Leaderboard

Some positive news amongst the chaos, Sam Murdoch is called up to a Scotland under-19s camp. First Morton player to be called up at any age level for almost 10 years. Well done him, very well deserved.

I think the hounding of Dalrada is massively premature. We don't know what the terms of their agreement are and we don't know what demands, if any, they have made. Their only public statements so far have been 100% positive. IF it turns out that they're trying to hold the majority shareholder to ransom then obviously that's a problem but right now we've only heard, officially, from one side. The implication from that side is that they're trying to resolve it, trying to find a middle ground. I believe that Dalrada deserve the chance to demonstrate a similar commitment before they're written off, and that includes their stance - whatever it might be - on board members etc. Frankly speaking though, they're a sponsor. They're not corporate stewards of the club. I don't think they owe a statement. I do think, however, that the GMFC Board owes a statement at this point. The embargo was already a sign that standards were slipping, and this is even more grave than that. They need to clarify the communication lines with the major shareholder of the club - namely, us fans (those of us who are paid up MCT members at least) - and explain why the embargo was swept under the carpet. I want fan ownership to succeed and I want each member of the board to succeed. I don't think there needs to be a statement every time someone coughs at Cappielow. I don't think we need to air dirty laundry in public all the time. But this current situation needs far more clarity than it has, and for me that's down to the GMFC board failing to remember its duty to its major shareholder.

I think Bible John's chat gpt got confused when he asked it to re-word Dunning's post.

The first wasn’t a booking from what I recall- it looked more like he was fouled but Callum Scott (of Longridge at Firhill penalty fame) booked Adeloye instead of the Peterhead player. The second one he put his arm across the defender when jumping for a header. Not much in it but by the laws of the game it’s a booking whether you agree it should be or not. Ironically the sort of challenge that he normally infuriates us by not even attempting to go into. Despite how difficult an afternoon it turned out, I thought we were pretty good for the most part. We completely dominated the first half and missed a number of really good chances before being sucker punched and reacted well after half time to turn the game around with minimum fuss. The game turned completely on the red card as Peterhead smelt blood and threw everything at us, while we had no real out ball on the halfway line to give us any respite. Once the equaliser came it felt there was an inevitability that rather than our superior fitness seeing us through, the extra man would see us unstuck, but the players did a good job of dragging themselves through it. No complaints about the penalties either, especially given that we didn’t look to have too many natural takers on the park at full time. Longridge nearly ripped the net out. Peterhead aren’t a good side at all but you’re unlikely to get an easy ride against a team only a division below you in the big cup, as St. Johnstone found to their cost. It wasn’t pretty, but we’re through. And rather than hammering anyone for struggling against League One opposition I’m inclined to credit them for getting through a sticky situation when they could easily have crumbled.

I think overall the meeting has to be considered a success, largely thanks to Brian Bonar reassuring us regarding any future share issues. I do think though that, yet again, MCT need to address online attendees having their questions ignored in favour of questions in the room. This has been an ongoing issue, and although there is some mitigation because of the venue change and the technical difficulties, there needs to be a bit more structure in these meetings to make sure members attending online have their questions heard. Ahead of the meeting, my main concerns were future GMFC share issues, the club chairman and the credibility of the MCT representatives on the club board. Brian Bonar dialling into the meeting via Zoom was a very welcome development, as he allayed the fears many supporters had that Dalrada may have nefarious intentions regarding the running of the club and their representation in the boardroom. I do think however, the fact that Mr Bonar convinced more people within five minutes than the two documents and video released by MCT/GMFC directors, is rather telling of how poorly the proposal was relayed to the membership. The sheer volume and range of questions, along with the turnout at the meeting, highlighted how many supporters did not feel they were in a position to make an informed decision. This underlines just how lacklustre the presentation of the proposal was. Both the club and MCT need to learn from this and quickly. This is underlined by the fact that GMFC/MCT refused point blank to release the proposed agreement, citing commercial confidentiality as the reason for this refusal. Brian Bonar then refuted this outright, saying that he’d make the agreement available to anyone who wished to view it. Again, this gives little confidence in the capabilities of those negotiating and communicating to the membership on behalf of MCT. For all Brian Bonar’s very charming performance at the meeting did reassure me that future GMFC share issues would not be a concern, the opposite could be said of the performance of the club chairman. I felt Laird presented in an incredibly arrogant and self aggrandising manner. Given his role in hiding a transfer embargo from the club’s majority shareholders, I’d assert that Dalrada may be the only stakeholder in the club that are pleased to see Laird continue in this role. The complete lack of transparency regarding the links to his son’s football coaching and analysis company seems to be an issue that has not been answered, given his complete denial of any knowledge of this in the FAQ document. I for one am very concerned that our club chairman has never been subject to the SFA’s fit and proper assessment for club directors, and the motivations behind the decision not to enlist him for these assessments. Regardless of the outcome of the vote, this is incredibly concerning and something I feel fans deserve answered definitely, rather than the chairman consistently trying to dodge this issue. With John Laird confessing that the transfer embargo is still an ongoing matter at the EGM, this brings me to the subject of our MCT representatives. For all both Robinson and Barr seemed to offer rather mealy mouthed apologies for their role in this, my position is that the damage has already been done. The confidence of the membership is absolutely vital to MCT, and for such an egregious breach of trust to be willingly conducted by both these individuals, and the knock on effect this caused within the MCT board, is risible. I'd also remind the membership that this is not the first time Graham Barr has wheeled out the 'learn lessons and do better next time' line. MCT need a clear plan on how they plan to re-establish the trust of the membership. I’m incredibly pleased that Dalrada’s involvement in Greenock Morton will continue, and that certainty can be provided to Dougie Imrie as quickly as possible to allow our squad building to commence. That doesn’t paint the whole picture however, and I think both boards must be willing to reflect on how poorly they have performed over the last few months. We need an MCT that thrives and continually pushes the club forward, and the behaviour of some of our representatives in recent times has rocked the organisation to its foundations. I'm glad Dalrada are on board, but we must do better.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DGeF0oWMcvp/?igsh=ZTdrd3ZqazQ0cnFl

Sean McGinty was at fault for at least two of Alloa's three goals at Airdrie today. Cheers, Sean.

As a club we are currently a complete shambles and the responsibility for this falls fully on Laird, the GMFC Board and MCT Board. It is shameful that so many who are responsible for this failing in governance and responsibility to shareholders, MCT members and fans choose to continue to hide in the shadows - their only interest appears to be self-preservation and not what is in the best interests of the Club. We are a fan-owned Club but this last season has confirmed this means nothing to those in charge - we are being taken for fools. Whether intentional or unintentional this response to the many questions out there is contradictory and incomplete. Nothing has changed - MCT members are being invited to vote with a gun to their heads. I suspect the motion will pass due to a combination of apathy and fear. I don't blame anyone who votes in favour of the resolution but this is not what we were promised as a fan owned club. In the circumstances, you cannot blame the manager and players looking elsewhere as who in their right minds would want to be part of this shitshow.

I've just submitted this rather large list of questions to MCT. I'm assuming they will collate questions and answer them at the meeting. Dalrada: Should Dalrada continue their history of missed/late payments to GMFC, what protections are GMFC implementing to protect the club’s financial wellbeing? If Dalrada miss or default on payment(s), will the number of Dalrada board members on the GMFC board be reduced? If not, why not? What failsafe measures have MCT discussed should the proposal be rejected by the membership? Why, and by who, was it decided that a written summary of the proposed agreement sent to the membership, rather than the proposed deal in its entirety? Will a full version of the agreement (redacted where necessary to protect sensitive data) be sent to the membership? If not, why not? It is stated within the email that the agreement, should it be successful, will be reviewed in twelve months time. Given the proportion of the club’s income that comes from Dalrada, could this review begin in February 2026 instead, with the aim of having a final decision by May 2026 instead? Whilst we cannot guarantee which league we would be playing in for the following season, and some additional caveats may need to be inserted into any proposed agreement, this would give the men’s first team manager a more definitive idea of the budget for the season ahead, allowing squad building to begin as soon as possible. GMFC Chairman: Is or has John Laird ever been a member of MCT? Has John Laird invested any money in the Club or MCT? Has John Laird been registered as a director of GMFC with Companies House? If not, why not? Over the last twelve months, how many MCT board meetings has John Laird attended? Does John Laird currently have any financial interest in any footballing companies, including coaching, scouting and agency organisations? If so, what mechanisms have the GMFC board put in place to prevent conflicts of interest from arising? If there are none, why is this the case? What mechanisms are in place to allow the MCT membership, the clubs owners, to remove a Chairman should they be unhappy with their leadership? MCT Reps on the GMFC Board: Given a clear failure in communication and governance, and a clear breach of the memberships’ trust by both Graham Barr and Sam Robinson, what is the justification for the interim MCT board being ‘happy’ for both named individuals to continue in their role? What is the justification for MCT directors who have previously resigned from their posts making such an important decision without allowing a vote of the membership to inform their decision? Have Graham Barr or Sam Robinson offered any explanation or apology for their actions in hiding vital information from both the club’s owners and the men’s first team manager? What assurances have the interim board sought from Graham and Sam regarding their future conduct and responsibilities towards all MCT members? What are the mechanisms by which MCT members can remove representatives should their conduct fall below an acceptable standard? Given recent developments, and the subsequent impact upon the trust the fanbase have in MCT as an organisation, and the representation the membership have on the GMFC board, would this be a prudent opportunity to start recording minutes from discussions held at MCT and GMFC board meetings? Obviously, certain information would need to be redacted, but this could go a long way to improving the transparency and integrity of our elected representatives. If this is not possible, why not?

NOPE! just not having that and disappointed that no one else has flagged this up. Maybe in your Texas hick town, but not here. I have been in and out of various hospitals in Larbert and Glasgow over the last few months and i can assure you that the nurses and indeed any hospital staff I have encountered have been absolutely superb and the treatment from the NHS in general has been outstanding.

Some may (nor may not, I don’t expect anyone to hang on any of my words) have noticed I’ve not had much to say on here since joining the MCT board. Given that my main sales pitch was transparency, I think it’s only fair that I do comment, albeit from a personal viewpoint, rather than the collective MCT board view. Some of our board may agree or disagree with me as I’ve not ran this by them, though the Morton board made it clear that I’m free share my opinions. Firstly, the reason I’ve not been so active hasn’t been any deliberate lack of transparency, more a case of being involved in regular calls, dealing with MCT comms (which have admittedly been sporadic), writing for the Tele and discussing Morton in my own private chats, there comes a point that talking, writing and posting about Morton all the time gets tiresome, even for me. However, I do feel the need to answer the quoted post, albeit belatedly. Again, this is personal opinion, so not necessarily that of the rest of the board, but when not in full possession of the facts, I don’t feel it is responsible of the MCT board, nor is it constructive to be commenting on such sensitive matters. We’re also volunteers with jobs, who were working at the point this demand to answer an unsubstantiated rumour was placed on us. I know that Dean and I are the prominent board members on this forum, so don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest this was aimed at us, but I wasn’t going to drop everything to deal with gossip, especially having given up some of my employers’ time earlier in the week to ensure a statement was released addressing Imrie’s departure. This didn’t just involve waiting by my phone to click a button as the process dragged on throughout Tuesday before finally being confirmed by both clubs. The club board have been open with us throughout the process of Imrie’s departure, and we’re grateful to them for that. I was also in receipt of Chris’s voice note, given that we’re friendly and have a working relationship, which differed greatly from their version of events. Being honest, I was fairly comfortable with the club’s version, having been given regular updates over last weekend, and while I didn’t want to see Imrie leave, didn’t see a problem with how Morton conducted themselves. That said, as is the case with most difficult situations like this, there are normally three versions of events, with the third being what actually happened, and somewhere in the middle. That’s not to say there are untruths from the Morton board, and Chris has conceded there were untruths on his version. But as I said above, without knowing for certain, it would be wrong of us to comment. I don’t know if John Laird gave Imrie three games to save his job- this was never communicated to us at a time the Morton board were open with a lot of sensitive information, so I personally don’t believe this to have been the case. On the subject of Chris, it’s a situation that I’m saddened by. I know there were folk he upset at times, and he could be divisive and made mistakes along the way, but I had, and still have a lot of time for the guy. It may not seem like much to a lot of folk, but a few years ago I was shovelling chips into boxes, and now I write a newspaper column. That’s a big deal for me, and for that opportunity I owe him a debt of gratitude. I really hope he gets over this and goes onto have a long and successful career. I get that I’ve not answered everything that’s been asked of myself or the board in the last week or so and apologise for not managing that yet. For example @Madton tagged me on P&B the other day. I’m not ignoring that but there’s a lot in it to cover so will ask the necessary questions and get back to you, though I’m definitely trying to steer clear of posting on that forum and getting into battles with fans of other clubs. This won’t satisfy everyone of course- I may have missed something and won't be able to answer any replies today given the long drive to and from Peterhead, but I’ll try to get to anything that is directed to the MCT board when I can over the weekend. In the meantime, if anyone has anything to ask at the game feel free. If you don’t know me, someone will be able to point you in my direction.

I get it, but we’d also moan like fuck if they never put them on sale. I’ll get one as usual. You all will too. And we’ll be miserable about it. We go again.

Could also organise one of those moments where all the fans throw on a teddy and stop a game for a few minutes while they are collected to be donated to hospitals who look after sick kids.

If those drafting the proposal are to be taken at their word that they truly only have the best intentions for the club and fanbase, a ‘no’ vote should not represent an immediate end of their interest. People with a genuine desire to improve things for the club and the community would respond by trying to ascertain why the vote didn’t go in their favour and formulate a series of amendments to get the deal over the line. There should be no room for an “offer” to be made in a strong armed manner that suggests the ownership can either take it or get stuffed.

Nah, gutted it looks like he is finally away. 5th longest serving manager in the entire SPFL. Kept us up after the carnage of Macpherson and kept the ship steady when all around him was a bin fire. Regardless of his personal ambitions, nobody can say he didn't work his arse off for the club despite all the challenges put in front of him. Would have liked to see what he could do with a larger, more competitive budget but also a full, clear summer to run and it and build with it. Will go down as a very good appointment all things considered and one of the few real positives to give the board of recent years credit for. Let's hope their next appointment turns out as favourable.

That was terrific. Every player did well there and you could single any of them out, but Shaw had his best game for Morton and was imperious. Moore was superb, MacPherson looks a totally different player when he's playing higher up the park, Moffat and Adeloye both ran themselves into the ground out of possession while their decision making in it was consistently good. The shape asked a lot of Wilson having to be more advanced and do more on the ball which he did well.

"My primary motivation for returning was to help ensure the club's financial viability in the Championship. I believe we've achieved that goal." Ah yes, surely the bronze statue awaits on Sinclair Street for our selfless hero upon stepping down. Except that it is, as usual, self-serving bollocks of course. Acting with the primary aim stated (leaving aside the 'viability' of a model now dependent to a larger annual benefactor that Douglas Rae, so what is meant is 'fullll-time futba') would be a potentially valid excuse for MCT directors who were also on the GMFC board. We could reject that claim on their part too, but the conflict of serving two masters at once os clear. But last time I checked, Stuart Duncan was not sitting on the GMFC board in any capacity. There was no competing source of authority - the only role that Duncan had was as a member of the MCT board. Which raises some rather unfortunate questions for our erstwhile hero: 1) With what legitimate mandate did you act against the interests of the MCT membership you were elected to represent? When did you publicly state your prioritisation of 'fullll time futba' over the interests of the majority stakeholders in GMFC for full transparency and accountability, and when did you win sufficient support for that agenda? I don't recall that being on any candidate biography. 2) With what legitimacy at all did you act after both i) resigning from the MCT board in a tantrum and ii) canvassing support for an EGM against the remainimg board membership - an EGM that was conveniently discarded 0.4 seconds after you were 'co-opted' onto the interim MCT board? So no, I don't think there'll be a bronze statue forthcoming at all. If there is one lesson that new candidates should be embracing from this farcical last 6 months, it is that MCT board members must uphold a duty of fair representation and accountability towards the membership. If we continue to have MCT directors who get elected by default and then just run their own agenda, then MCT as an organisation will join GMST (see also Duncan, Stuart) in being a failed rump entity within 10 years.

A lengthy post about…not much. Sorry. In the spirit of transparency and good communication, my name is Craig and I sometimes do some filming for the club and Morton in the Community. With all the recent nonsense I reached out to the GMFC board members a few days ago through an email to Dale to offer them the chance to do quick interviews to explain their position on the upcoming vote and why, as well as hopefully explaining some of their recent actions. I also emailed coms@MCT with the same offer, and Graham McLennan and through him those who have recently stepped away. I also said in all my communications that I would share everything (hence this). In the past I had a few dealings with Graham McLennan and a few texts messages with Graham Barr while I was doing ‘Ton TV match days during lockdown. I don’t know any of the others. The only 2 who got back to me were McLennan and Barr. McLennan was open to the idea as he felt fans should have as much information as possible pre-vote. Graham Barr took the time to get in touch, but was reluctant as he was worried that more “tit for tat stuff and sharing is just going to keep the mess going…” but was happy to speak to me on the phone. I replied that not sharing stuff seemed to have led us to this mess and speaking to me on the phone would only add to the “I’ve heard that…”etc etc on places like this forum. He said he was “keen to speak but cautious” adding “I’m certainly open to transparency ahead of the meeting and hope the FAQs will go along way to providing more depth to the situation” But in the end it looks like it isn’t happening and I thanked him for getting back to me. Graham McLennan on hearing that he was the only person so far willing to do an interview on camera decided that it might not be a great idea if it was just him, looking more like propaganda rather than just one point of view among others. I don’t really have a platform and I’m no investigative journalist, so I guess I’m not surprised that the idea of me and my camera didn’t appeal. But as many of us on here have scratched our heads wondering if we should do more as MCT members it was the only thing I could think of. Anyone who is at all bothered can look back at my posts on here to get my personal opinion on things as they currently stand, but I honestly offered this up with an open mind to try and give all involved a chance to clear the air and help inform our judgement. My real bias working in video production, is that watching videos makes things easier to digest rather than lengthy written statements (or bloody posts like this!) If I had an agenda it was simply to try and help with all this, and help ensure that after over 45 years of standing in the cowshed (with or without the sun-roof) that I could look forward to continuing to do so far in the future. The last time I tried to do anything vaguely similar is when MCT were struggling to get things going not long after they took over at the club, I just wanted to do something positive as the whole atmosphere was fairly toxic. It turned out to be the day Gus MacPherson was sacked when I grabbed a hold of Andy Ritchie who kindly gave me this piece to camera. It all still rings true to me which is no surprise as Andy always speaks so well…

MCT still generates some really weird, overly negative reactions. 3 years of fan ownership has delivered 3 years of championship football and a huge financial turnaround. That already counts as success for a provincial club at this level, no matter what happens next. No ownership model will make us immune to losing players or getting relegated. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better than it was under the Raes. Its also a lot better than the alternative (which was, and still is, nothing).

I want Strapp to do well and have a good career but if I'm being asked to sympathize with the treatment of a pure gallus local lad who we let train here when he wasn't with the club, or support the best manager we've had in our lifetime, I'm picking Imrie every time and twice on Sundays.

Anyone actually wanting Imrie to leave or talking of sacking him is wild. You can spin various stats any way you like and argue managers who managed a top four finish for us were ultimately more successful because of managing one higher league placing, but for consistency of performance Imrie had a better points per game record at this level than any Morton manager since Tommy McLean. At any club at this level, but especially Morton with our past track record, it's an unavoidable reality of football that you'll have more bad managers than good ones and most will end up going due to being sacked or mutually consented for poor results. That being the case, when you actually get a good manager you should do everything you can to keep them, because it's extremely difficult to keep getting appointments right and especially so when you're operating with a lower budget than your competitors. Everyone agrees that 3 wins in 16 needed to improve but he should have been absolutely nowhere near the sack, the idea that we'd have been anywhere near paying him off is risible. If there'd been no interest from Raith and we'd sacked him on Monday for poor performance, the sack the board shouts in response would have been deafening.

Taking parts especially worthy of comment here: This does not address the fundamental point here. The big issue around this is not how confident GMFC or MCT are that Dalrada will keep up with their scheduled payments, but what happens if they fail to do so. This is critically important and we have absolutely no information on it. We all already know there'll be a contract, we need to know what that contract actually enforces. Without a guarantee that there is some form of restitution for the club if Dalrada default (again), it's impossible to support this. Following on from the above, what on earth does "not been missed as such" mean? Did they default on payments or didn't they? Was the GMFC AGM misled when a director of the club said there that Dalrada had failed to keep up with payments? Was there no contractual schedule? If we've actually signed up to a sponsorship deal without one, it really speaks volumes for the excellent governance of those existing board members who are being kept in place as part of a deal to bring us more efficient governance! On the plus side, a six month deadline to bring another deal to the table is positive and means this farce won't be repeated next season in the event of a yes vote, though with that in mind the lack of explanation of why we're doing this in May just now rather than in December or January is noted. This is the single most important question in the whole document, and as covered by others already that isn't an answer. We need an absolutely concrete yes to this question rather than "expected". Which is why, even if it's deemed inappropriate due to commercial sensitivity to release the contract in full (why that couldn't be done with some details redacted I don't know), for this particular detail we should have the actual wording of the relevant sections of the contract, in full and unredacted. We need to know that allowing a third party influence over the board for 12 months in return for 12 months investment doesn't constitute handing them control of the board forever even if the investment stops, without seeing that wording we have no way of knowing we're not doing that and this FAQ has not provided any reassurance whatsoever on that point. For now let's take the specific issue we have with Barr and Robinson out of this. What does "Dalrada have only asked" mean? Does that mean something to this effect will be in the contract? That any removal has to be agreed by the rest of the GMFC board and has to be for a 'solid business reason'? Who decides what constitutes a 'solid business reason'? So if for any reason the MCT membership put forward a motion of no confidence in one of the MCT representatives, then even in the hypothetical scenario that that confidence vote sees 99.9% of the MCT membership go against that MCT rep, if the rest of the non-MCT GMFC board members disagree with that decision, or Dalrada feel it's not a solid business reason, then that individual either stays on the board or Dalrada walk? Will it be written into the agreement that Dalrada can walk away and abandon their payments unilaterally if the MCT membership and/or MCT board force changes in the MCT representatives? This is why we need to see the actual text of the agreement, to make it crystal clear that that absolutely fucking outrageous suggestion isn't in it. I'm genuinely furious at the idea the rest of the GMFC board and Dalrada would be given a veto like that. Far from leaving the accountability of MCT representatives on the GMFC board unchanged, it would mean there is literally no accountability whatsoever and leave both the MCT membership and MCT board completely powerless to influence who their representatives are. If we're going to accept having our control of the board diluted then we need to actually have the power to choose our representatives for the seats we do have. This needs urgent clarification, and if my interpretation above is indeed the case then that is an utter disgrace. Yeah, we've already had the blatant lie about the motivations of the MCT representatives two weeks ago, piling more deceit on top of their initial dishonest silence. They have also in reality not expressed regret or far less had the decency or humility to apologise for their behaviour. The pertinent facts of the matter are that they both knew about the embargo on 17 March and sat on it for six weeks. Those facts were confirmed by the joint statement of 13 May, a statement which was largely written to defend them. They have already aired their side of the story in that statement, and when given that opportunity they chose to tell a risible lie about not derailing a playoff challenge, when the manager of the first team was also being kept in the dark, because the actual reason is that they thought they could get away with no one ever knowing about the gross incompetence on their watch if it was fixed quickly. I'll not put the image of the whole what caused the FIFA embargo answer here, but there are still gaping holes in that (which tbf should be for GMFC to account for, preferably in a statement announcing the departures of those responsible, rather than MCT). Regardless of the underlying issues that arose through the initial registration of the signing, there have been extremely specific allegations made about the club not monitoring any contact from governing bodies for 8 months, then being made aware of contact from FIFA in November, with the embargo not being enforced until March. The suggestion that the club were trying really hard to contact FIFA but just got stonewalled with an insistence on them sending details to the wrong email address - for four months - is eyebrow raising. If there's a real intention to improve governance, then GMFC addressing those claims is necessary. The word 'advisory' is used an awful lot in the John Laird section. If he's just there as an advisory figure, for strategic support, with no formal authority or responsibilities, then why is he the Chair of the Club (not of the GMFC board, such a significant distinction) rather than remaining as an unofficial advisor? And why then, with his apparent lack of independent authority, with all decisions being taken by the board, was he the one who travelled alone for negotiations with Dalrada? If his role is seemingly so lacking in any real influence, why is it a condition of the proposal that he remains in place? That entire section provides more questions than answers. This doesn't answer the question.

An alternative story and criticism of the club is out there in terms of the transfer embargo. And it makes their washing their hands of any blame look awful. There needs to be acknowledgment that mistakes were made and relationships have been poor. The story about Millen has been out for a long time now, but we're still in the dark about it. Indeed, I heard that even Imrie was in the dark about it when it happened. If they didn't want the story to filter out in this way then they shouldn't have gone about things the way they did. We're at a point when we at least need some clarity. These are two areas where under other circumstances things maybe could be swept under the carpet, and there are others (what happened with catering being one), but when I'm being asked to make a really important decision I need to know a little bit more about what's been going on. They're doing this at a really vital moment for planning for next season, and want me to make a really important decision, but I don't know much about Laird whatsoever. Why is the chairman of the club always do silent? I don't even fully understand why he's chairman, or what he bringing to the role. Why are the directors on the board so silent? I think what gets me most is the leak which started this thread. When self interest was at stake, people were happy to anonymously leak information. They were happy to criticise what others were doing without taking any criticism upon themselves. Above all else, I'm being asked to trust people who don't seem to be willing to help me get to know them better. I want to know more about Laird, his vision for the club, what he wants to do. I want to hear from Barr and Robinson. I want to know who Gourdie is. I want some humility over the FIFA situation. I want at least a tiny bit of transparency over the Millen situation. I want to know how the pie stall queues have managed to triple in length. I want to know why I should believe that the current club board are the best placed people to lead the club forward. The point I'm trying to make is that it is possible to convince me - I have no grudges, or personal issues - but I'm lacking reasons to trust them. The joint statement made it seem like only others had ever done anything wrong, that the only issues came from people at MCT who didn't know what they were doing or overstepped the mark, but it's hard to trust those who make out like they've never made mistakes. Mistakes were made with the FIFA issue. Start with a proper apology for that and then let us get to know the club board members a bit better. A little bit of humility can go a long way.

You are fully entitled to your view, but there are two points that require challenging: 1) The transfer embargo demonstrates that MCT does not have "total control" to relinquish. This is worth correcting because it is also the false choice peddled by the lackey Interim Board about this proposal: 'fan run' v 'fan owned'. At no point since taking ownership have MCT members demanded the right to run the club - there has been no public voting on sacking managers or setting wage budgets, all the decisions have been delegated to GMFC's board and the paid backroom staff. In addition, MCT never exercised full control of the GMFC board - it was always a mixture of directors from different backgrounds. Right now, MCT has no effective representation at all because its delegates on said board have gone rogue and are serving another master. The transfer embargo was not disclosed by the club to its 90% owner - in what other business relationship would that be acceptable? The issue then is not Dalrada's smart professionals taking over from MCT amateurs. It is actually about having the real and legal owners of the club - its fanbase, through MCT - exercising basic scrutiny over a club that becomes transparent in its decision-making. The current proposal does not provide for this - quite the opposite, in fact - and so at a minimum should be amended: • MCT should retain at least 50% representation on the club board. • The two rogue reps cannot be retained under MCT's official standard. If Dalrada want to take ownership of them, then fine. Ideally: • The fundamental lack of transparency should also be addressed by providing minutes for board meetings to MCT (and any other significant partner), with the MCT board entitled to summarise these for wider publication. 2) If the sponsor wishes to install people with competence, then which of the current board members and/or paid staff will be getting their jotters for the transfer embargo farce, or its pathetic cover-up? None of Dalrada's mates, seemingly, so what about the chairman or the chief executive? The issue with a lack of competence does not stem from fan ownership or MCT having representation on the club board. It stems from the collective decision-making of said board as well as the individual actions of club executives and paid backroom staff. When two of said board members were hauled out for failing in their designated responsibility to MCT, Dalrada threw a tantrum to keep them on the club board - actions speak louder than words when it comes to ensuring competence.

Gordon has put his name to his posts - will you do the same when making allegations about him? Regardless of how true or otherwise your allegations are, they do not address either the situation we currently face, or any of the points he raised so forgive me for thinking it is coming across as whataboutery & a cheap attempt to discredit one of the only people who appear at this stage to be sharing information with the fans in good faith.

I asked the MCT board to permit some time for a counter argument to this proposal to be submitted. My request was not even acknowledged. We are racing headlong into a situation where members lose control of the club due to the MCT board blindly accepting the word of their mates on the GMFC board. I know from my time on the board that there is more going on than we are being told, but due to confidentiality laws I cannot discuss these things publicly (Stuart Duncan take note) but in my resignation email in March 2024 I warned that Laird was determined to grab the club from MCT ownership. One thing I can say, and which I announced at an AGM, is that the original deal with Dalrada was for 6 years. I don’t know if someone renegotiated that deal (and, if so, why) but there is no mention of that in the propoganda distributed by the MCT board. At the present time, I am ashamed to be associated with MCT and a series of directors who have no idea how to properly run a company. Finally, many thanks to those posters who wished me well in my recovery from health issues.

Former GMFC and MCT director Gordon Ritchie has asked me to post the following statement on his behalf - If you are named in this statement and wish the right to reply, please contact me directly. Thanks, Dean.

On one hand we have a steady match-going crowd, an ever-increasing MCT membership, a positive balance sheet, 3 mid-table seasons in the Championship, no obstacles to outside investment (see - Dalrada), tempered with some short-term negatives caused by a roaster of a GM and a dud of a season on the park (following on from a reasonably exciting one). On the other hand, we have a handful of posters on here and Facebook who have been presenting the same miserable points about terminal doom and personal apathy for literally years now (see page 1 of the MCT updates thread for reference). My own point of view is that the Rae family, Hugh Scott, Alan Lithgow and a successful period in the 70s/80s aren't relevant to the future of the club. Framing every discussion on ownership around them is a waste of time.

How did he manage to beat John369 to the exclusive?

Anyway, my bottom line is this: I feel significantly reassured - but not totally - about the prospect of an 'underground' share issue. I feel very reassured about the content of the agreement not having any hidden loopholes in it, and I feel very reassured that even if there were, Dalrada aren't looking for ownership via the back door. I will be emailing to ask for a copy to be 100% sure. These have me leaning very heavily towards 'Yes' based on the substance of the deal. Having had no real opinion on John Laird previously, I am very unimpressed with both his manner, and the substance of most of his responses. His continued evasion over the delays - notwithstanding Brian Bonar's health issues (from which I'm very glad he's on the mend) - was a display of brass neck. This tilts me somewhere back towards 'No' because Brian made it clear on the call he'd be relying on the Board to effectively get their house in order, and while Laird is not a voting member of the board, he's something of a 'chair' and I think he sets a bad tenor around the place, notwithstanding his business record. I think he's very Rae-like in that he doesn't like accountability, he doesn't like structure, and he operates best in a smoke-filled room with a lot of ambiguity. That, to me, is completely the incorrect approach both for a fan-owned club and for a club that's fiscally dependent on a major sponsor whose entire family are watching us like hawks. As for MCT: I do sympathize with Graham Barr in some ways. It's horrible to be part of a big issue at work that can't be fixed quickly, for which you have responsibility, and for which the hindsight is clear that you should have done differently. I've been there. So on a human level, yeah, I feel for the guy. But he's a director of the club. Everyone involved seems to have full confidence in him. And I just can't understand where that's coming from based on the last few months. The same applies to Sam Robinson - admittedly I don't know everything he said tonight because the microphone was rubbish. But on the transfer saga alone we've gone from "we kept it quiet for good reasons and while not everyone agrees, we were right" to "there are some aspects of regret" (not verbatim) to tonight's actual apology. I really don't get it. Apparently he (Barr) has had some dark nights of the soul, writing things but not publishing them, thinking of speaking out but then not, whatever. I think situations like this call for clarity and based on the last few weeks I just don't think he's up to that. That coupled with the train crash rollout of the vote, which got a good amount of discussion tonight, just leaves me scratching my head about how the top brass can look at the current composition and say "yep, they're the guys to get us out of this mess." That has me leaning back towards 'No.' However: MCT and GMFC are both ultimately correct that MCT has an absolute ton of turnover. It's not an easy job. Not everyone can do it, and most who can will have other things going on. There just isn't - as far as I can tell - a bench of talent waiting to fill the spots on the board from the MCT roster. Thus I can kind of understand why they (Dalrada) want to stick with the devil they know, and there's enough about the current guys that they can - presumably - be steered towards something productive. I don't actually agree with this but I can see why they would think that. Finally: I think any deal like this is risky. I can well understand why the Bonar family have a six-month get-out clause, and why it's only a year. I have a greater concern that we'll go down the QP route of getting accustomed to being flush, and then it all disappearing. This money's going to Imrie's squad-building: are we permitting multi-year contracts? I hope not. I think a deal with a get-out clause and a one-year duration is fundamentally incompatible with aspirations towards Premier League football. I think the various yer da's in the audience talking about administration and part-time football should be ashamed of themselves. Fearmongering that even the deal's architects aren't putting out there is just manipulative. After this Dunning-esque essay, at this exact moment I would abstain. If I can find nothing to worry about in the substance of the agreement, I will vote Yes. I will then treat the future votes over the interim board's appointments, and the review of the business in January, separately from this.

The silence of Barr and Robinson (OUR reps on the Morton board) is telling. As I stated before, there are things that I know but cannot disclose due to board confidentiality. I have given this matter much thought, and I am now publicly asking our reps to publish the minutes of the Morton board meeting in December 2023. I am also asking for them to indicate what happened to the 6 year deal that Dalrada signed and announced at an earlier AGM. Finally, I ask them to confirm what, if any. assurances Dalrada made about a notice period being given for the ending of the sponsorship deal. These are the type of things that our MCT board members should have asked before blindly accepting the proposal and recommending it to members. I know that Barr reads this forum regularly. Tell the members the truth.

“Since day one, Dalrada have never asked for anything in return for their contribution.” Aren’t they on our shirts the team wear at Cappielow supported by Dalrada? “The only condition Dalrada have placed on the deal is for the governance of the football club to improve.“ Aren't they now asking for members in the board and directors who have overseen the recent shambles to stay in the board alongside their chosen chairman? Big improvement? “In addition, it is stated representatives should carry out a project beneficial to the club before being appointed.” What did Graham Barr do? “The above would of course require a slight change to the GMFC Articles which state MCT reps should always be the majority on the Board. It is also worth adding that the interim MCT Board are happy to continue with Sam and Graham as MCT representatives.” Why are they happy for them to continue. Because of their communication skills? I must have missed their replies to Gordon Ritchie’s statement. The rest is just word salad about being pragmatic and best thing all round etc. It’s a big NO from me and I’d class myself usually as a bit of a fence sitter. To me it’s totally unacceptable and a slippery slope to being the next ICT or Hamilton I reckon. It feels like anyone who had the best intentions for MCT and Morton has left and those who have caused all this shite by their incompetence and self entitlement want to keep control.

Absolutely shocking stuff here. Of all the information that’s come out so far, I trust Gordon above the other sources so this is deeply concerning to say the least. I note with interest that Gordon’s statement mentions that he has spoken to the tele and shared evidence that the timelines claimed by the club are inaccurate. This is a big opportunity for the tele to show that they are worth their salt by doing some proper journalism as opposed to being a mouthpiece for unnamed “sources”. If (as seems to be the case) this is some sort of hostile power grab to seize control of the club, then personally I would prefer to tell Dalrada, Laird, Dale & their cohorts to do one. Even if it means part-time football.

96th minute winner by Robbie Muirhead to CRUSH the title dreams of big-spending Ayr United. Terrible, wee shame that.

Corr dislocated his shoulder at Raith a few months ago and has done it again twice since signing for Morton. You can’t legislate for every injury but you shouldn’t be coming out with nonsense like that in interviews because it will always come back to bite you. The fact he’s the general manager and spending far too much time speaking about football matters rather than almost everything else off the pitch that seems to be at a standstill makes it even worse. The only actual thing that I can think of that he’s implemented in his time so far is integrating the women’s team in to the club, which although admirable is not something I’ve seen discussed about the cost of that and if it’s sustainable for a fan owned club at our level to cover that cost? I genuinely don’t know the answer to that but I can’t imagine it’s cheap and if it’s self sustainable at this level or the level the women play at or ever will be. so much of the things he does from his middle management speak, five pillars, getting involved in football matters and almost being the front face of talking about them plastered all over internal and external media outlets as well as being the saviour of Greenock Morton Women’s team screams of someone trying to pad their CV for his next employer rather than someone who’s actually implementing any real change or progress at the club.

Germany vs Scotland | Cappielow Kickoff - Greenock Morton FC (gmfc.net) Absolutely brilliant work from the club here. Great value for money with the £20 including your first beer of the night, a glass & some grub. Great to see the club working to generate some revenue by making use of facilities during the close season while taking advantage of the buzz around the Euros. I am very much looking forward to watching this match in the company of fellow ton fans!

The statement is worded very carefully to appease all parties and allow them to move on. That’s very different from either side admitting that the version of events were incorrect. I know which side I’d trust more and it’s probably not the side of the people who have been caught in multiple lies and coverups.

His opinions should now be treated with the same attitude shown to any other opposition manager. I've got nothing against the guy for making a career move to suit himself, but football is tribal and he's ditched us for a direct competitor mid-season after fumbling a transfer window. I hope we pump Raith in all the remaining fixtures.

Harper was a guest of Morton's on Saturday. I'm sure the affection between Harper and Aberdeen is mutual, but Aberdeen will have 20-odd home games this season if they want to catch up with each other. It's poor form for him to totally dinghy the home club and Gerry did the right thing reminding him who the host was.

Still laughing at Bible John if I'm honest.

I see that's us now advertising the Groundsman's position, without a single word to acknowledge that Mark Farrell left the club. As someone has pointed out on twitter, our esteemed GM got a full article announcing his departure, and we've heard nothing about Farrell, or indeed Andy Millen. Transparency eh.

Brilliant news. Good to see the Wilson to Partick, pre contract was indeed a load of shite.

The answers to the FAQs started off quite well, but quickly verged into something mindbogglingly tone-deaf, and then meandered to the finish while somehow managing to raise more questions than answers. My instinct is still that the crux of this is about self-important people who think they know best and lack the humility to see any alternatives. I'm not convinced there is anything massively untoward happening here - apart from people who personally don't like each other and a whole load of arrogance. A fair bit of dishonesty thrown in there as well - but I suspect it all comes down to the arrogance of thinking they're the best (or only) people for the job. They couldn't even answer the question about the hole in the Cowshed roof with any confidence - it's the same update from months ago. By the weekend, it'll be six weeks till the League Cup starts. We should know what we're doing by now. Millen an 'HR' issue - just don't answer a question like that. The club doesn't have a clue what it's doing, does it? Btw, this was another statement where I kept forgetting it was meant to be from MCT rather than the club, because it doesn't read like it's on the side of the members of MCT trying to scrutinise what's going on.

Not sure his sister shares those sentiments.

I don't really have a huge issue with this. If there's a sponsor who's willing to be on the board and bring in some corporate experience then there's no real issue. The problem is if they start to interfere with decisions and act in their own interest. We've only got a small pool of supporters for the board so it needs supplemented by external people. I've also seen a few people query the two board setup. I don't think that's an issue in itself and (from memory) the articles of association for both are well intended. Again, the problem is if people act in their own interest. The GMFC board should be a majority of MCT representatives and the MCT board should be able to remove or change these members going by these articles. Since the MCT board are representing the members then it should allow members to force change via the MCT board. What's happened here is that the MCT board weren't happy with their representatives and tried to remove them but they refused to leave and went running to the sponsor. Whether the comms or way of telling them could have been improved is another story but the structure should work in theory. Just because Dalrada have a board seat shouldn't mean they have the deciding vote - it's majority MCT and the MCT people on it should answer to the MCT board (and therfore members) rather than act in their own interest.

Let's hope that this can all be resolved asap and we can begin to plan ahead for next season. So much uncertainty already with Dougie and now Millen. Add to that the players out of contract and now the boardroom drama. A plea to anyone involved on this debacle regardless of involvement with MCT, The Board and Dalrada. Swallow your pride, get round the table and put the best interests of the club and the fans first.

Ross Forbes, gentlemen. What a player. https://x.com/uav360drone/status/1888308536691867758?s=46

To be fair, the onus has to be on MCT to keep making the case for investing in them, and not doing so shouldn't deny fans a voice to criticise. Progress has definitely stalled in some areas over the past year or two. The model still needs to iron out the practical issues of being a relatively hands-off owner of a football club while acting as a collective voice of the fanbase - I think the working groups scheme is a step forward towards doing that. But the bigger picture is undoubtedly one of tremendous success compared to the nick we were in previously. Where I feel that people do not have the right to be taken seriously is when they're still braying on about Alan fucking Lithgow, while being conspicuous by their absence while the club was circling the drain during the 2020-22 period. Nobody at MCT, GMFC or anyone else should be giving time to that line of complaint any more.

I disagree with him, and find his posts and stance on the subject of fan ownership tiresome. I like the principle of fan ownership, though I’m not convinced about how well it’s implemented at Morton. There are positives to be taken- for all it’s easy to say that we only turned over profits off the back of cup ties at Celtic Park and Ibrox, it shouldn’t be forgotten that even without those, massive annual losses were stemmed in a relatively short period of time. I’m pleased with how they managed to source sponsorship from Dalrada, when it was getting to the stage we looked far too reliant on the Easdales. Rightly or wrongly I’m more comfortable with Dalrada. And we may well be flirting with relegation to League One for the foreseeable future. So what? It might have escaped many folks’ attention but save from seasons 2012-13 and 2016-17 under the Raes, League One was a distinct possibility just about every year. It’s hardly as if we’ve massively regressed from the halcyon days of a rich local businessman sweeping all before him. We’re one of the 22 biggest clubs in the country, so in theory are the archetypal Championship club- our longevity in the division supports that belief, we’ve spent 17 of the last 18 years in this league. But rather than just fan ownership, we’re also affected by external issues. The state of Cappielow, in terms of the costs to maintain it, and the small capacity to make money outwith football from it, aren’t the current regime’s fault. And as one of the few clubs in the division making ends meet, we’re going to be susceptible to relegation when other clubs spend outwith their means. At present, clubs of a similar or smaller stature to us that are spending more than they bring in are (so far as I can make out, I could be wrong) Ross County, Hamilton, Ayr, Raith and Queen’s Park. Livingston are the beneficiaries of massive prize money that will be greatly reduced this season if they don’t go up, and Inverness have now hit the skids, having achieved more than us, having built everything on sand. I don’t want to be one of those clubs that pisses money against a wall again, and if it means we have go down, then so be it. We’re not talking about Bordeaux playing on a public park, we’re talking about Morton playing at Stenhousemuir and Montrose. Also, the way football is structured now doesn’t allow for clubs like Morton to succeed. Prize money is heavily weighted to the top end, making it harder for a club like us to progress without pissing money against a wall. Since the formation of the SPFL in 2013, only four clubs outwith the current Premiership have played in the top flight, with only Falkirk looking like changing that. It’s not too different to how the Champions League is the exclusive right of the few, but in a smaller scale. Calling for fresh investment is one thing, but what happens when these investors that were waiting to wave money at us want their money back? We got lucky with the Raes. They knew the history with their predecessor, respected their old man’s wishes for Morton not to wither and die, and were prepared to cut their losses. We wouldn’t be that lucky again. I’ve been quite critical of a few things under fan ownership- I called out the appointment of the current General Manager very early, and my opinion hasn’t changed. And I’m getting less and less patient with John Laird. I’ve not seen any evidence of anything he’s achieved in his time as Chairman, and the only time I’ve seen him appear was for a puff piece with Hugh MacDonald in the Daily Mail last month. Those things don’t mean I’m prepared to write off fan ownership completely though. It could certainly be improved, but is an improvement on what we had under the Raes. And I suspect that the position of Raith Rovers in five years time should be more concerning to their fans than the position of Morton should be to us.