SENTINELCELTS

Yesterday saw my partner in crime focus on today’s massive game and I don’t see the point in covering old ground except to state this home match is the players big chance to stake a claim for a starting berth in next weekend’s Cup Final, and as such I expect an exciting attacking approach by the Bhoys and therefore a good victory.
 
I would rather focus on the under-discussed (in my humble opinion) news of supporters failing to take a major shareholding in their club, and maybe ask for some local opinion.
 
It happened to be Dave King and The Rangers as you will know, but I’m wondering if this failure has implications for all.
 
I personally find it incredible such a large stake became available to supporters, any club’s supporters, in such a manner i.e. pay later, so why the low take-up?
 
The vessel? Quite possibly. If The Trust announced a similar deal I know there would be misgivings.
 
Low finance at ground level?
I defer to the natives being abroad. Its easy for me to imagine big numbers jumping at the opportunity should a similar offer become available for our club of choice but when you look at our history the last time the Tims put their hands into their collective pockets we had the perfect figurehead, they are few and far between these days, and at one stage we thought Dermot ideal just to show nationality and personal riches shouldnt become the benchmark.
Imagine today’s figurehead, who would need an online presence to garner the support needed to sit on the board of all their behalves.
Tempered with a Non Disclosure Agreement of course, just standard protocol and strictly business, nothing personal.
The questions and queries would become incessant to the point of irritating I’m sure.
Not only that but given the club are successful on the pitch and in attendance figures, the only viable area to become involved would be on the moral aspects, on which one can easily be outvoted with ‘a mere’ 15 percent holding.
 
Which ties into the next potential reason, Necessity.
A visible reason to grasp the opportunity doesn’t jump out, not to mention in this particular instance folk have been burned before. FSR should ensure that clubs survival from here on.
Asking the Tims for 20 million just to get overturned when push comes to shove would be viewed as unnecessary perhaps even vanity. The introduction of an Independent Regulator will automatically bring a dimension of fan input on the biggest levels, strip change and stadium location for instance, so necessity just isn’t there if your clubs not in danger of going insolvent.
 
Having a supporter representative on the board sounds great but what’s the practical benefit, if as pointed out you won’t get detailed information due to an NDA?
Make sure the books are fine? Of course they are. UEFA now makes sure of that, or the Independent Regulator will.
Get shown the letter being sent to the SFA regarding referees and/or VAR?
Great, the board can honestly state we wrote to them, and the supporters rep shall be asked daily via every form of social media for an update and become the focal point of frustration when silence from Hampden is forthcoming.
Have Hearts genuinely benefitted from having a supporter shareholding? I venture not.
 
I’m more and more open to the notion that while the supports feelings on any given subject are well worth taking into account at a boardroom level, having a supporter representative at the top table might not be the promised land after all.
 
By Mahe
sentinelcelts@gmail.com