All Activity

I think this is the crux of where we are at present. Whether anyone feels the board gets a free pass because of the managerial recruitment and the general perception that the club has been well managed in recent history is, ultimately, I'm sorry to advise, a matter of personal opinion. Likewise, some are seemingly quite happy to overlook ratified policies designed to protect everyone involved and provide clarity, because their personal ambivalence towards those policies appears to be directly linked to the state of our bank balance ..... £1m in the bank and operating loss "can you explain yourselves please" vs £15 million in transfer business in 13 months, "do what you like lads". You may believe that, despite those processes being in place, the ordinary fan shouldn't meddle. These are all positions I've seen voiced on this subject in the past month on both forums. But if you're going to argue that, then surely the alternative and fair position is that the 'owners' of the club should at least have been furnished with the bare minimum supporting documentation, allowing us to review it, ask questions and form an informed opinion. At the very least, it moves the discussion beyond the rather convenient position and potentially the banked on one of assuming a lot of fans will say "I'm not qualified to have an opinion on it." Keeping transfers ultra secret and family members in baseball caps and scarves is fun and welcome but for that in isolation. We were told at the AGM that the feasibility report had been received two weeks previously and that the board hadn't had sufficient time to digest it. But you're two weeks out from the one event in the calendar where you are directly accountable to the club's owners. Couldn't you at least skim it? Turn to the final page conclusions, understand the broad recommendations and provide a condensed summary to the people you're ultimately answerable to. The business we've done recently means we're at a fork in the road with true choices when before our path was very much defined for us. Reality check: in theory, we're a fan-owned club (yes, the italics are deliberate). With that comes an expectation, rightly or wrongly, of a greater level of transparency and accountability than you might reasonably expect from a traditional local businessman, whale or venture-capital. That's part of the bargain and covenant of fan ownership. And whether each individual fan personally has an appetite for that level of scrutiny is ultimately immaterial. A process was defined for matters of this nature. It was ratified, presumably for good reason, and it exists to provide protection and clarity for everyone involved. That process has, to a large extent, been ignored and a plan steamrollered. And that's the bit I find concerning. Not necessarily the outcome, not even necessarily the decision that was made, it's the precedent that has now been set. If a ratified process can simply be bypassed because, in this particular instance, it was inconvenient, expensive or ultimately could have been opposed to a desired outcome, what's to stop exactly the same thing happening again? If some recall, the club had to be reigned in when Sevco faced demotion to the 4th tier, Derek Weir and Dempster outlined the real implications for the club, but they still took it to the support/owners even if they personally may have voted the opposite way due to their roles as directors. However they then had a mandate. Once you've established that a process can be ignored because it worked out alright this time, you've rather undermined the whole point of having the process in the first place.

Not that much better.

Of course its possible to knock down the POD and rebuild it on the exact same footprint...that the footprint is the same doesn't mean that the facilities within the stand or the configuration of it would be the same as it is currently. The malaise around the South Stand is something that has caught me off guard a wee bit, I genuinely didnt realise it was in such a bad nick, but is it purely cosmetic, that a good clean and some paint will sort, or is it much more acute than that? The East has had its issues for as long as there have been seats in it, mainly around exiting the stand after matches and concourse being narrow. For me, we look at replacing the POD, with a functioning, money making facility with much better hospitality facilities, a bar, a restaurant etc. This can be done with finance that currently exists within the club and a much smaller mortgage than what we'd be left holding for any new stadium at the Craig.

I wouldnt expect most fans to be abreast of all the information required to make a fully informed decision on whether to refurb Fir Park or rebuild elsewhere. Obviously there are emotions involved either way. Thats exactly why it is important to have the feasibility report published, together with a laymans summary of what it means for the club.

Delighted mate, should have been done a lot sooner though.

If it was possible I would demolish POD stand and build a brand new one. Not sure if it would be possible and also fully appreciate the Hunter and McLean stands need a lot of work. Cooper stand fine so it wouldn't need upgrade. No easy solutions

Its a half baked daft idea which will achieve nothing. Larger clubs would simply ignore any requirement and take the relatively modest financial hit.

Very much so. Transport links are generally improved when there’s appetite to do so by key stakeholders. Still, question was asked on how others view redeveloping our current home.

I know there was a meeting friday, didn't realise there was pushback from clubs already. That podcast is as far as i've listened and it all seemed fairly positive. I can understand the pushback from certain angles. But theres valid points made about players brought in from down south or abroad no better than our own youngsters taking up a place in the squad. I'm sure we could point to many of our own examples there. The cup game thing i'd struggle to agree with to be fair (2x U21 players to start each cup game).

I probably more than anyone banged the Stama drum but injuries just never meant he could get a run. Lone striker not suited to him. I felt him and JT were developing a partnership until....yup...you guessed it..........stama got injured. Certainly not worst striker I have seen but just didnt work out

Aye spiderpig . I hope you're pleased with yourself 🤣🤣

One of my concerns bud would be infrastructure around a new build. Would there be improved transport links, etc? Pros and cons with both options about staying or moving.

That's their goalies name so fingers crossed

Will be interesting to see if he’s able to get a run of games . His pro record has him averaging less than 14 games per season . hopefully he comes good

JBA brought him in, I'm sure he thought he would do a job, needs a run in the team to see if he's any good though, feels like he's never had that kind of run

They had a meeting about it with all the SPFL clubs on Friday and a lot of the top flight teams pushed back on it including ourselves if Open Goal is to be believed but the main issue you 'll then get in Scottish football is us and other top flight clubs will then further stump players developments for the sake of them playing maybe 5 games in our first team in the cups and the league games once Europe/Relegation is no longer a possibility rather than going out on loan and getting 30 games at senior level

Toughest position to recruit for . When it comes to successful strikers there’s probably been more bad than good or certainly a fair amount of meh . Need convincing that Thor will prove to be any better but at least we can give the guy a chance .

Didn't work out in the end, but better than our Alex Fisher/Jordan White/Jacob Blyth tier of non-scoring strikers.

We are all aware of the constraints that a revamped Fir park would present but for me i would be up for staying and keeping all the memories etc, as long as the stadium was up to a modern standard as much as it can be within its limitations. We obviously cant knock the stadium down and start again so it would be done in stages, there will be disruption but nothing that cant be overcome. However until we see any potential proposals and timescales its nigh on impossible to make any informed comment. So I hope that whatever the club decide to do the supporters will be consulted via the WS or whatever other means they choose as we all have valid inputs.

There is an episode on the bbc scottish football podcast on this topic called "Why change is needed now to maximise the potential of Scotland's footballing talent". Think its just the sportsound pre-match radio from saturday cut down. Its a decent listen if interested. Basically incentivising clubs to play academy players in the league and mandating it in the cups. Whether is comes to anything is another matter. IMO the mandating of it in the cups seems OTT, but overall the arguments put forward for the initiative make total sense.

Perfect summary of Scottish Football.

Can we compete with big English clubs who pay out fortunes to lure young players to their academies? How do we crack that one?

100% spot on that sums up his time here perfectly, he was dross.

Overall AP was one of the worst signings we have paid for in a long time Always in the wrong place , 2 yards short, never really looked interested at all in his time here and permanently injured. Think he wanted away after two months here.

Glad AP has gone, as much as I think he is a good striker and was a potentially good buy, it’s not worked out and it’s clear he wants to be back in Oz with his family. Fair enough. Good for us as it removes a decent wage but unsure what opportunities he’ll get… but not our problem.