admin

There is a match programme.

No I did it for you. Don't post it again.

Are you all on the collective mad pills tonight? Do me a favour can you all froth in indication without recourse to personal abuse and/or potentially litigious content? Seriously if my phone pings with another report I'm going to throw the bloody thing against a wall and I've the best part of a year before my next upgrade. :-) Play at least semi nice for the foreseeable please.

@jagfox I couldn't care less for your own personal disregard for potential legal difficulties but you could get this forum, and me, in bother. Do not contuine with the line you are following. Like some others maybe stepping away from the forum for a bit would be no bad thing.

Must I? I'm pissed off enough as it is :-) Seriously, if there are issues there then hit Report and I'll have a look. I can imagine the nature of it all.

@Third Lanark I'm receiving multiple reports about your posts tonight. You might want to step away and stop posting for a bit and you certainly want to give thought to how you post and how you react to certain posters.

This thread is, understandably, generating some heated debate but it's stepping over the mark on occasion to the degree that posts are being reported due to "personal abuse". PMs have been sent asking for this to stop but this is a gentle, public, request for all to try and cut out the abuse.

That is just as likely to happen for a home game as it would an away game would it not? Should we book a bus to pick up all the players to take them to home games? Actually what is the difference in asking the players to make their own way to an away game and asking them to make their own way to a home game? You could be talking about much the same travel time in some instances.

Morton was always an away trip that no team bus was needed/required. Or at least since it didn't become automatic to book a team bus. Granted those would generally been Saturday rather than evening fixtures. As much (or as little) logic then as is now. I just don't see it as any major issue while there are far more pressing things to concern ourselves with.

And coaches automatically levitate above traffic?

Could have been worse. We could have taken a plane to Alloa and asked the players to make their own way to La Manga. The bus thing is a non-event. There is no need for a team bus for games that are relatively close by. It will suit the majority of players. Why ask them to travel, say, 40 minutes to Firhill to get the bus and then travel another 45 minutes or so to the game? Better they make their own way and don't have the bother of going back to Firhill afterwards to get their car? If it saves a few quid into the bargain so much the better. There's so much more to worry to get bogged down with the bus story.

Of all the things that worry me, of which there are plenty, the bus thing isn't one of them. As indicated elsewhere it is a return to a previous policy, albeit when we were skint. Alloa is about on the cusp of where if following this policy I would expect consideration to using a bus would kick in. I can certainly remember us not taking a bus to Stirling previously and to Falkirk the day we won the league. It probably suits a lot of the players too. They don't need to get to Firhill to get the bus or whatever scheduled pick up point (used to be Westerwood) just straight to the venue which might be less travelling for them. And after the game they can head straight to wherever they are going without having to head back to Firhill or wherever. It actually makes a lot of sense.

I feel I'm repeating myself but anyway here goes. The point I'm trying to make is the current performance of the BoD is, or should be, irrelevant when debating the takeover. It needs to be judged on its merits alone. Of course I'll be opened minded. I've said from day one that it could potentially be great for Partick Thistle but that shouldn't prevent anyone from trying to articulate why they are concerned. My concerns in no way relate to the current BoD. Personally I have no major issue with them. Or at least I see no maelovent intent in their actions that would prompt me to want their removal. I don't know anyone on the Board far less have any relationship, cosy or otherwise, with any of them.

I find it strange that people can spend time analysing the minutiae of every club statement but blithely dismiss the issue of 'dual ownership' as mere red tape. There are reasons why these regulations are in place. In part to protect clubs from being used for the benefit of others. A change in ownership needn't be a bad thing but I see nothing of substance to suggest to me that people aren't simply wanting to see change in the current BoD and are ignoring the fact that this is potentially a seismic change in how Partick Thistle operate. That's dangerous thinking.

Finally, something other than ,'What have the current Board done for us' mantra. Interesting and actually strikes at the core of where many of my concerns lie. If we become just part of an organisation's portfolio of clubs then our wellbeing becomes linked to theirs. Obviously things like TV deals etc. impact on how a club operates but currently pretty much every decision made, good or bad, by Thistle is Thistle's call based on what is considered the best for Thistle. As part of a wider stable of clubs we would lose that independence that sense of autonomy. Personally I would find it difficult to make an emotional connection the Club in those circumstances. We stop being what we are and are just a cog, a small one at that, in a machine.

Excellent post. Thank you. I can't find anything to find issue with in what you say.

This sums up my thoughts pretty well. Can someone, JJ or whoever, articulate why; and without reference to the current BoD, this is a good deal for Partick Thistle? Or even why they think it is a good deal. I suspect in the absence of anything concrete nobody can aside, perhaps, from those selling their shares.

Interesting. I doesn't make me feel any more comfortable though. I'm repeating myself I know but if the 'why now' is a motivation to remove the present BoD then I hope that that desire hasn't clouded their judgement over whether this is for the long term betterment of Partick Thistle. I fervently hope it is. It could be unbelievably exciting. One thing is certain though it will define the future of Partick Thistle for some time. Maybe I'm just resistant to change but until we know more then I'm going to remain extremely nervous about this.

I don't care if our Club's owners have a connection with Thistle/Maryhill/Glasgow provided they have the best interests of the club at heart and, most importantly, the ability to progress the Club. It can be argued that the current BoD don't have those qualities. Even if that is true it doesn't mean that this prospective takeover is right for us. There has to be more substance than 'they are not the current BoD' for me to embrace this as a good thing. They need to demonstrate why they are the people to take the club forward. I want clarity in that respect and free from reference to the performance of the current BoD. I'm hoping that we will soon have that as this current state of uncertainty is unhelpful on a number of levels.

Why now? It's the first time they've been approached to sell their shares?

That's pretty poor to be honest. I'll make this my final word on this. If a desire to try and get the club to fulfill their 'duty' you could simply have said something along the lines of 'I know there is some discussion surrounding a potential takeover. The club should, where possible, provide some clarity on the issue'. You were professing to not know if there was truth to the rumours. That wasn't true. And I'm still not sure why one party has a 'duty' to communicate and the other doesn't. Anyway, I'm going to try enjoy the rest of my Friday night with the house to myself.

I'm not saying that we need to know everything about new directors or new owners although that kind of level of transparency would be good. I'm simply saying that a desire to change ownership of the club doesn't mean that any prospective change is a good thing. Right now I don't have anywhere near enough information to even start to formulate an opinion as to the benefits, or otherwise, of this suggested takeover. Some clarity would be extremely useful just in case anyone whose reading this can provide any clarity.

A perfect example of the kind of Spin you so vociferously decry JJ I'm afraid which doesn't really answer any of my questions. I'm not going to flog this to death (honestly) but I'll ask again, why ask the club to issue a statement re the rumours when you knew there was substance to the rumours? Why not just say that?

The performance of the current BoD isn't reason, on its own, to jump into bed with the first suitor that comes along. Hopefully the Thistle people involved with the consortium have become involved because of something much more substantive than a desire to see change.

I'm still a bit confused to be honest. You were requesting a statement from the club earlier today re the rumours stating that they could be quashed with a simple denial. It would seem now that you knew something was happening and knew that there could be no denial. Why not just say that? Why the smoke and mirrors approach? I've concerns right now about three, separate but still interconnected, things. 1. Is the proposed takeover in the best interests of Partick Thistle? 2. How the rumours came into the public domain? Who are The Daily Mail's sources and who contacted who? If the approach came from the consortium then what was the objective in doing so? 3. Are the Thistle people involved in the takeover motivated by this being a good deal for the Club or a desire to see change within the current BoD? If the former, then great. If the latter then that worries me. Taking your post at face value then I appreciate that you are no better placed to answer those concerns than the next man. However, you said either on here or elsewhere that the Club had a 'duty' to respond to these rumours. Is there not a duty of the Thistle people involved to communicate their intentions? That might help address concerns like mine detailed above. This could be an exciting new dawn for our club but right now something stinks and I'm worried about how things are being communicated.