Board Refresh
JF asked whether discussions were ongoing regarding Board refresh or executive change.
BW confirmed that governance review and Board refresh discussions are ongoing but did not provide specifics. He did confirm that an external recruitment body would be used.
The Collective noted that without tangible detail or timescale, such statements would lack credibility with supporters.
B. Fan Engagement
Advisory Board / Structured Engagement
The Collective referenced October minutes which included discussion of a Fan Advisory Board. Four months on, no structured engagement mechanism had been introduced.
BW confirmed consultation on supporter engagement structures would begin and committed to meeting again within one month to update on progress.
However, he did not commit to establishing a “Fan Advisory Board” specifically, stating that wording and structure remain under review.
PT noted previous the meeting with the club in which there was specific reference to the establishment of a Fan Advisory Board using this exact terminology. Following this BW committed that the club would remain consistent and follow through on this with an offer to provide an update in a months’ time.
Kevin McQuillan and George Campbell confirmed research into other clubs’ models is underway.
The Collective stressed that:
-
- Engagement must be democratic and representative.
- Structures must endure beyond individual office holders.
- The absence of progress over four months has deepened mistrust.
- No timeline beyond a further meeting in one month was provided.
During discussion on supporter engagement BW invited John Paul Taylor (JPT) for comment which he stated candidly that he was not fully sighted on the current position regarding the development of a formal engagement framework. He indicated that he could not provide detail on progress or timelines.
The collective noted the difficulty this creates given that JPT holds the role of Supporter Liaison Officer.
Safe Standing Working Group
John Paul Taylor confirmed that an internal working group had examined potential safe standing configurations and scenarios.
Engagement with supporter groups had not progressed due to current tensions.
No timeline was provided for next steps.Green Brigade
The Collective raised the continued exclusion of the Green Brigade (GB), arguing:
-
- Their absence has negatively impacted atmosphere and team performance.
- The situation is contributing to wider supporter disillusionment.
- Two distinct issues appear to have been conflated:
1. Stadium management / Safety considerations.
2.Allegations relating to incidents at the AGM. - The approach taken amounts to collective punishment
The collective further noted that the club has historically and publicly remained opposed to strict liability, arguing that supporters should not be collectively punished for the actions of individuals.
It was therefore states that the current position – whereby an entire supporter group remains excluded due to alleged actions of individuals – is inconsistent with that public stance.
The Collective argued that:
- If specific individuals are alleged to have committed misconduct, those individuals should be addressed directly.
- Applying sanctions to a broader group undermines the clubs own stated principles
- The situation risks setting a precedent whereby collective punishment is normalised domestically
- The contradiction weakens the Club’s credibility when challenging strict liability externally.
It was further noted that:
- Following the allegations at the AGM those individuals were permitted entry
- The retrospective nature of subsequent sanctions was difficult to reconcile
- There has been no dialogue between the club and those individuals about this alleged incident
- The team is entering a critical run in and that atmosphere is a tangible factor.
BW confirmed he had met the Green Brigade the previous week and that dialogue is ongoing. He stated there is a will within the Board to resolve matters and that progress had been made on one strand, with another strand more complex.
It was stated that conditionality would apply. GC stated that the Head of Security (Mark Hargreaves) does not hold a veto.
The Collective reiterated that the current position of the club is disproportionate and that the contradiction of the club’s stance should be addressed. They also stated that reinstatement of the GB would represent a clear and immediate gesture of good faith.
BW acknowledged that the Green Brigade’s presence could have a positive impact on the team but did not commit to a timeframe for resolution of this matter.
C. Communications
Fan Media Access
The Collective raised concerns regarding the removal of fan media access, including the suspension of established outlets covering both the men’s and women’s teams.
It was noted that fan media were originally welcomed by the club as a means of broadening engagement and diversifying representation beyond mainstream press coverage. The Collective expressed concern that recent restrictions appear to coincide with increased criticism of executive decision making.
Kevin McQuillan stated that a refreshed communications strategy is underway and that the role of fan media is being reviewed. It was acknowledged that criticism of the Club may have influenced decisions. Neither KM or BW knew who made the decision that fan media access would be removed.
The Collective stressed that criticism of leadership is not misconduct and that powerful institutions must be open to scrutiny. It was argued that reducing access in response to criticism risks appearing thin-skinned and damages trust further.
No commitment was made regarding reinstatement or timeline for review.
Public Statements
The Collective noted that recent statements from the Club had been perceived as dismissive or critical of supporters and that this has exacerbated tensions.
BW disputed aspects of that characterisation but acknowledged communication could improve. KMQ referenced the ongoing review of the Club’s communications strategy.
No commitment was made regarding a revised approach to public messaging in the immediate term.
Continues on the next page…
A whole load of nothing don’t see why folk are so upset , the boards offering nothing ,sending the SLO and the walkabout bhoy Kevin was a bit of an insult and shows the Board don’t want to change or solve this problem
The support will be used to cover up this shitshow of a season that’s where they’ll lay the blame
Good Old Brit “Divide and Rule “…..why do people always fall for it ???
Why don’t the GB get a good KC to go into their next meeting ? What the board is doing is totally illegal. A KC would run rings round them and bring this whole sorry mess to a suitable conclusion.
I can help if they want to take up my offer .