Whilst I agree that no one should be subjected to abuse surely this also applies to Petrie?
He's had way more abuse than either Frank or Tracey yet that seems to be acceptable?
Consistency.
Whilst I agree that no one should be subjected to abuse surely this also applies to Petrie?
He's had way more abuse than either Frank or Tracey yet that seems to be acceptable?
Consistency.
He's a bit of a lightning Rod (boom, boom).Quote:
Originally Posted by WhileTheChief..
By way of backing up your belief that the polls on here and the bounce are unrepresentative of Hibs fans as a whole, can you think of any other polls on here or the bounce which have been overwhelmingly in favour of one position, yet the Hibs support at large have proved to be in favour of a completely different thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by green day
Quote:
Originally Posted by BSEJVT
Just so I understand - are you saying the 2 directors who we have a say in electing snd who we can freely contact should be done away with leaving 7 directors that we have absolutely no say in their appointment?
You think it's progress to ditch two committed lifelong hibs supporters and just have faceless directors who may not even attend games (other than Rod and Leeann) ?
Incidentally - it is possible to gauge the opinion of Hibs fans and nobody forced Frank or Tracey to do anything. Who is saying they were forced?
That's exactly what I am sayingQuote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Clash
They are on a hiding to nothing, unable to report on most of the burning issues we would want them to because of the need for confidentiality
They are a historical anomaly to a time when the board was seen as being completely out of touch with the Fans.
When you sit on a board you have two choices, support the position or resign, anything else is fragrantly dishonest of those involved.
I don't believe either Tracy or Frank were forced to do anything and would not for one second accuse them of being fragrantly dishonest.
Board's and their members need to compromise sometimes, its a pity that supporters free of those responsibilities cant see that or wont see that.
The simple truth is the board do what they have to do for the clubs future and prosperity.
That is often fully at odds with the fans wishes and having the entire Scottish Cup winning team in their place wouldn't change that if some of the fans didn't agree and felt strongly enough about the issue.
They do a great job representing the club at functions, funerals and visits here and there, but the only thing a seat on the board gives them is greater kudos in doing so.
If we feel strongly enough about anything we can contact the CEO
If this whole sorry mess has shown nothing else it is that having Fans Reps on the board will still result in a significant portion of the fans being aggrieved at decisions
Football decisions are never black or white, I am way beyond caring what happened years ago and prefer to look to the future. Others feel differently and are absolutely entitled to but it seems to me that those making all the noise on the topic (as is often the case on any topic) believe that they speak for everyone, they don't.
I am certainly not going to condemn the club or its current office bearers over it as I believe fully they have the clubs best interests at heart and acted in them and with the benefit of much more information and insight than those condemning them.
Its not possible to gauge the opinion of the support accurately without doing as I said or something akin to it as folk engage or don't as the case may be over so many different mediums and ways.
You can learn the opinion of the majority of the medium(s) you are canvassing, no more
It is an impossible task, even then lets say every fan thought the board should do something but the board knew they couldn't or shouldn't what would change?
The board are there to take the hard decisions that fans with their emotional involvement wont and suffer the consequences
The Time for Heroes video must have left no-one in doubt what Hibs mean to Rod Petrie and STF, yet even now Rod Petrie is derided for making hard decisions knowing they and he will be unpopular as a result as everything bad is Rod' s fault .
If fans reps are going to be dishonest, they should definitely smell nice while doing it. :agree: :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by BSEJVT
Sorry mate - 'your post is cap in hand' nonsense. On this occasion our elected reps have made what looks like a serious misjudgment after probably listening to people with similar views to yourself '.Quote:
Originally Posted by BSEJVT
Not so long ago there were posts praising our reps. So don't panic - you want to contact CEO direct then on you go. Don't see many posts on here by the CEO mind you.! Or offers to meet the support on Sayurday - which I think is admirable. You gonna be meeting the CEO on Saturday? I don't think so.
Supporters reps need to learn from this. Unlike you I do not think elected reps must be toothless on the board They can and hopefully will argue on behalf of supporters even if Rod disagrees. I bet you they probably both did - but then succumbed to this notion of having to be unanimous. Which is complete bollocks.
As for the other 5 directors what you saying about them ? ... you'd need to spend all night on google to find out who they are yet they also voted for the Rod!
Sorry, but sporting rules should always be black or white. If they're not black or white then they shouldn't exist. Grey areas exist in business, in politics, that's fine, but when they exist in sport then they go against everything that sport should stand for.Quote:
Originally Posted by BSEJVT
What amazes me is the number of people who are backing the statement (which basically says there is no value in spending the money on a review) without even asking how much a review would cost Hibs. If someone doesn't care any more then I can accept that, it means that they have no opinion on the matter, they are neutral; so why does it appear that they do actually have an opinion? That they specifically believe that we are better off not having a review when we don't even know what the downside to having a review is?
Mellow Hibee in the circustances might be an interesting nic. Perhaps for some its a question of loving Hibs more than hating rangers (despite what they have done).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellow Hibee
I consider myself someone who loves Hibs more than I hate Rangers, but I don't understand why backing a review would somehow diminish my love of Hibs. With the best will in the world, I can't see the downside to a review. If someone showed me why a review would be detrimental to Hibs, then I would give it some consideration, but so far I haven't seen anything (happy to be enlightened though).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancs Harp
What is cap in hand about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Clash
I think the Fans Reps are a distraction and short of their good works in representing the club at various events have and will achieve the square root of FA meaningful.
I suspect the boot is on the other foot in that you have deluded yourself into believing they can effect change whilst representing the fans.
They cant, they have the same responsibilities to the board as the other board members.
They were IMO a sop to the support at a time the relationship with the fans had completely broken down.
If the much vaunted anti EBT "majority" are to be believed they have done exactly the opposite of what IMO the role should be about and argued that "majority's" decision on the matter at the board.
If that majority exists, which I highly doubt, amongst the wider support they should have voted against the boards position and when that position was upheld resigned.
Instead they made up their own minds and voted accordingly disregarding the "majority" mandate they were given.
I have no problem with that, they are perfectly entitled to do so and I am certain did so honourably
But exactly how did they represent the "majority" of the support in this situation? They did not, could not, can not and never can.
All boards reach unanimous decisions, it needs to be so to show unity.
But if you cant support the boards decision IMO you should resign if you feel strongly enough against the stance taken.
You might not agree that that is the way it should be, but that is exactly how it is.
We will never know and rightly so, how the debate on the topic went, but what is clear is that no-one felt the need to resign.
BTW this isn't anti Tracy or Frank, its a comment on the unenviable position they find themselves in.
I have huge personal admiration for them giving up their time and taking the abuse they get.
This is much more about the ****ty end of the stick they find themselves holding, they are asked to do an impossible job.
BTW and to answer your other point, I have nothing to speak to the CEO about so wont be, but if I did I am confident she would hear my voice at a time appropriate to us and then do what she thought was right for the club.
Do you really think that if Frank told her the seagulls were annoying and dangerous just before kick off he would get much air time?
As for the other 5 directors, as far as I am aware they aren't part of this debate on the effectiveness or appropriateness of fans reps?
But fwiw I think they heard what they needed to hear and voted as their consciences dictated. Exactly as they should have.
Again as far I know though they didn't have "majority" mandate from those they were specifically appointed to the board to represent to carry any particular message to the board or to vote according to that mandate in any debate?
Sorry - don't have time for a lengthy response - distracted watching the EBT cheats get pumped just now .Quote:
Originally Posted by BSEJVT
Suffice to say your comment : "All boards reach unanimous decisions" tells me you don't understand how 'all boards' work so I can see why your other points are so contradictory and wrong. 'Cap in hand' as in subservient - which you're entitled to be it's just I don't agree with that mindset. That's all.
Total tosh.In other words reps must do what you think or their thinking is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Clash
No. Absolutely not.Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient hibee
As I sit on a couple of boards I am pretty confident I do!Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Clash
By the time the decision hits the papers it is unanimous, if its not then you are opening up divisions for inspection and interrogation or folk have resigned.
I am well aware of what cap in hand means.
To be honest, before your dig above, I had not a clue who you thought was cap in hand
I thought it may have been the Fans Reps as they have done as they were told by the board as opposed to following the direction of the "majority" of the support who elected them.
I am too polite to say so but I would class your position as far more cap in hand, you have swallowed the sweetener that is the Fans Reps but the brew tastes just as bad.
I support the boards decision, as I said before it is old ground that long ceased interesting me, quite how that makes me cap in hand you will need to explain.
There's no point in arguing with someone who knows everything, listens to nothing and cant debate points he is called to order on, so I am out.
But maybe you could indulge me before I go by telling me exactly what our Fans Reps have achieved of substance to date and what you think they can achieve in future that makes them so essential to our future?
You could maybe then go on to tell me why most other clubs have not followed this model and why they are missing out on the opportunity to do so?
It is pure window dressing, it is nice to think we are represented but as I keep saying if the "majority" view was that The Rangers should be held to account over the EBT's and this wasn't the outcome then what role are they fulfilling?
What value are they adding to the support if they act according to their conscience rather than their mandate?
IMO that makes them no different to the other 5 directors you glibly derided earlier?
I cant for the life of me see what they have done to support your position on this matter that makes them worthy of such stout praise or defence, but good on you for it.
I think most accepted that he wasn't a great candidate, but the person who asked the questions was extremely disrespectful, which was the main issue for many.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Will the information/legal side info be made public ?.Quote:
Originally Posted by traceyhibs
A lot of her argument is that it's based on views and emails on forums and emails. She should maybe stop going on Follow Follow as much.
Personally I think this whole official statement saga is completely over the top, we have enough to focus our energy on as a club, let's move on. Rangers got punted down to the bottom league and have played there way back up through the leagues. Let's move on!!Quote:
Originally Posted by traceyhibs
I am surprised to see our fans reps are voting on behalf of the fans on decisions at board meetings but voting based on their personal view and info they are privy to but the fans they represent are not. Very strange.
These fans rep roles were to be transparent and the biggest issue Hibs fans had with the roles was communication. poor Charlene got shot down during the nomination process for providing comm's from the working together meeting but this is the kind of things the fans want.
The fans rep role is not just 1 way where they take our moans and groans to the club, we need info communicated coming back out of the club eg topics that have been discussed at board meetings. It's not all sensitive info, that's just a screen for saying they don't want the fans knowing what's discussed. Or is there a central site/forum that I have missed where comms/minutes from our fans reps are kept.
Some of the comments on here - jeezo!
This is not about a hatred of the Huns and stripping titles, its to do with backing a review on the integrity of the folk who were/are in charge of our game. Don't know why folk can't see that.
Tracey has not answered anything in her reps statement about why the reps voted the way they did other than the 2 of them suffered abuse on social media and folk accusing their statements being written by someone else.
To be fair, Tracey did say that both were privy to further legal opinion/documents/advice that led them to their conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by ColinNish
I wonder why we need 2 fans reps, when one does all the talking for both?
Still. This. In 2017. Really?Quote:
Originally Posted by macca70
You're a funny guy .Quote:
Originally Posted by itslegaltender
Good line wasn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by sleeping giant
I liked it!Quote:
Originally Posted by oldbutdim
To a great number of folk it will always be about stripping titles that were obtained while playing ineligibly registered players. Any inquiry could open a door that would allow what should have been the ordinary process of having stripped them when using ineligibly registered players to be looked at again. I'm backing the board's decision but still feel aggrieved at a the Oldco being allowed to retain titles that ordinarily would have been rendered null and void in almost any other sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by ColinNish
Maybe they have different skill sets but both provide a valuable contributionQuote:
Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs
You seem to be bordering on a personal vendetta though
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaster
If this was Petrie he'd be getting the same questioning from me.
No idea what you are getting at or what your question is, put it in format of a sentence rather than just random words.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee