Fresh from calling for the removal of Brian Wilson, the Celtic Fans Collective has now turned its attention to another long-serving non-executive director whose time on the board they believe has long passed its natural end point…
Their latest target is Tom Allison, whose extraordinary 24-year tenure stands at almost two and a half times longer than the widely-accepted nine-year maximum recommended for independent non-executive directors. Allison has been described previously on The Celtic Star as ‘Dermot Desmond’s eyes and ears’ so you can perhaps understand why he has been in situ for so long.
In a new statement, the Celtic Fans Collective said:
“Tom Allison joined the Celtic board in September 2001. Tom Boyd was club captain and the team was preparing for Celtic’s first ever Champions League group stage match. Like Brian Wilson, Tom’s tenure is now more than double the nine-year maximum widely recommended for Non-Executive Directors under basic corporate governance standards. As a result, his ability to hold the CEO and CFO to account has been compromised. Celtic needs fresh ideas, expertise and leaders who understand the demands of a modern football club. Tom – your time at Celtic has expired.”
Allison’s 24-year stay is now one of the longest in Celtic’s modern history and, under the UK Corporate Governance Code, would be considered far beyond the threshold at which true independence can be maintained. Governance experts argue that the nine-year rule exists for a reason, the longer a director serves, the harder it becomes to challenge colleagues with whom they have formed close personal and professional bonds.
Just as importantly, long tenure creates a different kind of risk, one we highlighted in the Brian Wilson analysis yesterday. Directors entrenched for decades often become guardians of their own historical decisions. Challenging old strategies becomes awkward when those strategies were designed on their watch.
A board cannot meaningfully refresh its thinking if its members remain deeply attached to the ideas and systems they shaped many years earlier. At that point, the culture itself becomes questionable – is the board still fit for purpose when those tasked with oversight are defending legacy thinking rather than scrutinising it?
With the AGM approaching, the Celtic Fans Collective are putting the spotlight on every board member standing for re-election.
Next up – Tom Allison pic.twitter.com/cav1TP592i
— Celtic Fans Collective (@CFC_Collective) November 14, 2025
For many supporters, the answer is becoming increasingly clear.
In fairness niall, I can understand the collective looking for some form of victory at the AGM?
But targeting the NEDs?
How do the collective really think that replacement of any nodding dogs with other nodding dogs, is really going to bring any form of changes within the boardroom?
Fair play in effort, but in reality little chance of having any form of impact whatsoever imo?
Wouldn’t say a board is going to back down from a collective demands, especially while our club remains such a cash cow for the likes imo?
Much bigger issues remain upon the field of play for ourselves at present. The strength within a collective will grow, if the downward cycle of results, starts to becoming a bigger factor within our season.
All unknown factors at present, and still say we still are a club who haven’t lost to much to date this season, especially with so much still to play for all the same.
Of course we are in uncertain times within our club at present.
But focus for myself anyway, it’s more important for ourselves to be gaining victories on the pitch, moreso than gaining victories within the boardroom at present imo?
How do you know the noding dogs will be replaced with new noding dogs?
for all you know we might get ned’s with a bit of backbone and modern ideas
The whole board need replaced