Slipmat

If that allows Cochrane to play further up the park that's not necessarily a bad thing.

No, all speculation on my part. Just thinking out loud and probably putting 2 and 2 together to make 5. With Gibson, the BOD appointed him on an interim basis before giving him the job permanently. Yet they gave his successor (who albeit was widely thought of as having potential but no experience in the hotseat) a lengthy contract based on...? Now I'm sure Gibson would have been on peanuts and inexpensive to dismiss, but even taking that into account it seems to me that the BOD had a major rethink of their methods of selecting a manager after a succession of internal promotions, bringing a previously successful manager back (Johnston), or in the case of Naysmith appointing someone who had recently been proven to be successful at East Fife (albeit his star was on the wane by the time he arrived at Palmerston). My way of thinking is, I guess, based on a BOD adopting this radical change in direction after years of going down the supposed safe route, combined with the difficulty they seem to be having in ridding the club of Bartley - assuming (again!) that they want to do so.

Not just the length of contract. I'm starting to think that he either demanded or was offered a ridiculously high salary for a rookie manager at our level. One way or another, I expect that through his gift of the gab he has hoodwinked the board into awarding him a much better contract than they may have initially considered offering the successful candidate, so keen were they to get their man.

Watching the rugby is similar to watching Queens. No forward passes allowed.

I'm hoping he's available to work as a pundit for this match.

The opposite could be said given that the board allowed Bartley to sign Mumbongo and Kilsby. I actually believe that rather than not giving a f**k, they are just f**king clueless.

Hopefully Mr Hewitson remembers his words from December 2022: He is a young manager who deserved the opportunity, but football is a results-based business, and we aren't happy with the season so far and we have to do what we feel is best for the club.

At this rate he's going we'll be so deep into the ground we'll resurface in Australia.

They're ahead again. Could it have something to do with them having had 11 shots on goal?

Out of interest, roughly how many Queens fans are there today?

So, it took until first half stoppage time for us to register a shot on target against a team that have conceded almost twice as many goals as every other club in the league* In six and a half games this calendar year we have scored 3 goals. I can only go by the match stats, but it seems like Bartley has forgotten to include scoring goals in his "game-plan" again. * except Annan.

Botterill, McClelland, Brydon, Kilsby, Logan, Ferguson, Cochrane, Connelly, McKechnie, Doherty, Reilly bench: McKay, McGuffie, Mumbongo, Ambrose, Ross, Gibson, Burns, Walker, Green So Efe makes way for Kilsby and Cochrane is back in place of McKay. Good to see Gibson back and Jay Burns on the bench for the first time. Have we signed Green or will this be the last time he can be named as a trialist?

But despite all of that, deep down the supporters still loved him. Apparently. He makes Hewitson seem like Tony Bloom in comparison.

Didn't he refer to some of the Sunderland supporters as "parasites" and say that northerners had no business acumen? https://www.sunderlandecho.com/sport/football/sunderland-afc/you-wont-be-missed-sunderland-fans-delighted-as-charlie-methven-finally-exits-stadium-of-light-3740639

Aye, that's your boy. I seem to recall he left Sunderland under a bit of a cloud and was as toxic to many Sunderland fans as Hewitson is to some Queens supporters. Early days for him at Charlton, but they are presently languishing in their lowest league position - ever. Our community work is something that we are indeed doing well. You rarely hear news about anything happening on the commercial front though, as someone pointed out on here earlier this week. I'm not suggesting for one moment that anything underhand took place but it strikes me as being a trifle unfortunate that the shirt sponsorship draw has been won by businesses owned by club directors three times in the last 20 years. The shirt draw has served us well in it's time, but maybe actively seeking a shirt sponsor directly rather than asking businesses to participate in an annual lottery in the current economic climate may be a better option?

With us having played at least a game more than every other club in the division and a small gap opening up between the top 5 and the rest, I think it's now essential that we win our next four games if we are to entertain any thoughts of a top 4 finish. With less than two thirds of the league season having been completed by all clubs other than ourselves, that's a shocking state of affairs and for me completely sums up just what a shambles this season has been.

I wonder if consideration should be given to selling the naming rights to Palmerston? It may not be a popular course of action, and we could risk ending up with something as tacky as the Cheaper Direct Insurance Stadium, but at least it would help in dragging us out of a financial hole.

Montrose and Alloa winning. Time to bring on a defender.

From over 40 yards out at that! Maybe it was a misplaced pass!

I guess the trialist may be "Green", the keeper* who was on the bench last week? But... he's starting with two forwards and Connelly?! Is this the same Marvin Bartley we've come to know and love? * (ie "the GreenKeeper" - I'll get my coat)

The final paragraph (apart from the AGM) is so defeatist and negative... and annoying. Relying on a freak cup draw or unearthing another Lyndon Dykes every season and blaming losses on those factors suggests incompetent business management to me. Plenty said about pinning hopes on what unexpected income we might have acquired through luck, and a resignation that losses are inevitable, but not a single word on what the board have been or will be doing to attract investment. It's all very "this is where we are and there's nothing we can do about it".

This or 4-4-2. The problem with the way we play is a 4-3-3 rapidly becomes a 4-5-1 due to Bartley's ultra-negative tactics, which is why I'd rather go with 4-4-2. Of course neither will happen. Bartley, as usual, pissed me off in the Hamilton post-match interview when he said he wants to play Kilsby as the left CB in a back three because "that's where he plays for Carlisle in training". Thing is, he's played all season for Annan as a left back in a four in matches and by all accounts is quite good at it. So once again Bartley focusses on training over matches, and persists with a formation that isn't working.

I'm confused. A club formed in 2012 is the second most successful in Scottish top-flight history?! To use the BBC's condescending quote, "even League 2 East Fife" have spent more seasons in the top flight than that lot.

Warnock could clearly learn a lot from Bartley. Probably one of the main reasons he came to Scotland. At least that's what Bartley probably thinks.

Ironically Wenger's philosophy around the time of the invicibles was that, if possible, every pass should be a forward pass. Unnecessary back or sideways passes were frowned upon. Maybe Marvin's been holding the book upside down when looking at the diagrams.