jezobel Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 18 minutes ago, Zbairn said: Giving who shares ? ....no one is getting shares ! Why is the Crunchie stuff embarrassing ? Did anyone state egos with respect to the Navy Blue ? I thouight that there were a few bruised egos on the Board side with the offer. They said they were giving shares On the video. Crunchie stuff is embarrassing because he’s our great pest player and these guys are dragging him through the mud with all the slagging. Fannies. Who are the navy blue anyway Mark cambell wannabes -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 1 minute ago, jezobel said: They said they were giving shares On the video. Crunchie stuff is embarrassing because he’s our great pest player and these guys are dragging him through the mud with all the slagging. Fannies. Who are the navy blue anyway Mark cambell wannabes This is why methylated spirit shouldn’t be readily available to minors. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbairn Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 2 minutes ago, jezobel said: They said they were giving shares On the video. Crunchie stuff is embarrassing because he’s our great pest player and these guys are dragging him through the mud with all the slagging. Fannies. Who are the navy blue anyway Mark cambell wannabes Are you for real ????? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jezobel Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 2 minutes ago, Duncan Freemason said: This is why methylated spirit shouldn’t be readily available to minors. I youd know all about getting minors drunk -8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbairn Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 2 minutes ago, jezobel said: I youd know all about getting minors drunk Your responses are even too stupid to be considered a Board plant ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 1 minute ago, jezobel said: I youd know all about getting minors drunk I could just ridicule you, but you are doing a grand job on your own, so I won’t bother. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PedroMoutinho Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 I also suspect Phil Rawlins may have put a few of the chairmen in the league’s backs up by referring to us being in the ‘seaside league’ -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BooBairn Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 4 hours ago, Back Post Misses said: It was 550k Back tracking... why didn’t you make that correction earlier on? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank von Hell Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 13 hours ago, JulioBairn said: I must’ve missed this. Can you point me in the direction of where this was said? Thanks. You need context - It was suggested by HSW within his great theory about Rawlins devious masterplan of biding his time and buying the club's shares for next to nothing. It's never been said by Rawlins obviously, it's HSW conjecture Anyway , moving on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PedroMoutinho Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 10 minutes ago, Hank von Hell said: You need context - It was suggested by HSW within his great theory about Rawlins devious masterplan of biding his time and buying the club's shares for next to nothing. It's never been said by Rawlins obviously, it's HSW conjecture Anyway , moving on. Phil Rawlins was very clear this evening that they have absolutely no plans to build or develop anything on or around the stadium site. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roman_bairn Posted June 24, 2021 Share Posted June 24, 2021 Not taking sides here but getting a bit fed up with the one sided anti board rhetoric over the ‘free 600k’ that the board apparently turned down and has been castigated for. So to balance things up a bit, can someone explain the following:Why the Navy Blue group would not disclose who all the investors were and meet in total with the board as planned?Why was it being suggested that the board turned down money when no offer was apparently made?Why did the Navy Blue group cancel the planned meeting with the board and withdraw from the proposal?Why is everyone saying that it’s free money when there are conditions attached that the board say that they could not agree to?Maybe when someone gives us some honest, transparent and reasoned answers the rest of us will be in a position to take sides… 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stainrod Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 1 hour ago, PedroMoutinho said: Phil Rawlins was very clear this evening that they have absolutely no plans to build or develop anything on or around the stadium site. So the much vaunted Bog Rd Hilton plan is on the back burner . Tourists worldwide will be Heartbroken ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FFC 1876 Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 I'm late in the day but it took a while for me to piece my way through that. I thought the session on the whole was much better than I anticipated, I felt it actually did help not having it as a live session as it would have turned into a pissing contest and could have easily got out of hand. Any worries that Lewis was going to give them an easy ride were dispelled in the first question asked 'Why did no one resign after last season' I thought he was excellent throughout in what was a very difficult position for a club volunteer to be in. Holt did come across as a bellend but he does so in every single interview and I think it's more his weird sense of humour or attempts at humour that don't help him. Disappointed that we're only going to have 18 signed players of our own as I thought it would be more around the 20 mark especially with only 1 goalkeeper in the squad currently. But exciting to hear Sheerin talking about 3/4 loans already so he clearly has players in mind he'd like to bring in. 2 goalkeepers and 5/6 outfielders on trial currently. 1 goalkeeper, a striker and a versatile defender who can play centre back or right back was the key areas Sheerin felt we needed. Sheerin likes to play a 4-3-3 which sounds interesting considering our only recognised centre midfielders currently are Telfer, Hetherington and Gary Miller. I'm not hanging too much on that as if Sheerin's any good as a manager he should adapt or amend the system to suit the players when he's seen them in a few games. Major disappointment was Holt calling Ben Hall a key player last season. Hopefully it doesn't take Sheerin long to see how shite he is. Also disappointed to hear we have missed out on Paton as he certainly looked promising and at still only 20 you would like to think he would have more than fit into the sellable asset category had he signed and improved this season. Looks as if championship teams aren't being shy with their government 500k hand off last season so it'll be difficult for us to compete with that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FFC 1876 Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 Mutch Williamson Mckay Dixon Mccann Telfer Hetherington Ross Morrison New Mcguffie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDust Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 (edited) Did we really have 27 signed players pre the last transfer window ? I am still of the opinion that Holt was behind our shitfesting 4-5-1 formation at the restart, then when he got gig, I personally think anyone of the street could've done better. We obviously have bought M&Ms silence also That aside, I'll judge Holt on his real job, likewise the Rawlins and this season is the big test. The whole thing was as per the norm, everyone had their answers already set but have to say Lewis threw in a few curve balls that was met with silence, the one particularly aimed at Carrie Sheerin came across A-OK, 4-3-3 sounds interesting but we need a striker in The rest was typical politician answer a question but don't Edited June 25, 2021 by MrDust 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn in Exile Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 It must just be me but I think Sheerin comes across as a weak, mealy-mouthed yes man. Reddie from Pedro incoming. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 6 hours ago, BooBairn said: Back tracking... why didn’t you make that correction earlier on? That figure has been mentioned numerous times on here 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 5 hours ago, roman_bairn said: Not taking sides here but getting a bit fed up with the one sided anti board rhetoric over the ‘free 600k’ that the board apparently turned down and has been castigated for. So to balance things up a bit, can someone explain the following: Why the Navy Blue group would not disclose who all the investors were and meet in total with the board as planned? Why was it being suggested that the board turned down money when no offer was apparently made? Why did the Navy Blue group cancel the planned meeting with the board and withdraw from the proposal? Why is everyone saying that it’s free money when there are conditions attached that the board say that they could not agree to? Maybe when someone gives us some honest, transparent and reasoned answers the rest of us will be in a position to take sides… 1. From the first written communication to the club they knew the 10 names and their backgrounds. The group added one other nearer the end of the process whose name was communicated to the Board. The club never asked “several times” to meet all the group. They asked once which the group agreed to it when the process had made progress. That meeting was arranged however before that it became abundantly clear the Boards position was in the Gary Deans trench so it was pointless to meet. 2. The club absolutely knew the figure on the table. They knew from the initial presentation the figure. They had It in writing and even responded to it in writing trying to charge 20% more initially than the Rawlins paid. For Gordon Colborn to say the club didn’t know the figure from the group is a bit baffling. I assume he is simply playing semantics as the offer was not “formal” in that it didn’t come from a solicitor. But they knew the amount 100%. 3. The meeting was cancelled due to the fact the Board refused to negotiate anything. The only thing in the whole process they conceded was the price of the shares. The group felt the process was going nowhere so pulled out and let the club get on with their business without this distraction. 4. This has been explained numerous times. The group felt the club needed a reboot and a freshening up. The Board didn’t. In the initial presentation however the only thing the group believed had to happen was a removal of the DOF as the expense was not required. The group were bringing in a replacement who was investing therefore giving the club a 100k up. The group conceded that position and said they would work with Holt. Hope this helps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syd Puddefoot Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 (edited) Holts just not a likable person is he, and him being involved with recruitment is a worry. Justifying the January signings and stating Tiffony 'is young as well' when theres a 4 year age gap from tge guys we signed is desperate. stuff Phil Rawlins knows his stuff, think he'll be a big help to the club, by god we need it, cant say the same for others though. Him stating the club was in a mess sums it up. Deans, McFarlane and Colburn done nothing to improve connect between fans and bod. Cant see that changing. A bit if a worry that we're only 2 permanant signings away from our core squad. We need two strikers worth their corn. ''Loanees are a bit of a gamble' doesnt auger well either. We have to get them right. Pleasing to hear Sheerin will play attacking football but just told the whole league our formation before a balls kicked. I wish him well though. Massive season for us, we need to deliver. Edited June 25, 2021 by Syd Puddefoot 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 25, 2021 Share Posted June 25, 2021 I have only listened to bits of it. On the bits I listened to Lewis Connelly did a good job. Sheerin seems a decent likeable guy. That was it for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.