jaybee

Yeah... when the conflict comes, (and it will because that is Gus's style, and Oran is the only person sitting below him in organisation structure). It will end in tears, and possibly us losing a promising manager early doors, and being left with Smug Gus as the apparent saviour. That possibility, after just getting out of the self harm employing Stubbs brought fills me with dread. Why must these positions be confrontational? GS has intimated that Gus's remit will be collaborative and at the behest of the club ie; Manager, Director, CEO, but most assuredly NOT .... LPM

Great, constructive counter arguing there Jaybee. . I can see why you win debates hands down. Now. Can you let me know why you think a person with NO relevant qualifications, an apparent contempt for youth development , an ignorance of the benefits of clubs looking after players nutrition and with a complete lack of success in the last 5 or so years is so good for a role with, as far as we are led to believe, such far reaching responsibilities . This is also a man who, when with us, showed such petulance and treated the support with so much disdain. Someone mentioned "dinosaur". I think that would almost be kind to wee angry. Edited 4 hours ago by stlucifer I do appreciate what you and others like you are saying, I get where you are coming from, my choice is to respond in a less severe and perhaps slightly more irreverent manner; because I do not like; nor appreciate the level of vitriolic abuse that is aimed at an ex manager who whether or not we like his methods of working or of getting the team to play, did a pretty good job at a time in the clubs history where we / he had very little to work with given the clubs financial situation at the time (and I was living in Paisley then and was a regular at love street). All your points had relevance at that time however No relevant qualifications! for what? Surely GS will decide exactly what Gus's role will be and since he is in effect the employer; then he decides what experience is relevant, NOT you my friend. Contempt for youth development: I would have to agree partially with that in an historical sense, but more recently with QP the signs are that he has been utilising youth in greater numbers and in any case who is to say any element of youth development will fall within his remit in this new post? An ignorance of the benefits of clubs looking after players nutrition: I would think not particularly relevant here as I am sure Gus is not here to fulfill THAT role! A complete lack of success in the last 5 or so years: this is irrelevant to the position he now holds. This is also a man who, when with us, showed such petulance and treated the support with so much disdain: This is of course from your and some other peoples perspective and if you owned the club and controlled it then YOU could choose what to do .... NEWS FLASH!!!!!! YOU DON'T, GS does and his take on Gus is shall we just accept that it is different than yours? I am more than capable of providing reasoned and justifiable arguments to validate which ever position I support, the reason I treat some posts with contempt is that that is all they deserve as they are not rational; but emotional. Hope this clears this up for you

Earliest I can remember was 55p a pint ! Yes; i remember 1/10d in the bar beneath gilmour street station . a wee while ago noo. at t'other end of scale I bought a pint last summer at the Hay festival for £7.50, it's only money I suppose.

Not for me personally; but hey whatever rocks your boat bud...eh?

Could certainly argue that Cathro was much more qualified for management at this level than Kearney is. Cathro had been employed by some huge clubs around Europe and worked under some great managers and coached some of the best players in the world. Oran has never been employed by any full time club in any capacity ever. He’s very much learning on the job. The Northern Irish league doesn’t strike me as very relevant experience. That’s why we’ve got Gus, he’s got the relevant experience. If Jack Ross or Alan Stubbs were still here Gus wouldn’t be. Regardless of that comparison, what is for certain is that Gus now has a significant say on the running of this football club. This isn’t your old retired manager slowing down and going upstairs like Alex Smith at Falkirk or Alex Ferguson at United. Gus is a young man in his 40’s and knowing what he’s like he’ll be straight in at the coalface tomorrow morning making decisions. He wouldn’t have taken this job to wallow in the background. What do you think he will be doing? I imagine he will have the final say in recruitment at the very least. Wouldn’t surprise me if he was picking the team aswell. You do realise that too much catnip is bad for you? makes one delusional!

We were struggling to stay in the Premier league towards the end of his time. The football was dire and the supporters were drifting away to the cinema. I think that counts as a fail. That's why he was replaced. I think you need to stop sitting on the fence and just come out and say that you don't like Gus?

Let me explain where I'm coming from. We all know how close Scott and MacPherson are. he's openly admitted the friendship. IF he had appointed him as manager there would have been, rightly so, a meltdown. He's failed miserably , both at the tail end of his Buddies' career and since. There is no way he would have been accepted. the next best thing is to create a post, which it's been stated, WILL cross over to the playing side of things. How much is yet to be discovered but it WILL entail recruitment. Given they claim it's to do with continuity the inference is that he will have more of a say than the manager in that process At the very least this means that Kearney will have to make the proverbial silk purse out of MacPherson's sow's ear. This appointment could actually make Oran think again about his position. if tat happens who do you think will be best placed to slide in like a Tommy Craig? I wonder; do you have silver paper covering all of the windows in your house .........Just in case? they might just REALLY be after you!!

Well you explain any other motive for bringing back a mate who has done nothing in the last 4 years, has no experience in the new manufactured role and only bored the tits of the support before leaving us. Justification? Simple! Done it to pis* you off it worked

Ye, so let's offer him a 3 year deal, uproot his family, let him resign his full time job .When we could have just as easily offered the job to Gus no matter what the supporters thought, because most will have made that assumption in any case. I'm not to sure TC is capable of appreciating the suBtlety of your statement Pod

Because I’m not a complete and utter IDIOT and I know how groups work... Mutual respect for each other and the willingness to work together even through differences of opinion. Doesny take a genius to work that out My implication was that you had slightly more knowledge than you admit to, (although not that you are necessarily part of; or are attached to them) and I shan't even comment on how an IDIOT might spell or pronounce Does not. Previous to my retirement; I worked with groups professionally for around 25 years and I am afraid your interpretation of how groups work is 'at the least' very naive. What you describe is how groups should work, but that neglects the very real fact that within groups there are leaders and followers and that some leaders can be very persuasive in promoting their 'very reasonable' point of view and again I am not suggesting that this IS the case, what I am saying is UNLESS you are closer to them than you say then YOU cannot know. Also when groups vote to do something that is bound to be viewed as controversial, if endowed with the traits that you mentioned; would generally revisit that decision and amend or adjust their actions it such a way that they could still a) make their point and b) avoid the controversy in order to c) retain the credibility that as a group they had built previously. They did not follow that; IMO reasonable procedure and instead choose to issue a challenge to the St Mirren B.O.D. or more precisely GS, only one winner here I'm afraid. Sincerely my friend, I am simply of the opinion that the group was wrong and are compounding that by trying to justify what they did and furthermore by not simply holding their hands up and admitting they got it wrong, we all do from time to time myself included.

The decision of whether or not the banner should be made, had to be made by the group. As it is a group, if a suggestion is put forward there is a vote on this to determine whether or not it will be done, this vote was done and resulted in the banner being made. If one member of the group was to say they wanted to do it and everyone else said no then of course this would be ridiculous, but if the majority agree, the minority support the rest of the groups decision as it is made as a GROUP and represented by ALL members in the group. YOU seem to know a lot about how the GROUP work and operate ........ considering you have absolutely nothing to do with it?

What I want is for the club, SLO & W7/Northbank boys to work together for the future, whether this is what all involved parties want I’m unsure of as I cannot speak for any of them. I am complaining about the lack of communication between the parties and the doors being slammed in faces with regards to this. Can I just point out that my views have absolutely no correlation to the views of the boys in W7, as I’m not a spokesperson for them, for lack of a better word. This is just what I think about the situation and what I think should be done about it. I am in no way saying the club are all wrong and the boys in w7 are angels, as that would be a complete bare faced lie. There is wrong doing on both sides and until they can both come together to fix this mess I’m not willing to say any more about this. Thank goodness. I have a headache

But would it not be reasonable in this instance to publicly declare what was so offensive about the banner while allowing a far more offensive one to continue being displayed in the away end? ETA. this is a strange way of showing support for W7 lads. Mixed messages at best. I think GS stated that the reason it was refused was that it 'in his opinion. (which is the one that counts)' it was not football related, as for the Celtic 'shagger' poster I think that Div said earlier that he 'believed' that the reason nothing was done about that poster was because it may have caused 'trouble' with the Celtic fans and if as reported earlier there were only two police on duty I can't say I blame them. Equally it would be unreasonable to ask St Mirren stewards to attempt removal of it. Not sure what the solution is but I can see the reason why nothing was done.

But surely their human rights are being violated? Pre supposing they are human? and this is a JOKE before someone gets all arsey about it, lighten the mood PLEASE ?

I disagree that it clears things up or that we can all sign up to it. I'll not defend the banner in light of the club explicitly refusing permission, however what prompted the banner was the club being complicit in providing details of supporters to police which infuriated many. For Gordon to talk about return to positive atmosphere at the ground then go on a extremely negative rant for around two thirds of his update about banners doesn't quite match up. Gordon said "This atmosphere of positivity was however soured by the production of a banner in W7 which greatly disappointed me". The banner was displayed during the game, and the majority knew nothing about it until either halftime via twitter or post game, so it didn't affect any positive atmosphere at all. In fact it was the actions of stewards at the behest of the directors that could've soured things further. Appreciate the need to be in compliance with Police and other regulatory bodies, however it is the compliant nature of the board without looking after fans interests that's not comfortable for me. I do understand that there could be cost of policing to be factored into their responses to Police, but seems like they have forgotten that fans are the lifeblood of the club and seems easier to piss them off. Oh and for what it's worth I sit in W2 and have no personal involvement with W7, but targeting an area that have been largely responsible for the increase in noise, positivity and encouragement to the players seems counterproductive. The BIG clue is the highlighted section, irrespective of what you or I think re the banner, bottom line was, permission was refused to display it ... really leaving the club no choice but to remove it . Fault, yes, but NOT from the club.