Higgy

[Fearchar]

Many people in all lines of business know when to say a great deal without giving any information away at all. As you said, Ian, it's part of the job.

 

Of course, it could be argued that it's refreshing to have the people in charge saying, effectively, "I don't have a scooby what's going on."

[potty trained]

Many people in all lines of business know when to say a great deal without giving any information away at all. As you said, Ian, it's part of the job.

 

Of course, it could be argued that it's refreshing to have the people in charge saying, effectively, "I don't have a scooby what's going on."

 

But you said there was an apparent in ability to understand what went wrong. I think they fully understand what went wrong regardless of what the press printed.

That's all there is to say on the matter.

[ian_mac]

Many people in all lines of business know when to say a great deal without giving any information away at all. As you said, Ian, it's part of the job.

 

Of course, it could be argued that it's refreshing to have the people in charge saying, effectively, "I don't have a scooby what's going on."

Archie gave a perfectly acceptable account of what went wrong on the club website. He didn't overreact or single out players for blame. Would you rather he did?

 

Your original point was that he should have said nothing. Now you're saying it's refreshing that he spoke truthfully.

 

Which is it? Or are you just posting for the sake of it?

[LambieIsGod]

Got what he deserved yesterday Subbed! He and Taylor were rotten from the first minute so why should he have been kept on? Some of the crap on this forum about Archibald being tactically naive is laughable frankly, by far the smallest budget means fewer options unfortunately. Whilst I'm on my rant, what happened to our wonderful support, to be honest we were rotten too, strangely subdued atmosphere that was matched by the team. Playoffs here we come!

 

Strange how two people at the same game can have total opposing views. I was in my usual place in the North Stand and I actually said to my mate 10 mins into the game that I thought the supporters sounded more vocal than in some recent home games. That carried on until the 20th minute or so when our whole team capitulated and went into hibernation. It was only then that the supporters spent more time shouting at individuals than singing collectively. And quite rightly. The team were a disgrace on Saturday and don't deserve any protection from criticism. Archie has been more than patient with them and they showed no loyalty with their lack of effort. I truly think our support are the best in the country, you only have to look at some of our away game numbers. But no supporters in the world would watch that garbage and still keep singing for their team. We do try to be the 12th man, but the team have a responsibility to put the effort in if the supporters are expected to do the same. We have to pay for the privilege of being at Firhill, whilst the players are paid for being there. You would have thought it was the other way round on Saturday.

[Paulo]

I can't figure out whether the boo-boys or the 'holier than thou' fans are the more frustrating bunch within the support. They were both out in force on Saturday.

 

It seems like both are just waiting for an opportunity to claim the moral high ground.

[Fearchar]

Archie gave a perfectly acceptable account of what went wrong on the club website. He didn't overreact or single out players for blame. Would you rather he did?

 

Your original point was that he should have said nothing. Now you're saying it's refreshing that he spoke truthfully.

 

Which is it? Or are you just posting for the sake of it?

 

If you can't figure out when the juxtaposition in my comment is ironic, I'm afraid it's doubtful if I'm the person you should look to for guidance.

[Gibberish]

Lawless to start, Elliott to start , Higgy and Taylor benched next game

[Islay jag]

Anyone who thinks Higginbotham should have been the first player to be substituted on Saturday is mad.

 

Yes, he was having a poor game. Yes, he made a couple of poor decisions. But he is singlehandedly capable of changing games and was performing no more poorly than most of the rest of the team. It wasn't a lack of attacking width that was our problem. Anyone actually watching the game could see the problem was the poor game Fraser (who has had some excellent games this season) was having and the general poor performance of the centre-backs and those sitting just in front of them. Almost all of Hearts' threats came from individual errors among the "back six" and had little if anything to do with the performance of either of the first two players Archie took off.

 

If Archie was of the view that the midfield was underpowered, the logical thing to do would have been either to substitute Taylor, who had an absolute bloody stinker all day (pushing Doolan up and bringing on either Buaben or Moncur) or take off Doolan, who was being dragged back to support the defence at times in the first half the midfield was doing so poorly. The safe option, given the weakness of the midfield was mostly Fraser's fault on Saturday (though Bannigan was also having a sub-par game) would have been to take off Fraser and put on Buaben or Moncur.

 

It was utterly senseless to take off our two main supporting attack threats. It might have made sense had we been looking to change the system properly to a rigid 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1, but that's clearly not what we ended up doing. The Craigen substitution was more bewildering still: let's bring on someone even less well equipped than Fraser to try to change the midfield dynamic. Bewildering.

 

If you want a scapegoat for Saturday's performance, Higginbotham unequivocally is not your man. We lost because Taylor had a stinker, Fraser and Bannigan were about 3 seconds off the pace, Taylor-Sinclair seemed to develop club-foot and Mair and Piccolo were the definition of lethargy, and as a team collectively they showed no fight whatsoever on going 2-1 and 3-1 down.

 

 

Defo not looking to make Higginbotham a scapegoat, he's been a great signing and every player in the world is entitled to an off day, I was trying to make the point that there seemed to be a big reaction at the game and on here about him being hooked. To be honest any one of them could've gone, we were rotten all over the park!

[yoda-jag]

Hearts budget is 0 and they're playing their under 20s and 17s, so your point is invalid.

you want to have a serious reflection on your statement and its accuracy?

Are you serious?

They are in administration and potentially days away from liquidation. Billy Brown works for free they are so skint.

Guys like Carrick, Holt, Patterson, King and Nicholson are straight out of their youth team. They had 3 players over 21 in the team that utterly destroyed our sorry lot.

 

oh my giddy aunt.

where to start.

i was going to treat your post with "you are not serious and clearly on wind up" and not both replying, but seeing other posts of yours in past few days have shown a clear lack of understanding, common sense, factual reality and you acting like a raw prawn just for the sake of it .....

 

i will spell it out as simply as i can for you to understand.

if it helps, run your finger under the words as you read.

 

last season at hearts, all their first team squad on four figure weekly wages, many of these earning £3/4k a week or more. their player budget for this season pre-admin was projected to be £3 million (described by locke at the time as 'sensible' and sizeable reduction of their 2012/13 player budget). £3 million equates to a first team squad of 24 earning average of £2500 a week.

 

in summer 2013 hearts sold in excess of 10,000 season tickets (they only originally budgeted for and expected season ticket sales of 8,000). that equates to £3 million. add in sponsorship and corporate etc (another £1 million), pay at gate home fans and away supports (combined 3k average per home game = £1 million plus), plus prize money from previous season (another £750k minimum i believe), and that is nearly £6 million income projected for this season.

 

an administators job includes making sure a business budgets to survive on its income, until it can be sold, after a CVA is agreed. that means while in admin, the administrator (BDO) has to balance the books on what their outgoings from the time the adminsitrator is appointed ..... and thus balance their outgoings to their income for that period. what went before (debts accumulated up to pre-admin) is covered by the CVA, so no need to dip into or use 2013/2014 budget.

 

the administrator will ensure bdo costs are covered, deduct other maintenance and ground and matchday costs, taxes etc and whats left will be the player budget.

 

so from £6 million minimum income (which remember was only projected to be sufficient to last to february/march 2014 (as that was when bdo anticipated the admin period would end and club be sold with cva agreed) ..... thankfully(?) for hearts, they have had even higher home gates than bdo anticipated and thus budgeted for, and have lasted longer and have enough money to get them to virtually end of this month) are you seriously trying to argue that the circa £6 million has been swallowed into a black hole and players have been playing for free? that hearts budget this season, is as you categorically state 0, zero, zilch, nada?

 

or is the truth closer to hearts while releasing a number of their high earners of last season, still retained players like stevenson, wilson, macdonald, hammil and others (previous high earners, although it is generally understood and accepted they all took a drop in wages), who are still all on weekly wages of four figures, and a group of younger players who last season were earning in region of £250-500 hundred pounds per week (and higher than some of our first team players wages last season) and whose contracts didn't expire in the summer, and thus continued being paid as per contract, or whose contracts expired in summer but were extended on same or very similar terms to what they had, to ensure hearts had a squad of 25 players for this season. and i'm not even getting into the infrastructure and ricarton aspects of training and preparation advantages and facilities side of the argument that hearts (and others) as a long established spl club has over us. oh and billy brown only started working for free this month.

 

go on, tell me and all other forumites, is hearts player budget for this season really 0, zero, zilch, nada as you have proclaimed with all your obvious knowledge and expertise?

 

or you just going to embarrass yourself yet again and be a raw prawn again for sake of it?

 

 

 

 

as an aside, for those of a more sensible nature, came across this thread which shows player budgets for some clubs in recent years in spl, and links to other clubs budgets/health, which makes for some interesting reading.

Edited April 8, 2014 by yoda-jag

[wee col]

I think higgy got took off because in the first half he was taking throw in's himself before the team was set and took more that one free-kick on the halfway line and we lost the ball from it and the back four were out of position putting us on the back foot. imo at half time he was told to being this team mates into the game and when at 1-1 he did not pass to Taylor it was clean he was not playing for the team he HAD to come off.

[Woodstock Jag]

If Hearts had a player budget in the region of £3million this season, then surely that means their budget was bigger than ours? I haven't paid that much attention to Thistle's financial details for a while now, but I distinctly recall only 3-4 years ago our entire Club turnover being in the region of £1.5-2 million. Even allowing for the uplift in our fortunes and paying top-tier wages, I'd be surprised if our player budget was significantly greater than £3million.

[potty trained]

Based loosely on quotes from Beattie in the press, I've thought our wage budget was 500k last year and 1m this year.

 

I know for a fact the majority of st mirrens first team squad are on 2k+ a week, and we are nowhere near that.

 

All the players that have moved to the teams around us, your Boyds, Harkins, Tidsers of this world, over the last two windows, we showed an interest in, but couldn't match killie, st mirren, county Etc on wages. Harkins is on about 3k a week at st mirren!!!

 

 

[jlsarmy]

Based loosely on quotes from Beattie in the press, I've thought our wage budget was 500k last year and 1m this year.

 

I know for a fact the majority of st mirrens first team squad are on 2k+ a week, and we are nowhere near that.

 

All the players that have moved to the teams around us, your Boyds, Harkins, Tidsers of this world, over the last two windows, we showed an interest in, but couldn't match killie, st mirren, county Etc on wages. Harkins is on about 3k a week at st mirren!!!

Don't know where you get your figures but believe me they are miles out, teams like Kilmarnock etc are paying basic wages that are less than they were 7/8 years ago , we pay less but there isn't as big a difference as you would think,as for Gary Harkins getting £3000.00 per week ( are you serious ? ) ,nobody within our league apart from Celtic are paying that sort of money.

[potty trained]

Don't know where you get your figures but believe me they are miles out, teams like Kilmarnock etc are paying basic wages that are less than they were 7/8 years ago , we pay less but there isn't as big a difference as you would think,as for Gary Harkins getting £3000.00 per week ( are you serious ? ) ,nobody within our league apart from Celtic are paying that sort of money.

 

Really?

 

Thommo, teale, Goodwin, McLean, mcgowan and McAusland all on 2000-2500 last season.

 

Thompson's on 500 a goal.

 

Thommo & Teale being the highest earners until contracts got renewed.

 

Samson was on the same and left when they offered 1000 on his new contract.

 

St mirren tend to have a smaller squad (20 players) with a lot of youths promoted.

 

A 20 man squad on an average of 2000 a week is a wage budget of 2m a year.

 

 

ETA Beattie I think, has said if we stay up Archie's wage budget will double. Prize money for finishing 10th is around 800k... Go figure.

Edited April 8, 2014 by potty trained

[Chicob]

Lawless to start, Elliott to start , Higgy and Taylor benched next game

Elliot replacing anyone is ludicrous. I am sick to death of hearing people call for Elliot when things are going wrong.'We need to inject a bit of pace', ' we need to stretch the game' etc etc The guy just hasn't got it at this level. Yes he gives 100% but 99% of the time it is to no avail.I am still an Archie fan but having this guy in the frame regularly is really not helping the team. I'm sure others with far more ability must be shaking their heads when they see him coming on or not being subbed. Finally all this criticism of Higgy is equally ludicrous. He has been in our top 3 players all season. He had a poor game like all of them on Sat but give the guy a break.

[potty trained]

Elliot replacing anyone is ludicrous. I am sick to death of hearing people call for Elliot when things are going wrong.'We need to inject a bit of pace', ' we need to stretch the game' etc etc The guy just hasn't got it at this level. Yes he gives 100% but 99% of the time it is to no avail.I am still an Archie fan but having this guy in the frame regularly is really not helping the team. I'm sure others with far more ability must be shaking their heads when they see him coming on or not being subbed. Finally all this criticism of Higgy is equally ludicrous. He has been in our top 3 players all season. He had a poor game like all of them on Sat but give the guy a break.

 

I would hope that as you call for people to give higgy a break, that you would give Elliott a break.

 

Look at the bigger picture of the team and what he brings to it.

[Chicob]

I would hope that as you call for people to give higgy a break, that you would give Elliott a break.

 

Look at the bigger picture of the team and what he brings to it.

I am looking at the bigger picture of the team and the point is he doesn't bring anything to it. Unlike the criticism of Higgy this is not only a judgement made on one or two poor games. It is a judgement made over not only this season but also on last. Because you try hard doesn't mean you should constantly be in the squad. An element of talent is also required.

[jlsarmy]

 

 

Really?

 

Thommo, teale, Goodwin, McLean, mcgowan and McAusland all on 2000-2500 last season.

 

Thompson's on 500 a goal.

 

Thommo & Teale being the highest earners until contracts got renewed.

 

Samson was on the same and left when they offered 1000 on his new contract.

 

St mirren tend to have a smaller squad (20 players) with a lot of youths promoted.

 

A 20 man squad on an average of 2000 a week is a wage budget of 2m a year.

 

 

ETA Beattie I think, has said if we stay up Archie's wage budget will double. Prize money for finishing 10th is around 800k... Go figure.

don't doubt the players mentioned Thompson etc are getting more money than the rest, John Mcginn,Kenny McLean ,Jason Naismith etc are getting nowhere near 2000.00 per week , think you'll find a playing budget includes win bonuses , league position bonus and depending how the accounts are collated even the manager and the coaching staff within that figure .

[potty trained]

I am looking at the bigger picture of the team and the point is he doesn't bring anything to it. Unlike the criticism of Higgy this is not only a judgement made on one or two poor games. It is a judgement made over not only this season but also on last. Because you try hard doesn't mean you should constantly be in the squad. An element of talent is also required.

 

He doesn't bring anything to the team? Not one slightest thing?

 

You really are very blinkered!

[potty trained]

don't doubt the players mentioned Thompson etc are getting more money than the rest, John Mcginn,Kenny McLean ,Jason Naismith etc are getting nowhere near 2000.00 per week , think you'll find a playing budget includes win bonuses , league position bonus and depending how the accounts are collated even the manager and the coaching staff within that figure .

 

So are you agreeing with me about the majority of players I mentioned?

 

But you are disagreeing with McLean and Harkins?

 

I'm quite aware of what a playing budget is made up of, I was demonstrating it in the simplest of terms to demonstrate how it is possible for st mirren to have a much higher wage bill than ours.

 

 

[Woodstock Jag]

Elliott is a limited player, but he is useful on occasions. Anyone watching at Perth could see he was a considerable asset on the right wing. He provides exactly the sort of cover that Bannigan traditionally provides to Taylor-Sinclair on the left, can cause serious problems for a left-back lacking pace, and has a decent shot on him when he gets into the right positions. I would actually be tempted to move Erskine in to the middle on occasion and have Elliott out on the right, as Erskine has been struggling to make an impact out wide.

[potty trained]

Elliott is a limited player, but he is useful on occasions. Anyone watching at Perth could see he was a considerable asset on the right wing. He provides exactly the sort of cover that Bannigan traditionally provides to Taylor-Sinclair on the left, can cause serious problems for a left-back lacking pace, and has a decent shot on him when he gets into the right positions. I would actually be tempted to move Erskine in to the middle on occasion and have Elliott out on the right, as Erskine has been struggling to make an impact out wide.

 

Likewise the previous game in Perth he started on the right of what was almost a 4-4-1-1 with the two wide men being more defensive. Elliott worked tirelessly doubling up with SOD(?) on st johnstone's left.

[jlsarmy]

 

 

So are you agreeing with me about the majority of players I mentioned?

 

But you are disagreeing with McLean and Harkins?

 

I'm quite aware of what a playing budget is made up of, I was demonstrating it in the simplest of terms to demonstrate how it is possible for st mirren to have a much higher wage bill than ours.

you said the majority of the st Mirren squad were on 2000.00 per week, think you've quoted me 4 or 5 out of 20 , hardly the majority !

[potty trained]

you said the majority of the st Mirren squad were on 2000.00 per week, think you've quoted me 4 or 5 out of 20 , hardly the majority !

 

I said the majority of the first team squad, what I meant was the majority of their starting 11, or the ones who would be expecting to be in the starting 11. I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or confusion.

 

 

I am only going by what I have been told by people connected to the club, or players at the club.

 

It was used to demonstrate the gulf between our wage structured.

[Paulo]

Because you try hard doesn't mean you should constantly be in the squad. An element of talent is also required.

 

Maybe those with 'more talent' that you mention, really need to try harder then?