Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2019 11:56:32 GMT
I'm cutting KH a bit of slack he inherited a lot of players that were clearly not good enough. No idea how much the budget increased by so would KH say this is his ideal team? Last night not a surprise and I've lost all hope after Saturday.
Had a quick look at Third Lanarks demise. Some striking similarities.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Feb 13, 2019 12:26:01 GMT
. Had a quick look at Third Lanarks demise. Some striking similarities. Indeed, that`s where I fear we are heading.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2019 12:42:20 GMT
KH has replaced a fair part of brogan's squad and it his team. The question must be has he replaced them with better? For me the answer is no. No more slack from me. His record is appalling and worse than brogan's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2019 12:53:48 GMT
Fair enough then. Just interesting to see how much more he was given since the cash windfall came in.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Feb 13, 2019 17:13:55 GMT
Comment by a Stirling supporter to a question as to who did he think was better - Berwick or Rovers - they played BRFC last weekend.
"Went to both games and of the 2 sides Berwick were the slightly better team when we played them but not by much. Unless the Rovers turn it around and start getting points the I have to agree with you 10th spot this season and if that happens I would suspect whoever wins the playoff between the Highland League/Lowland League Champions (Looks like Cove Rangers and East Kilbride) would fancy their chances against you. "
|
|
|
Post by Nanook on Feb 13, 2019 21:37:51 GMT
Give Kevin Harper a break, he has had to take over a struggling team in mid season, make personel changes as he has gone along. So when would it be fair to describe the team as his?
|
|
|
Post by Nanook on Feb 13, 2019 22:03:25 GMT
. Had a quick look at Third Lanarks demise. Some striking similarities. Indeed, that`s where I fear we are heading..... Prorege, Rovergrant What exactly are you suggesting here? Third Lanark went out of business because Chairman Peter Hiddleston worked hard to put Third Lanark out of business. Corruption was not conclusively proved only because Hiddlestone died ahead of court action. The board were backed by share holders at the AGM. The club is in a better place financially than it has been for many seasons. As I said above, what exactly are you suggesting here?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2019 23:41:41 GMT
Corruption I am certainly not accusing anyone of. It's not that similarity I see.
Hiddleston had a closed shop of appointments keeping those around him that agreed with him and let no-one outside of the club in even it was detriment to the club. Which it was.
It went into a spiral of cost cutting in a short period of time without revenue growth or investment and that action only ends up in one way. Oblivion.
Board letting no-one outside in and focused in on cost cutting no matter what. Sound familiar?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2019 23:56:32 GMT
The board were backed by share holders at the AGM. The club is in a better place financially than it has been for many seasons.
Of course they were backed by the shareholders. What else were new (potentially) directors do on the day the transfer window finished? Smart move by DC. The board have made their bed, now lie in it.
The current financial position is irrelevant IF the club goes down. As I've said before, 0901 on the Monday following relegation is the Bank wanting its money back. This is very real.
So, I think very similar to Third Lanark. We have 100 years of history potentially being lost ironically in the 100th year. Never to be recovered. Ask Sevco.
This is the biggest threat to Rovers existence, ever. It's not getting better at the moment. I think some of the Board needed refreshed with outside views and help but that played out to some form of protectionism ala Hiddleston and here we are Mid Feb.
I truly hope we stay up. Factually, we're doomed.
|
|
|
Post by stewmelrover on Feb 14, 2019 6:34:37 GMT
Third Lanark went bust because of deliberate financial corruption by William Hiddlestone. Rovers biggest problem at the moment is with the team being bottom. Third Lanark finished in a comfortable mid-table position in 1967. 'Potential new directors' didn't get themselves elected at the agm: in what way were they barred from doing so? We don't even know who they were; even the keen sports journalist at the Advertiser 'couldn't find out'.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Feb 14, 2019 8:59:34 GMT
`Potential new directors` were not nominated for election (there was more than enough votes to have seen them elected )for the reasons given above by Pro Rege. A cynical move by the current BOD to have the AGM on the last day of the transfer window - THREE months after the accounts were signed off by the auditors. This was raised at the AGM by a former Director of the club....the answer he got was, to say the least , unsatisfactory. "The Rovers biggest problem at the moment is with the team being bottom" ....very observant....some of us are very concerned if we lose our SPFL status and the financial support that that brings, which, at the moment seems on the cards, what the `future` holds for the club. I heard nothing at the AGM that would indicate the BOD have any potential income streams to replace those which will be lost by dropping into the LL.
|
|
|
Post by stewmelrover on Feb 14, 2019 9:15:38 GMT
The agm was in January last year also. What does the transfer window have to do with appointing new directors? Difficult for Rovers fans to offer support to an anonymous takeover bid with no proposals whatsoever. They might have had some support if the bid/names/proposals to change things had been made clear.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Feb 14, 2019 9:25:32 GMT
There was NO TAKEOVER BID !!!. New Directors would have been nominated, proposed and seconded, then voted upon. There was sufficient shareholder support to have them voted on, but for the reasons articulated above by Pro Rege, it was decided, for now, not to proceed. Incidentally the AGM of the previous year was held on January 8th. Several existing members of the current BOD would still have been in place as they were not up for re-election. Why are you against change when it is quite obvious (as others, Jordie, Tommysermanni etc) consider that the club is in freefall, a freefall that none of those currently holding the levers of control seem capable of changing ?
|
|
|
Post by stewmelrover on Feb 14, 2019 9:32:32 GMT
No-one is against change; but how can anyone make a judgement without any information whatsoever? What change? By whom? We are all horrified at the prospect of relegation, but exactly what do you mean by change? If people wanted change, why didn't they get elected? There was the chance for change; it wasn't taken.
|
|
|
Post by Rovergrant on Feb 14, 2019 10:07:41 GMT
They didn`t get elected, David, because, they and those shareholders who were backing them, decided, with good reason, that the time was not right. This message board is not the place to provide `information`....does the current BOD come on here and discuss their plans...no. I was gobsmacked when one of the Directors said that at Board level there had been no discussions as to what they would do if SPFL status is lost.As far back as September I suggested that all who have the club`s interests at heart should come together and work together to get us out of this mess. I seem recall a number of years ago when the club was in trouble - not as big trouble as it is now, there was a meeting (Corsewall Street Community Centre ?) to come up with a plan for all to work together an improve the situation. Frank Meade and Lew McWilliam emerged and along with Robert Watt turned our fortunes around. Why not something similar now ? Won`t happen as the current BOD believe that it is only they who have the Club`s best interests and no one else`s opinion counts.
|
|