Cancelling of direct debits.

[David McCaig]

If Paulo Sergio comes back I'm upping my DD to ?51 per month!!

[Francis Albert]

Your separate thread went down like a lead balloon by the looks of things, four replies suggests the vast majority of the FOH membership don't have any major concerns with how it is being run, all IMO of course.

I don't have major or even minor concerns about how FoH is being run, The thread is not about that. It is about how FoH will be run in the long run after FoH gains control of the club. Maybe people should look at the proposals and judge how they ensure that for ten or twenty years or more FoH and (hence) the club will be run by the "rational people" we all hope for, and what the FoH members can do about it if it isn't.

[Lucille's Thirsty]

Watch what happens if Daly gets the job

Carnage.........

[Bazzas right boot]

Just heard Michael O'Neill has set up a DD for foh.

[Boab]

You might want to have a look at the fluctuations in gate sizes from the last 30 years, that's a more telling story than the last 3.

I don't need to take a look....I have been there for the last 30 years...and more !

I know exactly how the gates have been but i'm talking post admin. This season may well be the highest and that's after a disaster of a second half of last season.

[Boab]

You might want to have a look at the fluctuations in gate sizes from the last 30 years, that's a more telling story than the last 3.

I don't need to take a look....I have been there for the last 30 years...and more !

I know exactly how the gates have been but i'm talking post admin. This season may well be the highest and that's after a disaster of a second half of last season.

[Unknown user]

I don't get where you are coming from on this. You really do sound like you need to put yourself forward for a leadership role at FoH. You're very much on your own carping from the sidelines about governance stuff when what really matters is: Figures reveal Hearts fans have handed over staggering ?5million to Tynecastle club through supporters' group

No, he isn't, and the amount of people who think FoH governance is irrelevant scares me.

[Fxxx the SPFL]

No, he isn't, and the amount of people who think FoH governance is irrelevant scares me.

he's in the minority then and I can only go by my friends and work colleagues who contribute and all for life by the way. I don't think FoH governance is irrelevant I am happy to ensure as most are that our club never falls into the hands of an individual again. If other things crop up in the near future I am happy for FoH to fund our club again even if it means extending the actual handover I don't see it as any big deal all of course IMO

[Unknown user]

he's in the minority then and I can only go by my friends and work colleagues who contribute and all for life by the way. I don't think FoH governance is irrelevant I am happy to ensure as most are that our club never falls into the hands of an individual again. If other things crop up in the near future I am happy for FoH to fund our club again even if it means extending the actual handover I don't see it as any big deal all of course IMO

That's fine and well, but it assumes that everything's above board and wise decisions are being made, and that's something I refuse to take on trust. Nothing personal against Mrs B or anyone else, but the club is too important to trust anyone 100% for me

[cosanostra]

Just heard that Craig Levein killed a spider with a rolled up newspaper in Tynecastle instead of putting it outside.

Finger currently hovering over the FOH DD cancellation button in my internet banking.

  

[Bazzas right boot]

Just heard that Craig Levein killed a spider with a rolled up newspaper in Tynecastle instead of putting it outside.

Finger currently hovering over the FOH DD cancellation button in my internet banking.

I hate when folk do that tbh

....evil.

[Toggie88]

Just heard that Craig Levein killed a spider with a rolled up newspaper in Tynecastle instead of putting it outside.

Finger currently hovering over the FOH DD cancellation button in my internet banking.

  

 

CL could probably sacrifice an innocent child in the centre circle at half time though and some would back him.

 

"The only way we'll ever break the old firm is by trying something different..."

[Fxxx the SPFL]

That's fine and well, but it assumes that everything's above board and wise decisions are being made, and that's something I refuse to take on trust. Nothing personal against Mrs B or anyone else, but the club is too important to trust anyone 100% for me

I would like to think that all parties involved ARE doing what's best for Hearts/Our club, but yes there does require some scrutiny but not overkill. We all have differing opinions and that is good but i would like to think that we all (including the board/FoH members) have the club at heart and that is the most important factor.

[cosanostra]

CL could probably sacrifice an innocent child in the centre circle at half time though and some would back him.

 

"The only way we'll ever break the old firm is by trying something different..."

 

CL could personally discover the next Lionel Messi and sign him on a  lifetime contract at Hearts and some Hearts fans would still trot out the selfish, ego-maniac, interference, only in it for himself line of bullshit. It doesn't matter what he does, some people are dying to have a dig at him.

[Toggie88]

CL could personally discover the next Lionel Messi and sign him on a lifetime contract at Hearts and some Hearts fans would still trot out the selfish, ego-maniac, interference, only in it for himself line of bullshit. It doesn't matter what he does, some people are dying to have a dig at him.

Probably, but hey Levein would probably play him out of position and we'd lose him for nothing at the end of the season anyway.

 

And also, some people will forever be his apologists.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cosanostra]

Probably, but hey Levein would probably play him out of position and we'd lose him for nothing at the end of the season anyway.

 

And also, some people will forever be his apologists.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I don't really see any apologists for the guy to be honest.

Most posters (who can avoid foaming at the mouth whenever someone mentions Craig Levein) seem to agree that he's done okay so far and despite the massive blunder in employing Cathro, he's probably done enough to give him another stab at it.

This is the last chance he'll be afforded by lots of us. Pretty sure he'll be aware of that as well.

[Unknown user]

I would like to think that all parties involved ARE doing what's best for Hearts/Our club, but yes there does require some scrutiny but not overkill. We all have differing opinions and that is good but i would like to think that we all (including the board/FoH members) have the club at heart and that is the most important factor.

Indeed, but if there's nothing in place to ensure transparency, communication and accountability, there's no guarantee that the next incumbents will be good too. There's no point in raising five million if they decide to spend it on conkers

 

As I've said a few times now, good people make mistakes and misjudgements all the time, even when their hearts are in the right place

[The Treasurer]

I would like to think that all parties involved ARE doing what's best for Hearts/Our club, but yes there does require some scrutiny but not overkill. We all have differing opinions and that is good but i would like to think that we all (including the board/FoH members) have the club at heart and that is the most important factor.

Like you I am more than happy and comfortable with those running things with FoH, however these people, and any future office bearers must always be accountable and not be just left to do what they want because they are "good guys"

I'm pretty sure those involved wouldn't have it any other way. That's why things like governance, while not particularly exciting, are hugely important.

[Italian Lambretta]

I'm happy to increase my monthly payment if Paulo Sergio returns

[The Treasurer]

I don't have major or even minor concerns about how FoH is being run, The thread is not about that. It is about how FoH will be run in the long run after FoH gains control of the club. Maybe people should look at the proposals and judge how they ensure that for ten or twenty years or more FoH and (hence) the club will be run by the "rational people" we all hope for, and what the FoH members can do about it if it isn't.

 

You do raise some important points (occasionally) and you are right about office bearers being held to account.

The trouble is, because you have constantly nit-picked for no reason, people now instantly think "here he goes again" whenever your name appears on a thread and as a result any valid point you might have is overlooked

You have no-one but yourself to blame

[jambos are go!]

The conumdrum for FOH subscribers is how do you get a trusted/accountable governance model in place that is not vulnerable to being hijacked by some of the Trump like meglomaniacs so prominent on here.

[Francis Albert]

You do raise some important points (occasionally) and you are right about office bearers being held to account.

The trouble is, because you have constantly nit-picked for no reason, people now instantly think "here he goes again" whenever your name appears on a thread and as a result any valid point you might have is overlooked

You have no-one but yourself to blame

Thanks for the sermon. I see it differently - a JKB consensus that is intolerant of views that differ from the mainstream. Take Cathro. I thought Craigan (who seemed always to be one of the fairer commentators toward Hearts) made perfectly valid points about Cathro, but he and Boyd became "enemies of Hearts" out to get us on behalf of the Scottish football establishment and MSM, and for month after month that line was maintained, with any criticism of the great experiment shouted down.

[Francis Albert]

The conumdrum for FOH subscribers is how do you get a trusted/accountable governance model in place that is not vulnerable to being hijacked by some of the Trump like meglomaniacs so prominent on here.

You study the governance proposals, identify risks and weaknesses and comment and argue accordingly. The problem with the current proposals (IMO) is that they potentially open the door to future Trump like megalomaniacs (or a small cabal of them) and lack sufficient democracy and accountability to stop them or readily overthrow them.

[colinmaroon]

You study the governance proposals, identify risks and weaknesses and comment and argue accordingly. The problem with the current proposals (IMO) is that they potentially open the door to future Trump like megalomaniacs (or a small cabal of them) and lack sufficient democracy and accountability to stop them or readily overthrow them.

 

 

Good point.

[Unknown user]

Ruined a good post with the last five words.

 

Quite clearly much of our support (certainly a large number of posters on KB) ? while being absolutely superb by their financial-backing the club ? feel quite entitled to wet their pants if they feel they are not getting "what they pay for".

 

The idea that we expect nothing in return for our subs is obviously BS.

I'm going to disagree, fans of all clubs feel quite entitled to wet their pants if they feel they aren't getting what they want. The fact we can say "as an FoH subscriber" makes no material difference and certainly doesn't mean we get anything in return for the money.

[amadjambo]

We should not be using our DD's to ever hold a gun to the club's head on anything. Pretty shameful that some think cancelling their DD's because they are in the huff is ok.

[o1djambo]

Reading this thread, I think some posters would like us to become the mormon church. 

 

Mandatory 10% of your income to the church club or you don't get into heaven Tynecastle. 

Oh what a good idea.

[davemclaren]

Oh what a good idea.

Tithecastle.

[Francis Albert]

We should not be using our DD's to ever hold a gun to the club's head on anything. Pretty shameful that some think cancelling their DD's because they are in the huff is ok.

Holding a gun to someone's head is normally more associated with demanding money than deciding to stop voluntarily giving them money. How far does the prohibition on cancelling DDs go. Are you really saying it should never be done or threatened in any circumstances. If in a few years a proposal was developed by clubs to at last do something about OF dominance and an FoH owned Hearts lined up with Celtic to vote it down would it be shameful to cancel your DD?

 

Why are the thousands of Hearts fans who don't have and never have had a DD despite being able to afford it not abused for their "shameful" behaviour? And those who have not renewed their STs?

 

I find this moral high ground stuff a bit nauseating despite never personally (as yet) having considered cancelling my DD or not renewing my ST.

[jambos are go!]

You study the governance proposals, identify risks and weaknesses and comment and argue accordingly. The problem with the current proposals (IMO) is that they potentially open the door to future Trump like megalomaniacs (or a small cabal of them) and lack sufficient democracy and accountability to stop them or readily overthrow them.

Then counter proposals need to set out and explained. At the moment all the Hearts Supporters I know would rather stick with what we have got.

[Francis Albert]

Then counter proposals need to set out and explained. At the moment all the Hearts Supporters I know would rather stick with what we have got.

On what grounds do all the Hearts supporters you know prefer the new proposed governance arrangements rather than those currently in place, or those previously proposed by FoH? Or are you saying you and all the Hearts supporters you know don't want the proposed FoH changes and in that sense would prefer to "stick with what we have got"?

 

Counter proposals are being set out and explained in response to the FoH consultation document, which is the purpose presumably of the consultation. I assume FoH will, after the deadline for responses to their proposals (end-August), either modify the proposals to the extent counter-proposals and objections are valid, or explain why they do not think counter-proposals or objections are valid.