Great Hibernian Chairmen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brog

[/B]

Finally, re FR's assertion ( probably a joke ) that Tom had his own turnstile I can personally testify this as nonsense. This myth existed long before TH was involved with Hibs, it used to be the Gordon Smith turnstile & no doubt it was Jimmy Dunn's or McColl's back in the day.

---

I've no idea if it is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doddie

And the financial situation developing during those years? :rolleyes:

---

I have never taken a step back and looked at the Hart years objectively. At the time I was young and thought it was as much about luck as anything else. I think you have made a very good point there though Doddie. Another thing worth looking at is the plummeting attendances over the 70s - albeit in the context of decline nationally.

Like you, I don't think he was the visionary that Harry Swan was. Apart from anything else, Swan made us into one of the biggest teams in Britain at the time. Hart seems to have taken us in the opposite direction.

On the whole, history has been kinder to Hart than we were at the time. IIRC he was not the fans favourite by any stretch of the imagination.

Of course that was a time when people weren't as interested in who owned the club as they are now. Mind you, he was right about Harper though. Wasn't he?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

I've no idea if it is true.



I have never taken a step back and looked at the Hart years objectively. At the time I was young and thought it was as much about luck as anything else. I think you have made a very good point there though Doddie. Another thing worth looking at is the plummeting attendances over the 70s - albeit in the context of decline nationally.

Like you, I don't think he was the visionary that Harry Swan was. Apart from anything else, Swan made us into one of the biggest teams in Britain at the time. Hart seems to have taken us in the opposite direction.

On the whole, history has been kinder to Hart than we were at the time. IIRC he was not the fans favourite by any stretch of the imagination.

Of course that was a time when people weren't as interested in who owned the club as they are now. Mind you, he was right about Harper though. Wasn't he?

---

Harper who? :cool2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doddie

Harper who? :cool2:

---

:dunno: Ive heard you mention his name a few times, that's all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doddie

As said, Jim Black was at ER before Hart took over. The other three were Turnbull's first signings, and very good signings they were, but they didn't represent a huge investment by Tom Hart. ET signed them for less than £40,000 the lot.

Willie MacFarlane wasn't the only guy I knew who found it hard to get work after falling out with Tom Hart.

TH did indeed retire from the firm in 1973. He was then free to devote his whole time to running his 'beloved' Hibs. Strangely enough, I'd say that his 'beloved' Hibs started to go downhill rather quickly from - let me see - 1973? :cool2:

I would FAR rather have paid directors responsible to shareholders running the club than a dictator like Hart. Argue it how you will, he left the club worse off than he found it - MUCH worse off.

---

was 1973 not a great year to be a hibby:wink:

I am not clear how you would compare Chairmen but here are some observations

Swan - did he not 'sell a euroean semi to the Italians? Yes he had a great team but he also split up the Famous 5 (sold Johnstone) and did not really push on from that sucess and gates

Hart - 'we want Joe, Hart must go' . He brought in Turnbull, which was a great thing for Hibs. Apart from that he did zip with the ground. Typical of the owners at that time really.

Petrie - I have mixed views on the guy. He has done OK out of the Hibs and I think its Farmerthat should get many of the plaudits. Hard nosed approach has proven worthwhile.

Not sure how many chairmen I actualy admire outside Hibs. Some owners certainly - e.g. Blackburn's Jack Walker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luna_Asylum

league positions

1974 second
1975 second
1976 third
1977 fourth
1978 fourth

---

Its interesting to see these stats - looks like a very decent standard but by April 1978 our home crowds were under 4,000 for games against your Killies and Mortons. After the Tornadoes and the team that finished 2nd for the next 2 seasons with Bremner, Munro, Harper etc the fans expected us to be challenging the OF every year.

By 1976 we knew it wasn't going to happen and the crowds plummeted. Its been debated many times over whose fault this was - Turnbull for his lack of man-management and some poor signings, Hart for not putting the money in, the players for not believing in themselves, maybe the fans for giving up the ghost with the resultant lack of revenue - and of course Mr Joe Harper.

So I suppose there's plenty to commend Hart on as others have said but he did preside over a massive demise. A bit like Eddie I suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doddie

1. Most of the Tornadoes were at ER before either Hart or Turnbull arrived.

2. Hart fell out with, and sacked, the man who assembled those players - Willie MacFarlane.

3. Hart owned a building firm - that's where his money came from. I have it on good authority that not only was he 'at it' in a big way over government and council contracts, he was an absolute beast to work for and a bully to those who did work for him. NOT a nice man.

4. We had 3-4 years of reasonable success after he arrived. If that sounds grudging, bear in mind that we had some of the best players in Scotland at the time - Brownlie, Schaedler, Stanton, Blackley, Edwards, Gordon, Cropley, Duncan, Bremner were all good enough to play for Scotland (even if one or two didn't) and the ones I've left out, like Jimmy O'Rourke, Bobby Smith, Jim Black, would walk into any SPL team today as first picks for the first team. We should have done much better.

5. Hart made big promises, as did Turnbull. None of those promises were fulfilled. When he arrived, we were the third or fourth strongest club in the League, with good players, playing regularly in Europe, but with a ground that badly needed upgrading. When he died, he left us under-financed, struggling with relegation, a team of (at best) moderate players, in a stadium that urgently needed basic repairs, never mind an upgrade.

IMO Tom Hart's mismanagement of the club laid the seeds for our subsequent decline, first under Kenny Waugh, then under the Chuckle Brothers, that left us vulnerable to the Mercer takeover bid.

Money was wasted on big-name signings (Harper and Munro the main ones) who failed to deliver the goods.

Loyal players who had the good of the club at heart were treated very badly.

Hart wanted to be seen as the benefactor to whom glory and honour should be paid; he didn't like it when other people got the credit for success. He was owner and chairman, and therefore could whatever he wanted to do - no one could control him.

IMO Tom Hart wasn't fit to clean the shoes of Sir Tom Farmer, and under STF and Rod Petrie we've prospered much better than we ever did under Hart. Maybe not as spectacularly, but we have the training ground we needed, we have the stadium appropriate to our place in the game, and we have sound finances and a real sense of steady progress over 20 years.

Hart was of the same ilk as Romanov - just not as good at the game. I wouldn't want him back under ANY circumstances.

---

I tend to agree with nearly all of this except the Romanov comparison, Vlad truly is the master and he has absolutely no feeling for the Yammish or football generally, he could and would have bought any club that was in a bit of trouble and best fitted his plans for running money through it and generating money for him, - Hart was just like many old style chairmen of the time, he didn't do us much direct harm but because we were part of his general empire he didn't seem to me to run us with all things Hibs at the heart of what he did, he did do a lot of things for the short term and maybe for show so there are a few highs to remember - notably Tornadoes but they were McFarlanes team largely.
After he went it seems clear to me (with hindsight) that there was nothing underpinning the club and I think he did lay the foundations of our vulnerability to Whalearse and his financial backers takeover.
I think Harry Swan stands the test of time, the sort of guy you can trust to have responsibilty for something that is more than a business, they never own it but they steward it for us and hopefully ensure it thrives under that stewardship but for me the real test is to see whether we are in a better or worse place when their time in charge ends - for that Hart failed, Petrie is in danger of being hugely successful.

In the 1970's Hibs only finished out the top five once.

Compare that with the 60's when we managed a third a fourth & a fifth & no cups

Compare it with the last 20 years when we managed three thirds and two fourths & three fifths

So what came before Hart was not so successful in the league or cup. Clearly what came after was not great also but we are waiting to hear why that was his fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luna_Asylum

In the 1970's Hibs only finished out the top five once.

Compare that with the 60's when we managed a third a fourth & a fifth & no cups

Compare it with the last 20 years when we managed three thirds and two fourths & three fifths

So what came before Hart was not so successful in the league or cup. Clearly what came after was not great also but we are waiting to hear why that was his fault.

---

It was his fault because he did not leave the club on a sound business footing. When Waugh took over there was much to be done, which Kenny couldn't do. Result was we were sitting ducks for a couple of snake oil salesmen who promised the return of the old days. That in turn led to us being in such financial trouble that we went close to going out of existence.

That it has taken 20 years to get to the position we are in is testament to the mess we were in. Hart bankrolled the club, but without vision and strategy things spiralled out of control from 1975. He can't be blamed for decisions taken after he died, but he can be blamed for making a bit of a mess of things over 10 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erin go bragh

was 1973 not a great year to be a hibby:wink:

---

No, everything went rapidly down hill from the first day of that year, when hibs went top, watching Celtic tank us 3-0 in the last home match, to seal the title, ahead of rangers, says it all. 1972 was really good though, with one notable exception.

To be fair, I think it is unreasonable to assess current records to that of a bygone age, simply because of the money involved.

Harrower & Hart invested their own money & it cost 25p or adults to attend matches in those days, sporsorship was nowhere near the levels of today, nor was TV money, an altogether different playing field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

It was his fault because he did not leave the club on a sound business footing. When Waugh took over there was much to be done, which Kenny couldn't do. Result was we were sitting ducks for a couple of snake oil salesmen who promised the return of the old days. That in turn led to us being in such financial trouble that we went close to going out of existence.

That it has taken 20 years to get to the position we are in is testament to the mess we were in. Hart bankrolled the club, but without vision and strategy things spiralled out of control from 1975. He can't be blamed for decisions taken after he died, but he can be blamed for making a bit of a mess of things over 10 years.

---

So the accusation is that that he he did not leave us on a sound business footing.
Is it possible to be more specific about what he did wrong or did not do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luna_Asylum

So the accusation is that that he he did not leave us on a sound business footing.
Is it possible to be more specific about what he did wrong or did not do?

---

I am not party to what went on at the club. I can only observe happenings from a distance. Doddie gave a very good account of the whole of Hart's reign. Too many people look at two or three sparkling years between 72 and 75. For me the best that can be said about the Hart years is that the club was in no worse a position when he left than when he arrived.

Some specific points:

- Infrastructure, the stadium was allowed to rot into a decaying mess.

- Financial governance - kept paying things out of his own pocket instead of putting proper business practices in place.

- Supporters - seemed to constantly find himself at odds with his own fans.

- Management - allowed results to drift for too long when it was clear things weren't working out with Ned.

I am not saying Hart was the worst chairman we ever had, but he was not one of the greatest. He didn't take Hibs up a level, and didn't prepare us properly for the changes that were happening in the game. I'd give him 7/10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

I am not party to what went on at the club. I can only observe happenings from a distance. Doddie gave a very good account of the whole of Hart's reign. Too many people look at two or three sparkling years between 72 and 75. For me the best that can be said about the Hart years is that the club was in no worse a position when he left than when he arrived.

Some specific points:

- Infrastructure, the stadium was allowed to rot into a decaying mess.

- Financial governance - kept paying things out of his own pocket instead of putting proper business practices in place.

- Supporters - seemed to constantly find himself at odds with his own fans.

- Management - allowed results to drift for too long when it was clear things weren't working out with Ned.

I am not saying Hart was the worst chairman we ever had, but he was not one of the greatest. He didn't take Hibs up a level, and didn't prepare us properly for the changes that were happening in the game. I'd give him 7/10

---

Do you really think so?
Myself I thought that accusing him of being a beast, a fraudster, not fit to clean Farmers is shoes and being of the same ilk as Romanov a bit weird.

Your own observation that the club was not not financially worse off when he left than when he arrived is somewhat at odds with saying that it has taken till now to sort out the mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luna_Asylum

Do you really think so?
Myself I thought that accusing him of being a beast, a fraudster, not fit to clean Farmers is shoes and being of the same ilk as Romanov a bit weird.

Your own observation that the club was not not financially worse off when he left than when he arrived is somewhat at odds with saying that it has taken till now to sort out the mess.

---

I'm trying to be fair mate. He laid the foundations. Let's turn it on its head, what are the arguments for Hart being named one of Hibs greatest chairmen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

I'm trying to be fair mate. He laid the foundations. Let's turn it on its head, what are the arguments for Hart being named one of Hibs greatest chairmen?

---

Fair enough - good question. I am also just trying to be fair as he seems to be getting a bit of a rough time.

I doubt in all honesty a great case can be made for him. For sure I would include Turnballs Tornadoes but others want to deny him any credit for that. Also for a while the sale of players seemed to halt. In fact he allowed the signing of quite a few. Some will say this caused the problems to come later.

Lets agree then on 7/10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luna_Asylum

Fair enough - good question. I am also just trying to be fair as he seems to be getting a bit of a rough time.

I doubt in all honesty a great case can be made for him. For sure I would include Turnballs Tornadoes but others want to deny him any credit for that. Also for a while the sale of players seemed to halt. In fact he allowed the signing of quite a few. Some will say this caused the problems to come later.

Lets agree then on 7/10

---

:grr::grr::grr:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

- notably Tornadoes but they were McFarlanes team largely.
.

---

I think Willie Mac added Scheadler & Duncan, where's Ned brought in Edwards, Gordon & Herriot, the rest were signed by Bill Shankly & beyond.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ray-in-ireland

I think Willie Mac added Scheadler & Duncan, where's Ned brought in Edwards, Gordon & Herriot, the rest were signed by Bill Shankly & beyond.

---

:agree: You're right, probably should have said that in the main they pre dated Ned's era

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser_Sauzee

Please expand on this. What happened?!

---

Hibs beat Rangers 3-2 at ER, incredibly Jim Blair scored 2. Less incredibly Willie Johnston was sent off for Rangers, if memory serves me right for punching the same Blair in a wall defending a free kick.
After game Rangers' directors came into box where TH offered them a drink, Hibs hospitality was legendary at that time. The Rangers refused & were abusive to TH & Tommy Younger, they basically lost the plot accusing Hibs of bribing the ref!! :confused:
TH actually did his best to calm them down & tried to persuade them to have a drink. Huns then said they were off but they wanted their share of gate receipts there & then. TH said ok & asked for all the gate receipts ( including his own turnstile FR :wink: ) to be brought in. The money was all in bags, TH dumped them on the table told Rangers to take the lot & send us back the balance if they needed the cash so badly! To quote Arthur Montford there was almost a bit of a stramash then, TY came close to thumping Willie Waddell, amazingly was restrained by TH, & Rangers fled down stairs with TY chasing them & TH throwing the bags of money after them.
It's obvious from this correspondence that there's mixed feelings over TH but I never found him other than courteous & hospitable & he continually stood up for Hibs, to his personal cost against the Scottish Football establishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luna_Asylum

Fair enough - good question. I am also just trying to be fair as he seems to be getting a bit of a rough time.

I doubt in all honesty a great case can be made for him. For sure I would include Turnballs Tornadoes but others want to deny him any credit for that. Also for a while the sale of players seemed to halt. In fact he allowed the signing of quite a few. Some will say this caused the problems to come later.

Lets agree then on 7/10

---

I think, in fairness to Hart, he pumped a lot of his own money into the club - which came to rely on it too much. When he went it created an instant vaccuum , we went from being rich to poor overnight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Filled Rolls

I think, in fairness to Hart, he pumped a lot of his own money into the club - which came to rely on it too much. When he went it created an instant vaccuum , we went from being rich to poor overnight.

---

You, i think, are as near the truth as we will ever officially know
I only met TH on the odd occasion and never through business
When you spoke with him the fact that he was a Hibee from head to toe was never in doubt .
It was only through my involvement in the Mercer fiasco that I heard the story's , which were presumeably true , re his period "in charge"
At that time it was said he was very much his own man , made his own decisions , did not suffer fools gladly and was proud of the fact he "owned" HFC and happy to spend his own money on the club.
It was also mentioned that decisions were often taken without Board approval but almost always worked out.
The big problem appears to have been that in the event of his standing down/dying there was no financial "plan B " in place and that this alone brought about the problems we are now discussing .
If you roll forward to 2010, and look at the present set up with STF/RP at the helm , you could say lessons have been learned and when "Godfather and Son" leave, the club will be in a sound financial position .

:flag:

I think Farmer, although not a Chairman is an owner just like Hart and Waugh and so should get plaudits for playing a major part in fending off Mercer, funding us out of the SKY tv collapse and the more recent and potentially calamitous takeover bid from Sheihk Radel-Al-Rhol last summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdships

You, i think, are as near the truth as we will ever officially know
I only met TH on the odd occasion and never through business
When you spoke with him the fact that he was a Hibee from head to toe was never in doubt .
It was only through my involvement in the Mercer fiasco that I heard the story's , which were presumeably true , re his period "in charge"
At that time it was said he was very much his own man , made his own decisions , did not suffer fools gladly and was proud of the fact he "owned" HFC and happy to spend his own money on the club.
It was also mentioned that decisions were often taken without Board approval but almost always worked out.
The big problem appears to have been that in the event of his standing down/dying there was no financial "plan B " in place and that this alone brought about the problems we are now discussing .
If you roll forward to 2010, and look at the present set up with STF/RP at the helm , you could say lessons have been learned and when "Godfather and Son" leave, the club will be in a sound financial position .

:flag:

---

You make many good points there but in fact TH had a visionary succession plan for Hibs which involved Eddie Turnbull going on the board while still being Manager, that would have been yet another first for Hibs. For several reasons, some of which cannot be discussed on this board, that never happened but I remember TH talking about this plan around about 1978.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Speedway

I think Farmer, although not a Chairman is an owner just like Hart and Waugh and so should get plaudits for playing a major part in fending off Mercer, funding us out of the SKY tv collapse and the more recent and potentially calamitous takeover bid from Sheihk Radel-Al-Rhol last summer.

---

:faf::faf::faf::top marks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

:faf::faf::faf::top marks

---

What? :confused:

If it had been allowed to go ahead, it would have stirred up all kinds of trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Speedway

I think Farmer, although not a Chairman is an owner just like Hart and Waugh and so should get plaudits for playing a major part in fending off Mercer, funding us out of the SKY tv collapse and the more recent and potentially calamitous takeover bid from Sheihk Radel-Al-Rhol last summer.

---

That was the guy who was planning to build a Heartbreak Hotel at the back of the new stand, wasn't it?

And have all the players playing in Blue Suede Shoes?