Getting Involved

[oaksoft]

Look, Scottish Football for the past 30 years has been run by people with loads of "relevant experience" whether you want to look at John Boyle at Motherwell, David Murray at r*ngers, Stewart Milne at Aberdeen, or just about anywhere else - and look at the disastrous pile of shit they've left the game in.

What we need in Scottish Football today is people with a fresh approach. People who have an appreciation of the importance of developing our own (Scottish) talent and who understand that success isn't something that is easily bought. And with St Mirren moving into an era where it is becoming something that is part of a company being run for the benefit of the community it needs people who can think in a very different way.

Quite right Stuart. When the medical profession unearthed Harold Shipman, they decided not to replace him with another highly qualified and experienced doctor. They advertised for plumbers and shopkeepers to take over as the local GP. In fact they actively discourage all would-be doctors from having any previous medical experience at all.

Ach you do make me smile. Keep posting.

BTW for the billionth time just in case you missed it - Poz is not standing for the board.

[Stuart Dickson]

Quite right Stuart. When the medical profession unearthed Harold Shipman, they decided not to replace him with another highly qualified and experienced doctor. They advertised for plumbers and shopkeepers to take over as the local GP. In fact they actively discourage all would-be doctors from having any previous medical experience at all.

Ach you do make me smile. Keep posting.

BTW for the billionth time just in case you missed it - Poz is not standing for the board.

As I've already said - having had recent personal experience of the NHS in Wishaw General I think I would rather opt to be treated by a plumber who has watched ER a couple of times than I would any of the chancers they have recruited to wear NHS uniforms. I know plumbers can be a bit lazy but they'd have nothing on the fat chocolate munching bastards who's arses were obviously welded to their seats at their nursing station or on the so called "specialists" who's appearance in the ward was treated with the same sort of shock and bewilderment that you would expect to see on a St Mirrens supporters face having watched Marc McAusland have a good game.

[car-d bud]

Quite right Stuart. When the medical profession unearthed Harold Shipman, they decided not to replace him with another highly qualified and experienced doctor. They advertised for plumbers and shopkeepers to take over as the local GP. In fact they actively discourage all would-be doctors from having any previous medical experience at all.

Ach you do make me smile. Keep posting.

BTW for the billionth time just in case you missed it - Poz is not standing for the board.

WRONG,he is out of being involved in personal attacks on this forum,see last post,dont rule out a late challenge for any cic supporter based board position.............especially if SID is in the running forbthe same position

[St. Sid]

As I've already said - having had recent personal experience of the NHS in Wishaw General I think I would rather opt to be treated by a plumber who has watched ER a couple of times than I would any of the chancers they have recruited to wear NHS uniforms.

I know for a fact there are doctors and nurses that go on Pie & Bovril so that might explain the ticking bomb left in your fat belly.

As always the answer lies somewhere in the middle. For me the fans representation should be a mix of talent. Some with experience of running the club, some with experience of running supporters clubs, mibbae some old grammarian blah blah blawbag to represtent they c"nts. We need to get away from the description of Board Members and think about our elected members as fans reps. They will be there to represent us and our interests at the club. This should not be a jolly for some old grammarian trying to build a network for their business, it should not be an opportunity for some c"ntcillor type to try and breenj sausague roles based on supporting the award of contracts to their plying pals. That sort of BoD member will be a massive risk to the growth and even the maintaining of the numbers of general CIC members.

A bit of balance in the fans reps is required. Knowledge, credability with all sections of the support and utlimately a single interest in the success of SMFC Ltd. There will be plenty of representatives battling for the interests of their corporation and plenty battling for the interests of their social projects. There be conflicts in these interests with that of the support. We need to have people representing us that will firstly ensure they are representative of the support and secondly capable of operating at a level were they will need to negotiate with very experienced and capable people representing other interest groups - not least of all the CIC Board. The fans reps roles are also going to be tough as the fans will get stuck in at every opportunity - so a thick skin is required. Just look at the pelters good guys like SG have taken over the years. So, Pozbaird need not apply -

[Evil_Panda]

ex-jungle bhoys need not appy either.............

[Kombi Buddie]

Sid,

In relation to your lengthy post, if we see GLS and SG around a boardroom table again I'll eat my sizeable bunnet.

cannot remember the exact reasons given but isn't SG selling up because he's "knackered" or "cannot take St Mirren any further" or something like that??

If so, he is one of the last people who should be seeking election or being considered for election to any of the Boards.

[Guest somner9]

Anyone that wants to put themselves forward as a fans/community/corporate board member (Correct me if I am wrong, but as i understand it they aren't looking for nominees for the executive board or the board of SMFC?) would have to imbody not only being a saints fan, but also be completely involved or prepared to become so with the local community. By definition that rules out med - large business leaders and a whole host of so called professionals who don,t give a rat's ass about "Dial-a-ride", "Food Co-operatives", "Youth Sport", "Involvement" etc etc....

The professional sausage roll thieving posts are already spoken for on the other two boards! The third board "title intentional" will do well to keep a balance with the corporate and community groups forming an alliance at the expense of effective representation of fans. I know SD lauds the community aspect of a CiC and rightly so that should be the core, but not at the total expense of the "MotherShip".

The community groups have possibly had up to a YEAR's head start (So far) on any fans representatives, they will probably all know each other have have already met to work out common goals, aims, objectives, resources and strategy. This for me was one of the main failings of 10000 hours approach, and having learned that 10000 hours have already drafted a constitution only reinforces that. it's an arse about face approach that by design keeps the smfc fans at arms length.

So what's to be done if the deal is delivered?

1. SMFC fans groups (Individual pledgers, this forum and other forums, Travel clubs, shareholders, Smisa etc) need to meet, agree a basic common purpose with aims and objectives and insist to 10000 hours that their support will only be forthcoming when the imposed draft constitution is withdrawn!!! And when a new completely inclusive constitution, with input from ALL the stakeholders replaces it...

If you can't/don't or are ignored in having involvement in the drafting of a constitution then how can you support it, or recommend it to the people/group that you represent??? It's your club and your community surely if anything is to be drafted it should be your's too???

Anyone nominated/elected to a board will be instantly having to defend and be be held accountable for something drawn up by someone else i.e. RA, 10000 hours and all them lovely community groups that have been involved for over a year! (Who else do you think is on Team 10000 hours)

2. Make sure it's the best possible constitution you can, take advice from the successes at FC united etc, and learn the lessons from the failures too! There's an awful lot of goodwill out there amongst other supporters groups at clubs who have done or are considering the same

3. Who says that only the couple of peeps that 10000 hours let past the guards are the only voice of the fans??? don't assume it's job done and that all/most decisions, actions and direction taken will be beneficial to SMFC and it's fans! The community groups are skilled at getting together to crack bigger nuts! the fans need to be too!

4. Win and Love YOUR! community over. Ok you are going to start with 20 odd community groups that you may or may not have chosen to become involved with. Deal with it, learn quickly and get as many others involved as early as possible. don't wait, don't assume the job's done, don't take anyone's word or insistence that "you don't need to do or know that" or the other classic "have you/we really got the time to investigate that?". remember it's YOUR community that counts, not one that's chosen for you. (That said there will be some real stars among the groups already committed, so get involved insist on a meeting with them and learn/steal as many good ideas as possible. And share/let them knick yours too.

If you put yourself forward the above should form the "What will I do for you" part of your manifesto to the Cic pledgers and the fans. If you don't get the rest of the support involved, tell me or ask yourself "Who else will have the desire, the inclination or gain the benefit from involving as many saints fans and real local community groups as possible?"

[div]

If you put yourself forward the above should form the "What will I do for you" part of your manifesto to the Cic pledgers and the fans. If you don't get the rest of the support involved, tell me or ask yourself "Who else will have the desire, the inclination or gain the benefit from involving as many saints fans and real local community groups as possible?"

All very sound advice. Why is is all "you" though. Why is it not "we" ?

Are you one of these stand by the side types that is waiting to shrug their shoulders and say "I told you so" or do you really care about YOUR club enough to get involved and help lead the way ?

No point in telling everyone what to do if you've no intention at all of doing the same !

[Guest somner9]

All very sound advice. Why is is all "you" though. Why is it not "we" ?

Are you one of these stand by the side types that is waiting to shrug their shoulders and say "I told you so" or do you really care about YOUR club enough to get involved and help lead the way ?

No point in telling everyone what to do if you've no intention at all of doing the same !

As there seems little point also in telling me HOW i should support my club!

Maybe you missed it but somewhere in my posts I stated frimly I believed the CiC to be bad for SMFC. So the notion of me becoming involved in it to continually re-state that position would seem at best useless or indeed an annoyance to those who support it and want to be involved

I would also say that my post demonstrates clearly that I am not content or indeed would ever consider being as you say "one of these stand by the side types that is waiting to shrug their shoulders and say "I told you so"

Strange isn't it as someone who is completely against RA's style of CiC I've laid out a number of ideas/areas for consideration for anyone considering standing for a board position. All of which look forward and shriek inclusion and getting the widest fan backing for it.....

Maybe I'm just too blinkered in my vision of seeing the fans voice heard loud and clear in all this

(Strange we don't hear RA et all on this agenda??? )

[ktf]

As someone who is some what involved with the CiC from a community perspective, can I say that a lot, if not the majority, of the community groups signed up are so not only because they see the benefit for their organisation and the town/community, but also because those involved are St Mirren supporters.

I am most involved in the General St Mirren Discussion forum of this site, not this one. I am, and have been for years, a St Mirren ST holder, I love the club passionately and my involvement in the CiC is from a community perspective. I think it is fair to say that most of the community reps involved with the CiC are the same as me. I really wouldn't worry about the "best" for the club being usurped by those who have a community agenda We'll see that doesn't happen!

[Guest somner9]

As someone who is some what involved with the CiC from a community perspective, can I say that a lot, if not the majority, of the community groups signed up are so not only because they see the benefit for their organisation and the town/community, but also because those involved are St Mirren supporters.

I am most involved in the General St Mirren Discussion forum of this site, not this one. I am, and have been for years, a St Mirren ST holder, I love the club passionately and my involvement in the CiC is from a community perspective. I think it is fair to say that most of the community reps involved with the CiC are the same as me. I really wouldn't worry about the "best" for the club being usurped by those who have a community agenda We'll see that doesn't happen!

Did you help draft the constitution?

[2becks]

Does anyone know whether the promised online form for the skills audit is available yet?

[civilsaint]

People with the attitude of somner9 are potentially a significant problem for the CIC and its success. The type of people who have been prepared to shout their mouth off about negative rumours (and pass them off as fact) without any evidence can cause PR damage, throw as much mud as possible and some will stick. He is clearly the type of person who will be prepared to continue to slate the CIC at every potential opportunity (justified or not) just because he doesn't like the way they recruited members. These detracters are more of a threat to the CIC than any constitution or individual effort.

Somner9 looks intent in causing a rift between supporters, don't let him and his lack of substance succeed.

[div]

Does anyone know whether the promised online form for the skills audit is available yet?

It will be today

[Guest somner9]

People with the attitude of somner9 are potentially a significant problem for the CIC and its success. The type of people who have been prepared to shout their mouth off about negative rumours (and pass them off as fact) without any evidence can cause PR damage, throw as much mud as possible and some will stick. He is clearly the type of person who will be prepared to continue to slate the CIC at every potential opportunity (justified or not) just because he doesn't like the way they recruited members. These detracters are more of a threat to the CIC than any constitution or individual effort.

Somner9 looks intent in causing a rift between supporters, don't let him and his lack of substance succeed.

So you'll be able to back up your series of scandalous accusations with some evidence to substantiate it?

And perhaps more tellingly you have failed to read my post on the previous page outlining what would make the CiC a success in my opinion, still it's easier as you say to throw around rumours without any evidence!

P.s. can you list the many rumours I have thrown around so that we all may see and judge your evidence, If you can't list them then perhaps you'll do the honourable thing and apologise for creating a mischievous post without foundation?

[civilsaint]

* and insinuations

[Guest somner9]

* and insinuations

evidence man, evidence! come on are you shy?

[Reynard]

People with the attitude of somner9 are potentially a significant problem for the CIC and its success. The type of people who have been prepared to shout their mouth off about negative rumours (and pass them off as fact) without any evidence can cause PR damage, throw as much mud as possible and some will stick. He is clearly the type of person who will be prepared to continue to slate the CIC at every potential opportunity (justified or not) just because he doesn't like the way they recruited members. These detracters are more of a threat to the CIC than any constitution or individual effort.

Somner9 looks intent in causing a rift between supporters, don't let him and his lack of substance succeed.

I'm not sure how much damage, if any, can be done by a few guys on an internet site in a part of the forums where not many folk look. PR is up to the CiC people anyway so if they can sell this to the support and the local area then it doesn't really matter what a few people bumping their gums have to say. There is always a case for constructive criticism of anything. There have certainly been some decent points raised, some answered, some not, but some of the negative stuff seems to be just for the sake of it and it all becomes a bit of a parody. The people who don't want this to happen need to be as careful with THEIR PR as the CiC folk do in my opinion. To be perfectly honest I haven't really been digging into this too much as I'm only half interested and I don't have any great objections one way or another. All I want to see is a decent team on the park and the club to be well run off it. I'm not from the local area so really, the community bit won't affect me other than if it produces extra income for the club in some way.

The fact is that members of the current board with enough shares wanted to sell a controlling interest in the club. They set the price, they decide who or what they want to sell up to and that's really the end of the matter. It's up to those guys and they want £2million for the club so the CiC needs to raise that money to give to them so it has had to get that money together FIRST before anything can go forward. I think they have done a pretty good job in selling themselves and what they want to do to the funders. It would have been much easier in a situation like Motherwells where their owner basically just handed the club over without money needing to change hands. They could do something like we are doing without needing to have funding in place before it all starts up.

[St. Sid]

People with the attitude of somner9 are potentially a significant problem for the CIC and its success. The type of people who have been prepared to shout their mouth off about negative rumours (and pass them off as fact) without any evidence can cause PR damage, throw as much mud as possible and some will stick. He is clearly the type of person who will be prepared to continue to slate the CIC at every potential opportunity (justified or not) just because he doesn't like the way they recruited members. These detracters are more of a threat to the CIC than any constitution or individual effort.

Somner9 looks intent in causing a rift between supporters, don't let him and his lack of substance succeed.

We are beyond that sort of pish now. The CIC is going ahead. Somner9 has been very open in his views on the CIC and unles he is also "animal" or "Yul" I don't think your post stands. He has always outlined concerns rather than attacking individuals or just being plain anti.

Whilst I think his post goes a little too far, I actually agree with the jist of it. My big worry is not about whether the CIC will be successful - I am certain it will. My concern is about the fans role in it. Not just the members but the non-members. They / we (at the risk of upsetting Div) are still part of the club and will be on the receiving end of decisions made. Ultimately they / we are still SMFC. We are its customers...if you don't have your customer at the top of your priorities then you are in the shitter.

My concern is that the support is not functioning as an independent group in what is a critical period of due dilligence. ktf rightly points out that the community members have Saints fans - the Kibble being a prime example....great guy we have there. However, there will be conflicts of interest at some point. When you join a company, you sign a contract of employment. Hopefully you bawbags are reading yours. Whenever there is a conflict you can bet your bawz that your employers HR specialists will be pointing out the pertinent article in your CoE that puts the conflict of interest firmly in their favour.

Quite often the conflict can be perfectly innocent, and perfectly acceptable to both parties. I worked on a deal with a council for the supply of software to schools. The deal got dumped on me by a Director I didn't know that well. He wanted the deal done at stoopit margin in order to win it to curry favour with the vendor. I took the trouble to read the doc, swaw the threat and added a clause relating to the protection of margin as we bought in dollars and the c"ntcil bought in sterling. If the exchange rate went the wrong way I would have got pumped by my company for negative margin - the Director would have been scot free on the deal as it was my responsibility. As the exchange rate went the other way I wound up making good margin and ultimately money on the deal. The c"ntcil had no issues with having to pay more based on the exchange rate. The point being that even when all parties are good buddies, with the same aims...blah, blah, blah......failure by one party to do their due dilligence can lead to much pillaging later in the day.

Somner9 went a step too far; however I do think that the time is right for supporters to organise ourselves and apply some independent due dilligence to the current process. At the moment there is an assumption that there are some supporters involved and that they are doing due dilligence on matters such as the constitution. However, can anyone name the people involved, who is co-ordinating this - doesn't appear to be a supporter, who is taking responsibility for what, who is feeding back to the support. Happy to be proven wrong - but I don't see anything like that happening. The CIC is great. It is happening. It will be great for the club. What I am concerned about is how the support is engaging in the process. It appears to be meetings at the convenience of the CIC proposers. It appears to be by invitation.

I would just like to see some supporters step up to the mark and do the due dilligence to ensure that we are fully represented in the current process. We need to start looking at this as a project from a fans prespective. There should be an agreed process in place for fans. At the moment the pace, the rules, deliverables, etc are all being set by the CIC proposers.

So I will ask the question again - who is doing the due dilligence on behalf of the fans? If the answer is no one then we need to get our f'k'n act together.

[TsuMirren]

I would just like to see some supporters step up to the mark and do the due dilligence to ensure that we are fully represented in the current process. We need to start looking at this as a project from a fans prespective. There should be an agreed process in place for fans. At the moment the pace, the rules, deliverables, etc are all being set by the CIC proposers.

So I will ask the question again - who is doing the due dilligence on behalf of the fans? If the answer is no one then we need to get our f'k'n act together.

Do you mean the fans who will become CIC members or those who will take the decision to remain outwith the CIC? I'm assuming the former, but just thought I'd ask. I've not had a chance to contact Richard since Thursday's meeting, but will do so today.

[Guest somner9]

We are beyond that sort of pish now. The CIC is going ahead. Somner9 has been very open in his views on the CIC and unles he is also "animal" or "Yul" I don't think your post stands. He has always outlined concerns rather than attacking individuals or just being plain anti.

Whilst I think his post goes a little too far, I actually agree with the jist of it. My big worry is not about whether the CIC will be successful - I am certain it will. My concern is about the fans role in it. Not just the members but the non-members. They / we (at the risk of upsetting Div) are still part of the club and will be on the receiving end of decisions made. Ultimately they / we are still SMFC. We are its customers...if you don't have your customer at the top of your priorities then you are in the shitter.

My concern is that the support is not functioning as an independent group in what is a critical period of due dilligence. ktf rightly points out that the community members have Saints fans - the Kibble being a prime example....great guy we have there. However, there will be conflicts of interest at some point. When you join a company, you sign a contract of employment. Hopefully you bawbags are reading yours. Whenever there is a conflict you can bet your bawz that your employers HR specialists will be pointing out the pertinent article in your CoE that puts the conflict of interest firmly in their favour.

Quite often the conflict can be perfectly innocent, and perfectly acceptable to both parties. I worked on a deal with a council for the supply of software to schools. The deal got dumped on me by a Director I didn't know that well. He wanted the deal done at stoopit margin in order to win it to curry favour with the vendor. I took the trouble to read the doc, swaw the threat and added a clause relating to the protection of margin as we bought in dollars and the c"ntcil bought in sterling. If the exchange rate went the wrong way I would have got pumped by my company for negative margin - the Director would have been scot free on the deal as it was my responsibility. As the exchange rate went the other way I wound up making good margin and ultimately money on the deal. The c"ntcil had no issues with having to pay more based on the exchange rate. The point being that even when all parties are good buddies, with the same aims...blah, blah, blah......failure by one party to do their due dilligence can lead to much pillaging later in the day.

Somner9 went a step too far; however I do think that the time is right for supporters to organise ourselves and apply some independent due dilligence to the current process. At the moment there is an assumption that there are some supporters involved and that they are doing due dilligence on matters such as the constitution. However, can anyone name the people involved, who is co-ordinating this - doesn't appear to be a supporter, who is taking responsibility for what, who is feeding back to the support. Happy to be proven wrong - but I don't see anything like that happening. The CIC is great. It is happening. It will be great for the club. What I am concerned about is how the support is engaging in the process. It appears to be meetings at the convenience of the CIC proposers. It appears to be by invitation.

I would just like to see some supporters step up to the mark and do the due dilligence to ensure that we are fully represented in the current process. We need to start looking at this as a project from a fans prespective. There should be an agreed process in place for fans. At the moment the pace, the rules, deliverables, etc are all being set by the CIC proposers.

So I will ask the question again - who is doing the due dilligence on behalf of the fans? If the answer is no one then we need to get our f'k'n act together.

Almost agree with St Skid :o

Almost! not completely

I don't think Im going to far in my suggestions, rather pointing out the areas where unless addressed any potential Individual (Fans) board member would have an impossible position to defend and work from if they haven't been part of the process of drawing up the constitution of the CiC.

If the people putting up the cash for the CiC aren't involved in drawing up the constitution, who is? Who should be?

This is the CiC Rule book, which if you back/pledge the proposal is YOUR rule book. so if you are bank rolling it, shouldn't you have a say in writing it?

And for 10000 hours to suggest that putting forward a draft constitution for the couple of Individual (Fans) board members to try and get some amendment to, when the iniative and drive are all with the people who drafted it is a forlorn lost cause, akin to herding cats...

Just think you're paying for it, will have to abide by it, but you've played little part in forming it! That is the bad start that needs to be avoided if everyone involved is to feel they are part of the process going forward.

Forget the smokescreen of trotting out GLS at the meeting and if it's for you? get down and dirty with the detail......

Mean while i'll go and kick a few cats to keep me occupied. Hmmph Yul or animal indeed

[St. Sid]

Do you mean the fans who will become CIC members or those who will take the decision to remain outwith the CIC? I'm assuming the former, but just thought I'd ask. I've not had a chance to contact Richard since Thursday's meeting, but will do so today.

Fans are fans and it will effect both. As you rightly point out at this point in time there are no members as there is no legal entity to join. In my as ever humble opinion it is odd to be talkiing about members of something that doesn't exist - especially when no deadline for additional members is put in place.

Contact Richard about what - are you saying that we need permission to organise ourselves to do due dilligence? You may be missing the point about the due dilligence group being independent. There is nothing to discuss with REA if there is no interest from supporters in doing it. From my own brief encounters I am 100% certain that REA would actually welcome this.

If there is interest in the formation of such a group I am more than capable of contacting Richard myself to discuss how we make it happen. I don't think there will be, whcih is a real shame. I suspect as Div pointed out earlier that fans will be content to wait and see and then slaughter every small error, mistake, loophole that has been missed or goes against the interest of the fans - irrespective of whether it was intentional.

This is not about being anti-CIC this is about being pro-fans within the CIC.

another wee example.....the negotiations for the new strips comes into play later on in the season. JD Sports reckon then can leverage more margin by reducing the quality of the product. They argue that the slight drop in sales due to quality reduction will be counteracted by the increase in margin. JD Sports will increase the deal for St Mirren as a result. Most supporters will buy any old shite providing its got a Saints badge on it being the arguable premise. The club gets more money to spend on the playing side. This of course is an entirely made up scenario for the purpose of raising some questions.

The issue impacts all fans not just members. For me this is a strategic decision that would need to go to the members board for their approval. But do we know that to be the case yet? In theory based on the high level information provided to date I think it would. However, we don't know. JD Sports immediately have a conflict of interests as they will have corporate representation on the members board and perhaps even on SMFC Ltd BoD. We would potentially have a casting vote from the CIC CEO - would there be a conflict of interest, can JD Sports apply pressure there? Our fans reps could be influenced by the argument over more money for players over shite product for the fans - how do we ensure that fans actual views are represented by their reps? Is there anything in the constitution to say that the issue would have to be referred to the members BoD. Even if there is how do we know that the choice even exists?

Whilst I am confident that the constitution will be well written and all angles considered with the best of intentions. I have seen well intentioned clauses bite organisations on the @rse even with due dilligence by all interested parties. Fans getting together to document what it is we want from the CIC and what protection we would like for the club, and what decisions we would like to be involved in is not a bad and certainly not a negative thing to do. I reckon REA would actually be delighted to have our input. However, were we are the moment is simply not involved - and that is a ticking timebomb for anything that finally transpires and is not liked.

[ktf]

Did you help draft the constitution?

No, but that makes absolutely no difference. The CiC doesn't exist without us. If we don't like what we see, we can pull out, this applies to everyone: corporate, community and individual. If that happens the thing falls flat on its face and fails. It isn't in the interest of the CiC to fail and so there should be nothing in the constitution that will be detrimental to the club.

[Guest somner9]

No, but that makes absolutely no difference. The CiC doesn't exist without us. If we don't like what we see, we can pull out, this applies to everyone: corporate, community and individual. If that happens the thing falls flat on its face and fails. It isn't in the interest of the CiC to fail and so there should be nothing in the constitution that will be detrimental to the club.

Shouldn't the emphasis (Strange that I should highlight this) be on getting the constitution right first time? Then having a great PR tool to recruit/involve more fans/community groups to the fold? rather than "If we don't like what we see, we can pull out"

And the one way to make sure the constitution as you say is not "detrimental to the club" is to get all the stakeholders involved in writing it!

If as is suggested it's pre-written constitution by a pre-determined exec board and their pre-determined community groups what has the ordinary fan/individual member got to hang his/her (Pre-determined) hat on?

[ktf]

Shouldn't the emphasis (Strange that I should highlight this) be on getting the constitution right first time? Then having a great PR tool to recruit/involve more fans/community groups to the fold? rather than "If we don't like what we see, we can pull out"

And the one way to make sure the constitution as you say is not "detrimental to the club" is to get all the stakeholders involved in writing it!

If as is suggested it's pre-written constitution by a pre-determined exec board and their pre-determined community groups what has the ordinary fan/individual member got to hang his/her (Pre-determined) hat on?

Possibly but we don't live in an ideal world and not everything happens the way that we would ideally want them to. The choice then is do I turn my back on everything that I am not happy with, criticise it and talk about how back-to-front it is, or do I actively choose to get involved, to be a part of what happens on the inside and influence change? For me that's a no-brainer. If it involves the club that I love, the town that I love and the line of work that I love, I will choose to get involved and be a catalyst for change and not a dissenting voice, achieving nothing other than to piss people off.

Also, FWIW, I didn't suggest that it was pre-written, I suggested that it matters neither whether it is or isn't.