bungle_1981

http://downloads.glasgow2014.com/sites/default/files/documents/Marathon%20Map%20-%206Feb14%20v3.pdf

Main thing is no one was hurt. However, it's not "only a building", that implies it has the same status as a supermarket, identikit housing estate or shitty office block.
It's bit more relevant and iconic than that. Iconic buildings define images of cities. Think of Sydney, Paris, London and a host of other cities across the world. For many the GSoA is that for Glasgow. Thousands of people visit Glasgow each year just to see and photograph the building - it's hugely important part of Scotland's tourism economy.
The reason for that, is because it is THE defining building of an architectural era/movement.
Also, think about when it was built and how progressive it was. Think of all the shitty buildings you live your life in and around! Without realising, architecture and urban planning are probably up there in terms of what people complain most about because it's what we experience most.
It's phenomenal to think about when it was built and the fact it has been used constantly and remained relevant as a place of learning, motivation and creativity. It's not some private company hq, it's there for the benefit of everyone and one of the few buildings that public money should be used to rebuild it.

Main thing is no one was hurt. However, it's not "only a building", that implies it has the same status as a supermarket, identikit housing estate or shitty office block.
It's bit more relevant and iconic than that. Iconic buildings define images of cities. Think of Sydney, Paris, London and a host of other cities across the world. For many the GSoA is that for Glasgow. Thousands of people visit Glasgow each year just to see and photograph the building - it's hugely important part of Scotland's tourism economy.
The reason for that, is because it is THE defining building of an architectural era/movement.
Also, think about when it was built and how progressive it was. Think of all the shitty buildings you live your life in and around! Without realising, architecture and urban planning are probably up there in terms of what people complain most about because it's what we experience most.
It's phenomenal to think about when it was built and the fact it has been used constantly and remained relevant as a place of learning, motivation and creativity. It's not some private company hq, it's there for the benefit of everyone and one of the few buildings that public money should be used to rebuild it.

Main thing is no one was hurt. However, it's not "only a building", that implies it has the same status as a supermarket, identikit housing estate or shitty office block.
It's bit more relevant and iconic than that. Iconic buildings define images of cities. Think of Sydney, Paris, London and a host of other cities across the world. For many the GSoA is that for Glasgow. Thousands of people visit Glasgow each year just to see and photograph the building - it's hugely important part of Scotland's tourism economy.
The reason for that, is because it is THE defining building of an architectural era/movement.
Also, think about when it was built and how progressive it was. Think of all the shitty buildings you live your life in and around! Without realising, architecture and urban planning are probably up there in terms of what people complain most about because it's what we experience most.
It's phenomenal to think about when it was built and the fact it has been used constantly and remained relevant as a place of learning, motivation and creativity. It's not some private company hq, it's there for the benefit of everyone and one of the few buildings that public money should be used to rebuild it.

Main thing is no one was hurt. However, it's not "only a building", that implies it has the same status as a supermarket, identikit housing estate or shitty office block.
It's bit more relevant and iconic than that. Iconic buildings define images of cities. Think of Sydney, Paris, London and a host of other cities across the world. For many the GSoA is that for Glasgow. Thousands of people visit Glasgow each year just to see and photograph the building - it's hugely important part of Scotland's tourism economy.
The reason for that, is because it is THE defining building of an architectural era/movement.
Also, think about when it was built and how progressive it was. Think of all the shitty buildings you live your life in and around! Without realising, architecture and urban planning are probably up there in terms of what people complain most about because it's what we experience most.
It's phenomenal to think about when it was built and the fact it has been used constantly and remained relevant as a place of learning, motivation and creativity. It's not some private company hq, it's there for the benefit of everyone and one of the few buildings that public money should be used to rebuild it.

Main thing is no one was hurt. However, it's not "only a building", that implies it has the same status as a supermarket, identikit housing estate or shitty office block.
It's bit more relevant and iconic than that. Iconic buildings define images of cities. Think of Sydney, Paris, London and a host of other cities across the world. For many the GSoA is that for Glasgow. Thousands of people visit Glasgow each year just to see and photograph the building - it's hugely important part of Scotland's tourism economy.
The reason for that, is because it is THE defining building of an architectural era/movement.
Also, think about when it was built and how progressive it was. Think of all the shitty buildings you live your life in and around! Without realising, architecture and urban planning are probably up there in terms of what people complain most about because it's what we experience most.
It's phenomenal to think about when it was built and the fact it has been used constantly and remained relevant as a place of learning, motivation and creativity. It's not some private company hq, it's there for the benefit of everyone and one of the few buildings that public money should be used to rebuild it.

The strip itself may not be too bad. It is the sponsor which is hideous. I'm sure there is a league rule about the height and size of the sponsors logo on strips. Fingers crossed that shield thing is breaking the rule. Pozbaird may be able to shed some light since he was involved in designing past strips.

The strip itself may not be too bad. It is the sponsor which is hideous. I'm sure there is a league rule about the height and size of the sponsors logo on strips. Fingers crossed that shield thing is breaking the rule. Pozbaird may be able to shed some light since he was involved in designing past strips.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/nov/16/eric-djemba-djemba-manchester-united
I remember reading this article before Xmas. Thought it was a bit of PR piece in order to get his name in the mix before the transfer window. Did not think he'd end up with us.
Fingers crossed his signing benefits us. I can't help thinking there are a lot of folk getting excited because it's a name we all recognise. In truth he has not achieved a huge amount. If he is using us as a shop window then hopefully he turns it on like Goncalves.

The "ego" just keeps getting bigger and bigger.
God help us if Lennon leaves.
Just to add an alternative point of view, if you can allow some people to speak for themselves, I would wait until the end of the season before making any rational decision.
Thanks for reading this BOD.

The League Cup win certainly didn't boost the bank balance.

Do we need another thread going over the same thing?
Good point though, think it should just be in the correct thread

I like that detail. n the past, I've thought we should try that on a second strip. Always thought a white/grey outline on a black strip would look smart.
Like both the strips but reckon the red would look smarter if the stripe was narrower.

First, the playing field already has planning permission so sod all can be done about it.
Secondly, as it was an existing playing field the proposal automatically met the criteria of "Renfrewshire Local Plan Policy and the objectives of SPP11, in that it will protect and enhance active recreational open space use of the site".
Thirdly, it was noted by the case officer that there would be an increase in use of the facilty and, as such, recommended that a curfew of 2130 be imposed and that floodlights must be switched off by this time. Consequently, in order to protect local amenity, this was imposed as a condition of the planning permission. (the residents had requested a 2100 curfew in a letter of objection).
Fourth, the residents requested that the facility be restricted "to the exclusive use of St. Mirren F.C. with all activities being overseen by their officials to prevent inappropriate language or behaviour which could cause distress to local households". They also raised concern, "with regards to the conditions of the lease and the potential for the playing fields to be operated by St. Mirren FC as a commercial venture"
As neither were issues that Planning could impose, St.Mirren out of courtesy agreed to it.
Fifthly, the planning committee actually asked that the fences be raised. St. Mirren indicated that they would be raised to five metres, which is in-line with other council playing fields.
The case officer suggested that this be reviewed after six months if balls in gardens proved a problem (Excuse me missus, can ah huv ma baw back?).
They had the opportunity to object and they did. The planning approval took their concerns in to consideration. That's the point of the democratic process furfuxake.
It was a midden beforehand and St.mirren have come in and spent money on and probably improved the amenity of the area.
The funny thing is, the bowling club next door has a a licensed bar and is used until much later than half 9. It's probably worse in terms of being an anti-social neighbour.