Handsome_Devil

I appreciate the club statement uses the term 'investment' but unless we've stumbled across a model undiscovered at our level of football, we really mean donation or, at best, generous sponsorship. The only club in Scotland which makes sustained profit - certainly to the extent there's an obvious return to investment - is Celtic. Dundee United have had significant investment, got relegated anyway, and now have a bloke who will likely - one day - ask for his X million back. Hibs (and Falkirk?) also have external investment and while I've not followed them closely, I don't get the impression dividends are flowing. Waaaaay back in the days of Well Worth Saving the first acceptance was the most important thing was not the level we played at but that we played at all. The second acceptance was, after the lessons of Boyle - who was, if not successful, then at least relatively benign compared to other investors gone sour - that risking the long-term existence of the club for a few years of 'success' was not worth it. It is understandable that those lessons are largely forgotten by those who were there or not known at all to those who weren't. So I'm definitely interested in the potential investment we're getting but I'm much more interested in what we're offering in exchange. Should the worst happen and we go down there is, of course, the chance we follow Dunfermline, Falkirk etc into oblivion. But generally speaking, the clubs who really sink like stones are doing so paying off the failed investment of the past...I don't want us to go down but if we go down basically debt free, we will almost certainly become a yo-yo team with good spells and bad. And if it comes to that, I can certainly live with it. To me, that is a much better option than accepting X cash from the outside and thinking we will be the first ones to nail this... history, ours included, suggests that's just not going to happen.

Maybe a raffle to get the honours of bulleting him is the new fund-raising initiative?

This 100%. The same folk giving them crap are probably the ones who complain loudest when we can't find top people run everything brilliantly on a voluntarily or cut-price basis.

Wonder if this is the making of us or a "be careful what you wished for" moment... Tempted to think it's a roll of the dice that needs to be made mind but we will see. Thanks to both Jim McMahon and Derek Weir for their efforts, regardless of what some folk thought of them.

That's certainly fair...we currently have 16 from 18, win three out of the next seven and we're on par after 25 going into Hearts and Celtic. Which is not good by any means but probably keeps us above absolute panic, at least for a couple of weeks. But if you assume we don't surprise a city club, that effectively means we're looking at three wins from four v the rest - the margin for error in 'winnable' games is getting less and less. As obvious as it is to say, our games against the other absolute dross fighting for survival are key. Do fine there and we'll probably be ok...but of that group we've currently played five, won none...

It'll be matches two and three for my kids, a perverse part of me hopes it's an absolute fucking misery which ends in a hail of boos and protests. You know, separate the men (and women) from the (six-year-old) boys and (four-year-old) girls. Show them what it's all about early kind of thing. Never did me any harm. Oh.

Say we even take four points from the next four - optimistic - before we sign some folk in January, if we do not absolutely nail the first three games back we're going to be under a tonne of pressure again. Logically you need to stick with it, to avoid a repeat of the Hammell scenario, but that's some going if it all goes wrong or players suddenly lose faith... I appreciate every club will make an utter bollocks their managerial situation from time to time, it's inevitable - but I get a very, very strong feeling we're walking into our third such car crash in the space of 21 months. That really would merit 'sack the board' time, if only there were folk to replace them!

I obviously hope you're right but the fixture list is a double-edged sword in that regard - we resume league business with three winnable games in a week and a half and losing the first of them in Perth on the 27th will effectively kill any narrative changing hopes stone dead.

Mibbes...but he had the angle at the near post and got absolutely nowhere near it. And as he was aiming rather than getting the laces right through it, I don't know think it was that hard either. Certainly if that had been hit straight at Kelly, I'd have fully expected him to save it. I'd definitely back Wilkinson on those chances above Bair, for all his other flaws.

Watching from the first angle I thought he was unlucky to have just missed but you see it from behind the goal he wasn't even that close. Shame because he did brilliantly to that point. Bair's miss was both worse and not as annoying. It was an absolutely pathetic effort but I don't expect any better from him.

I definitely understand the transitional feel but obvious question is transitional to what? We got our fingers by burned with the attempted Alexander era, will we try that again? Or would we just bring in another "jobber" for 18 months until it's time to move on again? As for jobbers in general, there's no guarantee if course but generally speaking there is a bounce and if that bounce keeps you up... I've said before my concern about SK is/was only partly the results - if he'd been doing everything right but still losing I'd have been much more likely to say we should hold our nerve. As the for the feeling things might be turning...well, yes, maybe they are but when you blow the 'easy' games and only improve going into a run where three of four is Rangers, Pittodrie, Easter Road, there's no guarantee that's enough.

I'd argue that modern football, which is rubbish ofc, relies on a new manager bringing a new voice, new life and getting more out of folk who are already there. I appreciate the argument we can't sack a manager every year but frankly even successful managers last about 2.5 seasons these days...the principle and practice clash somewhat. Bizarrely his finally playing Gent and Davor have eased my annoyance a bit but do you trust him to recruit in January? I'm one of the most defensive of his transfer record - given the budget cuts - and at best I'm 50-50. But the main point for me is we should never be in a position where we bin a manager at this stage - it's giving up even the pretence of planning. And even his most determined backers would surely say four losses from now means he has to go. What I would say - bizarrely - is being adrift in 11th but well clear of 12th does change the calculation. Everyone says oh no we'll lose the playoff, logically looking at history that's clearly not true...so if we beat Livingston and scramble something from the other three, we may feel the risk-reward has changed.

We should just have a graf pinned on this thread about the margins which define success or failure in this league over one game or 38. You're clearly correct with even two wins win the last 14, a run which would hardly be wonderful, we'd be looking a lot better. On the other hand, after playing well in losing the first three of the run, you could argue that the point gained from County and Dundee were total gifts while St Johnstone let us off the hook twice as well. Even today, as much as we were apparently a bit more dangerous, they missed a bloody penalty. So if we're playing hypotheticals, as much as we could have been better, it's not a big leap to us being even worse, which is some going. I'd still be making the change now...I just can't see us getting the results over the next four before the window which won't make it inevitable and surely now is better than starting this process during a make or break window.

I saw nothing so no real comments but definitely sounds an improvement and a clean sheet a big boost. But that's now 6 points from 42, and given the next two likely six from 48 going into Livingston...that game's not big, it's large.

I've no way of knowing but I strongly suspect in practice you're right - it's just that's not how any kind of good model for what we have should work. In theory, at least, I appreciate circumstances, resources etc don't always make this possible in practice. But in terms of accountability, the Society at large can only be consulted en masse very occasionally, we fundamentally rely on those elected to the society board holding the club board to account. You don't need to be Sir John Curtice to see that's not very likely if Society board members make up two-thirds of the club board... Fwiw I don't necessarily think the manager appointment is a decision for the society in the ideal governance model. By all means have the Society chair/representative explain the structure on prospective candidates, so they know what they're getting themselves into, but managers last - on a good appointment - two to three years, that's the tactical/operational stuff the club board is responsible for, it's below the strategic level of the society.

Just to continue the Society bashing, I know they were probably made ages ago and just taking up space in someone's loft but sending out pointless card holders made of cheap plastic with the kids Christmas cards does not scream an organisation in touch with the zeitgeist!

I'm not saying he was totally unprofessional by spending summer on the lash before he eventually re-signed for us but a mini pre-season won't do Casey any harm.

I love there's an alternative universe where Big Mitch is coaching semi-pro back home rather than being Billy Big Baws at Man Utd because we sacked him one year for being 10th with 23 points from 26 games.

If we'd binned kettlewell when I wanted, Simo would have been my first pick from the known crowd...a shame.

There'll be a queue of 'charity' bet offers flooding your inbox this evening!

Definitely not and I think - though this is maybe unfair ofc as a view from the outside - this is what is winding folk up so much. The problem is not that we are making wrong decisions on big things but the appearance of simply not making any decision on them. Now there may be good reason for this, in which case, as far as commercially possible, tell us. Everyone, even the the perfectionist loonies in our support, understands that we'll occasionally get things wrong but a wrong decision will usually have some logic in the process and you say 'fair enough'. Our current predicament flows directly from May 22 when rather than back or sack Alexander, we did neither. There were obvious pros and cons to both paths but I'm pretty confident either would have been better than the ridiculous middle path we tried to walk, as fun as early kettlewell was. Getting to the situation where we're one deflection or dodgy VAR call from sacking our manager hours before or into a crucial window because we've let it get to an all-or-nothing six-pointer is fucking mental, whether we're run by well-meaning amateurs or not. If the decision has been made to give Kettlewell the window come hell or high water, fine, but communicate it and get everyone back on board.

I know you're not the only one to have said this but - in theory at least! - the Society board is the top layer, not the executive. The club board is accountable to the Society, which is represented by those elected/co-opted. The fact we only have a three-man board would be curious enough at the best of times but two of them also being on the Society board is farcical. I know lots of folk find the governance stuff boring and they're not necessarily wrong...but just because it's boring doesn't mean it's not important and if we're wanting to sort the medium-term, big picture whatever, this is a good place to start.

I agree with the recruitment bit, without knowing where or why it went wrong it looks pathetic. What medium-term strategy would you have? We already went all in on the community thing and pulled back, we already tried commuting long-term contracts to a manager and key players with potential and sacked that too. Don't really care what medium we use but make it regular, consistent and clear: the Society basically do exactly that already with their weekly emails. The lack of strategy in them comes from the fact the volunteers are who they are and we don't have anyone better. I'm also crossing fingers the new blood gives us a boost. What goals should we have beyond being solvent and being in the league to take advantage when we can? I'm not being sarky btw, I know that's often how these things come across on on the internet, but when you seem so set on it I'm just curious.

What's your alternative suggestion or how would you make what we have better?

Yeah, I was pro the investment last year too but there were plenty who weren't. And while we may disagree, if you're a fan-owned club with a limited base it's a fine line in carrying everyone with you regardless. I also agree re value stuff fwiw but it's hard to say when spending that money what the expected return is, when you think you'll get it, proving a link etc...so when every penny's a prisoner it's not surprising, if sad, that gets binned.