Onthefringes

Tenuous link to Daws & previous employment methinks… Player will be heading towards Championship.

Laugh all you like. It is what it is. At least it ain’t contradictory like that firm grip you’ve got. rivals? Nobody of note except perhaps Dundee? Others weren’t even on our radar despite what some on here think.

So what is it you’ve a firm grip on? This making sure you push a deal over the line has no circumstances? It’s not great, most recognise that. Market conditions dictate otherwise.

Yes. Something oft discussed at Club AGM in recent years.

At last, sanity.

Profit? Not really how it works, but, batter in. Let’s see what club accounts bring about a year from now.

Unlikely to oust Greg Taylor. Sounds some prospect

To put us in the poor house again?

🤔 I’d be checking sources, 11 appearances which is nearly two handfuls in Ayrshire and the likes.

Any money pays up the players contract. Unlikely to be profit made. The winning part is opening up space in an already light squad

Na. You done that nip left out for Santa?

Livingston signed him the other day ready for joining on January 1st I’m sure

Like I said, spare us. Need to stop taking the manager literally. You do realise why he won’t reveal his plan in full? Martindale ironically should keep his powder dry. His first signing is a right back from Torquay. Your conjecture of a master plan conveniently missed from your reply. We see you.

Conjecture at its finest. Spare us.

Nor disagreement here. Your summation aligns with my ‘tail wagging the dog’ quip.

We have a director who’s the founding partner of a strategic communications consultancy. He’s now not in their employ, but, suspect he could be relied upon to offer advice. Think some fans need to grasp that the Society exists to offer the club an overdraft facility - which in fairness hasn’t been required for some time. How much transparency do they need for that? Decision making & driving meaningful change will be on kit design at best. Various factors. Tail wagging the dog springs to mind & it’s unlikely the two co-opted board members will raise their heads above the parapet to question the governance.

Couldn’t get a start in front of Robbie Crawford. Let that sink in.

Parochial. Very. Saying that as if others don’t go to the football to support their team and the club. Just from experience, never had that ruined or safety jeopardised by the actions of people who don’t conform. Had a few by the actions of those supposedly charged with our safety, but, them’s the breaks. Don’t get me started on the family group who sat behind us versus Ross County a few weeks back…

”look at me, look at me” never more apt each and every time you post. Boring. Your prejudice and lack of understanding of a subject you clearly know little of offers nothing when others are debating reasonably.

End of debate. You stick to sniffing bicycle saddles.

Those representing club owners. For example, had the Russell/Brannan brand or dare I say it Burrows been charged with the task it would’ve read a whole lot better. Take Rangers statement last week: “Supporters are reminded the use of pyrotechnics is illegal within Scottish football stadiums, and any supporter found to be in possession of a pyrotechnic device at any match risks arrest. The club can also be sanctioned for any use of pyrotechnics within a stadium.” It’s factual, doesn’t offer opinion and ticks the boxes to avoid any issues from SPFL. Basics.

Reasoned debate. Is there an element of its use being edgy as it’s not allowed? A forbidden fruit? Reckon we’d see it take off in the first instance were it embraced, eventually the novelty wearing out.

Neither for nor against. I do accept there is poor legislation with poor execution of any law passed, as the health hazard/cause injury ideal has no real basis. You realise many of these devices are utilised in day to day life without issue? Enclosed spaces to record air flow for example? All points mentioned allude to the other debate. Disagree in the ‘acting in the interests of the club’ ideal you recall - not in the theory, but, how the message is delivered. Certain club individuals were involved in the wording of the statement & were advised it wasn’t constructive & would be an understatement. Not a good environment. Choice words. Mirrors the dysfunctional outlook many believe there to be. Would take all clubs’ to accept strict liability to see authorities take action. I’d discount the whataboutery of sanctions on one and not another. It’s not the refereeing fraternity likely to make any decisions. Your opinion is clear.

Fair enough, fan culture like football itself has evolved though. Society just as much.

Have I said I condone it? Just find the club stance questionable given their use of images past & present. This ‘if’ the authorities get involved is a misnomer. No club is subject to strict liability for the actions of fan behaviour, censure maybe. it’s not a new phenomenon, high time there was adult conversations and an appreciation by those in authority the spectacle can be managed safely and work together for the greater good before they lose any semblance of control they have, not the control they try to exert.