The New Raith Rovers Thread

[Raith Against The Machine]

Well, the owner isn't the chairman anymore, so that's something, and it's not his direct proxy Sinton either. 

It's far from ideal that the new chairman voted for the Goodwillie deal, but I don't think there was any realistic possibility of a brand new outsider coming in directly to the chairmanship, so this is probably about as good as could be expected. 

And at the risk of repeating myself for the 400th time, what should really follow now is a sit down with the new chairman where he offers a full apology, an explanation of how things went so badly wrong, and what he's doing to make sure it never happens again. 

[SirJimmyofNic]

I take it John Sim is still on the board ???

[Raith_Raver]

10 minutes ago, Against The Machine said:

And at the risk of repeating myself for the 400th time, what should really follow now is a sit down with the new chairman where he offers a full apology, an explanation of how things went so badly wrong, and what he's doing to make sure it never happens again. 

And for the 400th time can you let the subject rest in peace....

[renton]

4 minutes ago, SirJimmyofNic said:

I take it John Sim is still on the board ???

Aye. I mean, he owns the place lock stock and barrel.

[Michael W]

It removes Sim as Chairman and majority shareholder, meaning he is only the latter now. A small step forward innthe grand scheme of things, but a necessary one. 

It's annoying he voted for Goodwillie, but it was always going to be the case the new Chairman had done so, wasn't it? The two that voted against are gone and you don't appoint the newest Director to the role. 

Hopefully we'll be hearing from him soon and he'll do what the previous Chairman ducked....

[SirJimmyofNic]

10 minutes ago, renton said:

Aye. I mean, he owns the place lock stock and barrel.

Aye I'm aware of that, so its not quite taking a back seat but as long as it gets rid if the CEO it'll do

[embow]

Just what has the CEO done to warrant this outburst against her?

She is not a member of the board. She may sit in board meetings and may or may not be asked for her opinion but she will have no vote on any decision taken. She has to implement any board decision taken whether she agrees with it or not. She is a paid employee and will be there to oversee the day to day running of the company i.e. RRFC and the various subsidiaries such as Raith Rovers Holdings Ltd etc.

Does the club of this size need a CEO? That is an entirely different discussion. 

[SirJimmyofNic]

7 minutes ago, embow said:

Just what has the CEO done to warrant this outburst against her?

She is not a member of the board. She may sit in board meetings and may or may not be asked for her opinion but she will have no vote on any decision taken. She has to implement any board decision taken whether she agrees with it or not. She is a paid employee and will be there to oversee the day to day running of the company i.e. RRFC and the various subsidiaries such as Raith Rovers Holdings Ltd etc.

Does the club of this size need a CEO? That is an entirely different discussion. 

Her fingerprints were all over the DG fiasco, she lied to our biggest sponsor who in turn caused such a shitstorm for us in the media, other clubs fans turned on us , it fractured our own fan base, and because there was a clear conflict of interest involving herself in football matters due to her hubby being the assist manager......... and no a club our size doesn't need a CEO specially after the ballyhoo we had with the last one

[Broken Algorithms]

It's not as big a change as the new director, or even as big as a potentially fans forum which the club may use as a litmus test for future decisions (I'm fully aware that this may just be window dressing to show 'they've changed' to outsiders') but it's still a change nonetheless. One thing which hasn't really been spoken about is how MacDonald's company have picked up the sponsorship from TAG games. Nothing has really been covered as to how much that cost. Again, this is all rumours and might be dressed up but I did hear when it was announced that the new away sponsorship was specifically quite sizable to cover the costs of the Goodwillie debacle (admittedly, nothing has changed on that front as he's still at the club). 

I think it's quite easy to fall into assumptions: It's been the case both with those who are sceptical of the club, and those who are critical of former directors and feel that they're exploiting the situation for their own gains. The most important thing is that the club moves forward with a transparent message. RATM mentions getting a sit down with the chairman out, which will no doubt be done via Raith TV, and will cover an apology of some sorts. While I can understand why some fans have spoken about working with the likes of Rape Crisis Scotland or apologising to Denise Clair, I'm pretty sure any attempt to do so will be seen on the outside as a shallow publicity stunt and that actions have been louder than words in the past. If we're to apologise, it should be done tactfully and out of the public eye (for all we know, they might have already done it, although I doubt it). 

Maybe I'm naive, but I do think the club are turning a corner. I think that the community message will get hammered over the next few years much in the same way that Rangers plaster everything they do with 1872 in an attempt to gloss over what happened in 2012. Of all the decisions during Sim's tenure, they got one of the most important ones wrong, before doubling down on their view. They could make a thousand more and I doubt any would have anywhere near the negative consequences that this has had. 

[embow]

15 minutes ago, SirJimmyofNic said:

Her fingerprints were all over the DG fiasco, she lied to our biggest sponsor who in turn caused such a shitstorm for us in the media, other clubs fans turned on us , it fractured our own fan base, and because there was a clear conflict of interest involving herself in football matters due to her hubby being the assist manager......... and no a club our size doesn't need a CEO specially after the ballyhoo we had with the last one

"Lied to our biggest sponsor". You know this for a fact? If not then that could possibly be construed as being libelous. I doubt very much if she'll have spoken out without someone on the board sanctioning what she should tell people given the sensitivity of the matter.

 

I'm maybe totally mistaken or just plain naive but what has being the partner of the assistant coach/manager got to do with the subject matter? There's no doubt that they will speak about work at home but that should in no way impact on their paid duties within the club. As I said earlier she isn't a director ( unlike the previous incumbent who was also the secretary) so she would have no vote on whether the player in question was signed or not.

As for the club needing a CEO? I'm in exactly the same camp as you. It doesn't need one in my opinion, but  others running the club obviously deem it necessary.

[SirJimmyofNic]

1 minute ago, embow said:

"Lied to our biggest sponsor". You know this for a fact? If not then that could possibly be construed as being libelous. I doubt very much if she'll have spoken out without someone on the board sanctioning what she should tell people given the sensitivity of the matter.

 

I'm maybe totally mistaken or just plain naive but what has being the partner of the assistant coach/manager got to do with the subject matter? There's no doubt that they will speak about work at home but that should in no way impact on their paid duties within the club. As I said earlier she isn't a director ( unlike the previous incumbent who was also the secretary) so she would have no vote on whether the player in question was signed or not.

As for the club needing a CEO? I'm in exactly the same camp as you. It doesn't need one in my opinion, but  others running the club obviously deem it necessary.

Sorry, but I guess you missed the part about Val saying she was told by the CEO that we had no intention of signing DG, anyway theres no point in anymore fallouts between supporters 

[Broken Algorithms]

4 minutes ago, SirJimmyofNic said:

Sorry, but I guess you missed the part about Val saying she was told by the CEO that we had no intention of signing DG, anyway theres no point in anymore fallouts between supporters 

From what I've heard, at the time McCartney and the club were trying to bring in another target who would've been a loanee. She told this to Val when they spoke. This was a couple of weeks before deadline day. 

[renton]

11 minutes ago, embow said:

"Lied to our biggest sponsor". You know this for a fact? If not then that could possibly be construed as being libelous. I doubt very much if she'll have spoken out without someone on the board sanctioning what she should tell people given the sensitivity of the matter.

 

I'm maybe totally mistaken or just plain naive but what has being the partner of the assistant coach/manager got to do with the subject matter? There's no doubt that they will speak about work at home but that should in no way impact on their paid duties within the club. As I said earlier she isn't a director ( unlike the previous incumbent who was also the secretary) so she would have no vote on whether the player in question was signed or not.

As for the club needing a CEO? I'm in exactly the same camp as you. It doesn't need one in my opinion, but  others running the club obviously deem it necessary.

Val McDermid pointed the finger at McCartney over lying to her face.

As to the second point, aye - it matters. Perhaps her view of the Goodwillie affair was influenced by the impact not winning promotion would have on her husband's (part time) job and suppressed her other instincts?

But beyond that, as responsible for the day to day running of the club she needs to weigh the needs of thr football and corporate sides of the club, which might include sacking the management. Aye, I think that's a conflict of interest.

[San Starko Rover]

35 minutes ago, embow said:

"Lied to our biggest sponsor". You know this for a fact? If not then that could possibly be construed as being libelous. I doubt very much if she'll have spoken out without someone on the board sanctioning what she should tell people given the sensitivity of the matter.

 

I'm maybe totally mistaken or just plain naive but what has being the partner of the assistant coach/manager got to do with the subject matter? There's no doubt that they will speak about work at home but that should in no way impact on their paid duties within the club. As I said earlier she isn't a director ( unlike the previous incumbent who was also the secretary) so she would have no vote on whether the player in question was signed or not.

As for the club needing a CEO? I'm in exactly the same camp as you. It doesn't need one in my opinion, but  others running the club obviously deem it necessary.

She’ll probably need to go after Val McDermid and half the MSM before she comes after members of P&B in this libelous lawsuit.  

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19894480.val-mcdermid-claims-raith-rovers-chief-lied-david-goodwillie-signing/ 

[TxRover]

Happy to see some Board movement (new member, change at the top), and while it’s not enough (in my opinion) yet, it allows the possibility that the long desired interview and explanation may now occur. Glad to see perhaps the end of the beginning.

[rovers86]

That’ll definitely be the end off our chances getting a playoff place after that result tonight

[SirJimmyofNic]

1 minute ago, rovers86 said:

That’ll definitely be the end off our chances getting a playoff place after that result tonight

We still had to beat Morton tomorrow and Partick next week to have even a slim chance anyway, at least now the club can concentrate on next season

[Ro Sham Bo]

We need to concentrate on making sure we finish no worse than 5th. I certainly wouldn't be putting my house on us managing to do it though.

[foreverarover]

I'm sorry but not happy that the new chairman had decided to jump upon a situation like DG to plaster his own business over the TV at celtic park and to paint the town red at a cup final. Not overly amused.

[embow]

28 minutes ago, rovers86 said:

That’ll definitely be the end off our chances getting a playoff place after that result tonight

Not quite but it's definitely last chance saloon day tomorrow. A win and we are still hingin' on by a tack and with Partick next weekend it could yet be down to the last two games. No win tomorrow and it's all over. Possibly in more ways than one by the end of the season.