|
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
|
|
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,764 Views)
|
|
BlackpoolBhoy
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:03 AM
Post #5161
|
First name on the team-sheet
- Posts:
- 1,358
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #28,909
- Joined:
- 17 June 2011
|
- murphio
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:11 PM
Brian Quinn - he of the IMF and Bank of England - being held up as some kind of champion for Celtic FC principles because he has a bucket. Christ of night. From a merchant banker to a Bankier, sad times.
|
|
|
| |
|
paulfg42
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:07 AM
Post #5162
|
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
- Posts:
- 42,390
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #42
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
|
- nowonder
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:40 PM
- Benjamin7
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:15 PM
- remy mcswain
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:13 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
As long as they keep their traps shut? What about the SNP or Labour supporters who turn up at Celtic park? They allowed to engage in dialogue?
Can't have Brian Wilson on the board he supported British imperialism in direct contravention of Brother Walfrid who would be turning in his grave,can't have any SNP people because they implemented the offences at football Bill,Brother Walfrid would be spinning,can't have Tories who are the cause of poverty..Walfrid somersaulting.Certainly not Fianna Fail people (aye that's you Dermot) because they have caused generations of emigration among Ireland's poorest..Brother Walfrid would be appalled....What political position would be acceptable to the Celtic Trust and the GB...maybe Tommy Sheridan's crowd ?.Aye what we need on the board are supporters of a swinger and someone who is both a Celtic fan and a Rangers fan,..it's what Brother Walfrid would have wanted. I thought you posted some amount of stupidity on the politics thread but you've outdone yourself with this last couple.
|
|
|
| |
|
daithi1879
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:27 AM
Post #5163
|
- Posts:
- 6,244
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #24,748
- Joined:
- 4 November 2009
- Favourite all-time player
- henrik
|
- station
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:16 PM
- murphio
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:11 PM
Brian Quinn - he of the IMF and Bank of England - being held up as some kind of champion for Celtic FC principles because he has a bucket. Christ of night.
Who better to look after your money than a bank manager . My missus
|
|
|
| |
|
Torbjorn
|
23 Nov 2015, 01:41 AM
Post #5164
|
- Posts:
- 831
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #22,303
- Joined:
- 14 October 2008
|
- daithi1879
- 23 Nov 2015, 12:27 AM
- station
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:16 PM
- murphio
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:11 PM
Brian Quinn - he of the IMF and Bank of England - being held up as some kind of champion for Celtic FC principles because he has a bucket. Christ of night.
Who better to look after your money than a bank manager .
My missus Probably!
In the late 60s, Brian Quinn was writing about how well Sierra Leone was doing and this was after military coups overthrew democracy. The pro-market, anti-democratic politics of our government and board sit nicely together.
|
|
|
| |
|
Corky Buczek
|
23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Post #5165
|
- Posts:
- 8,240
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,021
- Joined:
- 26 May 2005
|
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Before I go further I'm not wanting to go into the following
!) PL's salary - I think everyone on this board other than Kingbhoyd accepts it is excessive. 2)The transfer strategy - I think its flawed but that not what this post is about 3) Directors who are out of their depth - and I would suggest that is exactly what Bankier is, given his performance on Friday 4) And having a director that is also a government minister - given the controversial nature of govts, its an accident waiting to happen when the business is relying on supporters who are ordinary members of the public - The irony of the Food collection at the weekend aimed at the very people who would be worse off if the tax credit cuts had gone through is an obvious example. There will be plenty more such controversies in the coming years and Livingstone will be forced to choose at some point between being a Celtic director and his position in the govt. Lay odds he will choose the latter.
The reason I'm asking the original question is the dismissive response by Murphio concerning Brian Quinn. I actually thought Quinn was a good chairman. He would have avoided what happened on Friday, he always came across well in the media and his handling of the Dida incident IMHO contributed to a far smaller punishment than many of us feared in the minutes after the game. I am sure that my politics are very different from his but I'd far rather have him on the board than say a left winger such as Brian Dempsey.
I remember back in the late 80s and early 90s, one of the major criticisms of the old board was its lack of business acumen. A ground that wasn't fit for purpose, no shirt sponsor, poor kit deals, and a club shop hidden behind Queen St station.
If you have a boardroom that full of folk with a background in business, then there's a strong likelihood that they will be - economically at least - right of centre. Having a board member who has a background in telecommunications is probably a good thing for a football club (when he becomes a govt minister that is another matter - see above) and I am told that Livingstone warned against the Setanta deal - its not celtic's fault that most other SPL clubs chose to ignore him.
With regards to merchandising we have appointed folk on the board in the not too recent past with a background in clothes retailing. Again that makes sense.
Where I think we lack, is directors who understand football. However do folk think that someone's politics should be a factor on whether they are a Celtic director ?
|
|
|
| |
|
popeyed
|
23 Nov 2015, 02:15 AM
Post #5166
|
Climbing walls while sittin' in a chair.
- Posts:
- 45,147
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #10,307
- Joined:
- 26 August 2007
- Favourite all-time player
- Peter van Honkdonks
|
- murphio
- 22 Nov 2015, 10:11 PM
Brian Quinn - he of the IMF and Bank of England - being held up as some kind of champion for Celtic FC principles because he has a bucket. Christ of night.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fearghas
|
23 Nov 2015, 02:16 AM
Post #5167
|
- Posts:
- 2,647
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,269
- Joined:
- 4 July 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
- Twitter Name
- Fearghas73
|
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Before I go further I'm not wanting to go into the following
!) PL's salary - I think everyone on this board other than Kingbhoyd accepts it is excessive. 2)The transfer strategy - I think its flawed but that not what this post is about 3) Directors who are out of their depth - and I would suggest that is exactly what Bankier is, given his performance on Friday 4) And having a director that is also a government minister - given the controversial nature of govts, its an accident waiting to happen when the business is relying on supporters who are ordinary members of the public - The irony of the Food collection at the weekend aimed at the very people who would be worse off if the tax credit cuts had gone through is an obvious example. There will be plenty more such controversies in the coming years and Livingstone will be forced to choose at some point between being a Celtic director and his position in the govt. Lay odds he will choose the latter.
The reason I'm asking the original question is the dismissive respond by Murphio concerning Brian Quinn. I actually thought Quinn was a good chairman. He would have avoided what happened on Friday, he always came across well in the media and his handling of the Dida incident IMHO contributed to a far smaller punishment than many of us feared in the minutes after the game. I am sure that my politics are very different from his but I'd far rather have him on the board than say a left winger such as Brian Dempsey.
I remember back in the late 80s and early 90s, one of the major criticisms of the old board was its lack of business acumen. A ground that wasn't fit for purpose, no shirt sponsor, poor kit deals, and a club shop hidden behind Queen St station.
If you have a boardroom that full of folk with a background in business, then there's a strong likelihood that they will be - economically at least - right of centre. Having a board member who has a background in telecommunications is probably a good thing for a football club (when he becomes a govt minister that is another matter - see above) and I am told that Livingstone warned against the Setanta deal - its not celtic's fault that most other SPL clubs chose to ignore him.
With regards to merchandising we have appointed folk on the board in the not too recent past with a background in clothes retailing. Again that makes sense.
Where I think we lack, is directors who understand football. However do folk honestly think that someone's politics should be a factor on whether they are a Celtic director ?
it's difficult enough to accept a tory being on the board but a different thing entirely when he publicly casts a vote that shafts under-privilleged people.
i'd no idea brian quinn was a tory because he never made his views public. that doesn't excuse him but at least he had the decency to keep his opinions to himself and consider the views of the support.
which answers your question. yes someone's political views should be a factor to whether they should be on the celtic board. in an ideal world.....
|
|
|
| |
|
Corky Buczek
|
23 Nov 2015, 02:27 AM
Post #5168
|
- Posts:
- 8,240
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,021
- Joined:
- 26 May 2005
|
- Fearghas
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:16 AM
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Before I go further I'm not wanting to go into the following
!) PL's salary - I think everyone on this board other than Kingbhoyd accepts it is excessive. 2)The transfer strategy - I think its flawed but that not what this post is about 3) Directors who are out of their depth - and I would suggest that is exactly what Bankier is, given his performance on Friday 4) And having a director that is also a government minister - given the controversial nature of govts, its an accident waiting to happen when the business is relying on supporters who are ordinary members of the public - The irony of the Food collection at the weekend aimed at the very people who would be worse off if the tax credit cuts had gone through is an obvious example. There will be plenty more such controversies in the coming years and Livingstone will be forced to choose at some point between being a Celtic director and his position in the govt. Lay odds he will choose the latter.
The reason I'm asking the original question is the dismissive respond by Murphio concerning Brian Quinn. I actually thought Quinn was a good chairman. He would have avoided what happened on Friday, he always came across well in the media and his handling of the Dida incident IMHO contributed to a far smaller punishment than many of us feared in the minutes after the game. I am sure that my politics are very different from his but I'd far rather have him on the board than say a left winger such as Brian Dempsey.
I remember back in the late 80s and early 90s, one of the major criticisms of the old board was its lack of business acumen. A ground that wasn't fit for purpose, no shirt sponsor, poor kit deals, and a club shop hidden behind Queen St station.
If you have a boardroom that full of folk with a background in business, then there's a strong likelihood that they will be - economically at least - right of centre. Having a board member who has a background in telecommunications is probably a good thing for a football club (when he becomes a govt minister that is another matter - see above) and I am told that Livingstone warned against the Setanta deal - its not celtic's fault that most other SPL clubs chose to ignore him.
With regards to merchandising we have appointed folk on the board in the not too recent past with a background in clothes retailing. Again that makes sense.
Where I think we lack, is directors who understand football. However do folk honestly think that someone's politics should be a factor on whether they are a Celtic director ?
it's difficult enough to accept a tory being on the board but a different thing entirely when he publicly casts a vote that shafts under-privilleged people. i'd no idea brian quinn was a tory because he never made his views public. that doesn't excuse him but at least he had the decency to keep his opinions to himself and consider the views of the support. which answers your question. yes someone's political views should be a factor to whether they should be on the celtic board. in an ideal world..... I said that being a Celtic director and a member of the govt (irrespective of persuasion) is IMHO incompatible.
I am guessing that with the exception of Brian Wilson, all of the board did or would have voted Tory last May. Dermot Desmond gave the Conservatives a £50K donation a few years back. Voting Conservative should not exclude you from being a Celtic director, although having a board that would appear to be almost completely Conservative is where I think we could be heading for trouble.
Personally I think a board should have a mix of views. One of my biggest worries just now, is the total disconnect between the board and the support. This is reflected in the Living Wage farce over the past few years, PL's salary and the failure on Friday to at least listen to the genuine concerns supporters have about Lord Livingstone.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fearghas
|
23 Nov 2015, 02:46 AM
Post #5169
|
- Posts:
- 2,647
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #34,269
- Joined:
- 4 July 2015
- Favourite all-time player
- Henke
- Twitter Name
- Fearghas73
|
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:27 AM
- Fearghas
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:16 AM
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Before I go further I'm not wanting to go into the following
!) PL's salary - I think everyone on this board other than Kingbhoyd accepts it is excessive. 2)The transfer strategy - I think its flawed but that not what this post is about 3) Directors who are out of their depth - and I would suggest that is exactly what Bankier is, given his performance on Friday 4) And having a director that is also a government minister - given the controversial nature of govts, its an accident waiting to happen when the business is relying on supporters who are ordinary members of the public - The irony of the Food collection at the weekend aimed at the very people who would be worse off if the tax credit cuts had gone through is an obvious example. There will be plenty more such controversies in the coming years and Livingstone will be forced to choose at some point between being a Celtic director and his position in the govt. Lay odds he will choose the latter.
The reason I'm asking the original question is the dismissive respond by Murphio concerning Brian Quinn. I actually thought Quinn was a good chairman. He would have avoided what happened on Friday, he always came across well in the media and his handling of the Dida incident IMHO contributed to a far smaller punishment than many of us feared in the minutes after the game. I am sure that my politics are very different from his but I'd far rather have him on the board than say a left winger such as Brian Dempsey.
I remember back in the late 80s and early 90s, one of the major criticisms of the old board was its lack of business acumen. A ground that wasn't fit for purpose, no shirt sponsor, poor kit deals, and a club shop hidden behind Queen St station.
If you have a boardroom that full of folk with a background in business, then there's a strong likelihood that they will be - economically at least - right of centre. Having a board member who has a background in telecommunications is probably a good thing for a football club (when he becomes a govt minister that is another matter - see above) and I am told that Livingstone warned against the Setanta deal - its not celtic's fault that most other SPL clubs chose to ignore him.
With regards to merchandising we have appointed folk on the board in the not too recent past with a background in clothes retailing. Again that makes sense.
Where I think we lack, is directors who understand football. However do folk honestly think that someone's politics should be a factor on whether they are a Celtic director ?
it's difficult enough to accept a tory being on the board but a different thing entirely when he publicly casts a vote that shafts under-privilleged people. i'd no idea brian quinn was a tory because he never made his views public. that doesn't excuse him but at least he had the decency to keep his opinions to himself and consider the views of the support. which answers your question. yes someone's political views should be a factor to whether they should be on the celtic board. in an ideal world.....
I said that being a Celtic director and a member of the govt (irrespective of persuasion) is IMHO incompatible. I am guessing that with the exception of Brian Wilson, all of the board did or would have voted Tory last May. Dermot Desmond gave the Conservatives a £50K donation a few years back. Voting Conservative should not exclude you from being a Celtic director, although having a board that would appear to be almost completely Conservative is where I think we could be heading for trouble. Personally I think a board should have a mix of views. One of my biggest worries just now, is the total disconnect between the board and the support. This is reflected in the Living Wage farce over the past few years, PL's salary and the failure on Friday to at least listen to the genuine concerns supporters have about Lord Livingstone. i wouldn't try to argue with any of that even if i wanted to.
|
|
|
| |
|
Gothamcelt
|
23 Nov 2015, 08:19 AM
Post #5170
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 10,926
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #26,222
- Joined:
- 12 June 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Sir Kenny Dalglish
|
This from the DR has Keith Jackson name in bold print but under it it says opinion from Paul Black, so who knows who wrote this.
Keith Jackson: Celtic chairman Ian Bankier came out fighting but Peter Lawwell's just backed himself into the corner over Ronny Deila
OPINION BY PAULBLACK
AS the fallout from the Parkhead club's AGM continues our man looks at where the club's chief executive stands after giving the manager his complete backing.
IT’S not like Peter Lawwell to box himself into a corner far less leave his own chin dangerously exposed.
Normally Celtic’s sure footed chief executive is a master of his craft around the ring of the boardroom. A big hitter. A shrewd strategist. A genuine heavyweight.
So it’s hard to fathom what exactly was going on inside the mind of the man who runs Scotland’s champions when he fronted up the club’s AGM on Friday. This yearly showdown with the shareholders has become an annual irritation to Lawwell who appears to posses a deep, personal aversion to having his decisions and policies held up to any kind of public scrutiny.
Spoiler: click to toggle The more powerful he has become over his years in the Parkhead office, the less tolerant he has become of being questioned. And I write that as a journalist who is no longer allowed to report from the Celtic Park press box, for daring not to toe Lawwell’s party line. That’s fine. It’s his club after all. He can do with it as he wishes. And therein lies Lawwell’s biggest problem. Because as much as he might believe himself to be Mr Celtic, the truth of the matter is that this club is not his personal property. It never has been and no matter how tightly he grips, it never will be. No, Celtic belongs to its supporters and Lawwell’s biggest problem right now is the growing sense of disconnect between his office and those huge slopes in Glasgow’s East End. It wasn't so very long ago that there was hardly a seat to be had inside the stadium on any given match day. But little by little, for a variety of reasons, these supporters have gradually drifted away from their spiritual home under Lawwell’s watch. According to the official attendance more than 42,000 were there on Saturday, shivering through a fairly excruciating 0-0 draw against Kilmarnock. Before kick-off, many thousands of them had dropped off donations at various Food Bank collection points around the ground. The photographic evidence of this outpouring of generosity are really quite something. It really was a magnificent, heartwarming effort and a shining example of what Celtic Football Club – which came into being in order to help feed the poor – is supposed to be all about. Lawwell of all people knows the mantra. He’s peddled it often enough. And yet, 24 hours earlier, there he was sharing a stage with a Tory peer, who appears to have no issue with taking away from this country’s most needy. Lawwell must surely recognise that this row over Lord Livingston’s place on Celtic’s board strikes at the very core of the club’s principles and values. And yet he sat back and allowed chairman Ian Bankier to compound it all by suggesting that a section of those fans campaigning against Livingston’s re-election were, in fact, ‘criminally racist’. It was almost as if Bankier had taken tips on how to host a serene AGM from former Rangers chairman David Somers. For such a smart operator it’s almost unfeasible that Lawwell had no idea that Bankier was about to go off on one and the subsequent attempt to defuse the situation with a press release, denying that he had said anything of the sort, was another ill judged affront. Just how the always politically savvy Lawwell could have allowed any of this to happen is difficult to comprehend. It’s an internal s***-storm, the smell from which is likely to linger for some time. Very probably for as long as Lord Livingston remains as part of the regime. Or Bankier for that matter who is himself coming under serious pressure to relinquish his position. Of course, the truth is that particular can has now been kicked some distance down the road. It’s unlikely to inconvenience Celtic’s board for another 12 months. Even if a small hard core among the club’s support might not be prepared to forgive and forget what they consider to be an act of hypocrisy and a smear on their own reputation. For the wider fan base, the focus will remain where it normally is for the average football fan. Firmly on the football. But that’s where Lawwell may have presented himself with an even bigger humdinger because his robust and bullish backing of Ronny Deila at Friday’s AGM could really come back to bite him. And very quickly indeed. There were no ifs nor buts about it. In fact, Lawwell left himself no wriggle room at all by declaring that Deila will remain in Celtic’s dugout for the foreseeable future and will be given the chance to lead the club through next summer’s Champions League qualifiers. The message Lawwell delivered was emphatic. And this is the real head scratcher because, by standing shoulder to shoulder with his manager, Lawwell has now positioned himself directly in the firing line. If Deila misses out on a third successive £20million ticket next season, then it won’t be just the manager who will have to take responsibility for the ignominy. It will be as much Lawwell’s fault. Maybe even more so. Of course, if Deila does come good then Lawwell will be able to say he backed a winner but the odds against the Norwegian taking Celtic forward in Europe have been drifting fairly consistently over a sustained period of time, long before the most recent back-to-back defeats against Molde. On Thursday night Deila faces a visit from Ajax in the Europa League, with Celtic already anchored to the bottom of Group A having claimed just two points from a possible 12. Two wins from Celtic’s final two matches in this section – which concludes with a trip to Istanbul and showdown against the big spending might of Fenerbahce – could yet see Deila progress into the knock-out rounds. Which would be good news for Lawwell. But where would defeat on Thursday leave Celtic’s CEO? In fact, what if Celtic should fail to secure another point from this campaign? On what basis then could Lawwell hope to convince Celtic supporters they have the right man at the helm when the serious stuff begins all over again in July? Lawwell describes Deila as ‘a developer, a builder, a creator of players and teams’ but the truth is Celtic have regressed on the pitch and by some distance since this man was plucked from the obscurity of the Norwegian league. Lawwell may well have believed he was landing the Nordic Jose Mourinho when he raided Stromsgodset to get his man. But there is a danger now that Lawwell’s unbendable desire to be ultimately proven correct could turn Deila into some sort of personal vanity project. It’s not like Lawwell to lack clarity of thought but on this matter his thinking appears to be somewhat scrambled. Like a boxer on the ropes, these next few weeks would seem like an ideal time to cover up until the head has cleared. But by throwing his weight so squarely behind Deila at this crucial moment in the manager’s second season, Lawwell may also just have let his own guard down. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/opinion/sport/keith-jackson-celtic-chairman-ian-6880478
|
|
|
| |
|
sevilliano
|
23 Nov 2015, 08:30 AM
Post #5171
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 10,619
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #80
- Joined:
- 1 September 2004
|
- Gothamcelt
- 23 Nov 2015, 08:19 AM
This from the DR has Keith Jackson name in bold print but under it it says opinion from Paul Black, so who knows who wrote this. Keith Jackson: Celtic chairman Ian Bankier came out fighting but Peter Lawwell's just backed himself into the corner over Ronny Deila
OPINION BY PAULBLACK AS the fallout from the Parkhead club's AGM continues our man looks at where the club's chief executive stands after giving the manager his complete backing. IT’S not like Peter Lawwell to box himself into a corner far less leave his own chin dangerously exposed. Normally Celtic’s sure footed chief executive is a master of his craft around the ring of the boardroom. A big hitter. A shrewd strategist. A genuine heavyweight. So it’s hard to fathom what exactly was going on inside the mind of the man who runs Scotland’s champions when he fronted up the club’s AGM on Friday. This yearly showdown with the shareholders has become an annual irritation to Lawwell who appears to posses a deep, personal aversion to having his decisions and policies held up to any kind of public scrutiny. Spoiler: click to toggle The more powerful he has become over his years in the Parkhead office, the less tolerant he has become of being questioned. And I write that as a journalist who is no longer allowed to report from the Celtic Park press box, for daring not to toe Lawwell’s party line. That’s fine. It’s his club after all. He can do with it as he wishes. And therein lies Lawwell’s biggest problem. Because as much as he might believe himself to be Mr Celtic, the truth of the matter is that this club is not his personal property. It never has been and no matter how tightly he grips, it never will be. No, Celtic belongs to its supporters and Lawwell’s biggest problem right now is the growing sense of disconnect between his office and those huge slopes in Glasgow’s East End. It wasn't so very long ago that there was hardly a seat to be had inside the stadium on any given match day. But little by little, for a variety of reasons, these supporters have gradually drifted away from their spiritual home under Lawwell’s watch. According to the official attendance more than 42,000 were there on Saturday, shivering through a fairly excruciating 0-0 draw against Kilmarnock. Before kick-off, many thousands of them had dropped off donations at various Food Bank collection points around the ground. The photographic evidence of this outpouring of generosity are really quite something. It really was a magnificent, heartwarming effort and a shining example of what Celtic Football Club – which came into being in order to help feed the poor – is supposed to be all about. Lawwell of all people knows the mantra. He’s peddled it often enough. And yet, 24 hours earlier, there he was sharing a stage with a Tory peer, who appears to have no issue with taking away from this country’s most needy. Lawwell must surely recognise that this row over Lord Livingston’s place on Celtic’s board strikes at the very core of the club’s principles and values. And yet he sat back and allowed chairman Ian Bankier to compound it all by suggesting that a section of those fans campaigning against Livingston’s re-election were, in fact, ‘criminally racist’. It was almost as if Bankier had taken tips on how to host a serene AGM from former Rangers chairman David Somers. For such a smart operator it’s almost unfeasible that Lawwell had no idea that Bankier was about to go off on one and the subsequent attempt to defuse the situation with a press release, denying that he had said anything of the sort, was another ill judged affront. Just how the always politically savvy Lawwell could have allowed any of this to happen is difficult to comprehend. It’s an internal s***-storm, the smell from which is likely to linger for some time. Very probably for as long as Lord Livingston remains as part of the regime. Or Bankier for that matter who is himself coming under serious pressure to relinquish his position. Of course, the truth is that particular can has now been kicked some distance down the road. It’s unlikely to inconvenience Celtic’s board for another 12 months. Even if a small hard core among the club’s support might not be prepared to forgive and forget what they consider to be an act of hypocrisy and a smear on their own reputation. For the wider fan base, the focus will remain where it normally is for the average football fan. Firmly on the football. But that’s where Lawwell may have presented himself with an even bigger humdinger because his robust and bullish backing of Ronny Deila at Friday’s AGM could really come back to bite him. And very quickly indeed. There were no ifs nor buts about it. In fact, Lawwell left himself no wriggle room at all by declaring that Deila will remain in Celtic’s dugout for the foreseeable future and will be given the chance to lead the club through next summer’s Champions League qualifiers. The message Lawwell delivered was emphatic. And this is the real head scratcher because, by standing shoulder to shoulder with his manager, Lawwell has now positioned himself directly in the firing line. If Deila misses out on a third successive £20million ticket next season, then it won’t be just the manager who will have to take responsibility for the ignominy. It will be as much Lawwell’s fault. Maybe even more so. Of course, if Deila does come good then Lawwell will be able to say he backed a winner but the odds against the Norwegian taking Celtic forward in Europe have been drifting fairly consistently over a sustained period of time, long before the most recent back-to-back defeats against Molde. On Thursday night Deila faces a visit from Ajax in the Europa League, with Celtic already anchored to the bottom of Group A having claimed just two points from a possible 12. Two wins from Celtic’s final two matches in this section – which concludes with a trip to Istanbul and showdown against the big spending might of Fenerbahce – could yet see Deila progress into the knock-out rounds. Which would be good news for Lawwell. But where would defeat on Thursday leave Celtic’s CEO? In fact, what if Celtic should fail to secure another point from this campaign? On what basis then could Lawwell hope to convince Celtic supporters they have the right man at the helm when the serious stuff begins all over again in July? Lawwell describes Deila as ‘a developer, a builder, a creator of players and teams’ but the truth is Celtic have regressed on the pitch and by some distance since this man was plucked from the obscurity of the Norwegian league. Lawwell may well have believed he was landing the Nordic Jose Mourinho when he raided Stromsgodset to get his man. But there is a danger now that Lawwell’s unbendable desire to be ultimately proven correct could turn Deila into some sort of personal vanity project. It’s not like Lawwell to lack clarity of thought but on this matter his thinking appears to be somewhat scrambled. Like a boxer on the ropes, these next few weeks would seem like an ideal time to cover up until the head has cleared. But by throwing his weight so squarely behind Deila at this crucial moment in the manager’s second season, Lawwell may also just have let his own guard down. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/opinion/sport/keith-jackson-celtic-chairman-ian-6880478 wow I am Keith Jackson
|
|
|
| |
|
Estadio nacional
|
23 Nov 2015, 10:55 AM
Post #5172
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 11,689
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #882
- Joined:
- 22 April 2005
- Twitter Name
- Graham1a
|
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Ideally by people voted for by the fans, a president system like Spain or Argentina.
Fan ownership/members system and vote on who runs the club.
IhaveADreamCSC
|
|
|
| |
|
One sharp cookie
|
23 Nov 2015, 11:15 AM
Post #5173
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #29,328
- Joined:
- 26 August 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- Lubo Moravcik
|
- Estadio nacional
- 23 Nov 2015, 10:55 AM
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Ideally by people voted for by the fans, a president system like Spain or Argentina. Fan ownership/members system and vote on who runs the club. IhaveADreamCSC People often cite the Spanish system, where fans vote for a president, as one worth following. But many Spanish clubs are absolute basket cases. Barcelona's tax dealings make the old Rangers seem positively altruistic. While Real Madrid are about to sack yet another manager in knee-jerk fashion. I'm not convinced fan ownership would end daft decisions being made. In fact, it might make things even worse.
|
|
|
| |
|
Hoops For Me All The Way
|
23 Nov 2015, 11:57 AM
Post #5174
|
You want equality? Consider if that person feels Equal.
- Posts:
- 14,859
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #29,046
- Joined:
- 13 July 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- Lemon, Jinky, Henke, Lubo
|
Just sent Brian Wilson a tweet asking for his views on the living wage and removal of tax credits from impoverished families.
Doubt he will answer. Too busy working on promoting his Shawbost mills new tweed design for the SFA and jaunts to Cuba. Doubt there is much call for tweed in the Caribbean.
|
|
|
| |
|
tenerifetim
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:00 PM
Post #5175
|
- Posts:
- 7,273
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #29,009
- Joined:
- 6 July 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- henrik larrson
|
- One sharp cookie
- 23 Nov 2015, 11:15 AM
- Estadio nacional
- 23 Nov 2015, 10:55 AM
- Corky Buczek
- 23 Nov 2015, 02:04 AM
Genuine Question - how should the Celtic board be made up ?
Ideally by people voted for by the fans, a president system like Spain or Argentina. Fan ownership/members system and vote on who runs the club. IhaveADreamCSC
People often cite the Spanish system, where fans vote for a president, as one worth following. But many Spanish clubs are absolute basket cases. Barcelona's tax dealings make the old Rangers seem positively altruistic. While Real Madrid are about to sack yet another manager in knee-jerk fashion. I'm not convinced fan ownership would end daft decisions being made. In fact, it might make things even worse. Need something better to make the Board more answerable to fans as well as shareholders -our major shareholder couldn´t even be arsed to turn up and the Board couldn´t be bothered to consult with the fans group over the motion then tried tobacktrack by missing out the "Torrent" part of comment, Another attempt at deflection today http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/statement-sunday-ian-livingston-responds/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
|
|
|
| |
|
Wee Ed KTF
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:09 PM
Post #5176
|
- Posts:
- 6,194
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,493
- Joined:
- 10 July 2005
|
CQN and E-Tims have both published the Livingston statement
Is it genuine?
|
|
|
| |
|
Kingslim
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:20 PM
Post #5177
|
- Posts:
- 17,986
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #33,465
- Joined:
- 1 May 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul McStay
|
- Wee Ed KTF
- 23 Nov 2015, 12:09 PM
CQN and E-Tims have both published the Livingston statement
Is it genuine? Must be or they wouldn't have posted it I suspect.
Even if you do get a couple of idiots on twitter. How can they determine if they're genuine and not for talking sake huns at the wind up? To then use this as a stick to beat shareholders and ultimately the wider Celtic support with is not what you would expect from a club chairman and that's putting it mildly.
Edited by Kingslim, 23 Nov 2015, 12:21 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Ned Rise
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:30 PM
Post #5178
|
These boots were made for hunbustin'
- Posts:
- 9,160
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #30,170
- Joined:
- 12 January 2012
|
Despicable comments aimed at Livingston, can't be any debate about that.
Bankier's statement out of order regardless, as it suggested a 'torrent of abuse' and generally painted the Celtic support as racist.
If those comments are criminally racist they should be dealt with in the appropriate way, just as any other actions or lawbreaking by individuals are. Tarring the support with such a broad brush was a ridiculous thing to do.
|
|
|
| |
|
Wee Ed KTF
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:44 PM
Post #5179
|
- Posts:
- 6,194
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #1,493
- Joined:
- 10 July 2005
|
- Kingslim
- 23 Nov 2015, 12:20 PM
- Wee Ed KTF
- 23 Nov 2015, 12:09 PM
CQN and E-Tims have both published the Livingston statement
Is it genuine?
Must be or they wouldn't have posted it I suspect. Even if you do get a couple of idiots on twitter. How can they determine if they're genuine and not for talking sake huns at the wind up? To then use this as a stick to beat shareholders and ultimately the wider Celtic support with is not what you would expect from a club chairman and that's putting it mildly. CQN said the 'Livingston statement' had been posted on the Affiliation's website
E-Tims said of the 'Livingston statement' - "This was among the replies to Friday’s diary. I’ve emailed the address it was sent from, but it doesn’t exist. Perhaps, in case of further abuse it was deleted."
Livingston did not use the Club's website for his statement ?
Maybe I'm just a suspicious old git
|
|
|
| |
|
One sharp cookie
|
23 Nov 2015, 12:45 PM
Post #5180
|
- Posts:
- 4,494
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #29,328
- Joined:
- 26 August 2011
- Favourite all-time player
- Lubo Moravcik
|
Livingston's quotes are actually fairly balanced and sensible, especially when compared to the official statements the board has submitted these past few days.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|