Explosive Smisa application

[bazil85]

4 hours ago, BuddieinEK said:

Part fan owned.

Selective quote.

Stalker.

Now bog off and ignore me. I didn't invite your shoite input. 

You know what you have to do if you don’t want me to respond to you. You’ve failed multiple times & as such, I will engage with you as I see fit  

We are both active users of this fan owned clubs, fan forum. Tough luck. 

[djchapsticks]

Nice to see this thread has gone pretty much as predicted in last 48hrs or so...

[portmahomack saint]

3 hours ago, djchapsticks said:

Nice to see this thread has gone pretty much as predicted in last 48hrs or so...

Bazil is on guard just in case any culprit try's a counter offensive 

[BuddieinEK]

9 minutes ago, portmahomack saint said:

Bazil is on guard just in case any culprit try's a counter offensive 

 

[djchapsticks]

Has a wee chance to watch some of the Q&A session today and it's toe-curling stuff.

Doakie standing up and shouting 'I am the source' like something out League of Gentleman is a particular highlight.

[faraway saint]

3 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Has a wee chance to watch some of the Q&A session today and it's toe-curling stuff.

Doakie standing up and shouting 'I am the source' like something out League of Gentleman is a particular highlight.

It was leaked to AW on Saturday. 

Who would have done that? 

[garzo]

14 hours ago, djchapsticks said:

Has a wee chance to watch some of the Q&A session today and it's toe-curling stuff.

Doakie standing up and shouting 'I am the source' like something out League of Gentleman is a particular highlight.

I enjoyed the last 10 minutes 🙂

[bazil85]

15 hours ago, djchapsticks said:

Has a wee chance to watch some of the Q&A session today and it's toe-curling stuff.

Doakie standing up and shouting 'I am the source' like something out League of Gentleman is a particular highlight.

https://tenor.com/biwKb.gif

[Steven Glansberg]

15 hours ago, djchapsticks said:

Has a wee chance to watch some of the Q&A session today and it's toe-curling stuff.

Doakie standing up and shouting 'I am the source' like something out League of Gentleman is a particular highlight.

Convinced he isn't a real person, he's a guy playing a character and he's really committed to the bit. 

[bazil85]

I’m actually really disappointed in SMISA. Putting the AGM video’s up without a disclaimer was absolutely the wrong thing to do.
 

Over 18s warning needed, given it shows Alan Wardrop getting utterly shagged on stage. 😂😂

[faraway saint]

5 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

 

Over 18s warning needed, given it shows Alan Wardrop getting utterly shagged on stage. 😂😂

Over 18's? 🙄

[bazil85]

6 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Over 18's? 🙄

It was a joke, have a wee think about it…

[Cookie Monster]

It was a joke, have a wee think about it…

It was a grammatical mistake. Comma, have a think about it. [emoji14]

[faraway saint]

50 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

It was a joke, have a wee think about it…

Hilarious. 😜

[bazil85]

17 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

It was a grammatical mistake. Comma, have a think about it.

Can’t beat a wee grammar comment on a fan forum. They add so much value. 
 

We are very lucky to have that level of nitpicker on here…  😅

Edited May 23, 2023 by bazil85

[kevo_smfc]

Just watched part 3 of the video from the AGM.

Could be wrong, though it looked like it conveniently ran out of recording space as AW was given a platform.

[Maboza]

27 minutes ago, kevo_smfc said:

Just watched part 3 of the video from the AGM.

Could be wrong, though it looked like it conveniently ran out of recording space as AW was given a platform.

 

I said previously and will say again: 

What is the likelihood of Renfrewshire Council mistakenly shading a piece of land next to the stadium for a multi-million pound funding bid?

Let’s get this right - not just the long, derelict piece of land (if we don’t were to believe that they were just pointing to any old scrap of spare land) - it just so happens to be the exact piece of land that stops and starts at the precise boundary of land owned by St.Mirren FC. That’s exactly what is on the bid.

The St.Mirren board and Kibble want us to believe and accept that Renfrewshire Council mistakenly applied shading to point to that exact land.

And they did so without Kibble pointing to it. 
 

 

[Brilliant Disguise]

25 minutes ago, kevo_smfc said:

Just watched part 3 of the video from the AGM.

Could be wrong, though it looked like it conveniently ran out of recording space as AW was given a platform.

Episode 2 is the real action. It’s the most cringeworthy watch you will ever see. Not one member on the board and former member comes across with any credibility. 

Needham gets pulled up for making faces at the people asking questions. (We wasn’t alone the entire board was doing it) Disgraceful actions from a so called chairman.  

Paul M got the wrong end of the stick when he was appointed to the board. He looked like he was appointed to be bored. 

Dia Station on the board needs to get some anger management training.

 

[Brilliant Disguise]

6 minutes ago, Maboza said:

 

The St.Mirren board and Kibble want us to believe and accept that Renfrewshire Council mistakenly applied shading to point to that exact land.

 

 

What’s the timeline from that original accusation and the Kibble excuse it was the Council. Days, weeks MONTHS !!!!

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, kevo_smfc said:

Just watched part 3 of the video from the AGM.

Could be wrong, though it looked like it conveniently ran out of recording space as AW was given a platform.

Seemed like just more of the same to me, he wasn’t covering any new details. That debate could have been finished in 5-10 minutes. 
 

It was embarrassing & difficult to watch. As I said weeks ago, it’s trivial & should be long closed. Mountain out of a mole hill. 
 

Hopefully people can finally put this to bed & we can actually move forward as a club. 

[djchapsticks]

2 hours ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

Episode 2 is the real action. It’s the most cringeworthy watch you will ever see. Not one member on the board and former member comes across with any credibility. 

Needham gets pulled up for making faces at the people asking questions. (We wasn’t alone the entire board was doing it) Disgraceful actions from a so called chairman.  

 

You believe AW came out of that looking good? He was like a spoilt, petulant child throughout, at one point even refusing to hand over his microphone for a rebuttal to a question FFS.

The SMISA meeting is a cross section of 100 or so members and taken across lets say, very *specific* demographic of late middle aged men who seem to be on the whole, quite agitated and firmly of the belief that their way is correct and that's that. So it did appear that there was significant support for AW in that room.

However, proof of where the fan and membership interest lies in this entire situation is in the polling, so lets lay down some irrefutable facts here:

• Approx 400 members voted in the recent elections - around 1/3 of the total SMISA membership.
• There were 5 candidates to choose from to elect to the SMISA board
• Alan Wardrop's statement garnered easily the most publicity, the most traction and was the most (to quote our pal Doakie) 'explosive' of all 5 member statements. A proper blockbuster they'd have you believe.
• Alan Wardrop's statement and campaign resulted in him finishing 5th placed among the 5 entrants and nowhere near winning a place on the SMISA board despite the publicity around it.
   

From that, I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of the SMISA membership either don't see this as a large enough issue to bother voting on whatsoever (because you can bet your bottom dollar that an engaged membership would have taken the time to cast a vote on such allegations if they believed there was systematic wrongdoing) and the vast majority of the 400 who did vote, decided that AW is either not to be believed and/or not worth one of the two places on the SMISA board.

That should be the end of it really. A few shouty, grumpy old men are really all that's left of this. I don't trust AW, I don't trust his reasons for doing what he's doing, I don't trust him sitting on this for several months and I don't trust the explanation given for him sitting on it since February until now. It was a cynical move to get on the SMISA BoD and it has failed spectacularly. Him and his mouthpieces now need to sit down, shut up and accept that the large majority of supporters are not interested in their noses being out of joint over minor issues and are not willing to support or back them up on this.

[Brilliant Disguise]

7 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

You believe AW came out of that looking good? He was like a spoilt, petulant child throughout, at one point even refusing to hand over his microphone for a rebuttal to a question FFS.

The SMISA meeting is a cross section of 100 or so members and taken across lets say, very *specific* demographic of late middle aged men who seem to be on the whole, quite agitated and firmly of the belief that their way is correct and that's that. So it did appear that there was significant support for AW in that room.

However, proof of where the fan and membership interest lies in this entire situation is in the polling, so lets lay down some irrefutable facts here:

• Approx 400 members voted in the recent elections - around 1/3 of the total SMISA membership.
• There were 5 candidates to choose from to elect to the SMISA board
• Alan Wardrop's statement garnered easily the most publicity, the most traction and was the most (to quote our pal Doakie) 'explosive' of all 5 member statements. A proper blockbuster they'd have you believe.
• Alan Wardrop's statement and campaign resulted in him finishing 5th placed among the 5 entrants and nowhere near winning a place on the SMISA board despite the publicity around it.
   

From that, I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of the SMISA membership either don't see this as a large enough issue to bother voting on whatsoever (because you can bet your bottom dollar that an engaged membership would have taken the time to cast a vote on such allegations if they believed there was systematic wrongdoing) and the vast majority of the 400 who did vote, decided that AW is either not to be believed and/or not worth one of the two places on the SMISA board.

That should be the end of it really. A few shouty, grumpy old men are really all that's left of this. I don't trust AW, I don't trust his reasons for doing what he's doing, I don't trust him sitting on this for several months and I don't trust the explanation given for him sitting on it since February until now. It was a cynical move to get on the SMISA BoD and it has failed spectacularly. Him and his mouthpieces now need to sit down, shut up and accept that the large majority of supporters are not interested in their noses being out of joint over minor issues and are not willing to support or back them up on this.

You obviously missed the bit I wrote

9 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Not one member on the board and former member comes across with any credibility.

 

When only a 1/3 voted in the recent elections suggests that 2/3 are not that bothered. (That is the norm for anything that is SMISA related and that is a problem)

That does not however mean that 2/3rds of the membership can have you decide on their thoughts on the matter. 

 

The few shouty grumpy old men had their opinion. Funny how no one in the room offered a differing opinion. I did not witness a single person stand up and defend the board, other than the board.

What i have taken from your post is the best SMISA members are the ones who don’t engage but keep paying their money. If you voice an opinion you are labelled one of the few shouty grumpy old men. 

IMO - AW has made a tit of himself over this. Not on the content of his allegations but in the manner, the timing and the ignorance of who he was taking on. In relation to the content of his allegations I don’t care. The nub of the argument is the claim that Kibbles guys are in it for themselves. From what i observed the SMFC guys are in it also for themselves. JN hinted at other issues on the board. Who was the other Director that they took legal advice on to have removed and why.

 

 

 

[djchapsticks]

4 minutes ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

You obviously missed the bit I wrote

I did. Apologies.

I'd say more that the demographic of the shouty grumpy old men is what will make up a disproportionate amount of the 100 members in the SMISA meeting and won't in fact be a fair cross reference of the overall membership (as is evident in the voting outcome where AW was soundly rejected by the vote). That in itself is a problem, anyone who would offer up a dissenting voice like myself has absolutely no notion to sit in a crowd like that as it would descend into a bunfight.

Too many late middle aged guys with over inflated egos thinking they could do it better without any evidence to backup that they could, I'm afraid.

[Cookie Monster]

Have a look at the following, the 1st picture shows St Mirren owned land.



The site measures approx 125m x 50m at its widest, narrowing to 30m.



The next picture shows what they propose to build on the "Site"



Just to get a scale of things that were proposed in the above picture I highlighted this area.



IMHO there is no way what was proposed could fit in the proposed site.


Nevertheless I believe it is beyond carelessness that the club weren't informed when someone must have noticed "the error"

Having watched the video, glad to see either our Chairman agreed with me or he agreed that much with me he used my evidence in his rebuttal regarding location of the wellbeing centre. [emoji6]

[alanb]

SMiSA Update on RCGF Application

Rumbling along 

SMiSA to ask Club board and AW for their thoughts