PTFC Trust sack Chairman …..

[erty13]

All the directors and chief exec should be embarrassed that what comes across as a disagreement, had to be resolved by quite an extreme step of removing the Chairman.

Are they not all Thistle fans wanting the club to do well. This should have been settled in the boardroom behind closed doors. It the issuse can't be resolved then make sure that someone who helped when needed exits with dignity.

This should have got to this stage, it makes the club look like it is run by amateurs. 

[Yellow & Redneck]

1 hour ago, erty13 said:

This should have got to this stage, it makes the club look like it is run by amateurs. 

That's the problem though. It's being run by people whose egos are more important than doing what is best for the club. Being a fan isn't qualification enough to run the club. 

[scotty]

16 minutes ago, Yellow & Redneck said:

That's the problem though. It's being run by people whose egos are more important than doing what is best for the club. Being a fan isn't qualification enough to run the club. 

Apparantly, neither is being a business person!

[Lambies Lost Doo]

I've worked for a number of "professional" private companies through my career and you get the same drama, pettiness and fall outs at all levels of leadership. It's cringeworthy. We are not any different unfortunately which is really frustrating as we are a small club with limited fanbase who just want the club to be stable, successful and also fun.

Edited October 7, 2023 by Lambies Lost Doo

[lady-isobel-barnett]

8 minutes ago, Lambies Lost Doo said:

I've worked for a number of "professional" private companies through my career and you get the same drama, pettiness and fall outs and all levels of leadership. It's cringeworthy. We are not any different unfortunately.

Was going to post something along the same lines. From my experience directors are often on a Board primarily for their skillset. Getting the right balance of individual abilities is a hard enough task. Getting a Board of directors with the necessary skillsets AND who'll all get along with each other, extremely unlikely.

I'm generalising but It's easy to play the tin-pot card when there's a fall out. Perhaps tho' the real tin-pot boards are the ones where everyone gets along with each other swimmingly but lack the necessary skills to succeed. 

[Very Bitter Jag]

I am currently still behind TJF, however, I do find the dilution of the fan share and control a concern, especially if there were counter offers to be looked at, and look forward to getting more info, especially if this 51% German model is suddenly used as justification.

Regardless of this current situation I'd still prefer to be where we are now than being Barnsley's feeder team or still under J Lows tenure.

[erty13]

23 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

Perhaps tho' the real tin-pot boards are the ones where everyone gets along with each other swimmingly but lack the necessary skills to succeed

This is not about getting along , we publically removed the chairman..

That does not happen often in boards.

[eljaggo]

I, like most people I suspect, have no idea what is going on.  However true fan ownership means having control over all the Club's decisions.  That cannot happen if fans' share ownership falls below 25% of voting (ordinary) shares, since minority shareholders can then veto crucial decisions. 

[sandy]

Looking at the communications emerging I have an over-riding sense of sadness. I thought we had got all the politics and infighting out the way with the removal of the last Board, it seems not.

Many fans just want to see a positive attitude on the pitch, not more distractions off it. 

[The Legend Blows]

Can anyone explain in concise  layman's terms what individuals are actually pulling the strings, making the decisions and putting out the statements on the official site?

I for one have no idea what is going on in terms of the bigger picture. Are all the fans groups merely token representation as it feels like they're a bit pointless if they get ignored and marginalised by a small group of individuals who are actually in control.

I have read the latest statement on the OS incidentally but it all seems very amateurish. I'm trying to recall another club that has this amount of tinpot manoeuvring when looking for investment and changing boardroom personnel.  

[Fearchar]

3 hours ago, erty13 said:

All the directors and chief exec should be embarrassed that what comes across as a disagreement, had to be resolved by quite an extreme step of removing the Chairman.

Are they not all Thistle fans wanting the club to do well. This should have been settled in the boardroom behind closed doors. It the issuse can't be resolved then make sure that someone who helped when needed exits with dignity.

This should have got to this stage, it makes the club look like it is run by amateurs. 

Perhaps there is a lesson in this for the future: that the club (CEO?) should have mediators lined up to be used when (not if) such disagreements erupt. The local football club to my mother in Germany had a similar problem, when the Aufsichtsrat (a non-executive board) disagreed fundamentally with the executive and resigned en masse. Luckily, former board members stepped in to mediate, and the board resumed its position, with an agreement between the two factions.

In a club owned jointly by many people, differences - even stark ones - are bound to arise, and it would seem worthwhile to prepare for such disputes so that they don't take on a life of their own to the detriment of everyone's aspirations for the club. Retaining professional mediators must surely be better than conflict in social media.

[javeajag]

this has been posted on Facebook and if I interpret it correctly the chairman was sacked for refusing to back down in his demand to fly the Union Jack at firhill……we are now in a strange episode of the twilight zone ……god help us 
 

ian wright

Been trying to get my head round this situation. So, I have been reading through the barrage of comments posted here, on other fan sites and the more restrained ones on the Clubs official Facebook. Undoubtedly this is a damaging embarrassment to the Club. Alistair,  I understand your frustration. You seem to think you have been mistreated in some way then unfairly ousted from the Chair after the financial help you gave to the Club in one of its (far to frequent) hours of need. This will always be appreciated but posting (or allowing posts in your name) that are riddled with inaccuracies as Allan Herron, who started this thread, points out makes me question your understanding of the structure ownership and management of the club you chaired. As a shareholder and former Chair of the initial Working Group I admit it is complicated and hard to understand but company law, fiduciary and confidentiality are something every director of every company should have an understanding of. This is what you sign up for when accepting a directorship. It’s not ‘hiding behind confidentiality’ as Davy posts. I know directors of previous boards who still have to bite their tongues when publicly criticised for a boards collective action that they disagreed with. It can be frustrating and leads to all sorts of misunderstandings that can’t always be explained to the fans. They however accepted their responsibilities for the privilege of being a director and continue to respect the  limitation this put on them to discuss Club business publicly. It is the law! If you can’t work within these bounds then you are out of your depth. You mention appointing McCrea to the board then being astounded he made suggestions of how the Club might be run. What on earth is wrong with that? Did you want a board of yes men? Surely all board members should be there for their ideas, experience, knowledge or at very least as a devils advocate to challenge any fellow director who may express an opinion or suggest a course of action that would seem detrimental to that organisation. A good Chair will allow this discourse, then try to guide it in a united and purposeful direction and if out voted accept a majority decision, then either support that position or resign. It would appear you did neither. The allegations you are making are very serious, seem to be (in your words) personal and vindictive and worse have been made publicly. You are in very dangerous territory. I can’t believe the rumours that I’m hearing that the other directors had to tell you that flying a Union Jack over Firhill might be a bad idea! Don’t care about your politics (I welcome all to Firhill) but one of the few advantages we have, over our larger neighbours, is that we are a Scottish team in Glasgow. There is a clue in our name! Please tell me this isn’t true! If it is then, I guess it just shows how out of touch you are with the fan base you are now trying to court on this thread. I guess (and I have no inside knowledge of this) that the issues were more serious than this. Probably all to do with the attempts to bring in new investment capital to the Club. Whatever your proposal it seems clear you were out on your own here. It seems that the only way the other directors (one of whom represents the fans through TJF) and ultimately the Club’s owners, the Trust, all thought you were wrong and whatever stance you had taken was not in their opinion in the best interest of the Club. So you were removed. As William says I don’t now know what you are trying to achieve here. I don’t know you personally at all but I do know some of the other people involved and I admit I have known and been friends with Dougie McCrea for years. I don’t know if he will appreciate this post or think it further stokes the flames but I have absolutely no doubt any decisions he made would have been with Thistle (and not him personally) to the front and centre of his thoughts.
The Club and the fans have thanked you for your timely loans, there will always be a debt of gratitude to you for this but please try to resolve this in a manner that does not now hurt your club, the club you tried your best to help.

[CotterJag]

20 minutes ago, javeajag said:

this has been posted on Facebook and if I interpret it correctly the chairman was sacked for refusing to back down in his demand to fly the Union Jack at firhill……we are now in a strange episode of the twilight zone ……god help us 
 

ian wright

Been trying to get my head round this situation. So, I have been reading through the barrage of comments posted here, on other fan sites and the more restrained ones on the Clubs official Facebook. Undoubtedly this is a damaging embarrassment to the Club. Alistair,  I understand your frustration. You seem to think you have been mistreated in some way then unfairly ousted from the Chair after the financial help you gave to the Club in one of its (far to frequent) hours of need. This will always be appreciated but posting (or allowing posts in your name) that are riddled with inaccuracies as Allan Herron, who started this thread, points out makes me question your understanding of the structure ownership and management of the club you chaired. As a shareholder and former Chair of the initial Working Group I admit it is complicated and hard to understand but company law, fiduciary and confidentiality are something every director of every company should have an understanding of. This is what you sign up for when accepting a directorship. It’s not ‘hiding behind confidentiality’ as Davy posts. I know directors of previous boards who still have to bite their tongues when publicly criticised for a boards collective action that they disagreed with. It can be frustrating and leads to all sorts of misunderstandings that can’t always be explained to the fans. They however accepted their responsibilities for the privilege of being a director and continue to respect the  limitation this put on them to discuss Club business publicly. It is the law! If you can’t work within these bounds then you are out of your depth. You mention appointing McCrea to the board then being astounded he made suggestions of how the Club might be run. What on earth is wrong with that? Did you want a board of yes men? Surely all board members should be there for their ideas, experience, knowledge or at very least as a devils advocate to challenge any fellow director who may express an opinion or suggest a course of action that would seem detrimental to that organisation. A good Chair will allow this discourse, then try to guide it in a united and purposeful direction and if out voted accept a majority decision, then either support that position or resign. It would appear you did neither. The allegations you are making are very serious, seem to be (in your words) personal and vindictive and worse have been made publicly. You are in very dangerous territory. I can’t believe the rumours that I’m hearing that the other directors had to tell you that flying a Union Jack over Firhill might be a bad idea! Don’t care about your politics (I welcome all to Firhill) but one of the few advantages we have, over our larger neighbours, is that we are a Scottish team in Glasgow. There is a clue in our name! Please tell me this isn’t true! If it is then, I guess it just shows how out of touch you are with the fan base you are now trying to court on this thread. I guess (and I have no inside knowledge of this) that the issues were more serious than this. Probably all to do with the attempts to bring in new investment capital to the Club. Whatever your proposal it seems clear you were out on your own here. It seems that the only way the other directors (one of whom represents the fans through TJF) and ultimately the Club’s owners, the Trust, all thought you were wrong and whatever stance you had taken was not in their opinion in the best interest of the Club. So you were removed. As William says I don’t now know what you are trying to achieve here. I don’t know you personally at all but I do know some of the other people involved and I admit I have known and been friends with Dougie McCrea for years. I don’t know if he will appreciate this post or think it further stokes the flames but I have absolutely no doubt any decisions he made would have been with Thistle (and not him personally) to the front and centre of his thoughts.
The Club and the fans have thanked you for your timely loans, there will always be a debt of gratitude to you for this but please try to resolve this in a manner that does not now hurt your club, the club you tried your best to help.

Hard to know what to say about this without sounding political and any personal view on the flag situation could start a 700 page thread I'm sure.

If it's true however, then the other directors have read the room correctly. Well mine at least.

It's a shame to lose a fan of Thistle in any circumstances but it does highlight the old adage of not mixing business with pleasure.

When I win the Euromillions, I'll be throwing money at Thistle but like to think I'll retain my 'fan only' status.

 

 

[erty13]

I personally don't care who was in the wrong, but it is disappointing that the parties / directors involved did not have the brain power to realise that if it was not resolved in the board room it would turn into a complete shitshow, once it gets on social media..

It gives the fans no confidence on how the club is being run.

Everyone involved needs to learn from this sorry episode. 

[Dick Dastardly]

7 hours ago, javeajag said:

this has been posted on Facebook and if I interpret it correctly the chairman was sacked for refusing to back down in his demand to fly the Union Jack at firhill……we are now in a strange episode of the twilight zone ……god help us 

Now I am annoyed.

It is the Union Flag, not the Union Jack. It is only the Union Jack if it is being flown from the bow or head of the spritsail mast on a ship. 

signed A. Pedant. 

[Jordanhill Jag]

10 hours ago, javeajag said:

this has been posted on Facebook and if I interpret it correctly the chairman was sacked for refusing to back down in his demand to fly the Union Jack at firhill……we are now in a strange episode of the twilight zone ……god help us 
 

ian wright

Been trying to get my head round this situation. So, I have been reading through the barrage of comments posted here, on other fan sites and the more restrained ones on the Clubs official Facebook. Undoubtedly this is a damaging embarrassment to the Club. Alistair,  I understand your frustration. You seem to think you have been mistreated in some way then unfairly ousted from the Chair after the financial help you gave to the Club in one of its (far to frequent) hours of need. This will always be appreciated but posting (or allowing posts in your name) that are riddled with inaccuracies as Allan Herron, who started this thread, points out makes me question your understanding of the structure ownership and management of the club you chaired. As a shareholder and former Chair of the initial Working Group I admit it is complicated and hard to understand but company law, fiduciary and confidentiality are something every director of every company should have an understanding of. This is what you sign up for when accepting a directorship. It’s not ‘hiding behind confidentiality’ as Davy posts. I know directors of previous boards who still have to bite their tongues when publicly criticised for a boards collective action that they disagreed with. It can be frustrating and leads to all sorts of misunderstandings that can’t always be explained to the fans. They however accepted their responsibilities for the privilege of being a director and continue to respect the  limitation this put on them to discuss Club business publicly. It is the law! If you can’t work within these bounds then you are out of your depth. You mention appointing McCrea to the board then being astounded he made suggestions of how the Club might be run. What on earth is wrong with that? Did you want a board of yes men? Surely all board members should be there for their ideas, experience, knowledge or at very least as a devils advocate to challenge any fellow director who may express an opinion or suggest a course of action that would seem detrimental to that organisation. A good Chair will allow this discourse, then try to guide it in a united and purposeful direction and if out voted accept a majority decision, then either support that position or resign. It would appear you did neither. The allegations you are making are very serious, seem to be (in your words) personal and vindictive and worse have been made publicly. You are in very dangerous territory. I can’t believe the rumours that I’m hearing that the other directors had to tell you that flying a Union Jack over Firhill might be a bad idea! Don’t care about your politics (I welcome all to Firhill) but one of the few advantages we have, over our larger neighbours, is that we are a Scottish team in Glasgow. There is a clue in our name! Please tell me this isn’t true! If it is then, I guess it just shows how out of touch you are with the fan base you are now trying to court on this thread. I guess (and I have no inside knowledge of this) that the issues were more serious than this. Probably all to do with the attempts to bring in new investment capital to the Club. Whatever your proposal it seems clear you were out on your own here. It seems that the only way the other directors (one of whom represents the fans through TJF) and ultimately the Club’s owners, the Trust, all thought you were wrong and whatever stance you had taken was not in their opinion in the best interest of the Club. So you were removed. As William says I don’t now know what you are trying to achieve here. I don’t know you personally at all but I do know some of the other people involved and I admit I have known and been friends with Dougie McCrea for years. I don’t know if he will appreciate this post or think it further stokes the flames but I have absolutely no doubt any decisions he made would have been with Thistle (and not him personally) to the front and centre of his thoughts.
The Club and the fans have thanked you for your timely loans, there will always be a debt of gratitude to you for this but please try to resolve this in a manner that does not now hurt your club, the club you tried your best to help.

So if Im reading this correct we decided to Fly Flags - rather than stick to purely Thistle Flags - we decide to Fly the Saltire - now over the past few years all Police Stations - Fire Stations -Schools etc etc have been instructed to Fly the Saltire - its a Political Statement - combine that with all your signs being in Gaelic and it very much looks Political - so Alistair Creevy looks to balance this by Flying the Flag of Scotland and also the UK together

Im honestly struggling to see how this is somehow an issue - the man was trying to have a balance - why not simply fly Thistle Flags ? Why was he to back down and the others were Right in Flying the Saltire - just aviod ANY Non Thistle Flags 
 

its complete and utter tittle tattle given the challenges we face to balance the books each Season -and speaks volumes 

[Jordanhill Jag]

9 hours ago, CotterJag said:

Hard to know what to say about this without sounding political and any personal view on the flag situation could start a 700 page thread I'm sure.

If it's true however, then the other directors have read the room correctly. Well mine at least.

It's a shame to lose a fan of Thistle in any circumstances but it does highlight the old adage of not mixing business with pleasure.

When I win the Euromillions, I'll be throwing money at Thistle but like to think I'll retain my 'fan only' status.

 

 

No - they have not “ read the room correctly “ the correct reading would simply to Fly Thistle Flags or No Flags at all - then its not an issue 

[Jordanhill Jag]

19 hours ago, Fearchar said:

Perhaps there is a lesson in this for the future: that the club (CEO?) should have mediators lined up to be used when (not if) such disagreements erupt. The local football club to my mother in Germany had a similar problem, when the Aufsichtsrat (a non-executive board) disagreed fundamentally with the executive and resigned en masse. Luckily, former board members stepped in to mediate, and the board resumed its position, with an agreement between the two factions.

In a club owned jointly by many people, differences - even stark ones - are bound to arise, and it would seem worthwhile to prepare for such disputes so that they don't take on a life of their own to the detriment of everyone's aspirations for the club. Retaining professional mediators must surely be better than conflict in social media.

Agreed - we should have Non Execs - with a Veto 

 

[lady-isobel-barnett]

2 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

It is only the Union Jack if it is being flown from the bow or head of the spritsail mast on a ship.  

Could maybe make an exception for any such flag being flown anywhere up the A9 yesterday.

[laukat]

13 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

So if Im reading this correct we decided to Fly Flags - rather than stick to purely Thistle Flags - we decide to Fly the Saltire - now over the past few years all Police Stations - Fire Stations -Schools etc etc have been instructed to Fly the Saltire - its a Political Statement - combine that with all your signs being in Gaelic and it very much looks Political - so Alistair Creevy looks to balance this by Flying the Flag of Scotland and also the UK together

Im honestly struggling to see how this is somehow an issue - the man was trying to have a balance - why not simply fly Thistle Flags ? Why was he to back down and the others were Right in Flying the Saltire - just aviod ANY Non Thistle Flags 
 

its complete and utter tittle tattle given the challenges we face to balance the books each Season -and speaks volumes 

Agree its probably tittle tattle and in the scale of issues not the thing that should be consuming much discussion. 

However the club is built around the idea we are a Scottish club proud to be Scottish playing in Scottish Leagues. An expression of that is the Saltire. Displaying the Saltire at Firhill has never to my mind been a political statement. Personally I am in favour of Independence but I know many who aren't. We are first and foremost a club that is proud of its Scottish identity and welcomes all locals to watch no matter their political opinion, country of birth or any other matter

We have long since positioned ourselves as not being a UK/unionist club as per the blue cheek and we don't display the flag of another country as per the green cheek of the arse.

So if we have a Chairman who doesn't understand the ethos of the club then perhaps its just as well he's no longer there no matter the reason why he actually departed.

 

[Jordanhill Jag]

23 minutes ago, laukat said:

Agree its probably tittle tattle and in the scale of issues not the thing that should be consuming much discussion. 

However the club is built around the idea we are a Scottish club proud to be Scottish playing in Scottish Leagues. An expression of that is the Saltire. Displaying the Saltire at Firhill has never to my mind been a political statement. Personally I am in favour of Independence but I know many who aren't. We are first and foremost a club that is proud of its Scottish identity and welcomes all locals to watch no matter their political opinion, country of birth or any other matter

We have long since positioned ourselves as not being a UK/unionist club as per the blue cheek and we don't display the flag of another country as per the green cheek of the arse.

So if we have a Chairman who doesn't understand the ethos of the club then perhaps its just as well he's no longer there no matter the reason why he actually departed.

 

Im sorry ? “ when have “ long positioned ourselves as not being a UK / Unionist Club” clearly I didnt get that memo - the views on separation are split roughly 45% against the Union - 55% for - this will be broadly reflected in our support

However your post is revealing and probably correct - there are those who want us to reflect q particular Political View as a Club and it looks like that View has sway - however its not our Club “ ethos” and if the Chairman didnt understand it - frankly neither did I - and if he has departed because of it then a lot of Fans are no longer Welcome at Firhill if we now have an “ ethos”  

If this in any way was influential on why someone who bailed us out with £150K of his own cash was sacked then we need to take a long hard look at ourselves as a Club  

 

Edited October 8, 2023 by Jordanhill Jag

[Fawlty Towers]

The only flag I am interested is seeing at Firhill is the one saying "Scottish Championship Winners Season 23/24".

[Dick Dastardly]

31 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Im sorry ? “ when have “ long positioned ourselves as not being a UK / Unionist Club” clearly I didnt get that memo - the views on separation are split roughly 45% against the Union - 55% for - this will be broadly reflected in our support

However your post is revealing and probably correct - there are those who want us to reflect q particular Political View as a Club and it looks like that View has sway - however its not our Club “ ethos” and if the Chairman didnt understand it - frankly neither did I - and if he has departed because of it then a lot of Fans are no longer Welcome at Firhill if we now have an “ ethos”  

If this in any way was influential on why someone who bailed us out with £150K of his own cash was sacked then we need to take a long hard look at ourselves as a Club  

 

I read that differently. Not being a unionist doesn’t mean supporting independence. I’d like to think that our ethos is to have no affiliation with either side.

Agree with others who have said club (and championship) flags only spas to remove any doubt.

Edited October 8, 2023 by Dick Dastardly

[CotterJag]

25 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Im sorry ? “ when have “ long positioned ourselves as not being a UK / Unionist Club” clearly I didnt get that memo - the views on separation are split roughly 45% against the Union - 55% for - this will be broadly reflected in our support

However your post is revealing and probably correct - there are those who want us to reflect q particular Political View as a Club and it looks like that View has sway - however its not our Club “ ethos” and if the Chairman didnt understand it - frankly neither did I - and if he has departed because of it then a lot of Fans are no longer Welcome at Firhill if we now have an “ ethos”  

If this in any way was influential on why someone who bailed us out with £150K of his own cash was sacked then we need to take a long hard look at ourselves as a Club  

 

I don't think there's any need to twist this.

We most certainly are not a UK/Unionist Club and flying a UK flag above our stadium would most certainly be a political message.  

Our Club does everything to avoid being measured in this way and we are a Club that is all inclusive. I'm proud to say this.

It's maybe a different argument but flying the Saltire does not make a Club / person an anti-unionist or an SNP supporter. Being a Club in Scotland, I imagine it would go largely unnoticed.

Flying the Union flag, would be a statement and it's not something I would appreciate or understand.   

[laukat]

5 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Im sorry ? “ when have “ long positioned ourselves as not being a UK / Unionist Club” clearly I didnt get that memo - the views on separation are split roughly 45% against the Union - 55% for - this will be broadly reflected in our support

However your post is revealing and probably correct - there are those who want us to reflect q particular Political View as a Club and it looks like that View has sway - however its not our Club “ ethos” and if the Chairman didnt understand it - frankly neither did I - and if he has departed because of it then a lot of Fans are no longer Welcome at Firhill if we now have an “ ethos”  

You missed the lyrics to a song we've sang for the last 40 years? Admittedly the lyrics aren't explicitly about being anti Unionism or Irish Republicanism but effectively amount to we are not Ranger or Celtic, don't believe in the things they do, don't want religion or politics involved in football and have no  desire to play in another league as we are a Scottish club.

My comments above about not being a UK/Unionist club can also be more easily read as not wanting to be Rangers. We start moving towards that we no longer have an identity.

Unfortunately the use of the Union flag in a football sense has been tarred by association with fans of clubs like Rangers and to a lesser degree Airdrie. Not recognising that shows a lack of understanding of the history of Scottish football and its absolutely nothing to do with being pro or anti Independence.

Ever club has an ethos or an identity. In most towns it is a simple as being the only pro club in the town. When you get to the cities that host more than one club the ethos and identity becomes a bit more nuanced. In Glasgow we have had to work hard over decades to be the alternative to Celtic and Rangers. Queens Park used to have the identity of the last Amateur team and I worry for their future now they have ditched that, Clyde struggled so badly they moved out of Glasgow and are now possibly going to disappear from the top leagues.