to fine Riordan for speaking out about the state of the pitch.

Poisonous and looks after HIMSELF.

And dinnae get me started on his waterworks during the DVD.

As long as he's daeing his thing, board members are puppets.

What an utterly clueless post on so many levels

Exactly what credit has he taken

Leanne is the public face of Hibs and as Chairman he is trotted out when he needs to be as he represents the majority shareholders interests

Rod Petrie could have earned many more times what he has with Hibs with no aggravation, he wasn't someone no-mark, he was a well respected and connected accountant and Chief Executive of an Investment Bank.

He was originally put into run the club by STF and stayed around because he grew attached to the club.

In exactly what way is he poisonous, because he wont turn round and drop his drawers to some of the half wit ideas that have crossed his and Leanne's desk.

He then conducts himself with a bit dignity on the clubs behalf, unlike some of those purveyors of idiocy

His job, like the boards isn't to be popular it is to make hard decisions to take the club forward whilst retaining financial control.

It gets on my goat that because folk either individually or as a group make decisions that folk don't like that they are called puppets or worse.

It wont bother them one iota and makes the name callers look childish and boorish.

Its not all been sweetness and light but I have absolutely no doubt that post Duff & Gray everything the various boards of Hibs has done has been within the financial constraints they set themselves in the best interests of the club

I wouldn't swap where we are now for any club in Scotland, including Celtic & The Rangers as I wouldn't want their baggage and prefer our quiet dignity.

[BSEJVT]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I must admit I was surprised by how ill prepared they were for the interview given they knew the questions.
He kept repeating the ‘those who bothered to turn up line’ when talking about the meetings but there was only one I could have attended and that was the working together meeting. Unfortunately I was down south that week. The meeting in the Hibs Club was a closed meeting for members only and the surgeries he talked about were, I think, in the Hibs club on match days (members only) and anyway matchdays for me are with my 11 year old son and I’m not going to drag him to a meeting about football governance.
I was disappointed I could not attend the working together meeting.
I now fully accept the decision even though I disagree with it and think it reflects badly on the club.
I’m more interested in the clubs position on FFP going forward now but they refuse to engage on that subject as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree entirely with this

I never felt there was anything to be gained by dwelling on the issues of the past, but we need to ensure that they are understood and not repeated in future.

[Eaststand]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What an utterly clueless post on so many levels

Exactly what credit has he taken

Leanne is the public face of Hibs and as Chairman he is trotted out when he needs to be as he represents the majority shareholders interests

Rod Petrie could have earned many more times what he has with Hibs with no aggravation, he wasn't someone no-mark, he was a well respected and connected accountant and Chief Executive of an Investment Bank.

He was originally put into run the club by STF and stayed around because he grew attached to the club.

In exactly what way is he poisonous, because he wont turn round and drop his drawers to some of the half wit ideas that have crossed his and Leanne's desk.

He then conducts himself with a bit dignity on the clubs behalf, unlike some of those purveyors of idiocy

His job, like the boards isn't to be popular it is to make hard decisions to take the club forward whilst retaining financial control.

It gets on my goat that because folk either individually or as a group make decisions that folk don't like that they are called puppets or worse.

It wont bother them one iota and makes the name callers look childish and boorish.

Its not all been sweetness and light but I have absolutely no doubt that post Duff & Gray everything the various boards of Hibs has done has been within the financial constraints they set themselves in the best interests of the club

I wouldn't swap where we are now for any club in Scotland, including Celtic & The Rangers as I wouldn't want their baggage and prefer our quiet dignity.

Good post this, and lots of points well made.

GGTTH

[matty_f]

I wonder if the roles that Tracy and Frank have were rebranded as 'Fan Elected Directors' it might give a more accurate representation of what they do, and give everyone more realistic expectations on what they can achieve.

It's impossible to represent the support effectively, we all have different opinions and are engaged with the club at different levels, so right away they're fighting a losing battle to live up to the title.

I think the principle behind having two supporter elected directors on the board is good, with a lot of merit and the podcast did a good job of highlighting some of the good work both reps do.

In its current state though, there's too big a disparity between what people think they should be doing, and what they can do.

There's probably a successful and effective way to have these roles in place, and I'd say it's worth persevering with rather than dismissing.

[McD]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The man's fake.

Happy to take the credit when everything's good, disappears when the going gets tough. He even had the audacity to fine Riordan for speaking out about the state of the pitch.

Poisonous and looks after HIMSELF.

And dinnae get me started on his waterworks during the DVD.

As long as he's daeing his thing, board members are puppets.

None of which constitutes the word “fraud”. All rather childish and pathetic, from behind an anonymous username.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What an utterly clueless post on so many levels

Exactly what credit has he taken

Leanne is the public face of Hibs and as Chairman he is trotted out when he needs to be as he represents the majority shareholders interests

Rod Petrie could have earned many more times what he has with Hibs with no aggravation, he wasn't someone no-mark, he was a well respected and connected accountant and Chief Executive of an Investment Bank.

He was originally put into run the club by STF and stayed around because he grew attached to the club.

In exactly what way is he poisonous, because he wont turn round and drop his drawers to some of the half wit ideas that have crossed his and Leanne's desk.

He then conducts himself with a bit dignity on the clubs behalf, unlike some of those purveyors of idiocy

His job, like the boards isn't to be popular it is to make hard decisions to take the club forward whilst retaining financial control.

It gets on my goat that because folk either individually or as a group make decisions that folk don't like that they are called puppets or worse.

It wont bother them one iota and makes the name callers look childish and boorish.

Its not all been sweetness and light but I have absolutely no doubt that post Duff & Gray everything the various boards of Hibs has done has been within the financial constraints they set themselves in the best interests of the club

I wouldn't swap where we are now for any club in Scotland, including Celtic & The Rangers as I wouldn't want their baggage and prefer our quiet dignity.

Terrific post

[Forza Fred]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I wonder if the roles that Tracy and Frank have were rebranded as 'Fan Elected Directors' it might give a more accurate representation of what they do, and give everyone more realistic expectations on what they can achieve.

It's impossible to represent the support effectively, we all have different opinions and are engaged with the club at different levels, so right away they're fighting a losing battle to live up to the title.

I think the principle behind having two supporter elected directors on the board is good, with a lot of merit and the podcast did a good job of highlighting some of the good work both reps do.

In its current state though, there's too big a disparity between what people think they should be doing, and what they can do.

There's probably a successful and effective way to have these roles in place, and I'd say it's worth persevering with rather than dismissing.

I posted similar earlier..........there is nothing wrong with having ‘fans elected directors’ as you say, and I think it gives the opportunity for at least some fan representation on the board....as well as adding to the resources the club has to interact with the punters, but ‘fans’ would have to understand that a particular view they may hold, may not be shared by the elected board member.........in much the same way we elect MPs on their general beliefs, but they do not necessarily agree with ‘everything’ we believe.

The ballot box can then change them if that is the wish.

But I’m not sure that would be acceptable to a fair few fans.

I fully expect that when this cycle of the ‘fan rep’ cycle comes to an end, their will be some kind of ‘restructuring exercise ‘ announced by the board and it will be discontinued in its current form.

And No, it won’t be due to any individuals who currently hold the roles, who both do their very best for the club they support........just an ‘experiment’ that will have run. It’s time.

[RIP]

They are as Matty rightly pointed out 'fan elected' directors. Before the concept was agreed and initiated, all board members and most staff at the club were huge Hibbies.

This has been the case since 1875 and that model is replicated across the football world. Who other than a supporter would give up so much of their free time for so little thanks?

[ozwoody]

One thing I have noticed on this, and the podcast thread, is that there has been no input from the fans reps themselves.
If I was misquoted, or came across the wrong way, I would be clarifying any points that have been brought up.
Both were hugely active on here prior to elections but not as involved afterwards.
This is no critism of them as people, I dont know them at all, but more an observation of the role they have put themselves forward for.In terms of ticket allocation and rangers debacle, they did not come over well at all.As I have said previously, a fans rep cannot be on the board , no matter their best intentions, as their hands are tied with what they can report back.

[WestStandWillie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

None of which constitutes the word “fraud”. All rather childish and pathetic, from behind an anonymous username.

Deal wae it.