Thetownend.com

Seton taking the law into his own hands 8)

I'm assuming he's referring to our friends at Trust Stfc?

It seems so.

source?

I'm looking forward to reading what Reg has to say about this to be honest.

He's not a happy bunny! I suppose he's perfectly within his rights to be upset considering the investments he's made over the years.

Just posted on the official site.

 I blame Justin Tomlinson for upsettimg SSW.....he carried out the putsch, that turned the Trust into a political organisation....even Sonic Youth posts on their forum.

Not happy at all is he.

I think in recent memory including this one I have only ever seen three official statements from Sir Seton Wills.  One being an end of season interview for the match day programme the other being a condemnation of the Trust after they slammed Mike Diamandis's involvement and approached DD to I believe utilise his shares.

Think the key paragraph has to be:



Clearly the Trust's ticket price proposals have hit a raw nerve and upset a few people behind the scenes.

 The recent comments over Diamandis’s ex-employee Sandy Gray also appear to have not gone unnoticed.  Although to be fair to the Trust this has purely been mentioned on message boards and not been released as an official statement, or in any way part of anything official from the Trust.
 
Considering what they have recently achieved on the stadium development front, if you believe it's motivated or not, it's a bit of a harsh condemnation.

Ask yourself this...

Why have all these 'happy stories' come out this week?

What harm would a supporters rep do if you never had something to hide?

Sir Seton wills has done fantasticly for this club but the guy shouldn't be untouchable.I do agree with Reg though, the viabilty of the Trust has been comprimised by JT's involvement.But he is no longer involved and ask your self what have the Trust got to gain?

They are after a sucsesfull STFC and nothing else,what does everyone else want?

It's not the first time Sir Seton's had a go at the trust and in some way I think he has a fair point, I didn't think there figures on ticketing were that well researched, as I've said before, I don't think they've taken everything into account with the attendances and it's based on too much conjecture.

Sir Seton is hugely important for the future of this football club, his family control the club and have loaned us millions, I can't see any viable alternatives so the trust should be careful with what they're saying.

So why no supporter on the board?

the Trusts figures may not add up (they do) but whats to stop a fan on  the board?

they are hiding something and this broadside at a supporters orginisation proves it.

Do agree Yeovil.

While the praise for the supporters club is well justified the political comments regarding the Trust really boil down to the fact that both organisations have very different defining roles.

Whether you agree with the Trust or not I think it’s vital that a body of sorts exists to question the decisions that affect us all.  Clearly some of the questions being asked are not to the liking of those in charge.

Rather than release such a public denunciation I think the board and Sir Seton would have been far better served had they looked to actively engage some of the comments made and if they are so unresearched and politically motivated then set the record straight.

Personally it looks like the club are trying to discredit the Trust and drive a wedge between it and the fans.

 To give this message any credibility it was made by the one person who fans hold in the highest regard (or in any regard in some cases) involved with the club, Sir Seton Wills.

I think it’s a real shame that he’s felt the need to do this but it doesn’t in any way effect the respect and appreciation I have for all that he’s done.

sir seton probably didnt even write it, i expect some other PR person at the club did it, just like the letter from willie carson thats comes with the season ticket promotion & accounts & stuff. carson doesnt go near it yet it still has his name on it

like you said, just using his name to try & give it respect

Well I don't believe Sir Seton would let a statement be released using his name if it didn't reflect his views.

What he asks is for a trust member not to apply for a directorship, presumably because of the atmosphere he feels there comments have created.

I think he has a fair point that we have over achieved with the funds at our disposal, certainly to make the playoffs last year was a magnificent achievement.

But what are the Trust going to do? What have they achieved so far? Whilst I accept that the supporters club aren't going to be funding a takeover anytime soon, they have constantly raised money for the club and channeled it in endlessly and asked for nothing in return. The Trust have raised very little money and are content to demand a seat on the board whilst complaining about everything under the sun.

As much as I'd like to see a representative of the fans on the board of directors, I personally feel a member of TrustSTFC would be wholly inappropriate.

FAO Yeovil......with regard your assertion on the Trust site to BWB about SSW, he wasn't born into the tobacco family, but rather married into it.....having been previously plain David Seton.

Why?

what do you think they will get out of it?

Are the Trust making money out of STFC?

Will the Tust gain in the future?


These people are Swindon fans that are scaring the board(they stand to gain nothing apart from a safe footing for OUR football club)They want what we want!

As far as im concerned Sonic you are ill informed and prejudiced against anything to do with the Trust.

I dont see how this changes anything?

just change 'born' into 'married' in the original post.As far as im concerened everything that is wrong with our club can be condensed into the last 5 (probably) hours...

 I'm not suggesting it changes anything......just pointing it out.

 Although I suppose teh son of a rich family would have been unlikely to have stood on the terraces at 1950's STFC and developed a lifetime passion for the club.

I can't believe you wrote that  :(  



The trust haven't done anything for the club.  

Their ill-informed, badly thought out and poorly presented piece about ticket prices is an embarassment to all trust members.

Does anyone know who does the printing (where the majority of your trust subscription and some of your Red Army Fund donation goes?)  would it be Tomlinson?  

The political thing has got so far out of hand its embarassing.  Tomlinson is an arse trying to further his own political career, but I'm not sure if that is what SSW means - maybe he means the whole trying to get a place on the board issue and getting in the way of re development and trying to get involved in the running of the club, expressing their minority opinion publicly via the press and interfering with negociations with the council.

The trust are not the voice for Swindon fans.  They are self-appointed.  At their meeting - how many turned up?  

Why the fuck should the owners and directors of STFC pay the slightest bit of attention to what a handful of people say?  Its their company - not the trusts and at the end of the day they are perfectly and rightly entitled to run their company as they see fit.  

A member of the trust on the Board of Directors?  :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:

I don't doubt for a minute that there are some members of the trust who are very dedicated to STFC and try their best to make a difference and their hearts are in the right place and they should be commended - but there are undoubtably some with an agenda.

The Supporters Club on the other hand, is doing great stuff for the club, sponsoring, donating, raising funds - all without trying to get on the board's back.  

We are lucky to have SSW continue to back the club.  I'm not surprised he's disgusted with the trust.  I've often thought about joining the trust, but now I'm glad I didn't.  

Hurrah for the supporters club - who really are making a difference.

It's not something I follow particularly closely but the Trust have done precisely fuck all, why do they deserve to be on the board? I don't doubt their intentions are good but what are they going to achieve? They wrongly think they speak for all supporters and their contribution to the club has been pitiful, as far as I can see the only time they're in the press is when they're criticising the club.

I simply don't think a member of the Trust on the board would appropriately represent the fans.

There's also Justin Tomlinson, of course.

oh dear are the trust now trying to make out they got us a scoreboard? :box:

http://www.thisisstfc.co.uk/forum_new/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21695

oooh I love proving people wrong!

No, that's just someone posting on the Adver forum who apparently can't tell the difference between the Trust and the SC

ahh, hello mr davis. what brings you to bandit country?

Erm, well for one thing there was getting cross-party support for the motion to redevelop the CG without which the club would not even have been talking to the council about the CG redevelopment the statement slagging off the Trust urges us all to get behind. There's more than that obviously but it's all on the Trust website if you're really interested, but I just thought this one was so ironic as to be almost funny.

I didn't see anyone from the trust try to put them straight which is a pity since when anyone posts anything negative about the trust - up pops a trust person with their spin......

My damn browser which is having a bit of a senior evening. Keeps flaking out on me so apologies if I disappear suddenly - I'm about to throw the pc out the window and focus on drinking beer which is what I should be doing anyway!

Are you trying to say the Trust are solely responsible for the motion to redevelop the CG?

To be fair, I just went over there to do that and sonicyouth had done it before me. I could post a message saying the same as sonic did, but I don't think it would be very helpful would it.

Erm, if it helps,  by the way, as you seem to have a strong dislike for Justin T, I've never voted Tory in my life and don't intend to start in the near future.

In terms of initiating getting the motion in, drafting the motion, scurrying round in the background meeting the leaders of all the political groups on the council to get all-party support for it, re-drafting the motion so the politicos could all agree on it, redrafting it again when they fell out a bit about some obscure wording, sorting out the petition backing it, getting members and fans to write to and email their councillors supporting the motion, being the only ones who answered the letters in the Adver from people slagging off the motion, then, well, yes to that extent I am. Apart from that though we did fuck all and just sat back.

I think to question the overall trust’s motivation is very low.

Sorry folks but there it is.

What have they done for the club?

Financially from memory they secured the clubs training ground in a sponsorship deal a few years back.  Not to mention the Red Army fund, which they have campaigned tirelessly to promote and we have already seen the results in the Michael Proctor deal this season.

Not to mention they where successful in collecting over 4,000 signatures and helping to get the stadium development back on its feet.  Hardly representing a minority view.

Sorry Mrs Spacey but who does the printing is just not an issue worth even debating.  

Although it’s absolutely narrow mindedness in my opinion I can understand why some people might question Justin Tomlinson’s position, after all he is a Tory. However, he puts in a lot of work for the trust and so what if it buys him a little publicity?  If his efforts benefit the club at the end of the day what the fuck does it matter?  To label the whole of the trust ‘political’ on that basis and that basis alone is ridiculous.

As I mentioned previously the supporters club are an absolute shining light, but to use a term I’ll hate myself for here, their ‘mission statement’ is a very different one to the Trust.  

I have followed the trust closely since it came about and I can say that they are an impressive example of people who have the clubs very best interests at heart.  

The statement made today and in the circumstances is pitiful.  As it was released on the website, as I understand it at present, members of the trust where in a meeting with Bob Holt and Sandy Gray who agreed that they would work together with the Trust.

The one sentiment that I agreed with Sir Seton Wills in that statement is that now is a time we all need to work together and rally behind the club.  This really has had the completely opposite effect.

I must admit if this now serves to drive a wedge between the club, Sir Seton Wills, the board, between the fans themselves, the supporters club and the trust I will be gutted.

4,000 people supporting the development, not the Trust. Huge difference there.

Nobody is questioning the motives of the Trust, they are fans and want what's best for the club. I simply don't see what they have done that's worthy of seat on the board of directors.

As far as I'm aware there's already a 'wedge' between the Trust and the supporter's club

Bob Holt wasn't there in the end, but I was along with Tony Norris and Andy Ratcliffe for the Trust as was Sandy Gray and the club's press officer/website editor. Sandy G showed us the statement and told us it would be going out at the AGM - she "forgot" to mention it had already been released on the club website. We told her that we thought Sir Seton had been badly misinformed as to the nature and purpose of the Trust and what we have and have not said and done. And that there was nothing to be served by releasing this statement and starting a public spat. She appeared to agree with us, although as she presumably knew (as CEO and with the website editor sat next to her) that the statement had already been released on the site while we were waiting to go into the meeting with them, this kind of sticks in my craw a little at present.

As will we. I've got nothing but respect for SSW - although I do think he's been ill-advised to the point of being misled over this. We've tried very hard to work with the board this season, but it would appear everything we've done of a positive nature is forgotten or dismissed because we had the temerity to criticise the ticket prices. "Pay up and shut up" it would seem is the appropriate attitude for fans.

the trust has good motives but they never seem to ever get much done in my opinion, and nor do the supporters club really. Both organisations are great and for a good cause just don't seem to do that much, might be just me.

i signed up with the truststfc this season and got 1 thing thorugh the post about what there doing.... didn't last long. it was good and gave information, but we want regualrly updates on what there doing.

Not as far as I'm aware there isn't, and I'm a member of the Trust board so if there is a wedge it's a pretty one-sided one. Erm, can you have a one-sided wedge?

I certainly hope there isn't because I think the SC do a top job (and I don't know anyone who thinks otherwise), it's just they do a different job to the one we do. And they do it bloody well.

You might like to post on the Adver forum to confirm that the trust had nothing to do with the scoreboard in case Sonic's post may be deleted (due to the fact he has the townend website in his signature and they really don't appreciate the competition :roll: )


I've looked into the Supporters' Club and the Trust and I would like to think that I never express an opinion unless I am happy that it is a reasonably informed opinion (aside from the occasional mucking about stuff).

The Supporters' Club have raised over 10 times as much money for the club in the same period of time as the Trust.  They do not makes demands of the Board.

I'm quite happy to learn why you (as in you the Trust - not you personally) seem to think you have the right to speak for all of us fans.  Also why do you think you have the right to tell somebody else how to run their company?


Again I'd like to stress that this isn't personal and I know that some of you really do have the best intentions. :)


Well, as for Tomlinson, where do I start?  I reckon he's a liability to be honest.  He came on here - professing to tell us all what's going on with the redevelopment and basically patronised us and then bored us all into a coma, then ran away to slag us off on the trust site...the only thing I learnt from him was that you can fit 4 bags of rubbish into a wheelie bin!

Obviously, I don't know the whole situation but from what I understand the Trust aren't the most popular of people amongst many people from the supporters club. Perhaps I misunderstood and got the wrong end of the stick.

For the record, I am totally biased but you already realised that.

So what exactly is it that you do which makes you so different to the supporters club? Moan about ticket prices and rant on internet forums?

The point was the Trust where the ones that instigated it all and as PaulD mentioned above where responsible for doing a lot of the ground work.

What have the board done worthy of a seat on the board?  Being employed by Mike Diamandis?

Speculation and not really an issue I know.  But, I think their work speaks for its self and if that's not worthy of a place on the board I don't know what is.

Trust/fan representation on the board would be a massive boost for the fans in terms of bringing the club closer to it’s supporters base and help clear up and improve a lot of the negativity that exists..

As for the rift between the supporters club and the Trust it’s not something I am aware of but would be interested to know about.  If there is I see both parties have had the good grace not to air their dirty laundry in public.

i think the fan on the board is a great idea and get it done. but i just don;t want one of them nonces from the trust doing it, want someone that will just tell us whats happening, not some 60 year old. a proper fan would be nice.

also....maybe the wrong time to ask but who is Mike Diamandis?

I don't think that's very fair on either us or the SC - but maybe both of us need to be better about communicating what we are doing. But then when we do that, we get slagged off for being in the press too much :?

That'd be the latest newsletter I assume? You should have had one a few weeks ago. To be fair, there's pretty regular updates on what we've been doing on the website, and this season we've been sending fairly regular email updates to members - if you haven't been getting them send me your membership ref and email  to [email protected] and I'll add you to the list, (also if you didn't get the newsletter sent through a few weeks ago). We try and keep the amount we send out by post down because of the cost. The idea is to try not to spend too much money on postage and letters etc so we have more money for (e.g.) getting leaflets printed backing the CG redevelopment, putting in for the Harold Fleming medals etc.

fucking hell, do we have to go down the Mike Diamandis path? I don't want Dazzza getting the club knocking down his door  :shock:

oh right, fair enough then mate. yeh i got the newsletter thing a few weeks ago.
Well, just keep telling us what your doing. i probably should also just look at the site more often.

yeh i was going to e mail you cause you lot also have my details all completely wrong  :soapy tit wank: i will e mail sometime in the near future

Erm, likewise. But preferably off-forum as I'd agree about dirty laundry in public and that

Mr Davis, once you're done campaigning on behalf of TrustSTFC, would you care to answer my question?

So what exactly is it that you do which makes you so different to the supporters club?

I'm a bit behind in this thread tonight.    :-))(

I don't think the trust has ever claimed to speak for all of the fans and it would be unacceptable to ever do so.

However the questions and points they have raised in my opinion have all been very valid and have needed asking.  The impression of being trouble makers for the sake of it is grossly unfair.

The way the club has been run in the past it’s imperative that issues are raised.  The current board are not the best of communicators and it’s in everyone’s interests that concerns are addressed and points put across.

A fan representative on the Board is a lovely idea yes - but what if it were your company?

This is Swindon Town - a private company - we are talking about and not Barclays!  The club doesn't make any money - everything is done on a very tight budget and understandably so...would you want someone on the board who could influence decision-making  and possibly lead to the loss of your investment and to the club being wound up (albeit unintentionally and with the best of intentions)?

SSW isn't launching an attack on the fans, he's protecting his interest.

As for the Supporters' Club vs Trust rift - I don't know anything about that.  What I know is the good work being done by the Supporters' Club will mean I will be renewing my membership (after a couple of lapsed years  :oops: - I'm a busy bunny) and offering as much as my time as I can to helping them continue.

I know quite a lot about the Diamandis / Dunwoody stuff (and I might chuck another D for Devlin in there for good measure)...but Dazzza you seem to know a little bit more - wanna tell?  :D

What is it you know, out of interest?

I think a lot of people are being a bit paranoid about Diamandis and the board's intentions, people read far too much into things sometimes.

Just have - just to make you happy! Although I still think it looks a bit silly with sonic's comment as well, so I kind of hope they do delete his post!


Actually the SC have been going twice as long as us, but yes, no arguments whatever they have raised a lot more money than we have and probably always will. They are very good at it and should be praised at every opportunity for doing so - as indeed we did, giving credit for the scoreboard, in our last newsletter. It's on the website under Newsletters - go check if you don't believe me! But that's not (primarily) what we're there for - Supporters' Trusts are a government backed initiative (under a group called Supporters' Direct) to get fans more involved in running their clubs. OK, we have been fundraising as well with the Red Army Fund (in conjunction with the SC, I might add), but it's not our primary aim - arguably we've confused matters with the Red Army Fund, but I'm not going to apologise for having raised over 10 grand to be spent on players!


We don't - we speak for our members. And if you don't like what we're saying we're a democratic organisation - join the Trust, stand for the (Trust) board and knock some common sense into us. Or come to a members' meeting and tell us where we're going wrong.

Well, it's not just a company is it? It's a football club we all, as fans, have a profound stake in (not to mention having put a shedload of money in over the years in season tickets etc). Let's face it, if it was just a business, it'd have gone to the wall years ago. And to be fair, what we've tried to do is not just have a go but offer help as well and where we think something's been done wrong, offer constructive criticism. Like with the alternative ticket prices proposals. You might not personally have been impressed with them - fair enough - but they were as well researched as they could be without access to the actual gate receipts, costed, well-thought out. And come on, you must admit, it's certainly a damn sight better than just going "WAaaahhh! Prices too high!" Please remember as well, the proposal was supposed to be the basis for a discussion with the club when we met for the consultation on ticket prices which Bob Holt publicly promised to do but the board then backed out of that consultation. I'd have welcomed (and still would) someone from the board going through the figures with us and proving that we were just wrong and that the prices they've set are necessary. Fair enough - we offered tonight in fact that if they can do that and prove there is a genuine business plan and analysis behind the ticket prices, and that our figures are bollocks, we'll put out a press release saying so. No probs.


Thank you very much


I'm not here to defend Justin - he's a politico and more than capable of fighting his own corner - but as I remember it, he didn't slag you off on our site that was Gerald Phillips/Gerry/StiltonRed/bobby "defending" him. And erm, well, you don't need me to tell you what Gerald's like. And I'm certainly not defending him!!

Can you really get four bags of rubbish in a wheelie-bin? Did he say if we can all have one? I could really use one to be honest.

I think/hope I've answered that in my reply to mrs spacey below. But if I haven't I'm sure you'll tell me. Sorry about the delay - tried to answer mrs s as fully as I could and it took a while to do all that typing!

"No the supporters club did - raised 10 grand to do it iirc."

Fair bit more than that in all honesty!

Apologies - tell me how much more and I'll go back and correct my own post. Or if you can't say exactly, point me in the right area.

Nearer double that but don't bother changing it, I just wanted to nitpick 8)

thanks for the response. I must confess that I had misconstrued your intentions with the RAF and thought you were trying to fundraise. Apologies.

On another note, how long have these redevelopment discussions been going on?

Erm, well we are with the Red Army Fund, obviously. But it's not our main thrust (ooh, err)


With the club? Council? We started to ask around with the council over the summer after the Shaw Tip fiasco went belly up - we'd been telling the club it was going to for months by the way and pleading with them to do some PR work on it, talk to councillors, talk to residents etc. But they were convinced they didn't need to worry until nearer the planning application so it all went tits up long before then.

Then there was a couple of months of the club (well, Bob Holt) and the council just slagging each other off. Which we kind of thought would probably not help get a new stadium built. So we approached councillors off our own backs and made it clear we were an independent fans' group (and local residents) and that opened doors the club had closed to themselves. The club is widely regarded with some suspicion by some councillors who see it as little more than a badly run business that wants local taxpayers to keep bailing it out, then slags the council off when it screws things up. But we were able to come in from another angle and "pitch" the benefits a CG redevelopment would have for the whole town. And yes Justin T was very helpful helping us get off the ground in that (explaining how the council works etc) and also in getting the Tory group to back it. I don't see we should apologise for that (or that he should for that matter).

And these meetings are still going on - we're in the process of trying to set up meetings with the new leaders of the Labour and Lib Dem groups on the council to get to know them, let them know who we are, why the continued survival of STFC is something they should care about etc.

Does that answer the question? hope so cos I'm off to bed shortly!

I see, thanks again for your quick response and it was most informative. Interestingly, when Devlin was still at the club I recall a supporters club meeting at which he mentioned that the club would be playing in a new stadium by 06/07 and that the likely location was Shaw Tip. After his departure, Bob Holt came to a meeting and fielded questions as the Shaw Tip farce had gone tits up and there was mention of the ground being redeveloped then, apparently it was something the club had looked into but shelved in favour of a new location, as previous objections from local residents were a problem beforehand.

I don't recall dates or even a vague idea of when it happened but I thought it was an interesting point nevertheless.

I do remember something similar Sonic but it came from Devlin in an interview on the radio.

It was just as the Forest group where gaining real momentum and the official plans where just being released.

The question about a CG redevelopment was fielded by the answer that it had been looked into but was not a 'feasible' option mainly due to the cost.

Must admit at the time it came across as propaganda and justifiably so as it was at the unveiling of the plans.  

Logically, St Mowden and the board would always have opted for a move to Shaw as first choice as it would allow for a lot more housing on the CG site and more importantly profit.

Whether we like it or not the Trust will be the body that picks up the pieces of STFC when the shit hits the fan as is looking increasingly likely. This is because its an organisation, which is part of a wider community, charged with the task.

 It is also right and proper that questions are being raised as to the running of the club. I would like the Trust at the AGM to oppose the re-election of Sandy Gray, and offer an alternative candidate as a director.....obviously this is no more than a gesture, but is the correct vehicle for registering dissatisfaction.

I'd like to join back in with this but I went to the pub .I'll wait until tomorrow innit :oops:

Tomorrow is today.

Please stop correcting me Reg

 :soapy tit wank:

Please stop correcting me, Reg

Surely the onus is on you to tell us where you are going right.  

Incidently, how many members does the Trust have?

And how many members turned up to your last meeting?

Why should I join?






No I think you'll find it is a company which needs to trade as a going concern to be signed off by the auditors.

Yes ticket prices are high.  But they are not silly.  With regard to the Trust ticket price proposals I wasn't impressed - again I'm sure it was done with the best intentions and perhaps what we were shown on the trust website wasn't what was presented to the Club (I mean in terms of presentation).

I do stuff like that on a day to day basis and I know how you can pick and choose what info to include and what stance you choose whatever analysis you like at the end of the day.  Equally important, however, is how you present your findings.

We all know if youspeak to Bob Holt and Sandy Gray - they're not experienced at dealing with this sort of thing, although I'm sure they are very nice people.




Lie down with dogs and you get fleas!

If you need information on wheelie bin capacity - Tomlinson is your man - its only a matter of time before a new career in refuse collection beckons for the poor lad...

 :D

I'd hope we don't have to. From what I can gather from some months of lurking (having only broken my posting cherry tonight), you think we all want the club to go tits-up so we can form some kind of AFC Swindon, but I can assure you we bloody don't. What we'd like is to see a well-run club that connects with the community its based in, where the town appreciates the club and vice-versa. Hell, we may even get a few more people coming thru the gates. But that's the kind of dangerous radicals we are and why we have to be so thoroughly stamped on when we dare to raise questions about whether, possibly, things are not being run quite so well as they might be. Bloody nutters, the lot of us.


Actually I wouldn't. But the Trust will be voting in line with your wishes, Reg. Personally I think Sandy Gray has actually been a convenient scapegoat for decisions taken higher up the chain than her. Plus she's been dumped into a public-facing role she's clearly uncomfortable with and I suspect didn't want. All of which makes her an easy "whipping-boy". Which is why at the last members' meeting I voted against the proposal that the Trust should oppose her re-election as a director. But I lost the argument and was outvoted so the Trust will be voting against Sandy Gray's re-appointment as a director, as you wish Reg. But that's the nice thing about the Trust (and pretty much the whole point) - every member has an equal vote so it's a forum where every fan's voice counts. Paradoxically, I was almost happy to be outvoted (tho I still think its unfair on Sandy Gray) as it shows we're an organisation where the fans count and no-one can play Billy Big Bollocks (as my mate Luggsy would say).

Bob Holt has been the Acting CEO of the club all season until he was replaced by Sandy Gray, who I have it on good authority (Sandy Gray's - she told us in the meeting we had with her earlier this evening) will be confirmed in this role on a permanent basis at Tuesday's AGM. So when you say "they're not experienced at dealing with this sort of thing, although I'm sure they are very nice people" - they're running the club. And you're happy with this?

The whole point is that its not up to me.  

Its difficult for me to comment on SG's ability on a personal level, however it has been noted by a number of people that SG may not be sufficientltly experienced for such a role.  Removing myself from my love of STFC and trying to look at this in my professional capacity and objectively, I reckon they have a point - but what is the alternative?  

Do we suggest some trust person who has what experience exactly?

Any other alternatives?

What would rocking the boat at the meeting achieve?

Why? I've met her and I've said what I think - she's being made the scapegoat for some poor decisions being made above her. You've said you don't know whether she's any good or not but you defend those very same decisions and you "don't want to rock the boat". Me, I want the club to be well-run. So hang me.

I'm going to disregard anything that has been said after your "I'm off to bed shortly" post, as clearly this statement was false  :wink:

I haven't met her, I do not have a copy of her cv or references, or have I spoken to anyone in an official capacity about what exactly her role will entail.

I really want to avoid the comments that are to be expected of some people along the lines of SG she's rubbish/crap/a woman...blah blah etc..

I honestly don't know.  

Although I know all about Holy, Wills, Diamandis, Carson etc

I want the club to be well run too :D .

In what way would you want to run the club differently?

Couldn't agree more Reg.