P&J article

?We need to get out of our predicament as quickly as possible and everyone at the club, from the manager down to the players, needs to improve. We have the second half of the season to come and we must do better.?

No responsibility above Brewster then, or maybe like Brewster and Malky they've been "managing the club like they have been all season".

Bennett is unsure of the trust?s motives but feels the meeting has the potential to do more harm than good for the club. He said: ?The supporters? trust is a body which was set up with the backing of the club and we have engaged in dialogue with them regularly. We are all disappointed with the recent results but a meeting to discuss the club?s future sounds as if they want to add to the problems to me. Right now what the club needs is everyone pulling together as we look to move away from the bottom of the SPL.?

Sounds as if you want the job without accountability, Mr Bennett.

Look folks - no matter what you think of the man, he is paid a very fat salary for the role he performs. He should be judged on various football aspects some of which are as follows:

Team performance

Sound connections UK wide to source players (agents, scouts, opposite numbers at other clubs etc)

Selection of Team Manager

Performance of Team Manager

Player Contracts

Transfers In and Out

Youth Development

I would presume his line manager is the Chairman who should be constantly monitoring his performance (not as Sutherland did, just letting him have a free role because he had no ineterest/knowledge)

Make your own minds up as to his performance and future!

Duncan and McBain whilst great servants to the club are finished

I thought McBain was worthy of his MOTM on Sunday and was pleased with Duncan also.

I don't agree at all with that.

Slowly but surely more and more people are becoming aware of just how incompetant our board of directors and others at the club really are

So "incompetant" that if it wasn't for these guys we wouldn't have a club.... I'm sure if they ever did read through this guff they are probably asking why they bothered

So "incompetant" that if it wasn't for these guys we wouldn't have a club.... I'm sure if they ever did read through this guff they are probably asking why they bothered

It's unbelievable how blinkered you are. There was no point in them bothering if they are content to sit on their hands and watch us wither away and drop out of the SPL.

Given the torrents of abuse directed at the Manager and the club's Board for having the temerity to disagree with fans posting on CTO as to how the current problems are to be turned around, it's unbelievable that anyone could expect them to want to interact with such fans in any way.

Given the torrents of abuse directed at the Manager and the club's Board for having the temerity to disagree with fans posting on CTO as to how the current problems are to be turned around, it's unbelievable that anyone could expect them to want to interact with such fans in any way.

It is their lack of communication and general aura of arrogance that has turned many fans against the board of directors.

I really don't see that at all. Without going over statement by statement most of the communications have been fair comment even if you don't agree with them. They can't answer every point from every fan.

Duncan and McBain whilst great servants to the club are finished

I thought McBain was worthy of his MOTM on Sunday and was pleased with Duncan also.

I don't agree at all with that.

I'd agree with that, although McBain has a terrible tendency to go missing in games, and Duncan's erratic passing is a problem that we probably have to live with. We certainly couldn't hope to replace them as well as Black and Cowie, and we will need their experience and commitment to the club in the fight against relegation and in the eventuality that we go down.

There will always be people blinkered like Spectre and Harry Chibber. They don't see the hole in the bottom of their bucket as all the water drips out and keep trying to fill it up over and over. No point arguing with these guys as they don't listen.

Yeah right, the lynch mob is really good at listening.

There will always be people blinkered like Spectre and Harry Chibber. They don't see the hole in the bottom of their bucket as all the water drips out and keep trying to fill it up over and over. No point arguing with these guys as they don't listen.

They're as entitled to an opinion as anyone else and should not be dismissed on the basis that they don't necessarily agree with you.

Yeah right, the lynch mob is really good at listening.

I'm listening to you in disbelief.

Given the torrents of abuse directed at the Manager and the club's Board for having the temerity to disagree with fans posting on CTO as to how the current problems are to be turned around, it's unbelievable that anyone could expect them to want to interact with such fans in any way.

you can attempt to narrow the field as much as you like in an effort to minimise the amount of bad feeling, but I asked that very question yesterday and the answer that came back was that it does not seem to be just a few people on CTO ... its a significant number of "normal" fans who have no affiliation to any website or to any particular group other than those they attend matches with ....... or in some cases, used to attend matches with.

Why is there any reason to suppose that the views of those of us who post on this site are any different in broad terms from the team's general fan base ?

Grassa=Director of Football

i have to laugh at how he is still in this position thi guy couldn't direct traffic in a hamlet.

Why is there any reason to suppose that the views of those of us who post on this site are any different in broad terms from the team's general fan base ?

Thats what I meant, just because our views are out here on this forum for all to see, they are seemingly disposable as just people talking on the internet amongst themselves. They don't see it as we are only a small minority of a larger group who feel the same but have the means to vnt our frustrations, so like Spectre said about why would they listen to us on CTO, well we are the same as every other fan and thats why

Why is there any reason to suppose that the views of those of us who post on this site are any different in broad terms from the team's general fan base ?

Probably not in broad terms, but less vehemently so.

I would guess if you polled all fans as to whether the Manager should go, you'd probably get a similar overall reponse.

But I would also guess if you polled them if they trusted the club's Board to act in the club's interest, you'd not get such a negative response as appears to be the case here.

But I would also guess if you polled them if they trusted the club's Board to act in the club's interest, you'd not get such a negative response as appears to be the case here.

How do you work that out?

The Supporters Trust exists to encourage fans, specifically small shareholders, to have more of a voice in the running of the club. That's a good thing - I don't think anyone could disagree with that. However, should they be taking specific stances like this? It seems that the Trust representatives, representing as they do a group of shareholders, went to an informal meeting with George Fraser to discuss current results. They didn't like what they heard so have called a public meeting for all shareholders to discuss the situation further.

What is this meeting to discuss? If it is to discuss the managership of Craig Brewster then surely it should be an open meeting, for all supporters, rather than a meeting for shareholders? I can see why members of the board might be irked that a shareholding grouping are holding an unofficial shareholder meeting to discuss the employment of the clubs manager. It seems as though the Trust could be construed as trying to engineer a shareholder 'rebellion'.

I don't think that is the case but I find it strange that the Trust couldn't call a meeting for all supporters to air their concerns and put differing viewpoints forward.

Its not a shareholder meeting, its a trust members' meeting that shareholders have been invited to attend if they wish.

The Supporters Trust exists to encourage fans, specifically small shareholders, to have more of a voice in the running of the club. That's a good thing - I don't think anyone could disagree with that. However, should they be taking specific stances like this? It seems that the Trust representatives, representing as they do a group of shareholders, went to an informal meeting with George Fraser to discuss current results. They didn't like what they heard so have called a public meeting for all shareholders to discuss the situation further.

The members of the trust are not necessarily individual shareholders but collectively the trust holds a share (10%).

However, should they be taking specific stances like this?

I guess that's basically the question the Trust will be putting to its members at the meeting. Nothing wrong with that is there?

The Supporters Trust exists to encourage fans, specifically small shareholders, to have more of a voice in the running of the club. That's a good thing - I don't think anyone could disagree with that. However, should they be taking specific stances like this? It seems that the Trust representatives, representing as they do a group of shareholders, went to an informal meeting with George Fraser to discuss current results. They didn't like what they heard so have called a public meeting for all shareholders to discuss the situation further.

The members of the trust are not necessarily individual shareholders but collectively the trust holds a share (10%).

Correct...FFS... Pay attention here everyone... There's about 3 pages now on another thread all about the trust, thanks to all my dumb, stoopid questions....

Its not a shareholder meeting, its a trust members' meeting that shareholders have been invited to attend if they wish.

Surely every single Trust meeting is the same though? The way this meeting has been publicised and the fact that the Trust have specifically made clear their desire for shareholders to attend could give rise to the idea that the Trust didn't like what they heard in their meeting with the Chairman so are looking to strengthen their hand in terms of pulling in more small shareholders who aren't currently members.

I don't think that more small, individual shareholders joining the Trust is a bad thing at all but if the Trust wanted to provide a forum for the supporters to air grievences they could have done this easily. I don't think it helps the case and can understand why the Board who, as pointed out, encouraged the development of the Trust and hold regular meetings with it's representatives.

A cynic might suggest it seems the Trust are taking the opportunity of a worrying slump in form to try and drum up publicity and extend their membership. Also, presumably the Trust representative asked George Fraser if they were going to sack Brewster, Fraser said no so now we have this meeting. What will tonights meeting achieve beyond that? Did the Trust think the BoD were going to write up a P45 on their say-so? No club in Britain would function like that.

I find it strange that the Trust couldn't call a meeting for all supporters to air their concerns and put differing viewpoints forward.

All supporters are welcome to join the trust on the night.