JesusTejero

Nah you're right. Best not to bother with customer engagement or fostering and nurturing loyalty, or with making people feel valued. I don't think anyone said the club was a shambles. What there is, in my opinion, is a lack of leadership and an accompanying lack of engagement with fans, which contributes to (when added to other factors) poorer crowds and thus, consequently, less money for Archie to spend. Given that, in a previous monkey-based life, you were one of the most vitriolic posters on the forum, your backing of the club even when it's obvious to most people that there's a number of serious organisational and leadership issues at the club, is odd.

I agree. It's not the folk in the office that I am being critical of - they are always very courteous and polite and clearly do their best. The issue lies at the strategic level - and in the club not being run in such a way that maximises what we are capable of, and which, firstly, provides Archie the requisite tools to do his job, by maximising money and which, secondly, actually engages fans in any meaningful way, which then feeds back into the first point.

This is bang on, particularly the lack of joined-up thinking. I'm not sure what the board's vision is at the moment - aside from an occasional interview in the press and fairly anodyne (and I presume ghostwritten) pieces in the programe, we never really hear from the Chairman. I don't wish to be too unkind to either the Chairman or the Managing Director, but I do just feel like we lack off-field leadership and the kind of drive and vision that we require if we are to consolidate and grow.

We will agree to disagree over the quality of TAG. Would be interested to hear other people's thoughts on it though, as anyone that I've spoken to has been disappointed with it. In terms of your second point - I think the emphasis you're placing on the fans doing something about it is misguided. It should be up to the club to engage with the support, not the other way around.The "doing something about it" bit should be driven by the club. If fans feel that channels of engagement and/or participation don't exist, that is not the fault of the fans.

I absolutely sympathise with your point in bold, particularly when people don't go and then seem to flaunt the fact on here. However, the onus has to be on the club to entice people to come to games. This is a bit of a chicken and egg situation in that the product on the pitch can't substantially improve unless we get bigger crowds, but bigger crowds will tend not to occur until the football improves. However, it's obvious that there is a lot more the board and club staff (if there's many left these days) can do to make Firhill a more attractive place to go. Minor points that are repeated endlessly on here do make a difference; the cleanliness of the stadium, the catering, the ability to hear the tannoy, the Aitken Suite - all these relatively minor things that need to be fixed but aren't add up to make Firhill (and Thistle) sometimes just look a bit shoddy.

Eh? That's how the development of young players works 9 times out of 10. Before they are ready for the first team they go on loan to a lower division side to gain experience, then return and (if deemed ready) get a shot at the first team. You seem to suggest we somehow got lucky. Apologies if I'm entirely misreading you though!

Not sure if this is in response to my post or not? Just to clarify, I'm absolutely not asking the board to pump their own money into the club. Everyone knows that football is a financial black hole and I don't expect our directors to subsidise the club (other than their initial share purchase). What I do expect is the club to exhaust all possible sources of maximising revenue - TAG is just one example of where this is not happening. The launch of it was rubbish; the product itself is rubbish, and the end result is less revenue and less money to spend on players. Relying on fans to part with money in return for rubbish products is not how a football club should be run. As mentioned in my previous posts - what fans do the club speak to in order to develop the matchday experience? Who do they engage with in order to shape how schemes like TAG are developed, branded and launched? Where are the regular channels of communication through which fans can constructively participate in the product that the club serves up? They don't (as far as I can see) exist, and all of these things have a knock-on effect on the playing budget.

Clearly, we don't know the ins and outs of why this particular player hasn't signed, however it is indicative of a clear theme: that of Archie having to work within tighter and tighter financial constraints. It is apparent to everyone that we are a weaker team this year compared to last, whilst teams around us (with the exception of Killie) do appear to have strengthened. I am not going to ask the board to spend silly money on players, to 'push the boat out', or 'speculate to accumulate', but I would seriously question whether the board are giving Archie the backing that he deserves, and that he has earned. The guy not only won us the league (without him taking over it would not have happened), but has also kept us in the top league for two consecutive seasons - something that no manager has done since Lambie in the mid 90s. He is our best manager in decades and I hope to see him in charge for years to come, regardless of what some of the most hysterical posters on here say. To see his budget apparently slashed, and to see us seemingly miss out on a host of players (although I accept that I'm sure this happens to other clubs), leaves me incredibly disappointed. Added to this are the clear opportunities (as I think someone may have mentioned elsewhere on another thread) that the club continues to miss out on to raise additional money (e.g. TAG). There also seems to be (apart from panicked moves to extend the season ticket deadline) no real imagination being shown with regards to getting more people in the gates every second Saturday. Where is the direct fan engagement? Where is the 'one Thistle' mantra? I can't see any real efforts to involve the fans in decisions that affect them, or to involve fans in shaping the matchday experience. I am absolutely not someone who bashes the board. Running a football club is, I'm sure, a thankless task. But it does seem to me that Archie is being let down; something which, if we continue to struggle in the manner we have in the opening stages of the season, will be the fault of those who have failed to adequately maximise finances in order to support him in the manner he deserves.

Boring, boring, boring. Sooner we get rid of Joma and TTL the better.

Lindsay has been in and around the first team squad for a few seasons now and has played a lot on loan. He doesn't need to be wrapped in cotton wool and prevented from playing - that's the opposite kind of attitude that we need. All bringing in another centre back does is push him and Jack Hendry further down the pecking order at a time when they need games to improve. This isn't Football Manager. We have two excellent centre backs and two excellent young prospects as back up - we don't need another.

So Seaborne getting injured equates to Archie not getting it right? Hmm okay. Re: Lindsay. We either trust young players to play or we don't. If he's our best young prospect, as you say, then why would we make him 4th or 5th choice just as he's reaching the point in his career when he needs to play?

And what would be the big problem with that? Clubs at our level have to utilise the loan system

They obviously know better than the club doctor who has actually examined him and knows his medical history then eh?

Change what policy? You've just plucked a name of someone who we are highly unlikely to sign for a number of reasons.

Yes, we could do worse. But he's angling for a move down south and if he doesn't then will sign for mega bucks at Motherwell.

I like him and he definitely has potential but he wasn't great last night. Some very stray passes, got caught out a few times and I didn't thjnk he looked particularly comfortable at any point. He did look strong in the air, but I don't think it was his best night or a reflection of his ability.

Charlie Austin and Chris Smalling too, as well as numerous players playing in the Championship, League One and League Two. There are some absolutely superb players playing in the Conference South and in the leagues below that as well - many of whom could easily step up to our level and probably beyond given a chance.

Best tell the numerous league clubs who have signed players from below that level in recent years then - you clearly know better!

How many games below Conference level have you seen? There's some gems to be had in the English non-league, and English League One and Two Clubs (including teams that are far superior to us) regularly bring in guys from that level.

Not quite sure why folk are getting so upset about a six minute trial appearance - calm down you absolute pant wetters. Good game tonight. Amoo looked dangerous - very fast, always looking to beat the defender, and looks like he will be an important player (will definitely frustrate as well, but what Jags player doesn't?). Cerny also looked completely comfortable and very commanding. Highlight was seeing Welsh control the match for the first half, such a joy to see him back in action. Alabi looked poor but Miller looked like he would do a job for us. Good turnout of Jags as well - well done to those of you who travelled down for it (as opposed to those of us who don't live too far away!).

Really? A bunch of Hearts rejects, plus a couple of Sevco has-beens? I'll accept that Higgy is a decent signing but I wouldn't take any of their other signings. And they also have Gary Locke as their manager, negating any good signings they make.

Only if you're an idiot. I'm quite happy being relegated provided our leisurewear is top-notch, to be honest.

I absolutely love Doolan and hope he spends the rest of his career with us, and I agree with someone else earlier in the thread who said they'd be far more bothered if Doolan lined up against us than Doolan (although probably more for emotional reasons than any). However, it's clear in some games Taylor can be far more effective than Doolan - his physicality and, to coin a horrible phrase, 'number 9-ism', can sometimes be a lot more suitable. I would be ecstatic if he signed, and I'm sure it would spur Doolan on too just like added competition always has.

Thought exactly the same thing. I welcome her aboard but she isn't our first female board member - the club is making itself look rather silly on that one.

Agree with your point, but Billy McDonald is an appalling way to prove it!