Tom Hosie
-
Posts
949 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Tom Hosie
-
-
Two goals in his last 4 Thistle appearances from Alex Jakubiak, and a goal every 7 minutes of his second spell. The stats of a legend.
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:
Not much of a menu, but the bevvy’s cheap.
True. I'd be buggered. I don't like fish.
-
1 hour ago, Alb said:
Can we least get him till easter
Should be able to help with catering too.
-
4
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Third Lanark said:
Strange you make no comment about someone guessing what the wages are based on google.
Its been mentioned by several jags fans on different pages - maybe they are making it up but no worse a source than believing everything on google.
I also tend to take into consideration McLymonts comments about Dools being given a promotion winning budget
Why do you find it strange? Stranger than, say, saying that unless you have direct discussion about a player's wage then it would be difficult to know what they earned, and then providing figures for the wages of two players?
Aside from the impact it has on the overall sustainability of the football club I have no interest in speculation as to what any individual at the football club earns. It's none of my business. It's a private matter, or it should be, between employer and employee.
-
24 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:
I think most players (not all) will be on a lot more than that.
It had been mentioned that Milne was on £1000 a week and sayers by several people on £1500 a week which Milne was not happy with.
Theres no way McLymont would say a promotion winning budget and then pay players £700 a week. Unless you have individual discussions with the players I can’t see how it’s easy to know what they are on.
To give Doolan credit and I doubt guys like McCall or Campbell would have done this, he admitted at the AGM that he made a number of mistakes this season including with the budget etc
Yet you seem to know not just what two players were on, but also that one of them was unhappy about the wage the other was receiving.
Odd.
I kind of go with the line that anyone who did know what someone was earning wouldn't post that detail online.
Everything else is just guesswork.
-
1
-
-
I’m at a loss trying to figure out why an organisation which represents a sizeable number of Partick Thistle supporters, which contributes an annual six figure sum to the Club in addition to supporting financially the Partick Thistle Academy and Partick Thistle WFC shouldn’t have influence and representation commensurate with that financial commitment and size of membership.
It also happens to be a democratic, members’ organisation. Which means if you are unhappy in how it is operating then there is recourse available.
It’s also probably worth emphasising, again, for the benefit of clarity a few things.
The Jags Foundation is a trustee, alongside The Jags Trust, of the PTFC Trust the vehicle with which sits the majority shareholding in Partick Thistle Football Club.
If you are:
- A member of the Jags Foundation
- A member of The Jags Trust
- A Season Ticket holder
- 71 Club Member
You are a beneficiary of that majority shareholding.
In being a beneficiary you are entitled to:
- Participate in the vote (or stand yourself) of two representatives of the above to the Club Board. To emphasise, those two representatives are not restricted to solely members of The Jags Foundation.
- Participate in any beneficiary vote that may be required. We saw one such instance very recently with the Tranche Two vote.
To summarise then, The Jags Foundation does not elect the Board of Partick Thistle Football Club.
What it does currently have, in addition to the two fan representatives on the Club Board, is the ability to nominate one of their elected reps to sit on the Board, and currently that is an option that they are utilising.
You can argue that an additional, solely TJF rep, on the Club Board isn’t necessary, and I offer no view one way or the other, but that is something that the membership can change if they so wish to do so. That’s exactly how it should work.
It’s perfectly valid to express concern about how the Fan Ownership model is working. It’s no more exempt from scrutiny and criticism than any other ownership model. What it does provide though is influence into how the ownership model works and an ability to shape the future direction of a fan owned Partick Thistle in addition to the built in protections that come with being fan owned. It’s still very much in its infancy, and it will grow and evolve over time. To my layman’s eyes the Club -Trust agreement looks robust and the level of transparency and consultation re the Tranche Two was exemplary.
-
2
-
4 hours ago, JAG1970 said:
Agree that appointing the right manager is the hardest job, but you appear to be saying Bertie Auld’s appointment didn’t work?
Not at all. It's badly phrased. I'm saying Caldwell was the riskest appointment from recent history and going further back Cormack and Auld were also risky appointments. Caldwell didn't work. Cormack didn't. Auld emphatically did.
-
1
-
-
What has tended to happen when there has been a managerial vacancy is that the senior pro, or pros when it was Gerry Britton and Derek Whyte, are given the job an interim basis.
I forget the length of that interim basis for Britton and Whyte (or indeed if there was any notable uptick in results/performances - it could scarcely have got worse to be fair) but McNamara and Archibald were in temporary charge for not inconsiderable periods, Doolan for approximately a month. All three did well during that interim basis. Archibald fantastically well,
It's not a perfect approach by any means, not least as you are unlikely to have a transfer window while in temporary charge and it isn't 'their' players that they are working with, but it does give you a better gauge of how someone in their first managerial role is going to perform than a simple interview would. It's almost like an extended job interview.
Appointing a manager is probably the most important thing to get right for a club, but also almost certainly the hardest thing to get right. They are so many variables to consider that it is no real shock that clubs often appear to take the safest option. From a Thistle perspective the riskiest appointment was Caldwell, going further back Peter Cormack maybe even Bertie Auld immediately before him, and that clearly didn't work.
-
At 2-1 up I felt that we would need at least one more to get something from the game.
The first penalty is a clear penalty. No complaints at all.
First yellow for BG soft. The second incredibly so. The kind of foul you see every game, the kind of foul that 999 times out of 1000 doesn't see a yellow card given. Indeed Turner committed a near identical foul on 90 mins and wasn't booked. Simple foul, free kick and get on with the game. It was the haste, dare I say desire, that Hardie had to get the second yellow out for Brian that especially annoyed me.
Second pen, sometimes these go for you, sometimes against. It hits his hand but at pace and at a short distance. It's a tough call. I'd want it. I'd be annoyed, as I was, if it was awarded against us
Falkirk are a good side. We may have lost 11v11 in any case but the red card is a pivotal, game changing, moment.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, dl1971 said:
Jesus C. Graham has chucked the team under the bus!
He absolutely hasn't.
Second yellow was as soft as they come.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Lambies Lost Doo said:
Surely there is a point where your body is screaming at you to leave a sporting event before hospitalisation.
Depends on the score.
-
1
-
-
This scenario is, of course, a complete figment of my imagination and definitely hasn't happened, nor will happen.
Nameless local ref turns up at lunchtime, pockets his pitch inspection fee, takes a cursory look at the pitch, shrugs his shoulders and goes 'looks okay to me' because as it isn't ultimately down to him whether the game is on or off he doesn't care one way or the other.
The actual match officials turn up circa 6pm. As they are the ones directly in the firing line if someone picks up a serious injury, live on TV, due to the pitch they quite properly take a long look at the surface. Examine in detail any potential 'problem' spots.
Deciding to be cautious they decide it isn't worth the risk and circa 60 minutes before kick-off they call the game off pissing everyone off.
I'm sure none of the above will actually happen tonight.
-
Just now, lady-isobel-barnett said:
KO the mens match at 1.30pm and make it doubler!
🙂
That would work for me!
-
Just now, fifexile said:
Forecast is for -5°C pretty much all day. Sunday looks like 6°C at 3pm. Move the game to Sunday?
There is a SWPL fixture on Sunday, ironically enough involving Thistle and live on the TV, at 4:10pm at Hamilton.
-
1
-
-
Brian Graham's tally for Partick Thistle stands at 92.
There is some confusion surrounding two goals.
The referee's report* gives him the 1st goal in the 3-3 draw at ICT (meaning he officially bagged a hat-trick that evening) while most sources at the time, including myself, credited it as an own goal. As far as official records go though it's Brian Graham's goal.
Some sources credit him with the equaliser in the 2-2 draw at East Fife during the Covid season when the final touch actually came from Scott Tiffoney.
In some places his tally is 91, in others 93 but the accurate figure is 92.
Brian meantime is claiming 192!
*In much the same way that the referee's report gives the disputed goal at Edinburgh City this season to Dan O'Reilly and not Wasiri Williams.
-
Left Petershill at 7:45am.
Passed inspection at 9am.
Arrived Cove at 11am.
Game off at noon.
Expensive and ultimately pointless afternoon.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
TJF = PTFC there Club - there Rules - There Board - let them get on with it
Lets see how it works out - They Got the £1MN - now every single decision etc is on TJF
The Board are Hand Picked by them - they carry out TJF Orders & Strategy
So TJF are 100% responsible for all aspects of Key Decisions at PTFC
As for Elections - so If I'm not happy with the Government & I didn't stand for Election - does this remove my right to comment
I'm not a member of TJF or any other Trust
I am however a Club Shareholder - Albeit as WJ has pointed out on numerous occasions - my Shareholding is irrelevant - but I can go to the Club AGM - ask the Questions TJF used to ask & hold the Board to Account ( that's called Capitalism 🙂) and the Board are still answerable to there Shareholders - even irrelevant ones
⬆️Has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted and much, if not most, of it is with the greatest respect just nonsense.
Your comment about the removal of your "right to comment" is particuarly absurd as nobody is remotely suggesting that.
Were TJF actually 100% responsible "for all aspects of Key Decisions at PTFC" then as a members' organisation there exists a process to influence the agenda that TJF would be setting. That really shouldn't be difficult to grasp. It's up to each individual to decide how, or if, they wish to engage with that process.
PS I've absolutely no interest in your personal shareholding or whether anyone thinks it irrelevant or not.
-
This might be crazy, but I wonder if there is any way in which you could shape the direction of a democratic members' organisation?
I'm think something along the lines of, this might even have been tried before, where people are given a bit of paper (maybe even electronically - I'm no luddite) with some options on it and they, the members, get to choose which option they prefer. I think it's called voting.
There's even a mechanism, I believe, whereby you can offer yourself as an option. I think they are called elections.
-
5 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
OK Tom - No probs
You accuse me of obfuscation - but when I point out there isn't any other realistic option on the Ballot Paper beyond - Vote for Tranche 2 or Go Bust - you don't answer
Welcome to Democracy - TJF Style
Sorry, I thought you were making a joke.
-
14 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
What other options are people being given rather than Vote to agree it
Vote to not accept tranche 2?
It is pretty much a binary choice.
You are claiming that this was a "done deal" 9 months ago.
I'm making no comment on the financial position of Partick Thistle. I'm making no comment on the budgets that have been set. I'm making no comment on the Board of Partick Thistle, or the board of The Jags Foundation (I'm not even a member).
I merely trying to get you grasp the very simple premise that no democratic members' (or in this case beneficiaries) ballot is a "done deal" until the members have actually cast their votes.
That's as true of this ballot as it is of any ballot.
-
47 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
The fact that the Board have admitted that
a) They based there forecasted losses of £280K on the assumption of Tranche 2 going through
b) That they had No Plan B for it not going through
c) That TJF were fully aware of this as long ago as May ( and there Board Rep Longer )
d) That there was only options being put forward are Vote Tranche 2 - OR we will struggle to pay our Debtors on the Ballot Paper ( & TJF are supporting this )
So there was never at any point either from the Board nor TJF that Tranche 2 was not happening ( otherwise they would have had alternative proposals for there members to Vote on )
When you only have in effect one option on the Ballot Paper I would argue its "arrogant and contemptuous" of your membership
When the only options are Vote Yes - or we struggle to pay our Debtors - would you call that a fair Voting Option ?
Every action has been based on Tranche 2 being agreed ( without proper debate of any alternatives being put forwards )
I'm sure it will get 99.9% approval
I knew you wouldn't answer the question(s).
You obfuscate, either through a lack of understanding or something more wilful.
Tell me how this vote, how any vote, is a "done deal" when the ballot hasn't been completed?
Being able to anticipate the likely outcome of a ballot isn't evidence of collusion or misdirection.
In this specific instance, tranche 2 won't be approved if a majority of beneficiaries vote not to approve it.
It really is that simple.
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:
I have said for circa 9 Months that Tranche 2 was a done deal & that the Voting & Fan Consultation was a facade
Let's lay aside for a few minutes any debate on the merits of tranche 2.
Lets lay aside for a few minutes any debate on the value of fan ownership.
Let's take it down a level or two even and lay aside any debate on the performance of the PTFC Trust trustees and the performance of the Jags Foundation Board.
Please explain to me how something that is subject to a vote of the membership is a "done deal" ahead of that vote?
How is anything a "done deal" 9 months before a vote is cast?
Are you suggesting that should the vote be in favour of tranche 2 that those that voted Yes would have somehow been hoodwinked? That those that voted Yes weren't able to make an informed opinion on their own? That only those that offered some form of dissent had any form of insight? is everyone else just gullible?
That's arrogant and contemptuous of anyone that doesn't quite see things the same way you do.
-
2
-
-
Just in from the meeting.
Not going to give a blow by blow account, just an overview of the vibe I came away with.
There was a presentation to start proceedings which I found useful and informarive.
The questions received in advance and asked from the floor were largely excellent covering a wide range of subjects. The Board got no easy ride.
Answers similarly were broadly good. I may not always hwvr agreed 100% with the substance of the answers but I didn't get any sense of a lack of transparency from the collective Board.
I was most impressed though with Donald McClymont. Prior to tonight he was just a name and it was good to add some substance to that. He came across impressively IMO and more importantly, he was credible.
I was inclined to vote Yes before tonight. There was nothing about tonight that would prompt me to change that.
Btw the show was stolen by @Woodstock Jag's cat. Watch the video if only for that.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, dl1971 said:
If we gave 100 chimpanzees a typewriter and 100 years, would they eventually stop repeating themselves? Asking for a friend.
No.
The whole 'give a monkey an infinite amount of time and a keyboard and they will type the complete works of Shakespeare' theory has actually be debunked.
The thinking goes that for a monkey to type the complete works of Shakespeare he, or she, would require a time period longer than the lifetime of the universe to do so. Therefore there is only a finite time for our chimp pal to complete his, or her, task.
Personally I suspect the only reason why our simian friend would undertake such a task would be to avoid reading this thread which will almost certainly have the same post being made time and time again right up to end of the lifetime of the universe.
-
2
-
New Manager Thread
in Main Jags forum
Posted
Ferguson had long since left St Mirren when they qualified for European competition for the first time.