Jump to content

Hopeless Unbeliever

Members
  • Content Count

    289
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

83 Neutral

2 Followers

About Hopeless Unbeliever

  • Rank
    Jags fan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm keen not to wade into the due diligence debate in great detail as I think there's good points on either side, but one thing I would note is that TJF are (hopefully!) taking on the role of majority shareholder in PTFC. It is not the role of shareholders to have a business plan in place, nor is it the role of shareholders to have a plan to address any 'black hole' in the club's finances. That's the role of the existing Board of Directors of PTFC and will continue to be so after the transfer of ownership of the shares. I confess I haven't taken as close an interest as I should have to date in TJF's progress or why it stalled the first time around although clearly this seems to have been primarily driven by the club. Is our understanding that it failed largely around the due diligence debate? Reading the statements from PTFC/3BC does not leave much of a road back for TJF. While I think there are questions remaining around TJF's mandate given the relatively disappointing membership numbers so far, it's difficult to see how 3BC can possibly come up with an alternative with a stronger mandate.
  2. Bannigan's issue is he needs able and willing runners, give him runners and he will find them over and over. He also retains possession exceptionally well. I saw mention on here that Docherty is a better passer which is outrageous. He's better at quite a few things but passing is absolutely not one of them. Our issue this season is that our team has no discernible shape. We have Tiffoney on one wing who wants the ball into feet (understandably) and given the chance to go one on one with the full back. Without a marauding left back/left sided midfielder though he is always going to get doubled up on, even more so when we don't have any viable alternative on the opposite side of the pitch. Compare Bannigan's frontline in 12/13 when he had Erskine, Lawless and Doolan constantly moving and creating space, with ATS and O'Donnell supporting and taking advantage of that space. This season we've (typically) had Foster and McKenna as full backs, with Tiffoney/Graham/Smith up front (Rudden was the one guy who really moved to make space). He also has a midfield that is not especially mobile going forward, particularly in terms of providing width. I do think he has regressed in the defensive side of his game a little in recent years but that's probably understandable. I think if McCall can get the shape right next season, and the indications so far are he sees us going forward with a 3-5-2, that there is still a central role for Bannigan to play.
  3. The original letter, which many fans supported, called for change and said that it wanted to ensure that the best possible people came forward to fulfill the board roles in TJF. Of the 700 or so people who have now signed the letter, the 7 put forward under the Jags for Change banner were all original signatories of the letter. It feels a bit clumsy and to use it as a mandate for your election prospects seems slightly disingenuous given that the original letter made no mention of any of the original signatories standing. These are minor points in the grand scheme of things however and I think a lot of credit has to go to anyone willing to put themselves forward for these roles (a point that equally applies to the previous TJF members who came forward). I would hope that the club did not have an issue with all of the individuals previously involved with TJF and hope that more of them may see fit to stand again as that would speak to some level of optimism from experience that there is a viable solution here. My biggest concern at this stage would be that a new TJF Board coming in on the back of the Open Letter would immediately be setting off on the wrong foot with the club at a time when bridges require to be built. That is absolutely not a criticism of the Open Letter but there has to be a willingness to engage and not prejudge the past from both sides here. I am not sure how that is achieved as at this juncture we feel as far away from it as we ever have. It probably requires an acceptance on both sides that mistakes have been made and to find common ground, that the club has made important steps forward in recent years in several areas for which the current board deserve credit but also that there is never going to be a perfect solution put forward for fan ownership and that a compromise has to be reached. On a smaller point, I do have concerns about setting the membership rates so low as it's very difficult to uplift this in any significant manner once established, and gives a fairly easy argument against the legitimacy and ongoing viability of the organisation. Good luck to all standing, even for those who doubt fan ownership (and I don't include myself in that) it has to be recognised that this is the way the club is going and we have to ensure that it is done in the best way possible.
  4. I don't necessarily disagree with the sentiment here, though I do think there is a basis to question his character and influence on the dressing rooms at the clubs he's been at recently. Mostly here to defend Doolan though. Miller has 5 league goals so far this season. Doolan scored 14 league goals in 16/17 (in the SPL), 4 in 17/18 (SPL) and 7 in 18/19 (Championship - including of course his excellent goal against Morton). For all the general sentiment was it was time for Doolan to move on, his goals to minutes ratio last season (1 every 295 minutes) was better than Miller's this season. Onwards and upwards.
  5. You can't possibly be bitter that a player was open to a move to a team at a significantly higher level than Thistle? Very odd.
  6. How do you keep a board that don't want to be there?
  7. She's definitely pushing a few people's buttons.
  8. Quite a few members of the squad need that op.
  9. I've been reading Thistle forums for, I think, 20 years going back to the first days of Over Land and Sea. This is, without a doubt, the worst thread I've ever read on any of the various sites over the years. Anyway, carry on.
  10. Genuine question as I must have missed it - what was/is the GDPR issue?
  11. No suggestion at this stage that he's gifting the cash. I think (should it go ahead) that the presence or otherwise of Ms Low on the board will give a significant indication as to the intentions behind this approach. At present, the fact that it has emerged first as a fully formed media 'leak' is not ideal.
  12. Where did GC unearth these hidden gems McDonald, and Miller? And Zanatta for that matter.
  13. How anyone can think we have a good squad or Caldwell is the answer I do not know. It will be a miracle if we scrape 4th. Got lucky last season convincing an old pal to come out of retirement and having a player like Spittal (massively underappreciated), we've lost our two best players from last season and replaced them with Championship rejects, crocks and has-beens (and combinations thereof). As suggested, the fact our best player by a distance is a guy who has been decent but never excelled at this level says a lot. We still look more likely to bother the relegation playoffs than the promotion ones.
  14. So we had the lowest wage bill of all teams on which information was available? Finishing above a team with a wage bill 35% higher than ours? Shows what a remarkable job Archie did to keep us in that league and get us a top 6 finish (and what an incredible job Clarke did at Killie).
×