Still many questions in Binos trust board saga
Dear Editor I wish to respond to the recent article in the Observer (February 27, 2019) concerning the letter sent to the Scottish Football Association by the former volunteer youth academy coach at Stirling Albion regarding child protection policy at the club.
Lost in all this, is the dubious nature of the suspension and investigation by the trust board of club chairman and operations director Stuart Brown which I believe was motivated by a pre-existing vendetta against him.
As far back as August 2017, an informal core within that trust board was at war with the club chairman. The board was far from unanimous in that intent. They announced their intention to remove the chairman over a breach of the Companies Act. When challenged by a trust member to specify what the breach was, none could supply an answer and that illegitimate attempt came to nothing.
The war, however, went on, going to arbitration and the chairman agreeing to step down at the end of the season and the core group demanding he go immediately.
When news of the prosecutions of the two coaches of junior players at the club surfaced, this became the new focus for the pre-existing vendetta.
The chairman’s suspension was followed within a week by the resignations of six trust board members, many complaining that they had not even been informed of the meeting where the decision to suspend the chairman and launch an investigation was taken. How can either decision be legitimate in such circumstances.
Further to that, secret informal meetings were being conducted at which the supporters’ representative was excluded along with fellow trust board members. I now quote from an email sent by the coach (who contacted the SFA and was not named in the Observer article) to a former Albion employee, before the chairman’s suspension was announced. ‘Please find attached final press release now authorised for publication. Roy is to call you shortly to discuss circulation on website, social media, etc. This will now be going to the national press ... I intend going to this evening’s informal club board meeting (minus the trust reps) gathering which will be held at a neutral venue.”
By club board he means trust board and indeed the clan was gathering. Why were other board members not informed of this “gathering” on trust board business? Why was this anonymous coach informed when they were not? Why were no minutes kept of the meeting at which the chairman was suspended? Why were other board members not invited to that ‘gathering’ either?
Why is this anonymous coach informing the recipient rather than a trust board member? He is clearly involved and in the know, with those determined to oust chairman Brown. Yet he was their choice to lead an “independent” investigation. Where is the legitimacy in any of this?
Hugh Hanlon By email