Jump to content

dave.j

Gold Members
  • Posts

    6,461
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Posts posted by dave.j

  1. 1 hour ago, JustDom said:

    Have we got any idea about who has been offered a new deal, or is the ruling on it has changed due to the constant change of our season? As far as I can tell from the clubs website, Sneddon, Foster, Penrice, Williamson, Cardle, Gordon & Reilly (f**k knows what happened to him btw) are all out of contract at the end of the season meaning we'd only be left with 10 first team players plus a handful of youth players (Ocholi, Rodden, Lyon, McCready are the ones that come to mind). Outside of Cardle I'm not bothered about any of them leaving, would just be nice to know either way.

    They can all go. Even if we miraculously win this god forsaken league, I'd be quite happy to not see any of them in red n yellow again.

     

    By McCall's own admission, Cardle had one good season left in him. Hence why he got a one year extension. 

  2. 20 minutes ago, banditjag said:

    I saw the footage, pretty sad really but, not breaking the law, just not adhering to guidelines on social distancing. As for our director, shameful but predictable that people who support the arse cheeks find their way into smaller clubs, but they should be banned from such behaviour when in the employ of our clubs. Sacking/dismissal would be too good for him. Stripped of his dignity and thrown in the nolly.

    Social distancing, no mask indoors, travelling outside your council District for a swally. 

  3. 8 minutes ago, JagsCG said:

    For what reason (genuine question) has something gone on?

    I'm more than happy to stand corrected, but the guy out on the swally with Neil Lennon (in Newcastle?), calling himself Duncan, clearly breaking Covid Guidelines, looks a lot like our Celtic blogging Director. Quite a lot of people on social media suggesting it's him. 

    With our Chairman having such public disdain for those who break Covid Guidelines, I'd imagine he will be asked to leave the club.

  4. 2 hours ago, Bishop Briggs said:

    3BC will be included in Colin Weir's estate which is now subject to probate. Do you know the terms of his will and to whom he left 3BC?

    Do you know whether the new owner(s) will wish to transfer its assets to the Jags Foundation? Or are you still a bitter attention-seeker who knows f**k all?

    🤣🤣🤣 

  5. The rewards question I find really cringy and reflects badly on the guys involved. First of all, the reward is fan ownership. The ibsebtives suggested are so lacking in imagination, it's horrible. A zoom call with the players. Jesus!!!

     

    I wish they'd stop comparing us with other clubs. Almost always bigger clubs. Every Club is unique, they will experience different issues based on their club, the league they play in, what country they are in, how big their fanbase is and even what got them to fan ownership in the first place. 

     

    As I tweeted yesterday. All I want from the foundation is a date. Set in stone when we are getting the shares handed over. 

  6. 29 minutes ago, VictorOnopko said:

    I thought the last three questions were probably requests by JL so she can use the findings for some more whining in the near future.

    On your last point - I hope I am wrong about this, but I thought in the previous presentations/announcements, they mentioned that in fact, our current PR disaster/chairman would remain on the board even after the fan takeover - with the obvious intention of continuing to pull the strings (after buying the club with the training ground money then selling it to the fans...).

    I think it had been suggested as part of a clean handover, that maybe one or two hang about for a couple of months to make sure we know what we're doing. 

    But I'd be genuinely surprised if low wanted to hang around. A bit like the murderer helping the police with their investigation. 

    I don't think low was involved directly in getting those 3 questions in. Indirectly, influencing one or two of the cult, possibly 

  7. 48 minutes ago, Pie Of The Month said:

    It's not even just the last 3 questions that are poorly thought out. If we go through it:

    Q1 - A random selection of groupings of fans and a catch all of 'none of the above'. Just your bog standard punter who pays on the day in the Jackie Husband stand could in theory not be captured by any of those groups and select none of the above and they've no way of knowing anything about that person.

    Q3 - Leading question. They should want to know what thoughts are on fan ownership whether it's positive or negative. It's essentially a back patting "why will we be so great" question

    Q5 - Why are they asking a fan with no experience of how fan ownership works to pluck a figure out the air of how many members would be a decent number? Even if there's a common number picked out it has no meaning whatsoever

    Q6 and 7 - Ignoring that there's a 6a then a 7b why is there an option to say how much you'd be willing to pay if you think the proposed monthly fee is too high but no question to reply to with an amount if you think it's too low?

    Q9 - Fine but I think the priority should be on actually getting fan ownership in place before concerning ourselves with charitable donations

    Q11 - Cringy nonsense

    Q12 -14 Already covered as completely irrelevant and acting the victim

     

    Nailed it 

×
×
  • Create New...