Should John Needham resign due to inappropriate comments?

[alanb]

8 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

I seen it was the Cockles Wilson thing, and I seen the individuals classy comments.

The link you posted yesterday doesn't seem to work> 

Maybe deleted by creators 

[Sidmirren]

13 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

I knew the absurd crowdfunding page was getting donated to charity, that's yesterdays news. 

Mr Optimistic's post was, IMO, misleading. 

IMO 

[Mr Optimistic]

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/cockleswilson-supporters-1?utm_term=Bdk4bYE2E

 

This was the original page set up to pay Needhams fine. Given he just wants the whole sorry episode to go away it's little wonder the page has now been shut down. Not before some idiots (including what looks like smisa treasurer) donated!!

You would think as treasurer of SMISA you might have thought of getting in touch with the Chairman before making that decision.

Mickey Mouse organisation. The thought of them having more power or say in how the club moves forward is absolutely frightening. 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Mr Optimistic

[faraway saint]

12 minutes ago, Mr Optimistic said:

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/cockleswilson-supporters-1?utm_term=Bdk4bYE2E

 

This was the original page set up to pay Needhams fine. Given he just wants the whole sorry episode to go away it's little wonder the page has now been shut down. Not before some idiots (including what looks like smisa treasurer) donated!!

You would think as treasurer of SMISA you might have thought of getting in touch with the Chairman before making that decision.

Mickey Mouse organisation. The thought of them having more power or say in how the club moves forward is absolutely frightening. 

Out of interest, which one of the donators, is the treasurer? 

[doakie]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Evidence? 

This is a forum, not a court of law, Bazil so providing evidence is impossible but I'm lead to believe that there are enough well informed people contributing to this thread who have contacts within Smisa, within the board, from ex-directors and former employees who have been given the information by word of mouth and are confident that these allegations are true. This information is now circulating and you can choose to believe it or not (That's my disclaimer and from now on I'm simply going to refer to allegations)

The legal threat to remove the chairman has, allegedly, been delivered to Smisa and, allegedly, they've been legally warned not to discuss it in public. No one can provide hard copies of the letter (i.e. the evidence you desire) without apparently running the threat of legal action.

Why would anyone make up such a story?  If Smisa are muzzled where does our club go from here? Forgive me if I'm wrong but it seems that you are pro Kibble but it might be an idea get onside with Smisa and not Kibble. Why? Well, Smisa have the club's best interest at heart. I wonder if Kibble do? 

The full story will fully emerge but Smisa are, allegedly, being muzzled right now. Why not get in touch with Smisa yourself  - they are easy to contact - and see if you get an exact or a vague reply. But providing evidence would be literally an impossible task at this time.

The contributors to this thread should not waste their time with petty point scoring against each other (the "my dad's bigger than your dad" kind of argument/point scoring is tiring and boring) but should instead look at the bigger picture of what is happening at the club.  

We have a democratically elected chairman who Kibble are, allegedly, trying to have removed. Irrespective of anyone's thoughts on John Needham's behaviour, surely nobody with half a brain feels that Kibble should carry such authority. That's not democracy.

[faraway saint]

6 minutes ago, doakie said:

This is a forum, not a court of law, Bazil so providing evidence is impossible but I'm lead to believe that there are enough well informed people contributing to this thread who have contacts within Smisa, within the board, from ex-directors and former employees who have been given the information by word of mouth and are confident that these allegations are true. This information is now circulating and you can choose to believe it or not (That's my disclaimer and from now on I'm simply going to refer to allegations)

The legal threat to remove the chairman has, allegedly, been delivered to Smisa and, allegedly, they've been legally warned not to discuss it in public. No one can provide hard copies of the letter (i.e. the evidence you desire) without apparently running the threat of legal action.

Why would anyone make up such a story?  If Smisa are muzzled where does our club go from here? Forgive me if I'm wrong but it seems that you are pro Kibble but it might be an idea get onside with Smisa and not Kibble. Why? Well, Smisa have the club's best interest at heart. I wonder if Kibble do? 

The full story will fully emerge but Smisa are, allegedly, being muzzled right now. Why not get in touch with Smisa yourself  - they are easy to contact - and see if you get an exact or a vague reply. But providing evidence would be literally an impossible task at this time.

The contributors to this thread should not waste their time with petty point scoring against each other (the "my dad's bigger than your dad" kind of argument/point scoring is tiring and boring) but should instead look at the bigger picture of what is happening at the club.  

We have a democratically elected chairman who Kibble are, allegedly, trying to have removed. Irrespective of anyone's thoughts on John Needham's behaviour, surely nobody with half a brain feels that Kibble should carry such authority. That's not democracy.

Good post oakie. 

[bazil85]

10 minutes ago, doakie said:

This is a forum, not a court of law, Bazil so providing evidence is impossible but I'm lead to believe that there are enough well informed people contributing to this thread who have contacts within Smisa, within the board, from ex-directors and former employees who have been given the information by word of mouth and are confident that these allegations are true. This information is now circulating and you can choose to believe it or not (That's my disclaimer and from now on I'm simply going to refer to allegations)

The legal threat to remove the chairman has, allegedly, been delivered to Smisa and, allegedly, they've been legally warned not to discuss it in public. No one can provide hard copies of the letter (i.e. the evidence you desire) without apparently running the threat of legal action.

Why would anyone make up such a story?  If Smisa are muzzled where does our club go from here? Forgive me if I'm wrong but it seems that you are pro Kibble but it might be an idea get onside with Smisa and not Kibble. Why? Well, Smisa have the club's best interest at heart. I wonder if Kibble do? 

The full story will fully emerge but Smisa are, allegedly, being muzzled right now. Why not get in touch with Smisa yourself  - they are easy to contact - and see if you get an exact or a vague reply. But providing evidence would be literally an impossible task at this time.

The contributors to this thread should not waste their time with petty point scoring against each other (the "my dad's bigger than your dad" kind of argument/point scoring is tiring and boring) but should instead look at the bigger picture of what is happening at the club.  

We have a democratically elected chairman who Kibble are, allegedly, trying to have removed. Irrespective of anyone's thoughts on John Needham's behaviour, surely nobody with half a brain feels that Kibble should carry such authority. That's not democracy.

I’ll believe it when I see it. There’s been plenty of nonsense to this effect shared on here & elsewhere by St Mirren fans before. 
 

As for why would they make it up? For attention. 
 

It also isn’t one or other with SMISA & Kibble, I’m pro both regarding our football club. 
 

I would fully support the removal of the chairman & if that’s a view held by one of our major shareholders, we can see how it plays out. I don’t imagine Kibble are trying to get out of the club though, which is the point I don’t believe. Although I’m open to someone providing something more substantial than ‘I heard a whisper’ 

Edited December 3, 2021 by bazil85

[hamlet]

2 hours ago, MenstrieSaint said:

Could the club not call an egm and have one motion to bring  in two more  smisa directors and another motion that all the key decisions in running the club be taken to the vote .

An EGM is not needed. A motion could be called at the AGM which which has still to be announced, but is required to take place on or prior to the 20th January 2022.

O forgot the annual bit did not apply last year since the  meeting was held  13 months after the previous years Annual Meeting.

[faraway saint]

1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

I’ll believe it when I see it. There’s been plenty of nonsense to this effect shared on here & elsewhere by St Mirren fans before. 
 

As for why would they make it up? For attention. 

Popped you off ignore to see if you added anything worthwhile, nope.

The detail, and, even I have heard various aspects of this before now, provided would indicate, to anyone with half a brain, there's something going on.

You, as you have throughout this season of one disaster after another, simply (apt) won't see anything but fluffy white clouds.

Despite you're constant attempts to attention seek from me, this is it, for the foreseeable. 

 

[Cookie Monster]

Out of interest, which one of the donators, is the treasurer? 

The one on SMISA website with the title treasurer. [emoji14]

[alanb]

21 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Out of interest, which one of the donators, is the treasurer? 

To avoid anyone being a clype , Google is your friend, Sidmirren less so it seems 😉😉😉😇

Edited December 3, 2021 by alanb

[Cookie Monster]

An EGM is not needed. A motion could be called at the AGM which which has still to be announced, but is required to take place on or prior to the 20th January 2022.
O forgot the annual bit did not apply last year since the  meeting was held  13 months after the previous years Annual Meeting.

Does any motion need to be lodged, for example a month beforehand?

[hamlet]

Just now, Cookie Monster said:

10 minutes ago, hamlet said:

An EGM is not needed. A motion could be called at the AGM which which has still to be announced, but is required to take place on or prior to the 20th January 2022.
O forgot the annual bit did not apply last year since the  meeting was held  13 months after the previous years Annual Meeting.

Does any motion need to be lodged, for example a month beforehand?

Can be done on the night providing the motion is seconded.

[faraway saint]

7 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

The one on SMISA website with the title treasurer.

 

6 minutes ago, alanb said:

To avoid anyone being a clype , Google is your friend, Sidmirren less so it seems 😉😉😉😇

Thanks, fannies. 

[doakie]

10 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I’ll believe it when I see it. There’s been plenty of nonsense to this effect shared on here & elsewhere by St Mirren fans before. 
 

As for why would they make it up? For attention. 
 

It also isn’t one or other with SMISA & Kibble, I’m pro both regarding our football club. 
 

I would fully support the removal of the chairman & if that’s a view held by one of our major shareholders, we can see how it plays out. I don’t imagine Kibble are trying to get out of the club though, which is the point I don’t believe. Although I’m open to someone providing something more substantial than ‘I heard a whisper’ 

For the sake of accuracy, I did not say that Kibble are trying to get out of the club. On the contrary it seems that they are attempting to gain more control.

p.s. Do you really have to be so condescending i.e. "I’m open to someone providing something more substantial than ‘I heard a whisper’ ". There's really no need to be so disrespectful to someone who is simply trying to keep you and other fans informed. 

[faraway saint]

9 minutes ago, alanb said:

To avoid anyone being a clype , Google is your friend, Sidmirren less so it seems 😉😉😉😇

Got it, couldn't find Sidmirren, although Shull did come up? 

[Lager Tops]

If the vote for the chair took place now and the comments of the current chair were part of the selection process would they be voted in? If the answer is yes then that is a worry, as a st.mirren  supporter, and if the answer is no then get a robust mechanism in place for the next chair and do that replacement process now. If those in smisa truly have the best interests of st.mirren at heart then why would you want this to blot your ambitions and if you are the chair who has caused this would you put the club first and stand down or put yourself first and hang in? If there had been a robust list of exceptional benefits to the club instigated by the current chair then I could, slightly and only slightly, understand the personal defence promoted by some of his actions, but through all of this and the previous Q&A there has been nothing to suggest a keep at all costs individual. Fully understand that differences of opinions  exist from those on the outside, like me and most others here, but if you are on the inside and can’t get this right then what chance have we got. 

smisa you are the major shareholder, and in the place with authority that you wanted to be in, so please advise the fans and club you represent of your position on this and people can then decide whether this is an organisation upholding of the published values core to smisa and whether that position is representative of the full support.

[Mr Optimistic]

3 minutes ago, doakie said:

For the sake of accuracy, I did not say that Kibble are trying to get out of the club. On the contrary it seems that they are attempting to gain more control.

p.s. Do you really have to be so condescending i.e. "I’m open to someone providing something more substantial than ‘I heard a whisper’ ". There's really no need to be so disrespectful to someone who is simply trying to keep you and other fans informed. 

Keeping people informed with rumour and hearsay and absolutely NO facts to back it up. Aye.. thanks..

[norrie82]

For me since kibble became involved nothing had improved for the fans. The leadership of the club is non existent and for your ordinary fan things are worse in every department out with the playing side. You can’t tell me that the organisation, Communications and General running of the club are better. Nobody answers the phone and I feel less close to our team than I ever have. Let’s go back to paying our money to actually own our club. Time for the kibble to go 

[faraway saint]

11 minutes ago, norrie82 said:

For me since kibble became involved nothing had improved for the fans. The leadership of the club is non existent and for your ordinary fan things are worse in every department out with the playing side. You can’t tell me that the organisation, Communications and General running of the club are better. Nobody answers the phone and I feel less close to our team than I ever have. Let’s go back to paying our money to actually own our club. Time for the kibble to go 

It certainly comes across that as a club we are dropping like a stone in almost every aspect.

The "punters" are, seemingly, not worth any effort, meaningless sound bytes apart.

The team are heading, at he minute, on a downward spiral.

Really disappointing after last seasons decent achievement on the park. 

[doakie]

1 minute ago, Mr Optimistic said:

Keeping people informed with rumour and hearsay and absolutely NO facts to back it up. Aye.. thanks..

I've made it clear that who the sources of information are. Take a minute to digest what various well informed posters are trying to do - there are a number of fans trying to get the information out to the larger fanbase - something that the Smisa board cannot do at this moment. Whether you choose to believe the story or cynically dismiss it as rumour and hearsay is up to you but I suggest that you may want to treat these posts seriously. I've not come on here to have arguments - I'm simply trying to inform and sarcastic answers does neither you nor the club any favours. 

[Mr Optimistic]

Ok.. who are the sources of this information? I’ve clearly missed it. 

[Cookie Monster]

Ok.. who are the sources of this information? I’ve clearly missed it. 

He's told you again. [emoji1787]

[doakie]

1 minute ago, Mr Optimistic said:

Ok.. who are the sources of this information? I’ve clearly missed it. 

I posted it an hour ago. Did you post your sarcastic reply without reading my original post? Surely not. I've cut and paste the paragraph for you. Now, before I do, let me explain why I refer to "allegations". I do not want to be embroiled in the legal process and, in this digital age everyone's identity can be easily found no matter how ridiculous their pen name is. As a result, I refer to "allegations" and "lead to believe" but I assumed anyone reading it would easily work out why I used those terms. Here it is.

This is a forum, not a court of law, Bazil so providing evidence is impossible but I'm lead to believe that there are enough well informed people contributing to this thread who have contacts within Smisa, within the board, from ex-directors and former employees who have been given the information by word of mouth and are confident that these allegations are true. This information is now circulating and you can choose to believe it or not (That's my disclaimer and from now on I'm simply going to refer to allegations)

[Mr Optimistic]

6 minutes ago, doakie said:

I posted it an hour ago. Did you post your sarcastic reply without reading my original post? Surely not. I've cut and paste the paragraph for you. Now, before I do, let me explain why I refer to "allegations". I do not want to be embroiled in the legal process and, in this digital age everyone's identity can be easily found no matter how ridiculous their pen name is. As a result, I refer to "allegations" and "lead to believe" but I assumed anyone reading it would easily work out why I used those terms. Here it is.

This is a forum, not a court of law, Bazil so providing evidence is impossible but I'm lead to believe that there are enough well informed people contributing to this thread who have contacts within Smisa, within the board, from ex-directors and former employees who have been given the information by word of mouth and are confident that these allegations are true. This information is now circulating and you can choose to believe it or not (That's my disclaimer and from now on I'm simply going to refer to allegations)

As I suspected.. absolutely nothing.. 

If true though as a club we are going nowhere. A lame duck chairman and a board split down the middle. Needham doing the right thing would have avoided all this. 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Mr Optimistic