McCall Sacked

[javeajag]

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Of probable assistance to those trying to make sense of this... from the TJF statement.

I will go further. The accuracy of the Directors' Statement in the Annual Accounts (which claims, in effect, that a conscious decision was made to overspend to increase the player budget) must be doubted, given the answers given on this point at the AGM.

At the time I said that the new board should commission two reports one in the clubs finances and the other on the state of the stadium. This would have  allowed a common understanding on where we are starting from.

For reasons that are not stated there is a lot dancing around the state of our finances and a fair degree of reading between the lines is required.

I have a feeling that the ptfc trust don’t want to tell us , perhaps to protect the old board , how bad things actually are. In that regard I suspect TJF are a tad frustrated.

so reading between the lines ….

1. the word ‘significant’ in the TJF is in fact very ‘significant’ and is there to tell us , along with the whole statement,  that the finances are shot.

2. If I remember around  the agm  I think 3BC said they were giving c£300k to the club…but in fact it looks like this was never given which is in fact ‘significant ‘

3. I think we can take it that we serious cash flow issues hence the reaching out to individuals and ‘investors ‘ for help

4. probably the rangers game has plugged that gap or the lack of £300k from 3BC

in any small business cash flow is just about the most important thing and I’m a bit concerned that the ‘count every penny going out the door’ button has not been pressed. In our situation cost cutting is the first thing you would do and we need to get in with it. On the other hand efforts to increase revenue are no doubt underway.

in this context the decision on the management team at this time is a little concerning.

[eljaggo]

MarciaBlane is spot-on!

Just say it in plain language using Mark Twain's dictum:  "Use small words and use old words"

[MonehJags]

1 hour ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Greame 

You raise some interesting points - the most recent Club Statement said thus 

The primary aim for Partick Thistle Football Club for season 2022/23 is to regain Premiership status. The management team were given a budget to support this objective.

Given the playing squad assembled for this season, everyone at the club was united in the belief that this was an achievable prospect.

You have questioned the accuracy of the Directors Statement in the Annual Accounts ( Fair enough ) - however the above statement released by the Club makes specific claims  regards the budget given to the Management Team - and that there was agreed objectives - however what is confusing is that our Current Board are making reference to Budgets and Agreements of the previous Board - how do they know what was agreed ? How do they know the assertions made in the statement are accurate ?  - if Im reading the Club Statement accurately - the Current Board are using the previous Boards objectives and the Management Team - have been dismissed for failing to meet them - how do we know the "management team were given a budget to support this objective"   - TJF statement has gone to great lengths regards the requirement for Due Diligence ( which has now been effectively carried out) 

Was there Due Diligence regards the previous Boards "belief " that we could get promoted ? 

Sitting looking at the Teams in the League - QP are now funded by Willie Haughey one of Scotlands most astute Businessmen -They are managed by Owen Coyle - who managed in the English Premier with couple of decent Seasons - and there CEO is Lianne Dempster - one of the most respected Football CEOs in Scotland 

Now applying logic - the odds were stacked against us going up against QP from the outset - so a realistic objective was a Play Off Spot - ( which we are currently a point away from with a third of the Season to go ) 

But based on the previous Boards Target of regaining premiership status ( despite a very strong QP ) and the assertion that a Budget was made available to do this at the start of the Season  ( despite the fact TJF had to provide funds for a Players Contract extension in January ) - the management team were fired 

So the Question is - exactly whose targets - objectives and budgets were the management team working to ? The Current Boards - or as the Club Statement suggest - The Previous Boards - and how do we know ( as stated by the Club ) the target of Promotion and the Budget set at the start of the Season were realistic in the face of combined strength of QP Owner - Manager & CEO         

 

 

What does Queens Park have to do with Hamilton and Cove Rangers taking 10 points off us at Firhill? 

[MarciaBlaine]

48 minutes ago, jaf said:

Hi thanks for the feedback

I think you are right to acknowledge that there is some very specific wording we either had to, or wished to use.  I think we also wish to come across in as professional a way as we can whilst we continue to build the case for fan ownership by being credible. To do so, we adopt that professional language. 

But it is also important to educate/inform as many people as possible with these updates, so your point on clarity is noted.

Of course, we also have some members who actually appreciate the language used (from private feedback received), so we have a challenge keeping everyone happy - but we will do our best!

Thanks

 

It’s undoubtedly a balancing act for sure.

My constructive suggestion would be for comms to say “we’ve also made this statement available in a plain English version which you can read here”. Paste the original into chatgpt (it’s free and dead easy) with a request to “please simplify the following without summarising or shortening it” and put that on your site, bob’s your uncle.

Younger fans or those without a professional background get the gist and the fan ownership movement gets loads more backers!

[Jordanhill Jag]

23 minutes ago, MonehJags said:

What does Queens Park have to do with Hamilton and Cove Rangers taking 10 points off us at Firhill? 

The Statement from the Club made reference to the expectation of Promotion - with QP this was at best ambituous - realistically we were always looking at a Play Off Spot - in addition - who set the target of Promotion and who assessed that the Budget was adequate to do so - as they were set at the start of the Season ? 

We are a point off a Play Off Spot with a third of the Season to go ?    

[Jordanhill Jag]

36 minutes ago, javeajag said:

At the time I said that the new board should commission two reports one in the clubs finances and the other on the state of the stadium. This would have  allowed a common understanding on where we are starting from.

For reasons that are not stated there is a lot dancing around the state of our finances and a fair degree of reading between the lines is required.

I have a feeling that the ptfc trust don’t want to tell us , perhaps to protect the old board , how bad things actually are. In that regard I suspect TJF are a tad frustrated.

so reading between the lines ….

1. the word ‘significant’ in the TJF is in fact very ‘significant’ and is there to tell us , along with the whole statement,  that the finances are shot.

2. If I remember around  the agm  I think 3BC said they were giving c£300k to the club…but in fact it looks like this was never given which is in fact ‘significant ‘

3. I think we can take it that we serious cash flow issues hence the reaching out to individuals and ‘investors ‘ for help

4. probably the rangers game has plugged that gap or the lack of £300k from 3BC

in any small business cash flow is just about the most important thing and I’m a bit concerned that the ‘count every penny going out the door’ button has not been pressed. In our situation cost cutting is the first thing you would do and we need to get in with it. On the other hand efforts to increase revenue are no doubt underway.

in this context the decision on the management team at this time is a little concerning.

Spot On 

[MonehJags]

13 minutes ago, javeajag said:

At the time I said that the new board should commission two reports one in the clubs finances and the other on the state of the stadium. This would have  allowed a common understanding on where we are starting from.

For reasons that are not stated there is a lot dancing around the state of our finances and a fair degree of reading between the lines is required.

I have a feeling that the ptfc trust don’t want to tell us , perhaps to protect the old board , how bad things actually are. In that regard I suspect TJF are a tad frustrated.

so reading between the lines ….

1. the word ‘significant’ in the TJF is in fact very ‘significant’ and is there to tell us , along with the whole statement,  that the finances are shot.

2. If I remember around  the agm  I think 3BC said they were giving c£300k to the club…but in fact it looks like this was never given which is in fact ‘significant ‘

3. I think we can take it that we serious cash flow issues hence the reaching out to individuals and ‘investors ‘ for help

4. probably the rangers game has plugged that gap or the lack of £300k from 3BC

in any small business cash flow is just about the most important thing and I’m a bit concerned that the ‘count every penny going out the door’ button has not been pressed. In our situation cost cutting is the first thing you would do and we need to get in with it. On the other hand efforts to increase revenue are no doubt underway.

in this context the decision on the management team at this time is a little concerning.

On the point about receiving money from the 3BC's. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

The 3BC's was the company setup by Colin Weir with his money. Jackie Low and one other were put in charge. He passed away leaving them basically 'beneficiaries'. So if £300,000 was promised to PTFC and not given then they have trousered the dough and disappeared into the sunset. Might be wrong but it sounds about right

[MonehJags]

3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Statement from the Club made reference to the expectation of Promotion - with QP this was at best ambituous - realistically we were always looking at a Play Off Spot - in addition - who set the target of Promotion and who assessed that the Budget was adequate to do so - as they were set at the start of the Season ? 

We are a point off a Play Off Spot with a third of the Season to go ?    

We have won as many games as we have lost. To be perfectly honest, it hasnt been good enough. If you cant beat a Cove Rangers team who have been generally the whipping boys over 3 games then you deserve to walk.

[javeajag]

10 minutes ago, MonehJags said:

On the point about receiving money from the 3BC's. Correct me if I'm wrong here.

The 3BC's was the company setup by Colin Weir with his money. Jackie Low and one other were put in charge. He passed away leaving them basically 'beneficiaries'. So if £300,000 was promised to PTFC and not given then they have trousered the dough and disappeared into the sunset. Might be wrong but it sounds about right

No it probably went back to the weir family I suspect 

[Jordanhill Jag]

6 minutes ago, MonehJags said:

We have won as many games as we have lost. To be perfectly honest, it hasnt been good enough. If you cant beat a Cove Rangers team who have been generally the whipping boys over 3 games then you deserve to walk.

The Objective is Promotion - with QP - realistically this was always going to be via the Play Offs - we are one point away from the Play Offs - who we beat or dont beat is irrelevant - they were not sacked for losing to Cove - they were sacked for not being in a Promotion Spot as targeted at the start of the Season   

[Dick Dastardly]

For all those who are saying promotion with QP in the league was unrealistic, should perhaps remind themselves of this pre-season thread.

https://www.wearethistle.net/forums/index.php?/topic/14675-championship-top-four-at-end-of-202223-predictions/

Just 2 people predicted that QP would be in the top 4 and the bookies had them as 50/1 to win. I think that when the targets were set, that was realistic. Obviously hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

Love this quote from @Cfirejkl .... "A couple have Queens Park in their top 4 - I would have them relegated.   Seems like they scraped through last season- hope I’m wrong.  ALways had a soft spot for them." Wonder if he still has the soft spot ?

Edited February 14, 2023 by Dick Dastardly

[Big Col]

26 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Objective is Promotion - with QP - realistically this was always going to be via the Play Offs - we are one point away from the Play Offs - who we beat or dont beat is irrelevant - they were not sacked for losing to Cove - they were sacked for not being in a Promotion Spot as targeted at the start of the Season   

If you had been at the games against Hamilton and Cove, you’d have seen why they have been sacked. Performances were absolutely atrocious and the BoD have decided that change was needed. In fact, the performances in 2023 generally haven’t been good enough. Relying on a goalkeeer to get an equaliser against Cove? Come on - time to be realistic and admit that their time was up.

[jaf]

17 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

For all those who are saying promotion with QP in the league was unrealistic, should perhaps remind themselves of this pre-season thread.

https://www.wearethistle.net/forums/index.php?/topic/14675-championship-top-four-at-end-of-202223-predictions/

Just 2 people predicted that QP would be in the top 4 and the bookies had them as 50/1 to win. I think that when the targets were set, that was realistic. Obviously hindsight is a wonderful thing. 

Love this quote from @Cfirejkl .... "A couple have Queens Park in their top 4 - I would have them relegated.   Seems like they scraped through last season- hope I’m wrong.  ALways had a soft spot for them." Wonder if he still has the soft spot ?

Three of the current top four were the three clubs with the longest odds pre-season!

Really interesting to look back on that

 

 

[Jordanhill Jag]

51 minutes ago, Big Col said:

If you had been at the games against Hamilton and Cove, you’d have seen why they have been sacked. Performances were absolutely atrocious and the BoD have decided that change was needed. In fact, the performances in 2023 generally haven’t been good enough. Relying on a goalkeeer to get an equaliser against Cove? Come on - time to be realistic and admit that their time was up.

They were not sacked for performances - they were sacked for not meeting the Primary Objective of Promotion as set out at the start of the Season - read the Club Statement 

if this was the objective - then there was no logic given we were a point away from a Play Off Spot 

However its being suggested in the Press that recent performances against Cove and Hamilton were the reason - I hope this isnt the case - because it would mean that there has been a Knee Jerk Reaction rather than a Cool Calm assessment of where we were sitting 

No matter what Fans think - its the Boards job to look at things objectively

 

 

 

 

 

[Lenziejag]

4 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Greame 

You raise some interesting points - the most recent Club Statement said thus 

The primary aim for Partick Thistle Football Club for season 2022/23 is to regain Premiership status. The management team were given a budget to support this objective.

Given the playing squad assembled for this season, everyone at the club was united in the belief that this was an achievable prospect.

You have questioned the accuracy of the Directors Statement in the Annual Accounts ( Fair enough ) - however the above statement released by the Club makes specific claims  regards the budget given to the Management Team - and that there was agreed objectives - however what is confusing is that our Current Board are making reference to Budgets and Agreements of the previous Board - how do they know what was agreed ? How do they know the assertions made in the statement are accurate ?  - if Im reading the Club Statement accurately - the Current Board are using the previous Boards objectives and the Management Team - have been dismissed for failing to meet them - how do we know the "management team were given a budget to support this objective"   - TJF statement has gone to great lengths regards the requirement for Due Diligence ( which has now been effectively carried out) 

Was there Due Diligence regards the previous Boards "belief " that we could get promoted ? 

Sitting looking at the Teams in the League - QP are now funded by Willie Haughey one of Scotlands most astute Businessmen -They are managed by Owen Coyle - who managed in the English Premier with couple of decent Seasons - and there CEO is Lianne Dempster - one of the most respected Football CEOs in Scotland 

Now applying logic - the odds were stacked against us going up against QP from the outset - so a realistic objective was a Play Off Spot - ( which we are currently a point away from with a third of the Season to go ) 

But based on the previous Boards Target of regaining premiership status ( despite a very strong QP ) and the assertion that a Budget was made available to do this at the start of the Season  ( despite the fact TJF had to provide funds for a Players Contract extension in January ) - the management team were fired 

So the Question is - exactly whose targets - objectives and budgets were the management team working to ? The Current Boards - or as the Club Statement suggest - The Previous Boards - and how do we know ( as stated by the Club ) the target of Promotion and the Budget set at the start of the Season were realistic in the face of combined strength of QP Owner - Manager & CEO         

 

 

Not having any specific knowledge whatsoever, the new board will have access to all previous board minutes - not to mention that the current chair was on the old board. It is fair to assume that the current board know what the budget and objectives were. Objectives are usually agreed at the outset. If they weren’t realistic but McCall accepted them, unfortunately that is on him. You could ask him.

[eljaggo]

Why on earth would McCall reject the Board's objective of promotion?  Tantamount to a resignation.

[Lenziejag]

17 hours ago, The Thistle Archive said:

Stats can be malleable little blighters, but this table gives a solid no-nonsense comparison of Thistle and their 2nd / 3rd tier managers. Ian McCall's results are below our historical average for the level, and it's been going backwards this season...

I think it is normal for stats to get worse the longer a manager stays and would also be skewed depending on how long spent in each tier. Would be interesting to see the stats broken down further.

[MonehJags]

40 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

They were not sacked for performances - they were sacked for not meeting the Primary Objective of Promotion as set out at the start of the Season - read the Club Statement 

if this was the objective - then there was no logic given we were a point away from a Play Off Spot 

However its being suggested in the Press that recent performances against Cove and Hamilton were the reason - I hope this isnt the case - because it would mean that there has been a Knee Jerk Reaction rather than a Cool Calm assessment of where we were sitting 

No matter what Fans think - its the Boards job to look at things objectively

 

 

 

 

 

They probably have looked at it objectively and thought we wont get promoted with the status quo.

Your repeated logic that we are a point off the play-offs, with the fixtures coming up, do you think we would have still been a point off the play-offs with the status quo?

We have had some high scoring wins which has seen us go from Brazil one week to Brechin the next. Its only acceptable if your ambition is to remain in the championship.

Edited February 14, 2023 by MonehJags

[Lenziejag]

2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

The Objective is Promotion - with QP - realistically this was always going to be via the Play Offs - we are one point away from the Play Offs - who we beat or dont beat is irrelevant - they were not sacked for losing to Cove - they were sacked for not being in a Promotion Spot as targeted at the start of the Season   

So, the decision was taken on Saturday evening ? If Morton hadn’t won, they would have been ok ?

[Dick Dastardly]

We may be a point off the playoffs, but only after having been clear at the top. The trajectory was heading downwards.

[Dick Dastardly]

4 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

So, the decision was taken on Saturday evening ? If Morton hadn’t won, they would have been ok ?

I did suggest exactly that earlier 

[Jordanhill Jag]

28 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Not having any specific knowledge whatsoever, the new board will have access to all previous board minutes - not to mention that the current chair was on the old board. It is fair to assume that the current board know what the budget and objectives were. Objectives are usually agreed at the outset. If they weren’t realistic but McCall accepted them, unfortunately that is on him. You could ask him.

This is True - However the following Quote from TJF Questions the accuracy of previous Directors Statements - yet the current Board seem to be accepting that there was an adequate Budget for Promotion ( despite the fact that TJF had to fund the resigning of a Player in January ) ? 

So which part are we to accept - or is there Cherry Picking to suit a View of the Management Team ?   

Or its been suggested in the Press - that Performances against Hamilton & Cove were the deciding Factor ? 

So the bottom line is - which version is correct ?   

I will go further. The accuracy of the Directors' Statement in the Annual Accounts (which claims, in effect, that a conscious decision was made to overspend to increase the player budget) must be doubted, given the answers given on this point at the AGM.

 

[Jordanhill Jag]

13 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

We may be a point off the playoffs, but only after having been clear at the top. The trajectory was heading downwards.

Maybe - but the simple fact is we were still a Point from the Play offs - and that justifies the sack ? 

[Jordanhill Jag]

20 minutes ago, MonehJags said:

They probably have looked at it objectively and thought we wont get promoted with the status quo.

Your repeated logic that we are a point off the play-offs, with the fixtures coming up, do you think we would have still been a point off the play-offs with the status quo?

We have had some high scoring wins which has seen us go from Brazil one week to Brechin the next. Its only acceptable if your ambition is to remain in the championship.

I think we had a better chance than we will appointing someone who has never managed a Team and has only ever Coached Youngsters at a Football Academy (and  that is no disrespect to Dools who I admire Greatly )   

If we started slipping away from the Play Offs - fair enough - bit one point ? Seriously ? 

[Dick Dastardly]

5 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

I think we had a better chance than we will appointing someone who has never managed a Team and has only ever Coached Youngsters at a Football Academy (and  that is no disrespect to Dools who I admire Greatly )   

If we started slipping away from the Play Offs - fair enough - bit one point ? Seriously ? 

I’m not sure that I can be objective regarding McCall and possibly yourself for opposite opinions.