AlwaysOutnumbered... Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 Why is there so much negativity towards this board under Jacqui Low? Am I the only one who thought the PTFC Trust update on the official site was actually quite good? Genuinely interested to know why the board and Low/Britton are getting such a hard time from some fans yet David Beattie/Ian Maxwell seemed to get off pretty lightly in comparison. What has changed so drastically in the past few months? Is it purely down to the fact they appointed Gary Caldwell? Is it to do with the training ground and delays etc? I see comments saying that Low and Britton etc are destroying our club. Have I missed something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 The Board are an ‘easy’ target when results on the field are not good. Personally I think Jacqui and Gerry have the best intentions for Thistle and should be given time. Gerry is an upgrade on Maxwell for sure. But the manager has to carry the can if our performance doesn’t improve; as Archie & Shaggy did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 Maxi and Beattie got grief at times as well especially over moving North Stand etc, but under their tenure, we won promotion, removed debt, went top 6, had kids for free, and set up the academy, they got grief when Archie was held on too long as we headed to and achieved relegation, Beattie also put his own money in and owns shares. What have the new board achieved currently? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlwaysOutnumbered... Posted January 24, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 I'm not for one minute trying to have a go at David Beattie or Ian Maxwell. Was just interested to read why this board are getting it in the neck so badly at the minute. NorgeThistle - I don't have an answer for your question. I'm not sure what they have achieved so far. I'd be guessing if I said anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 Fair points Norge. I wonder though if David Beattie ‘carried’ Maxi to some extent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Kenny Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 23 minutes ago, sandy said: The Board are an ‘easy’ target when results on the field are not good. Personally I think Jacqui and Gerry have the best intentions for Thistle and should be given time. Gerry is an upgrade on Maxwell for sure. But the manager has to carry the can if our performance doesn’t improve; as Archie & Shaggy did. Genuinely interested, in what way has Gerry been an upgrade on Maxwell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, King Kenny said: Genuinely interested, in what way has Gerry been an upgrade on Maxwell? A sharper brain. Give him time, it will pay off for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaf Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 37 minutes ago, Norgethistle said: Maxi and Beattie got grief at times as well especially over moving North Stand etc, but under their tenure, we won promotion, removed debt, went top 6, had kids for free, and set up the academy, they got grief when Archie was held on too long as we headed to and achieved relegation, Beattie also put his own money in and owns shares. What have the new board achieved currently? Its hard to know what their vision is, which doesn't help them. It was perhaps supporters representation? Which it turns out is an illusion. It was perhaps a training ground that was absolutely vital for the club? Speculation on this persists, but best case its delayed. It was perhaps to instantly bounce back into the top division (where we belong!). Erm.... It was perhaps that Gary Caldwell was the messiah and Chesterfield board were rogues and so he can still lead us to promotion. Erm.... It was perhaps getting back to the Thistle Way. Whilst sacrificing one of the most 'thistle' players around. It was perhaps keeping a top division off field infrastructure. Whilst bringing in Championship revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 Isn't this a bit like asking how come Fred Goodwin's successor doesn't get as bad a time of it in the press as him in circa 2009? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KemoAvdiu Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, jaf said: Its hard to know what their vision is, which doesn't help them. It was perhaps supporters representation? Which it turns out is an illusion. It was perhaps a training ground that was absolutely vital for the club? Speculation on this persists, but best case its delayed. It was perhaps to instantly bounce back into the top division (where we belong!). Erm.... It was perhaps that Gary Caldwell was the messiah and Chesterfield board were rogues and so he can still lead us to promotion. Erm.... It was perhaps getting back to the Thistle Way. Whilst sacrificing one of the most 'thistle' players around. It was perhaps keeping a top division off field infrastructure. Whilst bringing in Championship revenue. All of this. But also, the change in leadership has signalled - to me anyway - a real change in the rhetoric and communication style from the board/club. We have gone from being pretty good at this side of things to - again, just my opinion - taking an approach that too often is full of bullshit, bluster and corporate-speak nonsense. Witness the laughably awful updates from Gerry Britton which told us almost nothing, and the frankly bizarre party political broadcast featuring Caldwell and Low where we were told promotion was still our aim. If your PR and spin is as obvious as ours has been in the last 6 months or so then it isn’t good PR or spin, and to me that speaks to treating the fans like idiots. That pattern continues when it comes to the fans Trust, whereby the club seemingly don’t deem it appropriate for the largest shareholder (the fans) to have a meaningful say in decisions. At a time when only one of the directors actually have any shares in the club, that completely stinks. I don’t think the board are bad people. I’m sure they put lots of work in and we don’t need any ‘sack the board’ style protests, but there’s a pattern of poor decisions and ridiculous, often vacuous and patronising statements that has developed since the club’s new leadership took charge which absolutely deserves to be called out. Edited January 24, 2019 by KemoAvdiu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 1 hour ago, AlwaysOutnumbered... said: Why is there so much negativity towards this board under Jacqui Low? Am I the only one who thought the PTFC Trust update on the official site was actually quite good? Genuinely interested to know why the board and Low/Britton are getting such a hard time from some fans yet David Beattie/Ian Maxwell seemed to get off pretty lightly in comparison. What has changed so drastically in the past few months? Is it purely down to the fact they appointed Gary Caldwell? Is it to do with the training ground and delays etc? I see comments saying that Low and Britton etc are destroying our club. Have I missed something? Personally i've not said they are destroying our club but they, or JL was responsible for appointing GC against GB's wishes (allegedly) and i'm sore like a lot of people that, so far, the manager has failed. Now they seem to be marginalising the trust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 It appears the vast majority of fans, whether in real time or in hindsight, believe Archie should've been sacked either well before or immediately after the play offs. In other words under the Beattie/Maxwell tenure. I've no strong opinions one way or other about Low and/or Britton but if you argue that our current situation is largely due to a continuation in management from last season then the Beattie/Maxwell regime is tainted to a high degree. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted January 24, 2019 Report Share Posted January 24, 2019 I think the frustration with the board is probably because they continued to say promotion was the target when it was obvious that staying in the league would be more realistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 21 hours ago, jaf said: 1. It was perhaps a training ground that was absolutely vital for the club? Speculation on this persists, but best case its delayed. 2. It was perhaps to instantly bounce back into the top division (where we belong!). Erm.... 3. It was perhaps getting back to the Thistle Way. Whilst sacrificing one of the most 'thistle' players around Just wanted to pick up on 3 of the points which I think are harsh criticism 1. This is a Three Black Cats initiative. All that the board can do is to pass on the advice that they are being given from their business partners. If Three Black Cats are saying "There is a delay within the council" what are the board supposed to do ? Contradict them and jeopardize the project ? I don't think that you can seriously hold this against the board. 2. This was a claim from the outgoing board. What is the new board supposed to say ? "Hi. We are the new board and while the old board were looking for promotion, we have reset our aims and just avoiding relegation is the new aim". That would have gone down well. I know that they have continued with this target when most of us think it unlikely, however I think it right that they should be working towards promotion until it is mathematically impossible. I think that most club boardrooms would be doing the same and it is hardly in conflict with getting out of our current plight. 3. I don't think I am alone in thinking that Erskine was done and it was right to move him on. I can't remember when he last played for a full 90 minutes, and my Livvy supporting cousin is far from impressed "You did well to get him off your books". So getting a significant wage off the playing staff was, in my opinion, a brave move. How they handled the PR and how that is reinvested is another question. I am by no means defending everything that the board has done recently, and some of your points are relevant, however a lot of the criticism they are currently getting on this forum is unfair, especially when they are in no position to answer back. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eljaggo Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 Why do you say the Board "are in no position to answer back"? The chair is a PR spinmeister, and is more than capable of broadcasting the Board's views on any topic. To many fans. the underlying dissatisfaction with the Board stems from the fact that the previous Boards and the Weirs sought to give the fans a say in the running of the Club. Despite having over 25% of the shares, fans are being denied that say by the present Board, who between them own 0.00003% of the Club's shares. If you take the previous Board and the Weirs stated intention at face value and I see no reason not to do so, then their intentions are being thwarted by this Board. To me that is the root of the dissatisfaction and criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 1 hour ago, Dick Dastardly said: 3. I don't think I am alone in thinking that Erskine was done and it was right to move him on. I can't remember when he last played for a full 90 minutes, and my Livvy supporting cousin is far from impressed "You did well to get him off your books". So getting a significant wage off the playing staff was, in my opinion, a brave move. How they handled the PR and how that is reinvested is another question. Is Erskine done. From a Thistle perspective he has been more productive than any other player bar Spittal this season in terms of goals and assists, I think. also, it has been mentioned before that it is difficult to assess a player on 1 game and that is all he has had at Livi, so far. This isn’t saying much,though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 2 games (a cup cameo and 80 minutes midweek). I am told he was rank in both. When was the last time he played 90 minutes ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 Oh dear oh dear .., unless the board give a daily commentary on every rumour/guy said / I heard then some people will never be happy - we are debt free ... ah but - we are getting a training centre ... ah but - we have an academy .... ah but no business operates that way ... buy ok ..we are shit in the park so let’s start with Beattie he refused to sack Archie and appointed Low.... feel better ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Dick Dastardly said: 2 games (a cup cameo and 80 minutes midweek). I am told he was rank in both. When was the last time he played 90 minutes ? He played about 10 mins in the Hearts game. and who cares if he doesn’t play 90 mins - this is a squad game. If he makes a contribution whatever time he is on the pitch then that would make him valuable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 Erskine is making no contribution now do move on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 9 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: He played about 10 mins in the Hearts game. and who cares if he doesn’t play 90 mins - this is a squad game. If he makes a contribution whatever time he is on the pitch then that would make him valuable It matters because as a manager, if you know a player is going to have to be replaced at some point, it restricts the tactical options that you have available. Don't get me wrong. Erskine was brilliant and among my fave ever Jags, but that was in the past and there is no room for sentiment. For my money, it was the right time for him to move on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyMac Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 3 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: It matters because as a manager, if you know a player is going to have to be replaced at some point, it restricts the tactical options that you have available. Don't get me wrong. Erskine was brilliant and among my fave ever Jags, but that was in the past and there is no room for sentiment. For my money, it was the right time for him to move on. What about Harkins? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 I would not have chosen Harkins for exactly that reason and I did say that how the money saved on Erskine was reinvested was another issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyMac Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 Just now, Dick Dastardly said: I would not have chosen Harkins for exactly that reason and I did say that how the money saved on Erskine was reinvested was another issue. Fair comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 25, 2019 Report Share Posted January 25, 2019 1 hour ago, eljaggo said: Why do you say the Board "are in no position to answer back"? The chair is a PR spinmeister, and is more than capable of broadcasting the Board's views on any topic. To many fans. the underlying dissatisfaction with the Board stems from the fact that the previous Boards and the Weirs sought to give the fans a say in the running of the Club. Despite having over 25% of the shares, fans are being denied that say by the present Board, who between them own 0.00003% of the Club's shares. If you take the previous Board and the Weirs stated intention at face value and I see no reason not to do so, then their intentions are being thwarted by this Board. To me that is the root of the dissatisfaction and criticism. I do not think it would be right for the board to respond on an unofficial fans forum. Other than that, I can't disagree with anything you say. 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.