Fans Rep Surgery - Sat 15th July at Hibs Club (NOT THIS WEEKEND)

[lord bunberry]

I must say I'm not buying the line that they came to a decision after considering opinions of fans on social media. The issue was very much n the background and it wasn't being discussed extensively even on here. The thread on here leading up to the statement was only being contributed to by a very low amount of posters.
The reaction after the statement showed a more realistic snapshot of the fans opinions on the subject. The fans reps have got this wrong in imo. Good luck to the 2 of them, but I won't be voting again when the time comes.

[Johnny Clash]

I must say I'm not buying the line that they came to a decision after considering opinions of fans on social media. The issue was very much n the background and it wasn't being discussed extensively even on here. The thread on here leading up to the statement was only being contributed to by a very low amount of posters.
The reaction after the statement showed a more realistic snapshot of the fans opinions on the subject. The fans reps have got this wrong in imo. Good luck to the 2 of them, but I won't be voting again when the time comes.

Despite some erratic posts things are at least becoming more clear.

The official Hibs statement refers to a 'unanimous view' being reached.

A few posts back Tracey also accepts that no vote was ever taken on this.
So it sounds like there was a discussion and everyone ended up agreeing to the view that we let the Paris Buns off the hook.

I am all in favour of having elected supporters reps on the board. However, I do think they've got it wrong with this issue and compounded the error of judgment by not communicating their reasons for all the directors reaching the 'unanimous view'.

The lack of communication they now accept was wrong.

So hopefully we'll soon see an explanation - perhaps after discussions with supports have been held today?

[Tornadoes70]

The SPFL published theirs.

https://spfl.co.uk/news/article/spfl-press-release-84/

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

First time I've seen this article. Its as I feared that any chance of retrospective action especially now we're fully informed of the issues as they stand is highly unlikely nay virtually impossible due to the inneffective actions taken at that time when the titles should have been stripped due to the ineligible registrations. There's no point having a review as Hibernian have pointed out. Once Rod becomes President we can but hope he can execute change from within.

:flag:

[lord bunberry]

Despite some erratic posts things are at least becoming more clear.

The official Hibs statement refers to a 'unanimous view' being reached.

A few posts back Tracey also accepts that no vote was ever taken on this.
So it sounds like there was a discussion and everyone ended up agreeing to the view that we let the Paris Buns off the hook.

I am all in favour of having elected supporters reps on the board. However, I do think they've got it wrong with this issue and compounded the error of judgment by not communicating their reasons for all the directors reaching the 'unanimous view'.

The lack of communication they now accept was wrong.

So hopefully we'll soon see an explanation - perhaps after discussions with supports have been held today?
I won't be holding my breathe on that one tbh. The wagons have been circled and they'll ride out the storm.

[ColinNish]

I won't be holding my breathe on that one tbh. The wagons have been circled and they'll ride out the storm.

Yip. Totally agree.
Will be interesting if anyone on here speaks to either of the reps today and posts up anything that was said.

[A Hi-Bee]

There wis me thinking that a surgery was something to do with doctor's, no doctor is going to find a cure for what ails the SFA or the ones who stay silent effectively supporting the stance taken by the blazers.

[ColinNish]

So, did anyone speak to the reps today at the game?

[Skol]

Ok, my questions are:
(1) Do you think Rangers have been punished sufficiently by being relegated to the bottom division, and that's why it's right to move on?
(2) If it turned out that Rangers hadn't been relegated at all, and were in fact liquidated, would you still say that their relegation was sufficient punishment for their decade or so of systematic cheating?

1 - They were not relegated
2 - doesnt make sense, if they hadnt been relegated how can relegation be a punishment ?

Personally I am happy with what happened way back when

[lapsedhibee]

1 - They were not relegated
2 - doesnt make sense, if they hadnt been relegated how can relegation be a punishment ?

Personally I am happy with what happened way back when
The liquidation of the old huns was a consequence of their overspending.
So far there have been no consequences for the old huns of their systematic cheating (just a relatively small fine on the new huns).

[Nakedmanoncrack]

So, did anyone speak to the reps today at the game?

Waste of time as they are clearly sticking to a line, and offering nothing new face to face.

[Skol]

The liquidation of the old huns was a consequence of their overspending.
So far there have been no consequences for the old huns of their systematic cheating (just a relatively small fine on the new huns).

They no longer exist, whats the point of consequences ?

[lapsedhibee]

They no longer exist, whats the point of consequences ?
Setting the record straight. As opposed to bent.

[Skol]

Setting the record straight. As opposed to bent.
We all know what happened.....

[lapsedhibee]

We all know what happened.....

That's fine then. Shouldn't be any objection to altering the record books.

[BoomtownHibees]

We all know what happened.....

How can we ensure it won't happen again if there's not an investigation in to how it was allowed to happen previously?

[Baldy Foghorn]

Hahahaha, one has had 30 years of working with computers, then promises the world because he got it wrong in the past, but then passes it all off to Tracey, completely disregarding what he promised when he wanted our votes.

If this was Petrie he'd be getting the same questioning from me.

Personal crusade, for some reason you seem to dislike Frank, bet you wouldn't say it to his face though:aok:

[blackpoolhibs]

Personal crusade, for some reason you seem to dislike Frank, bet you wouldn't say it to his face though:aok:

Why wouldnt say it to his face? :confused:

[Baldy Foghorn]

Why wouldnt say it to his face? :confused:

You have had the opportunity no?

[blackpoolhibs]

You have had the opportunity no?

Have i, when would that have been? :confused:

[Baldy Foghorn]

Have i, when would that have been? :confused:

Brondby?

[blackpoolhibs]

Brondby?

When did i see him in Bronby?

[Baldy Foghorn]

When did i see him in Bronby?

He was in Main square, mind you, you probably couldn't see me lol.....

Why do you dislike him so much?

[blackpoolhibs]

He was in Main square, mind you, you probably couldn't see me lol.....

Why do you dislike him so much?

So I couldn't see you, i wasn't looking for you :confused:, but I should have looked for someone else?

I don't dislike him at all, I don't even know him. I love it how you are doing all the question and answering for him, yet HE promised that HE could do better at communication, and we had his word on that.

What he never said was he'd get someone else to do it for him.

[Baldy Foghorn]

So I couldn't see you, i wasn't looking for you :confused:, but I should have looked for someone else?

I don't dislike him at all, I don't even know him. I love it how you are doing all the question and answering for him, yet HE promised that HE could do better at communication, and we had his word on that.

What he never said was he'd get someone else to do it for him.

You spoke to me in Brondby. Frank wasn't far from me.

Frank's not bothered by your criticism of him, I am curious for myself, not for Frank.....

He and Tracey work in tandem, as Tracey has said, however, you choose to not accept or choose to ignore

[blackpoolhibs]

You spoke to me in Brondby. Frank wasn't far from me.

Frank's not bothered by your criticism of him, I am curious for myself, not for Frank.....

He and Tracey work in tandem, as Tracey has said, however, you choose to not accept or choose to ignore

I don't remember speaking to you, and I wasn't that pissed? I certainly don't remember seeing frank, and I don't care one way or another whether any criticism bothers him?

[Baldy Foghorn]

I don't remember speaking to you, and I wasn't that pissed? I certainly don't remember seeing frank, and I don't care one way or another whether any criticism bothers him?

Beg to differ, however why don't you accept Tracey's explanatin of how they work together?

[Billy Whizz]

So, did anyone speak to the reps today at the game?

I spoke to Tracey

[blackpoolhibs]

Beg to differ, however why don't you accept Tracey's explanatin of how they work together?

When you show up at the hustings promising that he knew communications was his big failure of previous years, and then promise he'd be better at it, and we had his word on that.

So to then pass that on to someone else is a cop out, but one i expected from previous years.

[Baldy Foghorn]

When you show up at the hustings promising that he knew communications was his big failure of previous years, and then promise he'd be better at it, and we had his word on that.

So to then pass that on to someone else is a cop out, but one i expected from previous years.

Fair enough.....:aok:

[Nakedmanoncrack]

I spoke to Tracey

Anything new offered beyond what she put here?

[Billy Whizz]

Anything new offered beyond what she put here?

All I will say, and another poster on here was with me, so they will verify this, is I can't see Tracey agreeing with something that she's not satisfied with, assessing all the options!

[ColinNish]

All I will say, and another poster on here was with me, so they will verify this, is I can't see Tracey agreeing with something that she's not satisfied with, assessing all the options!

That's not really the point though is it? She is a fans rep and the last time i looked, that's someone who is there to represent the fans views and opinions, not decide for themselves if its right or wrong.

They should both resign but its not going to happen as they're both clearly not able to admit what they did was wrong.

[marinello59]

That's not really the point though is it? She is a fans rep and the last time i looked, that's someone who is there to represent the fans views and opinions, not decide for themselves if its right or wrong.

They should both resign but its not going to happen as they're both clearly not able to admit what they did was wrong.

The club only released a statement because the Reps took the fans concerns to the board. That was them doing their job as reps.
When it came the the vote they have to do their duty as board members meaning they make a decision in the best interests of the club based on the evidence they have. They fulfilled that duty as well.
I think it was the wrong decision but if everybody who are demanding justice actually got themselves organised to do something concrete, (Crowd funding, engage their own lawyers etc) instead of simply attacking our own club then something might be achieved. It's the SFA we should be attacking, not our own.

[Baldy Foghorn]

He club only released a statement because the Reps took the fans concerns to the board. That was them doing their job as reps.
When it came the the vote they have to do their duty as board memebers meaning they make a decision in the best interests of the club based on the evidence they have. They fulfilled that duty as well.
I think it was you he wrong decision bit if everybody who are demanding justice actually got themselves organised to do something concrete, (Crowd finding, engage their own lawyers etc) instead of simply attacking our own club then something might be achieved. It's the SFA we should be attacking, not our own.

:top marks

[ColinNish]

The club only released a statement because the Reps took the fans concerns to the board. That was them doing their job as reps.
When it came the the vote they have to do their duty as board members meaning they make a decision in the best interests of the club based on the evidence they have. They fulfilled that duty as well.
I think it was the wrong decision but if everybody who are demanding justice actually got themselves organised to do something concrete, (Crowd funding, engage their own lawyers etc) instead of simply attacking our own club then something might be achieved. It's the SFA we should be attacking, not our own.

That's your opinion and i don't agree as do quite a lot of other Hibees. If they had been doing their job properly, they would have polled the support, because let's face it, it's the support that put them there in the first place. Remember, this wasn't just decided at one board meeting, Tracey herself said it was discussed over a few, they had ample opportunity to allow all fans that wanted a say, a say and they chose not to.

[Danderhall Hibs]

All I will say, and another poster on here was with me, so they will verify this, is I can't see Tracey agreeing with something that she's not satisfied with, assessing all the options!

Was it a confidential conversation? :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

The club only released a statement because the Reps took the fans concerns to the board. That was them doing their job as reps.
When it came the the vote they have to do their duty as board members meaning they make a decision in the best interests of the club based on the evidence they have. They fulfilled that duty as well.
I think it was the wrong decision but if everybody who are demanding justice actually got themselves organised to do something concrete, (Crowd funding, engage their own lawyers etc) instead of simply attacking our own club then something might be achieved. It's the SFA we should be attacking, not our own.

We are trying to get to the SFA but the club are defending them. That's the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Billy Whizz]

Was it a confidential conversation? :greengrin

No it wasn't

[Pretty Boy]

That's your opinion and i don't agree as do quite a lot of other Hibees. If they had been doing their job properly, they would have polled the support, because let's face it, it's the support that put them there in the first place. Remember, this wasn't just decided at one board meeting, Tracey herself said it was discussed over a few, they had ample opportunity to allow all fans that wanted a say, a say and they chose not to.

What if they had polled ST holders and only a few hundred bothered to vote? Would they have gone to the board and said the majority just don't care, or certainly don't care enough to vote.

I really don't think there is anywhere near as big a majority consensus on this as some believe. A few of the guys that sit around me at ER are older and don't do social media or forums. Of the 5 I spoke to yesterday 3 didn't have a clue what I was talking about and 2 didn't care. A (non Hibs) Facebook page put up a picture of the banner from yesterdays game and the comments were split about 50/50 between 'you don't speak for me' and 'good on you'.

It's the fundemental issue with fans reps. The very idea that 2 people can accurately reflect the wishes of all, or even a majority of Hibs fans, is faintly ridiculous.

[marinello59]

We are trying to get to the SFA but the club are defending them. That's the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why can't you go straight for the SFA? If the fans want to change things they have to do something more than just moan about it.

[Baldy Foghorn]

Why can't you go straight for the SFA? If the fans want to change things they have to do something more than just moan about it.

They would rather moan at our club, than be pro-active and do it for themselves

[marinello59]

That's your opinion and i don't agree as do quite a lot of other Hibees. If they had been doing their job properly, they would have polled the support, because let's face it, it's the support that put them there in the first place. Remember, this wasn't just decided at one board meeting, Tracey herself said it was discussed over a few, they had ample opportunity to allow all fans that wanted a say, a say and they chose not to.

You obviously feel strongly that justice should be done as regards Sevco and holding the SFA to account so what practical steps towards acheiving that have you taken? Remember the SFA will be delighted that so many fans are distracted by attacking their own clubs whilst they get off the hook.

[Johnny Clash]

The club only released a statement because the Reps took the fans concerns to the board. That was them doing their job as reps.
When it came the the vote they have to do their duty as board members meaning they make a decision in the best interests of the club based on the evidence they have. They fulfilled that duty as well.
I think it was the wrong decision but if everybody who are demanding justice actually got themselves organised to do something concrete, (Crowd funding, engage their own lawyers etc) instead of simply attacking our own club then something might be achieved. It's the SFA we should be attacking, not our own.

If it came to a vote (which it didn't on this occasion) I would expect our reps to represent what they considered to be the majority view. If they were outvoted then they of course take collective responsibility of the board and defend the majority decision. That's democracy.

Tracey (Frank) made it clear in the July posts that our reps will be bringing this up on 31st July's board meeting as a result of all the concern that fans had expressed. The July hibs.net poll was an additional clear indicator as well as the overwhelming majority comments here and on the Bounce.

I spoke to the seven ST holders near me yesterday and they were all unhappy with the boards 'unanimous view'. More so the fact we were not asked our opinion at all. Only our two elected reps had some engagement with the supporters and that seems to have been subverted at the July meeting. There's no doubt from Tracey's post on this subject that the reps were going to bring this up from the position of wanting something done about the cheating.

I can accept reps may have to occasionally vote other than what's considered the majority view if they are privy to some top secret sensitive information at the meeting. However, this should then be explained .
I can't imagine what secret info that could be so sensitive to Hibs as we're talking about another outfit who had been caught cheating.

Tracey and Frank both accept it was a big mistake to keep silent after the 31st July 'unanimous view' . In which case surely if it was a mistake not to explain things then it's important to do so now.

We just want to know what happened and why. No need to disclose secret info just an explanation would do!!!

[Danderhall Hibs]

No it wasn't

Ok cheers

[McD]

If it came to a vote (which it didn't on this occasion) I would expect our reps to represent what they considered to be the majority view. If they were outvoted then they of course take collective responsibility of the board and defend the majority decision. That's democracy.

Tracey (Frank) made it clear in the July posts that our reps will be bringing this up on 31st July's board meeting as a result of all the concern that fans had expressed. The July hibs.net poll was an additional clear indicator as well as the overwhelming majority comments here and on the Bounce.

I spoke to the seven ST holders near me yesterday and they were all unhappy with the boards 'unanimous view'. More so the fact we were not asked our opinion at all. Only our two elected reps had some engagement with the supporters and that seems to have been subverted at the July meeting. There's no doubt from Tracey's post on this subject that the reps were going to bring this up from the position of wanting something done about the cheating.

I can accept reps may have to occasionally vote other than what's considered the majority view if they are privy to some top secret sensitive information at the meeting. However, this should then be explained .
I can't imagine what secret info that could be so sensitive to Hibs as we're talking about another outfit who had been caught cheating.

Tracey and Frank both accept it was a big mistake to keep silent after the 31st July 'unanimous view' . In which case surely if it was a mistake not to explain things then it's important to do so now.

We just want to know what happened and why. No need to disclose secret info just an explanation would do!!!



These 2 points are a bit contradictory aren't they?

also, isn't it just a little bit arrogant to say that since you can't imagine information so sensitive, it therefore can't exist?

You've said there wasn't a vote on this occasion, there was a board discussion, several presumably. Over the course of those discussions, they've come to a final position. What then did anyone expect the board's statement to say? "Some of us think this but more think that, so that's what we've decided to do"? Of course the statement will say they are unanimous, anything else would be folly.

Many people are upset with and disagree with the statement and the position it describes, to lash out at the reps isnt fair. They were elected to represent the fans, some don't seem to want to let them to do that.

[ColinNish]

What if they had polled ST holders and only a few hundred bothered to vote? Would they have gone to the board and said the majority just don't care, or certainly don't care enough to vote.

I really don't think there is anywhere near as big a majority consensus on this as some believe. A few of the guys that sit around me at ER are older and don't do social media or forums. Of the 5 I spoke to yesterday 3 didn't have a clue what I was talking about and 2 didn't care. A (non Hibs) Facebook page put up a picture of the banner from yesterdays game and the comments were split about 50/50 between 'you don't speak for me' and 'good on you'.

It's the fundemental issue with fans reps. The very idea that 2 people can accurately reflect the wishes of all, or even a majority of Hibs fans, is faintly ridiculous.

Then they'd have to go with the result of who voted. That's how voting works. Jeezo!!

It's funny how folk who want to "move on" only really know or speak to folk who feel the same and vice versa.

I agree with you on the issue of fans reps. What their role is is far too wooly. Club ambassadors would be a better name for them.

[ColinNish]

These 2 points are a bit contradictory aren't they?

also, isn't it just a little bit arrogant to say that since you can't imagine information so sensitive, it therefore can't exist?

You've said there wasn't a vote on this occasion, there was a board discussion, several presumably. Over the course of those discussions, they've come to a final position. What then did anyone expect the board's statement to say? "Some of us think this but more think that, so that's what we've decided to do"? Of course the statement will say they are unanimous, anything else would be folly.

Many people are upset with and disagree with the statement and the position it describes, to lash out at the reps isnt fair. They were elected to represent the fans, some don't seem to want to let them to do that.

But they never represented the fans in any way, shape or form, did they?

[ColinNish]

You obviously feel strongly that justice should be done as regards Sevco and holding the SFA to account so what practical steps towards acheiving that have you taken? Remember the SFA will be delighted that so many fans are distracted by attacking their own clubs whilst they get off the hook.

Already spoken to my branch head honcho of HSA. Work in progress.

[Johnny Clash]

These 2 points are a bit contradictory aren't they?

also, isn't it just a little bit arrogant to say that since you can't imagine information so sensitive, it therefore can't exist?

You've said there wasn't a vote on this occasion, there was a board discussion, several presumably. Over the course of those discussions, they've come to a final position. What then did anyone expect the board's statement to say? "Some of us think this but more think that, so that's what we've decided to do"? Of course the statement will say they are unanimous, anything else would be folly.

Many people are upset with and disagree with the statement and the position it describes, to lash out at the reps isnt fair. They were elected to represent the fans, some don't seem to want to let them to do that.

Nope . They are not contradictory at all mate. Perhaps you've got a better imagination than me? I never said there was no top secret squirrel info so I think it's a bit nuts to talk about arrogance.

Also, it was Tracey who said in a previous post there wasn't a vote. I''m therefore assuming Tracey's right - there was no vote.

[Nakedmanoncrack]

These 2 points are a bit contradictory aren't they?

also, isn't it just a little bit arrogant to say that since you can't imagine information so sensitive, it therefore can't exist?

You've said there wasn't a vote on this occasion, there was a board discussion, several presumably. Over the course of those discussions, they've come to a final position. What then did anyone expect the board's statement to say? "Some of us think this but more think that, so that's what we've decided to do"? Of course the statement will say they are unanimous, anything else would be folly.

Many people are upset with and disagree with the statement and the position it describes, to lash out at the reps isnt fair. They were elected to represent the fans, some don't seem to want to let them to do that.

If there had been a split of opinion they would have merely said they had arrived at a decision there would have been no more to add. They made the point of describing it an Unan.

As for what sensitive information could have swayed supposed reps to take a position - that they cannot credibly claim to be the clearly expressed view of the people who elected them - I only imagine this being the case if the 'sensitive information' would compromise the club or individuals at the club.

[andyf5]

That's your opinion and i don't agree as do quite a lot of other Hibees. If they had been doing their job properly, they would have polled the support, because let's face it, it's the support that put them there in the first place. Remember, this wasn't just decided at one board meeting, Tracey herself said it was discussed over a few, they had ample opportunity to allow all fans that wanted a say, a say and they chose not to.

I think part of the problem is what people expect a "fans rep" to do. I expect them to take part in board meetings and decisions in the best interests of the club a d with some experience of being a supporter. I do not expect them to consult and agree with me on every issue. Having contacted and met Tracy recently I've a huge respect for the unpaid work these reps do for our club. They are privy to all the information and did the job in the best interests of the club as they saw it.

[Johnny Clash]

These 2 points are a bit contradictory aren't they?

also, isn't it just a little bit arrogant to say that since you can't imagine information so sensitive, it therefore can't exist?

You've said there wasn't a vote on this occasion, there was a board discussion, several presumably. Over the course of those discussions, they've come to a final position. What then did anyone expect the board's statement to say? "Some of us think this but more think that, so that's what we've decided to do"? Of course the statement will say they are unanimous, anything else would be folly.

Many people are upset with and disagree with the statement and the position it describes, to lash out at the reps isnt fair. They were elected to represent the fans, some don't seem to want to let them to do that.


They official statement would say the 'majority' decision if some board members expressed an alternative point of view and were not convinced to change their minds,

[marinello59]

Already spoken to my branch head honcho of HSA. Work in progress.

Excellent, that's great news. Hopefully some progress is made in organising positive action to challenge the legal advice rather than merely issuing statements.

[MrSmith]

Yep everything so sensitive MI6, The FBI, Mossad, the KGB and The CIA are involved to keep it in amongst themselves. Utter bull****! It's a dirty, dirty game going on and they all have been caught with their finger in the pie! No one will ever talk at me re legal mind opinion as there are many independent lawyers whose legal opinion could easily out argue the other! It's a complete stitch up! Those want to ware it, go right ahead as I'm not! Fixed, rigged, complicit, duplicitous fraud. NOT IN MY NAME.

[MrSmith]

I'll post re on field opinion but not another penny of mine will go into Scottish football!

[ColinNish]

I think part of the problem is what people expect a "fans rep" to do. I expect them to take part in board meetings and decisions in the best interests of the club a d with some experience of being a supporter. I do not expect them to consult and agree with me on every issue. Having contacted and met Tracy recently I've a huge respect for the unpaid work these reps do for our club. They are privy to all the information and did the job in the best interests of the club as they saw it.

I don't expect them to consult on every issue either. But this was a massive issue and fans should have been consulted. Well, actually some were but we don't know how many.

[McD]

Nope . They are not contradictory at all mate. Perhaps you've got a better imagination than me? I never said there was no top secret squirrel info so I think it's a bit nuts to talk about arrogance.

Also, it was Tracey who said in a previous post there wasn't a vote. I''m therefore assuming Tracey's right - there was no vote.

the point I made about arrogance was not to say there isn't sensitive information, but that it was possibly a bit arrogant to suggest that as you couldn't imagine it, that it couldn't exist. I don't claim to know everything that could be discussed by our board. What I meant was that there are things that we 'don't know that we don't know', and that this sensitive info could fall into that category.

It was Tracey who said there wasn't a vote, that wasn't intended to come across as implying you had suggested that, apologies if it did, was simply a reference to you mentioning it in your post :aok:


They official statement would say the 'majority' decision if some board members expressed an alternative point of view and were not convinced to change their minds,

fair point :aok:

[Baldy Foghorn]

I'll post re on field opinion but not another penny of mine will go into Scottish football!

Hibs supporter?

[Martin Dundas]

As 288 companies house directors, the fans reps have legal / fiduciary duties and cannot abrogate those by voting on proxy based on what others views are. And by others we are talking about a wide fan base. They have to do what they believe to be right, based on the info presented to them at board meetings and not what is reported in the media and fans forums. Some might not like it, but that's the facts of the situation. For what it's worth, I am pleased that the club is focussing on football and the good work it's doing around things like mental health. That's where they (we) can make a positive difference to people's lives. With all the chat that goes on on this, I'm glad I didn't get voted on as a fans rep. I think they are doing a good job and hope they will be supported by most people on here.

[MrSmith]

Hibs supporter?

Your point?

[Baldy Foghorn]

Your point?

Why would you stop following your "team"....Must be really good to punish Hibs for this

[bigwheel]

Your point?

Think the point is: you can't be much of a Hibs supporter if you let this get in the way of following your team.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[MrSmith]

Why would you stop following your "team"....Must be really good to punish Hibs for this

Sorry don't follow your logic? "Hibs supporter" "your team" ?? Why don't you just spit it out and say what you really mean?

[MrSmith]

Think the point is: you can't be much of a Hibs supporter if you let this get in the way of following your team.....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Is a principle out with thought process?

[Baldy Foghorn]

Sorry don't follow your logic? "Hibs supporter" "your team" ?? Why don't you just spit it out and say what you really mean?

spit it out, think you have spat your dummy out...Not going back :greengrin

[bigwheel]

Is a principle out with thought process?

How about a principle of: I'm going to support my team no matter what....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[MrSmith]

spit it out, think you have spat your dummy out...Not going back :greengrin

You are damn right I have! I'm not paying into a rigged system any more! Call me what you want but this episode has sickened me and "my club" are complicit in the cover up. I have spent thousands on hibs in simple hope and good faith that as a "hibs supporter" believed we could achieve something in fair competition.

[MrSmith]

How about a principle of: I'm going to support my team no matter what....


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah I'll continue paying my hard earned into a rigged system! Good one.

[Johnny Clash]

the point I made about arrogance was not to say there isn't sensitive information, but that it was possibly a bit arrogant to suggest that as you couldn't imagine it, that it couldn't exist. I don't claim to know everything that could be discussed by our board. What I meant was that there are things that we 'don't know that we don't know', and that this sensitive info could fall into that category.

It was Tracey who said there wasn't a vote, that wasn't intended to come across as implying you had suggested that, apologies if it did, was simply a reference to you mentioning it in your post :aok:



fair point :aok:


No problem mate and no offence taken. I was being totally genuine - my personal opinion is something must have been said to make our two reps go along with that 'unanimous view'. I honestly can't think what that could have been as our club wasn't the accused. So if there was some earth shattering information that is sensitive to Hibs then just let us know that's what happened.

I don't think either Tracey or Frank would deliberately concede something lightly so presumably something heavy happened? It's all very weird and hopefully some statement from our reps will be forthcoming?

[Baldy Foghorn]

You are damn right I have! I'm not paying into a rigged system any more! Call me what you want but this episode has sickened me and "my club" are complicit in the cover up. I have spent thousands on hibs in simple hope and good faith that as a "hibs supporter" believed we could achieve something in fair competition.

Cheerio then........:rolleyes:

[MrSmith]

Cheerio then........:rolleyes:

Is that it? Clever eh!

[Baldy Foghorn]

Is that it? Clever eh!

Your choice, not mine....You are giving up on Hibs, clever

[GreenNWhiteArmy]

The club only released a statement because the Reps took the fans concerns to the board. That was them doing their job as reps.
When it came the the vote they have to do their duty as board members meaning they make a decision in the best interests of the club based on the evidence they have. They fulfilled that duty as well.
I think it was the wrong decision but if everybody who are demanding justice actually got themselves organised to do something concrete, (Crowd funding, engage their own lawyers etc) instead of simply attacking our own club then something might be achieved. It's the SFA we should be attacking, not our own.

I've read the various threads on the subject and it's an issue I'm not really prepared to divulge how I feel. People become very emotive on the issue and tbh, i'd rather comment about on the field stuff involving Hibernian FC. I have next to no knowledge on EBT's or the legalities around any of this nor have I been part of a board before.

Just wanted to highlight this was an excellent post by Marinello59

[bigwheel]

Yeah I'll continue paying my hard earned into a rigged system! Good one.

News alert....Life sucks sometimes.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Martin Dundas]

Can I suggest those who are unhappy look up what a director's (legal) responsibilities and duties are and then consider what they are posting. It's easy ranting and raving, but it's not as simple as that in the harsh old real world. If anyone doesn't like the "rigged" system, maybe think about spending your time and money elsewhere. It's niave to think you will change the world and it's possibly healthier spending time focusing on things that don't annoy you. I'm only really interested about a Saturday on the pitch.!And I think most of the 15k plus silent majority think the same. It's football. Not politics, GHTTH

[JimboHibs]

Can I suggest those who are unhappy look up what a director's (legal) responsibilities and duties are and then consider what they are posting. It's easy ranting and raving, but it's not as simple as that in the harsh old real world. If anyone doesn't like the "rigged" system, maybe think about spending your time and money elsewhere. It's niave to think you will change the world and it's possibly healthier spending time focusing on things that don't annoy you. I'm only really interested about a Saturday on the pitch.!And I think most of the 15k plus silent majority think the same. It's football. Not politics, GHTTH

There's much more to really only being interested about a Saturday on the pitch.

[Martin Dundas]

There's much more to really only being interested about a Saturday on the pitch.

Ok. Can you give some examples?

[Martin Dundas]

Ok. Can you give some examples?
I'm not a politically minded chap who feels that I need to or want to change the world. And if I spoke to every fan at Easter rd on a Saturday, I think most couldn't give a t@@s other than how the team played, what was the score, who won and did they have a good day out. Maybe I'm wrong. Each to their own. That's how I like to enjoy my days out at the football. If I wanted to change the world I'd be a politician. God forbid!

[Andy Bee]

I'm not a politically minded chap who feels that I need to or want to change the world. And if I spoke to every fan at Easter rd on a Saturday, I think most couldn't give a t@@s other than how the team played, what was the score, who won and did they have a good day out. Maybe I'm wrong. Each to their own. That's how I like to enjoy my days out at the football. If I wanted to change the world I'd be a politician. God forbid!

That's your perogative mate but don't assume that you're in the majority when every poll from every Scottish teams forum suggests otherwise bar Sevco. Everyone wants an investigation of the governing bodies, the fans reps knew it and the club knew it, why they released that statement only adds to the lack of transparency.

[JimboHibs]

Ok. Can you give some examples?

Loyalty points & Cup Top Ups as a supporter the removal of both leave me feeling slightly bitter towards our hierarchy.

[Forza Fred]

I've read the various threads on the subject and it's an issue I'm not really prepared to divulge how I feel. People become very emotive on the issue and tbh, i'd rather comment about on the field stuff involving Hibernian FC. I have next to no knowledge on EBT's or the legalities around any of this nor have I been part of a board before.

Just wanted to highlight this was an excellent post by Marinello59

I generally have an opinion about everything, but in this case I'm a bit like GreenNWhiteArmy in that my knowledge on EBTs and surrounding legalities could be engraved on the back of a five cent piece and still leave room for my name and address!

Somewhat ironic that the support seems to be divided...about a board decision involving Rangers!

I've followed Hibs for over 50 years and unhappiness with board decisions has been commonplace throughout that period, but never stopped me from supporting the football club.

The board have NOT always heeded the supporters wishes.....indeed there is no obligation on them to do so, the majority shareholders rule, whether we like it or not.

[Allant1981]

I'm not a politically minded chap who feels that I need to or want to change the world. And if I spoke to every fan at Easter rd on a Saturday, I think most couldn't give a t@@s other than how the team played, what was the score, who won and did they have a good day out. Maybe I'm wrong. Each to their own. That's how I like to enjoy my days out at the football. If I wanted to change the world I'd be a politician. God forbid!


apologies if im wrong but didnt you want to be a rep?

[Carheenlea]

Loyalty points & Cup Top Ups as a supporter the removal of both leave me feeling slightly bitter towards our hierarchy.

During the campaigning Frank assured me the loyalty points scheme was a priority of his and one he would be pushing to reinstate if elected. After the elections Tracy then brushed my query aside by more or less telling me on here to forget it as it wasn't going to happening. I don't hold any grudges though towards the reps - I'm sure Frank would have brought the issue to the table, but the dismissing of an issue that is supported by a large number of Hibs fans leaves you wondering what clout they actually have in the boardroom.
Once the term of office has been fulfilled, I'd be inclined to restructure and remove the fans rep from a boardroom position, and make them more of a ceremonial role.

[JeMeSouviens]

Can I suggest those who are unhappy look up what a director's (legal) responsibilities and duties are and then consider what they are posting. It's easy ranting and raving, but it's not as simple as that in the harsh old real world. If anyone doesn't like the "rigged" system, maybe think about spending your time and money elsewhere. It's niave to think you will change the world and it's possibly healthier spending time focusing on things that don't annoy you. I'm only really interested about a Saturday on the pitch.!And I think most of the 15k plus silent majority think the same. It's football. Not politics, GHTTH

Until you can get them to say something, do you think you (and others) could bin this attempt to co-opt most of the support to your position? Total guesswork helps nobody.

[Peevemor]

During the campaigning Frank assured me the loyalty points scheme was a priority of his and one he would be pushing to reinstate if elected. After the elections Tracy then brushed my query aside by more or less telling me on here to forget it as it wasn't going to happening. I don't hold any grudges though towards the reps - I'm sure Frank would have brought the issue to the table, but the dismissing of an issue that is supported by a large number of Hibs fans leaves you wondering what clout they actually have in the boardroom.
Once the term of office has been fulfilled, I'd be inclined to restructure and remove the fans rep from a boardroom position, and make them more of a ceremonial role.

Rod Petrie (representing the majority shareholder) and Leeann Dempster (due to her track record and popularity with the supporters) will have all the clout in the boardroom - that won't change as long as they are there. With that said, I really don't see how the supporters' rep thing, even though what they can share publicly is limited, can be anything but positive.

[Johnny Clash]

Let's not forget the creation of supporters reps in 2014 was to help repair the damage between a lot of fans and our Board.

As Leeann herself said in relation to supporters reps on the Board : "The Club have put a lot of effort into re-engaging with supporters on a number of levels... Hibs are intent on having ‘fans at the centre of everything we do’

I'm still hopeful we will get a full explanation from our reps and we can learn from this question of accountability.

I do not believe the answer is to destroy these positions and revert to a board with no direct input from the support. Yes, I realise that on this occasion the direct input from the fans reps seems hard to understand but we need to fix this. I don't doubt Frank or Tracey's love of Hibs and I'm sure they'd be gutted to think this lack of communication/engagement with fans will result in the demise of democratically elected board members.

Plenty democratically elected politicians lose the faith of their electorate and are subsequently dumped. The answer is not to do away with elected positions but rather help make sure they work and that the board's stated intention of 'having fans at the centre of everything we do' actually happens.

[Martin Dundas]

apologies if im wrong but didnt you want to be a rep?

No. Your right :-) I'm glad I stood 'tho.

[Ozyhibby]

Then they'd have to go with the result of who voted. That's how voting works. Jeezo!!

It's funny how folk who want to "move on" only really know or speak to folk who feel the same and vice versa.

I agree with you on the issue of fans reps. What their role is is far too wooly. Club ambassadors would be a better name for them.

I have noticed that those who favour moving on do seem to claim everyone who doesn't vote in any of the polls for their side. [emoji23]
If that happened in real life we wouldn't be leaving the eu.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MrSmith]

I have noticed that those who favour moving on do seem to claim everyone who doesn't vote in any of the polls for their side. [emoji23]
If that happened in real life we wouldn't be leaving the eu.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've been thinking on how to do this re a poll. What if Hibs.net admins logged everyone out and when logging back in users were presented with a poll re SFA investigation before they accessed the forum, could that work?

[Johnny Clash]

I've been thinking on how to do this re a poll. What if Hibs.net admins logged everyone out and when logging back in users were presented with a poll re SFA investigation before they accessed the forum, could that work?

Previous to supporters reps being created - a survey of more than 4000 Hibs fans was carried out with the help of Supporters Direct Scotland.

No idea how this works though.

[Forza Fred]

I've been thinking on how to do this re a poll. What if Hibs.net admins logged everyone out and when logging back in users were presented with a poll re SFA investigation before they accessed the forum, could that work?

But again, what the supporters vote for may not be what the major shareholders want to do.

The major shareholders decide club policy, not the supporters.

[green day]

Now that some of the dust has settled on this, can I ask a couple of questions?

It seems clear now that there is (very) limited support for Celtic FC position among the other professional clubs - indeed it now feels like the SPFL board went ahead and asked for an enquiry without asking their full membership first.

So - broadly the clubs dont want an enquiry, the SFA dont want an enquiry.

Where exactly does that leave the large number of fans who still want something to happen?

If Celtic cant get anything to happen themselves, is it even conceivable for a fans group / groups to gain any traction for anything?

n.b. I am not trying to have a pop, I am genuinely interested in where this leaves things

[Skol]

I have noticed that those who favour moving on do seem to claim everyone who doesn't vote in any of the polls for their side. [emoji23]
If that happened in real life we wouldn't be leaving the eu.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no way you can compare a poll on Hibs.Net with the vote to leave the EU.

Hibs.net poll was an unrepresentative poll of a small subset of those who would be eligible to vote. If you remember rightly, similar polls pre EU vote and other recent votes got their predictions quite badly wrong. It was a poll and not one for the club to take any note of and if they were to they would have to publish and follow more clearly laid out rules

[cabbageandribs1875]

Loyalty points & Cup Top Ups as a supporter the removal of both leave me feeling slightly bitter towards our hierarchy.



ditto :agree:

[JimboHibs]

ditto :agree:

The loyalty points system was a great idea until it was seen as some way of increasing revenue & was hijacked as an HSL bribe.