Jump to content

Should John Needham resign due to inappropriate comments?


Recommended Posts


25 minutes ago, alanb said:

A quick click on the link and some have 

some anonymous and some named too

Takes all sorts and hardly doubt he needed any financial assistance 

A couple of classy messages, aye, we're a cut above Rangers supporters. :lol:

Currently £135, almost there. :lol:

Edited by faraway saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think Needham has made a poor start as chairman, full of management speak and showing a lack of transparency, I don't think he should resign over this. He made mistakes, jokes in bad taste but not a resigning matter for me.

I doubt Kibble will agree though and this could be an interesting battle between them and SMISA which I fully expect Kibble will win. 

The wider question will then be at what point do the SMISA membership retain faith in the SMISA Board, given their current approach towards the membership is full on mushroom strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did SMISA not screen him to make sure he was an appropriate candidate before putting his appointment to the membership to vote on? Where was Kibble's checks done since they have to approve any appointments as well? And where was the SFA when the fit and proper person check was being done if two of these tweets were historic? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, munoz said:

It seems like today's outcome has come as a bit of an anticlimax for the pitchfork brigade. 

Shame that.

On the contrary the supporters of out bigoted chairman seem to have lost the ability to post.

They'll be thinking of their "ah but................................" responses. 

Or maybe their busy transferring funds to the crowd funding page? 

Edited by faraway saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MenstrieSaint said:

Personally I prefer a group of St Mirren fans running the club as opposed to a group of people who,s business expertise is profiting from providing services to the most vulnerable young people in Scotland . 

Agreed. The question, though, isn't about the motivation of the SMISA board and their reps on the St Mirren board - I don't think that's in doubt - but about whether they can stand up to the Kibble machine, as Kibble will always put the interests of Kibble first. The reality is we have had a total lack of transparency from SMISA on a whole range of things, and this could be because they're not allowed to. My fear is we are in some sort of coercive relationship with the "great bunch of lads" Kibble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. The question, though, isn't about the motivation of the SMISA board and their reps on the St Mirren board - I don't think that's in doubt - but about whether they can stand up to the Kibble machine, as Kibble will always put the interests of Kibble first. The reality is we have had a total lack of transparency from SMISA on a whole range of things, and this could be because they're not allowed to. My fear is we are in some sort of coercive relationship with the "great bunch of lads" Kibble.
It's no benefit of the Kibble if the club isn't doing well, as there wouldn't be the resources for the Kibble to use for the development of their trainees.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary the supporters of out bigoted chairman seem to have lost the ability to post.
They'll be thinking of their "ah but................................" responses. 
Or maybe their busy transferring funds to the crowd funding page? 
Was he found guilty by the tribunal for using actual bigoted words? If so, show me where they have indicated this.


A few years ago this happened, was anyone asking for the guilty party to be sacked?
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/scottish/rangers-fc-steven-gerrard-referee-comments-st-mirren-scottish-premiership-a8692716.html

In comparison the SFA think our chairman's comments were not as offending with the fine being in comparison less.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hendo said:

Agreed. The question, though, isn't about the motivation of the SMISA board and their reps on the St Mirren board - I don't think that's in doubt - but about whether they can stand up to the Kibble machine, as Kibble will always put the interests of Kibble first. The reality is we have had a total lack of transparency from SMISA on a whole range of things, and this could be because they're not allowed to. My fear is we are in some sort of coercive relationship with the "great bunch of lads" Kibble.

"My fear is we are in some sort of coercive relationship with the "great bunch of lads" Kibble."  My understanding is that you may well be correct and Smisa's hands are tied right now as lawyers letters threatening legal action if the chairman is not removed have been sent. 

Dictionary. What is the meaning of being coercive? : using threats to make someone do something
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, doakie said:

"My fear is we are in some sort of coercive relationship with the "great bunch of lads" Kibble."  My understanding is that you may well be correct and Smisa's hands are tied right now as lawyers letters threatening legal action if the chairman is not removed have been sent. 

Dictionary. What is the meaning of being coercive? : using threats to make someone do something

The shareholders agreement must have  some mechanism  for termination. 

Could be Smisa will have to buy out Kibble at a higher price than they paid GS ,that would need a lot of cash to be raised ,but we have been there before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, faraway saint said:

On the contrary the supporters of out bigoted chairman seem to have lost the ability to post.

They'll be thinking of their "ah but................................" responses. 

Or maybe their busy transferring funds to the crowd  funding page? 

Move along now Faraway nothing to see here son  :rolleyes: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, hamlet said:

Now I would expect him to do the right thing and resign.

The punishment more than fits the crime in my opinion. Mr Needham appears to be a thorn in the kibble’s side and I hope he remains to be so. Otherwise a kibble yes man could be appointed to the board under the guise of a SMiSA member. 
I mean no harm to kibble but if allegations of them having thrown the chairman under a bus because they don’t like him are true, then a very close eye needs to be kept on future appointments to the board.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, waldorf34 said:

The shareholders agreement must have  some mechanism  for termination. 

Could be Smisa will have to buy out Kibble at a higher price than they paid GS ,that would need a lot of cash to be raised ,but we have been there before.

The overwhelming majority of voting SMISA members favoured the Kibble buyout. They aren't going anywhere soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

The overwhelming majority of voting SMISA members favoured the Kibble buyout. They aren't going anywhere soon. 

Correct, but if Kibble aren't happy with things (as a minority shareholder), they are welcome to put their price (for their shareholding) to SMISA & SMISA can ask it's members if they want to buy Kibble out.

If suggestions elsewhere about Kibble taking legal action against The Club to have John Needham removed as chairman are true. The working relationship has broken down (irrepairably i'd say) & Kibble should put together an exit strategy & put it to SMISA.

Oh, I'm in the John Needham to stay camp.

He hasn't committed a crime. I expect  officials at other clubs have, on occasion, forgotten the responsibilities of their roles & not been hounded out. John Needham shouldn't be either.

A big reminder of "say what you like about them (whoever "them" may be) in private. Never in public"

& lets get back to important matters.

The football.

Edited by Kombibuddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kombibuddie said:

Correct, but if Kibble aren't happy with things (as a minority shareholder), they are welcome to put their price (for their shareholding) to SMISA & SMISA can ask it's members if they want to buy Kibble out.

If suggestions elsewhere about Kibble taking legal action against The Club to have John Needham removed as chairman are true. The working relationship has broken down (irrepairably i'd say) & Kibble should put together an exit strategy & put it to SMISA.

Oh, I'm in the John Needham to stay camp.

He hasn't committed a crime. I expect  officials at other clubs have, on occasion, forgotten the responsibilities of their roles & not been hounded out. John Needham shouldn't be either.

A big reminder of "say what you like about them (whoever "them" may be) in private. Never in public"

& lets get back to important matters.

The football.

I doubt the rumours will be true, it’s not the first time people have spread utter nonsense like this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A statue of John Needham should be placed outside the ground in his honour.

We should refuse to pay the fines.

The Old Firm’s success is based on the exploitation of sectarian hatred. If Sevco had been refused entry to the league then sectarianism in Scotland would have faded away.

All those who backed Sevco’s admittance to the league should hang their heads in shame. They know who they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I doubt the rumours will be true, it’s not the first time people have spread utter nonsense like this.  

I hope these rumours are not true too but on the off chance, there is a shred in it......

If they (Kibble) have even sought legal advice on that vein....time for them to put together their exit strategy & put it to SMISA for a buyout (of Kibble (to avoid doubt or spin)).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I doubt the rumours will be true, it’s not the first time people have spread utter nonsense like this.  

It's not nonsense, legal people have been approached  by both parties ,hopefully  reason will prevail and both parties can move forward together to bring success to the club.

Maybe we have to sacrifice  this Director to make that happen

We should not lose sight of the big picture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, waldorf34 said:

It's not nonsense, legal people have been approached  by both parties ,hopefully  reason will prevail and both parties can move forward together to bring success to the club.

Maybe we have to sacrifice  this Director to make that happen

We should not lose sight of the big picture. 

No sacrifice needed.

If Kibble are dissatisfied, they can name their price & lets have the majority owners decide

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...