The Queen of the South thread

[Riviera711]

bcd, the big coincidence draw.

I'm sure that everything was above board and that he probably bought most tickets but it still doesn't look good.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Riviera711
clarification

[peternapper]

Maybe have to avoid the half time draw when we visit Palmerston if they use the old hot ball trick 

 

[Monkey Tennis]

I would genuinely be pretty certain that this has not been any sort of fix.

Christ though, it's a bad result.

[the_palmy_pie]

8 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I would genuinely be pretty certain that this has not been any sort of fix.

Christ though, it's a bad result.

The draw was live on Facebook and drawn by Wullie Gibson. 

[Monkey Tennis]

3 minutes ago, the_palmy_pie said:

The draw was live on Facebook and drawn by Wullie Gibson. 

Yes, as I said I'm genuinely sure the process will have been entirely above board.

It's really not a great outcome though.

[Cardle is Magic]

Why was the chairman's company even an option?

[qos_75]

1 hour ago, Cardle is Magic said:

Why was the chairman's company even an option?

Well he bought a ticket I suppose.

That said, I would have expected him to have offered to redraw, that tends to be the normal procedure in similar draws.

Maybe he will have a rethink and  arrive at the correct decision over the next few days.

I have been critical of him over the past few years so maybe he will prove me wrong and do the right thing this time. 

[Riviera711]

With respect to declining the prize, I suppose it depends on how much money he put into the draw. As far as I know there isn't a limit to how many tickets you can buy. He may have bought several/loads of tickets and so contributed a significant proportion of the sponsorship raised.

I can imagine that at some local money raising event where someone bought 20 tickets and most other people bought 1 or 2, then you'd be reluctant to say redraw it. Maybe once you'd won a prize, then subsequent wins would be redrawn. However, of course, there was only one prize.

I know it still doesn't look good but just playing devil's advocate!

[Monkey Tennis]

39 minutes ago, Riviera711 said:

With respect to declining the prize, I suppose it depends on how much money he put into the draw. As far as I know there isn't a limit to how many tickets you can buy. He may have bought several/loads of tickets and so contributed a significant proportion of the sponsorship raised.

I can imagine that at some local money raising event where someone bought 20 tickets and most other people bought 1 or 2, then you'd be reluctant to say redraw it. Maybe once you'd won a prize, then subsequent wins would be redrawn. However, of course, there was only one prize.

I know it still docesn't look good but just playing devil's advocate!

All true.

It's probably the case too that multiple tickets have been purchased over each of the many, many years now,  that a draw has been done for the shirt sponsor.

It would be hard to argue that he's not 'entitled' to win this prize.  He did enter the competition fair and square.

The optics are not good though.  It's not a great outcome for the club.

[19QOS19]

It must be just me who's more concerned by the fact BCD's logo is boring as shit and will potentially result in a boring looking top [emoji38]

[die hard doonhamer]

I have to say, I really couldn’t care. The chairman puts his money in just like everyone else, he’s absolutely fairly entitled to claim the prize. 

[Kunter]

If he keeps the shirt it just shows the guy has no morals. 

 

 

[DeeGeeOneHamer]

The state of some of the takes on here about the shirt draw.

 

We want your money, but you can't have your name on the shirt.  Classy.

[Fae_the_'briggs]

I know there's a commercial aspect to replica shirts but I couldn't care less if we wore Rab C Nesbitt string vests as long as we won games. I don't remember any outcry when the Chairman's company(ies) were featured on electronic pitch side advertising during televised games from Palmerston, he's paid his money, he's entitled to the prize. He's got as much right to advertise his business as the next person. I'm sure if we'd been flying high and everything was rosy there wouldn't have been this outcry, it's a lot of fuss over nothing imo. 

[vikingTON]

24 minutes ago, DeeGeeOneHamer said:

The state of some of the takes on here about the shirt draw.

 

We want your money, but you can't have your name on the shirt.  Classy.

Perhaps they don't want the 'chairman's money', given that your accounts apparently have a healthy cash surplus, and your chairman has just helped drive your club into the abyss of the seaside leagues to battle it out with Kelty, Falkirk et. al. 

A chairman of a football club has every right to promote his company if they pay their way through the normal process. That's why Morton's shirts were sponsored by our chairman's various sweet brands for nearly 20 years. 

To run a raffle under the premise of giving smaller companies a chance to win the prize - so presumably they'd be expected to either pay less or nothing at all for sponsorship, after buying their ticket - only for the chairman's company to conveniently win anyway is a very bad look. 

For it to happen in the same week in which you got relegated is a masterclass in terrible PR. 

[Guest Flash]

6 minutes ago, Fae_the_'briggs said:

I know there's a commercial aspect to replica shirts but I couldn't care less if we wore Rab C Nesbitt string vests as long as we won games. I don't remember any outcry when the Chairman's company(ies) were featured on electronic pitch side advertising during televised games from Palmerston, he's paid his money, he's entitled to the prize. He's got as much right to advertise his business as the next person. I'm sure if we'd been flying high and everything was rosy there wouldn't have been this outcry, it's a lot of fuss over nothing imo. 

The difference between this and the pitch side advertising is that he will have paid the full amount to advertise on tv. The shirt draw provides (presumably) thousands of pounds worth of advertising for a few hundred. So, the chairman of the club is getting a benefit. There is nothing inherently wrong with accepting the benefit. But the chairmen/women of most clubs would normally pay the full commercial amount for shirt advertising so that the club benefits at least as much as they do. Perhaps they might even pay over the odds.
It is not a good look for the chairman to accept a reward, especially after the shitshow of a season we’ve just had. 

[the_palmy_pie]

I totally get the argument he’s paid his money and it’s not his problem one of his companies was drawn out but I still think he should of asked for his prize to be redrawn just like fellow director Craig Patterson did last year when his account company won a prize. 

[Fae_the_'briggs]

1 hour ago, Flash said:

The difference between this and the pitch side advertising is that he will have paid the full amount to advertise on tv. The shirt draw provides (presumably) thousands of pounds worth of advertising for a few hundred. So, the chairman of the club is getting a benefit. There is nothing inherently wrong with accepting the benefit. But the chairmen/women of most clubs would normally pay the full commercial amount for shirt advertising so that the club benefits at least as much as they do. Perhaps they might even pay over the odds.
It is not a good look for the chairman to accept a reward, especially after the shitshow of a season we’ve just had. 

How many Club Chairpersons did you poll to come to the conclusion that most would pay the full commercial price for shirt sponsorship. Your last sentence sums the problem up, it's only become a problem because it's been a terrible season yet what he paid and what he gets out of it will be the same as a good season. Actually that's not quite right, there will be reduced media coverage, no live Friday night games on TV, etc, in League 1 so he's not getting the same exposure. 

[Greenacres]

2 hours ago, Fae_the_'briggs said:

I know there's a commercial aspect to replica shirts but I couldn't care less if we wore Rab C Nesbitt string vests as long as we won games. I don't remember any outcry when the Chairman's company(ies) were featured on electronic pitch side advertising during televised games from Palmerston, he's paid his money, he's entitled to the prize. He's got as much right to advertise his business as the next person. I'm sure if we'd been flying high and everything was rosy there wouldn't have been this outcry, it's a lot of fuss over nothing imo. 

Think every small thing   just now is getting looked at  because of our relegation. 

Some fans seem to blame Billy for everything this will just make it worse another thing to complain about .

For me I I could not care what is on the shirts I am more bothered about the quality of player that will play for us next season .

 

[DeeGeeOneHamer]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

Perhaps they don't want the 'chairman's money', given that your accounts apparently have a healthy cash surplus, and your chairman has just helped drive your club into the abyss of the seaside leagues to battle it out with Kelty, Falkirk et. al. 

A chairman of a football club has every right to promote his company if they pay their way through the normal process. That's why Morton's shirts were sponsored by our chairman's various sweet brands for nearly 20 years. 

To run a raffle under the premise of giving smaller companies a chance to win the prize - so presumably they'd be expected to either pay less or nothing at all for sponsorship, after buying their ticket - only for the chairman's company to conveniently win anyway is a very bad look. 

For it to happen in the same week in which you got relegated is a masterclass in terrible PR. 

Football club gets relegated, hardly anything new, it's known risk to every side, every season.  That's football.

Buy a shirt sponsor raffle ticket, win the first prize, it's the known prize and has been for umpteen years.  It's not as if this is the first draw and his company won, or his company has won every year since it's inception.