Jump to content

jaf

Members
  • Content Count

    1,362
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

343 Excellent

About jaf

  • Rank
    Jags fan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array
  • Team
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

1,949 profile views
  1. It’s not an exchange of views its an opinion (yours) which is now corroborated as being erroneous versus inconvenient facts which are now corroborated as being true. Yet still no apology that your speculation was wrong? I hope, if elected, you can leave these petty biases and erroneous preconceptions behind.
  2. As most people know, I am Sandy Fyfe and I am standing. Good suggestion Tom.
  3. I know you won’t believe me, and that’s why I suggested @tom hosie should pop on and verify this so we can move on from your erroneous unfair speculation. Tom had a desire to put facts out there on this thread and you respected and accepted his version of events. You are speculating entirely wrongly. Tom can confirm you are and I hope he does so we can move on. You could perhaps even proactively PM him to validate what I am saying?
  4. I might think there are various reasons for there not being greater communication of facts but we won’t get into those just now. we are all different but whether your default position is overly trusting of everything from one side, or the other, there are facts and opinions Tom hosie did a good job of bringing some facts to this forum in the spirit of transparent honesty I would hope he could now confirm that there was never any suggestion of what you speculate in either documentation or from any individual at any TJF board meeting If he won’t confirm , as I say the minutes and documentation shall do so lets stick to the facts best we can rather than speculation? Good luck in the remainder of the election campaign
  5. Comes from third party voting software.
  6. Check spam jaggy. That’s where mine was!
  7. 100 per cent inaccurate. if elected , the detailed documented minutes will prove the point to you. I hope you will come back to say you were wrong and put the record straight. I also hope tom hosie will confirm that point to you since you seem to trust his previous posts would be good for the election campaign to be grounded in the reality of facts rather then erroneous speculation
  8. Hi Tom, I recall this meeting well. It was 13th October. I remember you saying , and I am paraphrasing, 'Whoever does this role , its a poisoned chalice - I think you should do it Sandy'! The reason I did not take the club board role was not due to a general reluctance though. It was due to a very specific one which you have omitted from your history of events. It was because I noted that I was best placed to remain on the TJF Board to oversee due diligence process without being compromised nor conflicted. On 14 October, I wrote to Gavin Taylor to decline the board position formally (having said I would sleep on it), including this paragraph which one of your fellow board members at the time described as a 'compelling reason' for me not to go onto the Club board (because at that time, there was an expectation by all on the TJF board that due diligence, as fed back during engagement sessions, was indeed a prerequisite to move forward). The position of others changed later. I have simply remained consistent. "3. I think I can add more value to TJF than to the PTFC board. That is a matter of opinion, but in particular for example in assessment/instruction of due diligence. I know you and I differ on this. You think it doesn’t matter as we will never refuse the share transfer. I agree with that to an extent, but I feel passionately that it absolutely does matter for our credibility that we know the position we are taking into fan ownership so there is a realistic set of expectations for our friends and fellow supporters." I am glad you and I now agree that the approach which was taken and was supported by the majority of the TJF Board 'did not work well'. As you know I felt this approach was flawed and I consulted my Institute and ethically was therefore required to resign on their advice. At the time you opined, how could I speak about working together and compromise and then resign when not getting my way? I think that matters of ethics where you have a regulatory body don't quite work like that, in that you sacrifice having the choice of compromise. Compromise over ethical matters is something I would not do. For fan ownership to work, in my opinion, the fan ownership body needs to be professional and have independent thought and standards (and ethics) from the outset. For the avoidance of doubt, this need not be adversarial as you suggest. I truly believe that can be avoided, but I also do not think there is any harm in having the ambition to do things as professionally as can be done from the outset.
  9. I am happy to go on the record that I have no desire to be on the football club board. I know others in our group feel the same. TJF previously tried to suggest that role for me, and I declined. I think its easy to underestimate some of the fabulous skills among our support though. I think I agree with you in that TJF board and club board members require different skillsets and motivations. Also to whoever said that 'getting rid of the entire club board' as the agenda of TJF - past or prospective - that is absolutely untrue.
  10. My predetermined view is aligned to yours. We need to increase numbers. I don’t think you will find disagreement to that among any of the group standing. Nor indeed any of the group standing down I suspect. Its hard to sell something to sceptical people when you don’t know what you are actually selling. That’s why there have been the demands for clarity on what criteria would make TBC engage with a fans organisation, something we do not yet know after two and a half years.
  11. Running a slate gives voting members a little more meat on the bones of what they are voting for. it also means that after an inordinate amount of time so far , if elected, that group can “hit the ground running”, and won’t spend time arguing with themselves over initial steps. There is I think some merit to that. But everyone is entitled to their opinion. Ultimately, it’s firstly for the members to decide when they vote, and secondly for TBC to decide whether to engage with whoever the new TJF comprises of. Every member is entitled to stand. Every member is entitled to vote.
  12. I recognise much of this, and we cannot MAKE TBC engage with the next TJF board. But by making TJF a stronger and stronger members organisation, we increase the opportunity for engagement with them. The 'Common Platform' also means that the next TJF board could be aligned and have unity. This will help accelerate options, and the group has been an ideas factory so far, and so I have high hopes that there are lots of ways we can move this forward - if elected.
  13. Argh, sorry, had not been around the forum for a while - no matter given Hibs lost!!!
  14. This was my thought too - playing so many games in a short period too. He has mentioned it one or two times before in recent weeks in post match interviews though, so not sure what's changed.
×