The Split

 

The Split

Brendan Behan, author, raconteur and one time IRA volunteer once joked that the first item on the agenda of any Dublin IRA meeting was always the split. There is a grain of truth in his assertation that there is a quarrelsome and fractious part of the Celtic soul. The founding generation of Celtic FC would doubtless agree with that as there were those who dropped out at an early stage as others, described as the ‘more pushy types,’ took over in those early days.

We saw the breakaway Glasgow Hibernians formed by James Quillin, a former Celtic committee member who disliked the way he saw Celtic going in 1889 and became embroiled in messy squabbling with other Celtic committee members in the press. He had initially invited Edinburgh Hibernians to relocate to Glasgow and when they refused, he and others who became known as ‘Quillinites’ founded the new Glasgow Hibernians FC. His vision was that the new club be modelled on the Edinburgh club and that players be drawn from the Irish Catholic community. They set up home in what is today Richmond Park, by the river Clyde and wore tops with vertical green and maroon stripes. Celtic watched from a distance as the new club rose and then vanished within 18 months, laden with debt. It’s interesting to think what the football landscape of Scotland would have looked like had Glasgow Hibernians survived, but with most of their target audience already committed to Celtic, their growth may have been limited.

Down through all the years that Celtic has existed, there has always been dissention, though most of it was led by people who wanted only the best for the club. Today’s AGM ended amid farcical scenes as a well-prepared and coordinated group of shareholders, heckled, chanted and generally made the smooth running of the meeting very difficult. Initial viewing of what went on suggest a more measured approach might have lent itself to close questioning of directors on their failings. In a sense they gave the board all the excuses they needed to halt proceedings and avoid serious scrutiny. They may reflect on that and conclude it was a tactical error.

Dermot Desmond, Celtic biggest shareholder (though not owner as is often reported) sent his son Ross to read a statement in his absence. It proved to be incendiary in its content. Among other things he said: ‘There is no doubt we make mistakes and try to learn from them, but we will not be bullied by aggressive factions.’ Desmond also claimed the protesters were "people whose only vocation in life is being anti-establishment.”  These comments were met by anger from some in the hall and there were chants of sack the board’ and the meeting was wound up by Peter Lawwell. Celtic released a short statement on the club website later in the day which said…

‘Regrettably, due to the continuing disruptive conduct of a small number of individuals preventing the orderly management of today’s AGM, we were required to conclude the meeting earlier than we had planned. Such conduct is completely unacceptable and hugely disappointing, and while today’s events are completely out-with our control, clearly, we regret the impact on our shareholders who were deprived of the opportunity to take part in an orderly and constructive meeting.’

Various Celtic podcasts and social media accounts are predictably focussing on Ross Desmond’s seemingly harsh words for the ‘bullies’ and ‘anti-establishment’ types, seeing them as a direct slander on fans trying to force the club to change and give the support a team to be proud of. They are remarkably quiet about the boorish behaviour of a minority which had the AGM abandoned, seeing it as legitimate protest. Perhaps those protesting realise that their suggestions and ideas for the way forward would have little chance of success given the percentage of shares held by the board and their allies? Either way, the board has performed poorly in certain aspects of their remit, and seemed to admit as much, but surely an orderly meeting would have allowed for questioning and a much closer scrutiny of their actions and perceived inactions?

The immediate way forward looks fraught as neither side looks like backing down. The board hold most of the cards at the moment as they control the majority of the shares in the club. Those protesting need to put in place a realistic vision of the way forward that goes beyond suggesting mass resignations of board members. Who is likely to come in and buy Celtic shares worth tens of millions of pounds? Who will ensure they are the right people to lead Celtic forward?  The current board is widely regarded as being financially prudent to the degree that Celtic have been called the best run club in the UK. That being said, they made a horrendous mess of the summer transfer window, communicate poorly and totally mishandled the departure of Brendan Rodgers. The statement released by Dermot Desmond in the wake of Rodgers’ departure was graceless and unnecessarily vindictive. A Celtic representative should be above such things.

This unholy mess has come at a time when the team is dealing with an injury list as long as your arm and facing a run of very tough fixtures domestically and in Europe. There is a clear disconnect between a section of the Celtic support and those running the club. How big that section of the support is remains to be seen.  The Celtic support as a whole is divided and that is not healthy. Some agree with the reasons the fans protesting but not the methodology utilised. Others feel the whole thing is affecting the team at a time when they need our backing.  I tend to think that talking is the way forward. We tend not to hear each other when we shout. We all want the same thing; a thriving, forward thinking, competitive football club so let’s sit around the table like adults and see how we can achieve this. As Brendan Behan said…

“The best way to escape from a problem is to solve it.”