I READ with mounting concern and incredulity your newspaper's assertions that Mr Brian Dempsey is the true voice of Celtic supporters and the saviour of the club. As all are no doubt aware, Mr Dempsey has the backing of the likes of Mr Peter Rafferty, the chairman of the Affiliation of Registered Celtic Supporters Clubs, who also claims to have a mandate to speak on the ordinary fans' behalf. Besides the lack of a factual basis for this claim, I feel that there are some fundamental questions regarding Mr Demp-sey's past involvement in the affairs of Celtic Football Club which merit closer examination.

First, how much, and when, has Mr Dempsey invested in the club? At the time of the takeover Mr Dempsey was asked by Fergus McCann to invest in Celtic. It hardly needs recalling that this was a time when the club was struggling under a mountain of debt and other problems. Mr Dempsey pointedly refused to do so. Now, having let Fergus McCann and the other major shareholders bear all the risk and pay all the costs associated with putting Celtic back in an advantageous position football-wise, stadium-wise and finance-wise, Mr Dempsey has reappeared to attempt to reap the benefits of what others have sown.

Secondly, Mr Dempsey is on record as stating that the club is not heading down the path he envisaged four years ago when he helped engineer the ousting of the old board. Just what path does Mr Dempsey mean? What was, and is, his vision for Celtic?

In 1994, Fergus McCann said he would effect a financial rescue package and create a large body of shareholders among the supporters, that he would restore the spirit of charity which inspired the club's founding and would make Celtic a force for positive social action, that he would build a new stadium at Parkhead, and that he would strengthen the team and bring an end to the era of Rangers' domination.

Today, Celtic have the largest and best club stadium in the UK with 50,000 season ticket holders. There are 10,000 shareholders, with more to be created shortly. On these criteria they are now ranked in the top five of European clubs. The team has just enjoyed their most successful season in 10 years. Off the park, the club has won recognition from the European Commission for their Bhoys Against Bigotry campaign. The questions to Mr Dempsey are simple. If this is not the path that he foresaw for Celtic in 1994, then what is? And where did Mr McCann go wrong? What would Mr Dempsey change?

Questions also need to be asked as to Peter Rafferty's motives for involvement in Dempsey's campaign. After all, this is the same Peter Rafferty who could not bring himself to campaign for the removal of the Old Board when Celtic were on the verge of financial ruin. And this is the same Peter Rafferty who opposed the appointment of Jock Brown as the general manager on the grounds that he was ''too Rangers minded'', an appeal to the lowest form of tribalism. He also called on Celtic fans to protest by cancelling their season book direct debits. Has Mr Rafferty led by personal example in this regard? This I very much doubt. I can assure you that Mr Rafferty does not speak for me, nor for any of the large number of Celtic fans that I know.

One must question the motives of a man who was not willing to invest any of his own money in the club at the moment when that help was needed most. With Fergus McCann preparing to sell his shares in the near future, the reappearance of Mr Dempsey on the scene is surely not just fortuitous timing. Fergus McCann has transformed the fortunes of Celtic Football Club. In doing so he has kept every promise that he made to the fans when he took over in 1994. In marked contrast, Mr Dempsey has done nothing to advance the cause of Celtic Football Club.

The abject failure of the ''protest Huddle'' last weekend is indication that Dempsey and Rafferty have the backing of a small, but vocal, minority of Celtic fans. In contrast the silent majority, and that is a vast majority, are clearly content with the stewardship of Fergus McCann.

Charles Haggerty,

72 Crichton Street,

Glasgow.

q FIRST I would like to congratulate The Herald on its comprehensive athletics coverage. However I feel compelled to write after reading the report on the Britannia Womens 10k on Monday, not from an athletics angle, but from a ''Woman in Sport'' angle.

I am fortunate enough to be a full-time athlete at present but I was forced to take the role of spectator at the weekend due to injury. This gave me the opportunity to witness the wonderful sight of what has become one of the largest woman-only road races in Britain. As I train daily in Glasgow I witness first hand the increase in races in female runners on the streets as a direct result of the woman's jogging network and the 10k. In fact at this time of year I often meet more female than male runners whilst training, which was certainly never the case a couple of years ago. I was therefore dismayed on Monday morning to see the scant amount of space allocated to this event in The Herald.

As I live with a Hearts supporter I am only too aware that there were other events to be covered last weekend, but surely 4322 female readers (or to be precise 4321 and a bloke in a dress!) deserved more recognition for their efforts. Better coverage would have helped this event to continue to increase in size.

Your excellent athletic coverage of the exploits of Liz McColgan and Yvonne Murray encouraged me to take up athletics, why not use this opportunity to encourage other women into sport?

Vikki McPherson

89 Oban Drive

Glasgow.