The West Stand Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Could be wrong but with Willie gone does that only leave one CM in Moon? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhliston Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 23 minutes ago, The West Stand said: Could be wrong but with Willie gone does that only leave one CM in Moon? Yes but Danny Jardine could fill in that role if push comes to shove, just hope we have replacements in for the start of the League season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WattersIsGod Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 12 hours ago, King Crownest said: s it as stupid as borrowing £600K you don’t need, handing your club over to someone who’s never run one before and giving them the power to dump the corpse and walk away scot-free? We keep being told this bid is the dogs and it’s going to revolutionise Scottish football. But bearing in mind what happened to Gretna I think it’s perfectly reasonable to point out that, as part of the contract, the consortium will able to saddle the club with debt but are not offering personal guarantees that their actions won’t end with Stirling Albion in liquidation. John Neill has plenty of folk willing to shout loud on his behalf but none of them are willing to put their money where their mouth is either. Montrose and Stenny got promotion last season with, at a guess, a playing budget about half the size of SAFC’s. Meanwhile Albion Rovers blew money they didn’t have and ended up relegated and are now having to fill their squad with Alloa's teenage off-cuts. So, looking about you at the evidence, why would you think borrowing a stack of cash is the way to go? This summer should have seen the club and the trust helping Dave Mackay hold a post mortem to get the bottom of why smaller clubs with less money have succeeded where we’ve failed instead of squabbling over some bloke's magic beans. It isn't a bad point you are making. I struggle to see what a club of this size needs 600k for and even more struggle to see how it could ever pay back the loan. the problem being that even if it was used to enhance the squad and possibly gain promotion, there is no guarantee that this will bring increased revenues. in fact, getting promoted could well see player costs go up further without an associated increase in gate receipts to cover it. we've been higher in the league structure than this before and gates didn't increase substantially. For me, it's all backwards. You begin with a vision of where you would like to get to, develop a business plan and cost/benefit analysis of how you might get there and then you start working out the costs of it and how it will be funded. You don't borrow 600k and then decide what to spend it on........... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 With Robertson quitting it makes me wonder why we got rid of Andy Black? Need two centre midfielders now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The West Stand Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 With Robertson quitting it makes me wonder why we got rid of Andy Black? Need two centre midfielders now. More that 2 imo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BinosCammy Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 If we are playing the 4 3 3 then at least 3 midfielders, with one of them being a defensive minded player 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 If we are playing the 4 3 3 then at least 3 midfielders, with one of them being a defensive minded playerI imagine thats how we will play. Jardine getting forward and Moon and whoever we get as a replacement covering defensively. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawfield shed boy Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Scott McLaughlin. CM. Training with a view to signing. He ll give you 100% thats all i can add 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB_Bino Posted July 12, 2018 Author Share Posted July 12, 2018 Scott McLaughlin. CM. Training with a view to signing. He ll give you 100% thats all i can add No he’s not, he’s signed for Edusport. Nice try though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 No he’s not, he’s signed for Edusport. Nice try though.Clyde fans have been hitting out with this patter for years, its quite concerning that they genuinely find it funny... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BinosCammy Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 Dominic Docherty signed, ex Queens Park player, a midfielder 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 The Consortium have decided to pull out because of the actions of certain dinosaurs connected with the club. Absolutely raging at this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhliston Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 5 hours ago, JakeSAFC said: The Consortium have decided to pull out because of the actions of certain dinosaurs connected with the club. Absolutely raging at this. Well if supporters are not happy about this and are members of the Supporters Trust then their is nothing to stop them proposing a motion to remove John Hunter and his associates from the Club Board should they desire. The Trust are the major shareholders in the Club and as such can remove Directors should they feel the need to do so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The West Stand Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 Mcgeachie new captain 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB_Bino Posted July 14, 2018 Author Share Posted July 14, 2018 Not to downbeat tonight (about actions on the pitch), I think the lads can be proud of their display, despite the scoreline looking like we took a battering.The team didn’t look out of place during the whole first half, but the lad Moussa managed to outmuscle our Defender (may have been Marr) to score. When the Second Half kicked off, they managed to up a few gears, and brush us away. They were efficient without being brilliant. Once the 4th went in, the match became like a pre-season friendly in truth.Quite a few standouts form me and when you consider that we were without 3 of our first picks (Barr, Allan & Smith were all out) then we looked decent if we can keep these standards up throughout the season.I worry that we lack physicality and I also fell that our delivery from the wide areas was pretty poor, but if Davie Mackay has already spoken about signing a winger and maybe Smith and Allan would also help with this.I thought Danny Jardine was the main man today and he’s going to be a huge player for us this season. Kevin Moon snapped and bit in the middle of the park and looked sharper than last season, Marr & Hamilton looked solid at the back, but couldn’t deal with Moussa’s physicality. McGeachie was his usual self Defensively but struggled to get the ball into the box at the other side. Young Thomson looked out of his depth, but it’s a big ask for the lad and I felt he did ok to show that he has talents to work with, certainly better than Noble. Talking of youngsters, Kyle Banner continues to do well when asked to play. He had a few moments on the ball where he looked indecisive, but I like the lad and there is no reason why he can’t be the next McGeachie or Hamilton.Peaso worked hard up front but plays for the Free Kicks all too often for my liking, he also had a moment where he could have scored but crossed the ball to.....well, no one. Mark Stewart impressed me though and could be a really good signing with his positive running and work rate.So by and large a good day, yeah it’s never good to lose, but lots of positives to take from the 90 minutes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 Well if supporters are not happy about this and are members of the Supporters Trust then their is nothing to stop them proposing a motion to remove John Hunter and his associates from the Club Board should they desire. The Trust are the major shareholders in the Club and as such can remove Directors should they feel the need to do so. If we do, here’s hoping we actually get to vote this time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headthebaw Posted July 14, 2018 Share Posted July 14, 2018 We desperately need a centre forward 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeSAFC Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 We desperately need a centre forwardNot seen us this season but on paper I would agree. Also need a midfielder on paper. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Watch Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 On 14/07/2018 at 12:59, JakeSAFC said: The Consortium have decided to pull out because of the actions of certain dinosaurs connected with the club. Absolutely raging at this. Why should you be raging? The withdrawal is a cause for celebration. In this thread, King Crownest has capably set out the pitfalls he sees in the consortium paper and need no further embellishment from me. I can add, however, that I had a lawyer friend of mine who specialises in business acquisitions look at the details of the consortium bid and she said that she would recommend any client not to touch it with a barge pole. She felt that its terms were weighted too heavily in favour of the bidder with little or no guarantees of SAFC emerging unscathed in the event that the bidders walked away. In other words, the club would be left impotent to handle any adverse financial situation should the bidders decide to decamp. She also pointed out, rightly, that the new regime the Club could, in effect, be run as the personal plaything of the two bidders with no influence being allowed from any supporters’ representatives (the Trust). So if the supporters considered that the two incumbents were not acting in the best interests of the Club there was absolutely nothing they could do about it – they would have to suffer in silence and watch the Club deteriorate – and worse. Neither would it be possible for any SAFC shareholder to be able to intervene What is astonishing is the sight of a hard core of so-called supporters who have been beguiled by the utterances of two people – jumping up and down in frustration and swearing vengeance upon a group of scapegoats who arguably had no bearing upon the consortium’s withdrawal from the stage. The consortium for its part has chosen to suggest that there has been false reporting and commenting in the media without actually attempting to substantiate such allegations. It has also referred to “constant stalling and creating barriers to allow a vote to take place” again without any evidence being offered in support. If there has been stalling and barriers created this surely can only have come from one or two (or both) parties – the Club Executive or the Trust Board. Since there are only six members on the Club Executive and three of those are Stuart Brown and his two regular supporters (with the former having a casting vote). Are the two consortium bidders pointing an accusing finger at Mr Brown – who knows? More likely that the Trust Board is in the sights of the consortium. As I understand it, the Trust Board has seven members most of whom are unknown to me. It is now well over 24 hours since the consortium withdrew. So far, not a peep out of the Trust Board about the consortium’s withdrawal statement or how it intends to respond to it. No emails, no website announcement, nothing, absolutely NADA. An utter shambles of the first order. Likewise, no statement from the Club Executive. Its silence is inexcusable. Could someone tell me why the Trust Board failed to organise a postal ballot on the consortium’s offer immediately after the meeting with Messrs Rowley and Neil which I attended on 27th June? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quentin Taranbino Posted July 15, 2018 Share Posted July 15, 2018 23 minutes ago, Red Watch said: Could someone tell me why the Trust Board failed to organise a postal ballot on the consortium’s offer immediately after the meeting with Messrs Rowley and Neil which I attended on 27th June? I disagree with majority of your post but the part that is quoted I am also keen to understand. The trust hadn't set a date for the vote, is this because legal checks were ongoing? Is it because people were on holiday? Is it something else? I'm not blaming the trust but I am keen to know whether a vote was intended, whether a date had been set or whether they had delayed it for X reasons? 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.