The Queen of the South thread

[QoS_1919]

We should have signed a experienced keeper on loan when Martin got injured  
We are asking a lot of Lieghfield to play so many games.
Lieghfield will be a good keeper when he plays more games but that really should be in the under 20 team.
Do Queens have a goalkeeper coach who can help Lieghfield ?
You can get away with it playing young players outfield but a keeper has  to have experience he can be the difference between you winning and losing games .
 
 
 
 
 
 

He played plenty if games with the 20s. Experience comes with playing at a higher level and he's done fine, maybe not the best at times but he's still learning. The fact leighfield is getting made as a scapegoat for our defensive problems in nonsense.
How many experienced goalkeepers are out there that we could have got on an emergency loan? And if we did bring one in then what would that have done to the young lads confidence. Our manager trusts his players and stuck by the young lads and rightly so.

[NOTS]

8 hours ago, Northfield 53 said:

We should have signed a experienced keeper on loan when Martin got injured  

We are asking a lot of Lieghfield to play so many games.

Lieghfield will be a good keeper when he plays more games but that really should be in the under 20 team.

Do Queens have a goalkeeper coach who can help Lieghfield ?

You can get away with it playing young players outfield but a keeper has  to have experience he can be the difference between you winning and losing games .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Martin is the GK Coach by all accounts.

[Northfield 53]

2 hours ago, NOTS said:

Martin is the GK Coach by all accounts.

We need to get a goalkeeper coach.

Even someone who comes in 2 days a week . 

The goalkeeper is only one problem we need a centre half someone like Mark Durnan who will organise others.

I don't think we could get any better than Naysmith he has a difficult job with the budget he has 

Look at Dunfermline they have double the budget we have we could never attract the likes of Nicky Clark  back to Queens .

In saying that they regularly get over 4000  we are lucky to get just over a 1000. 

Our market is short term loan signing not ideal but that is it.

 

[Steeplechat]

Big Jim Thomson banned from the Queens Arena and needs to inform the club if he wants to attend home games. What’s that all about ?

[kirkyblue2]

There was a thread about JT on Saturday night which was removed, don’t think we can discuss it.

[Steeplechat]

Really sad how things have turned out regarding JT. Somebody still gets her own way despite no longer being an employee

[NOTS]

2 hours ago, Steeplechat said:

Big Jim Thomson banned from the Queens Arena and needs to inform the club if he wants to attend home games. What’s that all about ?
 

Seems all a bit bizarre. I have spoken to JT in recent months at some away fixtures like at Dumbarton, as he stays in Kilsyth and he was more than helpful when organising Testimonial Dinner tickets. A poor way to treat a former club captain.

[19QOS19]

Big Jim Thomson banned from the Queens Arena and needs to inform the club if he wants to attend home games. What’s that all about ?

Utterly embarrassing. It appears that even though he's the one who's been fucked over (pardon the pun) he's still the one who's being made to be the bad one. The sooner the real culprits at our club are gone, the better.

[Steeplechat]

Hearing more & more people saying they won’t be back until the Chairman and his sidekick are away. Really sad situation

[Rjc-1988]

Thats totally the point if the fans believe in what we are doing and are being entertained and seeing signs of hope and progress they will attend. As it is we are going nowhere with the current gaffer and there is a staleness and apathy about the place. We have not beat 1 decent team at home. Naysmiths signings have in the main been wrong. Even when hes got them right he didn't utilise them to their potential. For example Kane was constantly in and out for the majority of his spell, but near the end he finally showed what he could do but by that time he was going anyway. There is certainly far more potential for the club to get way more than around 1000 home fans especially when u consider it was for a "big game" against the future champions St Mirren. Basically Naysmith has to go. We are brutal to watch and are losing money due to fans being driven away. We cant keep relying on the hardcore, we need to get in the floaters who could become regulars, but the only way to do that is to get in a new man in charge. Hopefully someone whos philosophy is to attack and play attractive football. McIntyre or McNamara anyone?

In all our time in the Championship league I have never known such apathy from the local support. Yes we have had to endure some pretty turgid seasons but we have invariably retained a hardcore support of 1400+ and a decent away support. In that time we have actually had some squads that have been a lot poorer than this one so why the lack of interest?

My theory on Football Managers is that if they are going to be any good at this level they start to make an impact pretty quickly - usually within a few months. Even if results are modest you start to get a sense of optimism with a progressive Manager.With GN he has been here for about 16 months now - does anybody honestly feel that he is capable of really making a difference? To me he doesn't seem able to motivate the players and from a tactical perspective it all looks so predictable and lacking in flair and imagination.

It is not easy to find these "game changing" Managers but when you do you can seriously outperform your budget/status - Killie and Livvy are the two best examples at present.

I don't think we will be offering two and a half year managerial contracts in the future - that has left us in a no win situation.

[Monkey Tennis]

6 minutes ago, Rjc-1988 said:

 

In all our time in the Championship league I have never known such apathy from the local support. Yes we have had to endure some pretty turgid seasons but we have invariably retained a hardcore support of 1400+ and a decent away support. In that time we have actually had some squads that have been a lot poorer than this one so why the lack of interest?

My theory on Football Managers is that if they are going to be any good at this level they start to make an impact pretty quickly - usually within a few months. Even if results are modest you start to get a sense of optimism with a progressive Manager.With GN he has been here for about 16 months now - does anybody honestly feel that he is capable of really making a difference? To me he doesn't seem able to motivate the players and from a tactical perspective it all looks so predictable and lacking in flair and imagination.

It is not easy to find these "game changing" Managers but when you do you can seriously outperform your budget/status - Killie and Livvy are the two best examples at present.

I don't think we will be offering two and a half year managerial contracts in the future - that has left us in a no win situation.

 

I really don't understand why we offered such a long contract this time.  The last few had been rolling ones after a year, so why we departed from that in appointing someone with a mediocre record at a lower level, I don't know.

 

I'd add St Mirren to your list of clubs where a managerial change has had a huge impact, although their relative budget will be better than those of the others you mention.  It's a good example of what you're on about though,  because the improvement in results was not immediate, but once underway, it's been incredibly sustained.

[weeredbook]

3 hours ago, kirkyblue2 said:

There was a thread about JT on Saturday night which was removed, don’t think we can discuss it.

Must have had instructions.

[NOTS]

1 hour ago, Steeplechat said:

Hearing more & more people saying they won’t be back until the Chairman and his sidekick are away. Really sad situation

Is the sidekick GN or one of the other directors?

[NOTS]

On looking at Naysmith's managerial performances with East Fife and Queens, here are the up-to-date stats:

East Fife November 2013 to 6 December 2016

130 games in-charge, 50 games Won, 27 games Draws, 53 games Lost. Win Percentage; just under 39%

Queen of the South 6 December 2016 to Present

65 games in-charge, 22 games Won, 20 games Draws, 23 games Lost. Win Percentage; just under 34%

 

[Guest Flash]

27 minutes ago, NOTS said:

On looking at Naysmith's managerial performances with East Fife and Queens, here are the up-to-date stats:

East Fife November 2013 to 6 December 2016

130 games in-charge, 50 games Won, 27 games Draws, 53 games Lost. Win Percentage; just under 39%

Queen of the South 6 December 2016 to Present

65 games in-charge, 22 games Won, 20 games Draws, 23 games Lost. Win Percentage; just under 34%

 

Of the 22 wins, 10 have been against teams who were either lower league or on their way there (6 League 1, 4 League 2). And all but one of them part-time.

Of the remainder, 3 have been against Dumbarton, who are part-time.

That leaves 9 and 3 of those were v St.Mirren and Falkirk when they were terrible. The other 6 were 2 v Morton, 2 v Dundee U, 1 v Livi and 1 v Dunfermline.

 

Edited April 2, 2018 by Flash

[Rjc-1988]

I really don't understand why we offered such a long contract this time.  The last few had been rolling ones after a year, so why we departed from that in appointing someone with a mediocre record at a lower level, I don't know.
 
I'd add St Mirren to your list of clubs where a managerial change has had a huge impact, although their relative budget will be better than those of the others you mention.  It's a good example of what you're on about though,  because the improvement in results was not immediate, but once underway, it's been incredibly sustained.

Agree Jack Ross is a good example - it wasn't that long ago that he was at Alloa and looking for a step up. These progressive types do exist but if you pick the wrong one you need to be able to walk away from the arrangement by only being tied to a one year rolling contract.

In the case of GN he had done nothing at managerial level to warrant anything more than that but I can only assume that he pushed for it.The mistake was not necessarily appointing GN but offering a long term deal. BOD left with a difficult decision to make now - if the drop in spectator interest continues the buy out payment might be the cheaper option.

[Guest Flash]

3 minutes ago, Rjc-1988 said:

 

Agree Jack Ross is a good example - it wasn't that long ago that he was at Alloa and looking for a step up. These progressive types do exist but if you pick the wrong one you need to be able to walk away from the arrangement by only being tied to a one year rolling contract.

In the case of GN he had done nothing at managerial level to warrant anything more than that but I can only assume that he pushed for it.The mistake was not necessarily appointing GN but offering a long term deal. BOD left with a difficult decision to make now - if the drop in spectator interest continues the buy out payment might be the cheaper option.

 

The decision at the end of the season will be the same as it would have been if he had been on a one year rolling contract. 

[Monkey Tennis]

7 minutes ago, Rjc-1988 said:

 

Agree Jack Ross is a good example - it wasn't that long ago that he was at Alloa and looking for a step up. These progressive types do exist but if you pick the wrong one you need to be able to walk away from the arrangement by only being tied to a one year rolling contract.

In the case of GN he had done nothing at managerial level to warrant anything more than that but I can only assume that he pushed for it.The mistake was not necessarily appointing GN but offering a long term deal. BOD left with a difficult decision to make now - if the drop in spectator interest continues the buy out payment might be the cheaper option.

 

It might prove in time to be the cheaper option, but the difficulty is that of course there's no way of knowing that in advance.  

I really don't rate GN or think he's been a good appointment at all.  However, we're staying up and probably finishing somewhere close to where our budget indicates we should.  Getting rid carries no guarantees whatever of a boost to gates.  I tend to think tbh that any direct impact there is likely to be minimal. 

We've changed once or twice lately when there was no absolute obligation to do so and it's hard to argue that it's worked.  I can't for the life of me see a change of manager coming anytime soon.

[Weewull]

surely everyone knows who the chairman’s side kick is?

[Northfield 53]

1 hour ago, Rjc-1988 said:

 

Agree Jack Ross is a good example - it wasn't that long ago that he was at Alloa and looking for a step up. These progressive types do exist but if you pick the wrong one you need to be able to walk away from the arrangement by only being tied to a one year rolling contract.

In the case of GN he had done nothing at managerial level to warrant anything more than that but I can only assume that he pushed for it.The mistake was not necessarily appointing GN but offering a long term deal. BOD left with a difficult decision to make now - if the drop in spectator interest continues the buy out payment might be the cheaper option.

 

Can't compare Jack Ross to Gary Naysmith .

Ross is at a massive club compared to Queens.

Ross like most of the club's in the Championship  will have 3 times the budget Naysmith has .

Never going to happen but would Jack Ross do a better job at Queens than Gary Naysmith with the budget he has to work with ..

James Fowler never did a better job than Naysmith he must be amazed at how much Ross has to spend compared to what he had at Queens . ..

Huge costly gamble to get rid of Naysmith could we attract someone better last time on the shortlist was Iain Durrant and Barry Ferguson  are they better than Naysmith