SAINTS SUBMISSION ON SCOTTISH FOOTBALL

[mainstand]

The enterprise and culture committee of the Scottish parliament hav been looking into Scottish football and how it is run, a number of Clubs and individuals have made submissions. Saints submission is attached, quite interesting with regarrds to Saints view on Clubs being relegated for going into administration and fans involvement in clubs.

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/enterprise/inquiries/sfi/fie_pt02_St%20Johnstone%20Football%20Club.pdf

[pezza70]

He puts some good points across

But replying a year after the original letter is poor in anyone's eyes I would of thought

[Hazel1884]

He puts some good points across

But replying a year after the original letter is poor in anyone's eyes I would of thought

It was recieved on 16th June 2004, pezza!!!!

[pezza70]

My mistake

I thought it was just send last week, not within a few weeks of receipt

[Saintkev]

My only issue, though I'm not surprised, is the bit about Supporters Involvement... basically keep them at arms length unless they are rich!

[Beej]

My only issue, though I'm not surprised, is the bit about Supporters Involvement... basically keep them at arms length unless they are rich!

To be fair I took "significant contribution" to not necessarily mean financial but to mean they had to contribute something rather than just be a figure head.

[Saintkev]

From previous chats with the club, I don't see someone like myself but with a lot to offer being welcomed with open-arms!

[Hazel1884]

From previous chats with the club, I don't see someone like myself but with a lot to offer being welcomed with open-arms!

The most recent directors were welcomed with open arms, in the terms that Beej means. Park, Gallagher (and i would think) Brown did not invest in the club!

[Saintkev]

They did not invest heavily, but also they are not what I'd term your average fan... and I think it's wrong that the average fan has little to no say in the club... as Mr Duff states, they are always there to bail clubs out, why wait until then, especially when as a unit we have much to offer!?

[David]

They did not invest heavily, but also they are not what I'd term your average fan... and I think it's wrong that the average fan has little to no say in the club... as Mr Duff states, they are always there to bail clubs out, why wait until then, especially when as a unit we have much to offer!?

It's a very difficult issue, this. Fans of most clubs would say they want 'supporter representation' at their club, but at the end of the day, how do you organise it? You can elect officials, make representations and so on - but behind closed doors (as most meetings are conducted), how do people know that they're being represented? Does the 'average fan'

A classic example was at Hearts last month - the Romanov dynasty offered to meet a couple of supporters' "leaders" to discuss the turmoil down there. Before the meetings, the supporter chaps were bullish, saying they'd lay down the law, etc, but came out with pretty timid statements saying things were fine, but wouldn't divulge the details of the meetings. How is your average supporter going to take that as 'fan involvement'?

Can't remember the number of times I've heard Old Firm fans moan about the rent-a-quote people who appear in the media as "fans chiefs" - Man United's "representatives" are even worse, they made a fool of themselves during the Glazer takeover. I'd hate to see something like that develop at Saints.

When I worked for Aberdeen briefly, we ran a 'fans chatroom' on their official site, where Keith Wyness - and later, Steve Paterson, answered questions live on the net. The questions didn't all appear live as you'd expect, in case of bad language, legal stuff, etc, but he didn't duck anything - and everyone saw the answers (which were posted as a transcript later on, for people who missed it). At least that way, people all got an equal chance at having their say.

[Saintkev]

I'm under no illusions that this would be easy to organise, however, it's something I feel would benefit all teams, not just ours... when I first got involved with the Federation, I thought that's what it was about, but it serves a different purpose... and certainly does not have any power to change major things that maybe could... not dissing the Fed here, just not what I expected at first... and judging by the amount of questions that just cannot be taken on by the Federation, I believe a pressure group which tries to get a representative onto board meetings would be beneficial, but wont happen until (and touch wood this doesn't happen) Saints are up the creek without a paddle... then it's reactive rather than pro-active, which may not be in time.

I should state that I believe that in most ways the club is being run very well, but even the most blinkered person would have to accept that it let's itself down in some ways, for example PR... what's the harm in improving that which I believe a more community (or at least supporters) ownership would do very much. If supporters and local businesses etc, saw a club willing to listen to them, they'd be more likely to invest.

Anyway, I could rant all day about this...

[Broggy Man]

When I worked for Aberdeen briefly, we ran a 'fans chatroom' on their official site, where Keith Wyness - and later, Steve Paterson, answered questions live on the net. The questions didn't all appear live as you'd expect, in case of bad language, legal stuff, etc, but he didn't duck anything - and everyone saw the answers (which were posted as a transcript later on, for people who missed it). At least that way, people all got an equal chance at having their say

Do we not do something like that now David and PS what has happened to you picture??

[mainstand]

If supporters and local businesses etc, saw a club willing to listen to them, they'd be more likely to invest.

I don't think the majority could care less. They are more interested in a winning team than anything else.

It is also very difficult when, as Duff says in the letter, you have a majority shareholder, I think it would cause more problems as you would get more debates on here about the Club and geof not listening.

Ayway you wouldn't like the board meetings, as I doubt if you wouldn be able to stand

[blueheaven]

I've always hated the idea of "fans leaders", "supporters chiefs", or whatever other tag the media tend to assign to them - how do these people get these positions, and how can anyone possibly claim to represent the supporters? Forums like this one prove that supporters tend to have massively differing views on individual issues, so I think it's impossible to send one supporter into a boardroom claiming to represent everyone's interests.

[David]

Do we not do something like that now David and PS what has happened to you picture??

Yep - Paul has made great strides in doing that kind of thing on the site, by doing the legwork behind the scenes, making sure things get answered. However we tried a similar thing recently with 'questions to the Chairman' via the programme, and the response was, er, non-existent. We got a bigger response to a kids' word search. The feature will still happen, but I've had to go round hawking for questions, rather than waiting on them arriving.

My avatar is on holiday (ie. I deleted it by accident!)

[Saintkev]

I've always hated the idea of "fans leaders", "supporters chiefs", or whatever other tag the media tend to assign to them - how do these people get these positions, and how can anyone possibly claim to represent the supporters? Forums like this one prove that supporters tend to have massively differing views on individual issues, so I think it's impossible to send one supporter into a boardroom claiming to represent everyone's interests.

It's like politics, a representative (that the media give the fancy tags to) is voted in and re-voted each season goes in giving the views of the majority of fans and makes the club a lot more open and accessible. He/She would also be able to offer the services of fans etc to assist the club in various ways.

[David]

It's like politics, a representative (that the media give the fancy tags to) is voted in and re-voted each season goes in giving the views of the majority of fans and makes the club a lot more open and accessible. He/She would also be able to offer the services of fans etc to assist the club in various ways.

Not many politicians do what the public want them to, though - if that were the case, we'd have brought back hanging 30 years ago! :-)

[Saintkev]

Not many politicians do what the public want them to, though - if that were the case, we'd have brought back hanging 30 years ago! :-)

But politicians hide from the electorate... a well picked representative couldn't! And it's not as if a representative has loads of power. No club with community or fans ownership has ever gone under!