WeeBud

There'll be some surprised and others not AS surprised as some!!!

I suppose we shouldn’t mention Stubbs 58 wins in 100 games at Hibs then.....just in case it skews your stats!!

I believe John Kennedy is in Dubai or certainly was the other day.......he has definitely shown an interest in the job.

I know you didn't have permission from at least one of the guys in your original post and that he would rather you didn't namecheck him on-line!!

He really isn’t, he’s a deluded has-been that never was..........find one person, other than Tommy Sheridan or Craig Brown, that’s got a truly good word to say about him!!

Don't forget....."all we are saying, is shoot Maggie Faulds"!!

I wasn’t justifying it Renfrew, I was only pointing out to the previous poster that things like this have always gone on

I don't think it has changed that much....it's pretty common knowledge that Fergie was talking to Aberdeen while still employed by St Mirren and without permission (I'm not saying that is what JR has done). The biggest difference now I think is that information and news is more readily available and spreads more quickly because of the internet and social media.

Hybrid pitches are on average 4% synthetic and I think there are plenty of pitches in the EPL that are Hybrid, they play just the same as all grass pitches.

Div, as you seem to be well versed in such things......would you know anyone that would or could replace the screen of a SurfacePro??

Interesting stuff Kemp.......I started following St Mirren on a regular basis around 1975 and witnessed the birth and growth of Fergie's Furies, it was brilliant stuff both on and off the field. There was a real bond between The Manager, The Team, The Supporters and The Town. I was a youngster then and the whole dynamic surrounding St Mirren fitted perfectly. I loved 99-2000 but I have to say that this year has been as close as it has ever felt to that time. It may well be because, at 14, my youngest is experiencing almost all I have described above but I would say that this season wins it for me especially with the symmetry of handing out a doing to the Dundee United (one of my favourite ever games) along the way.

It's not, and never has been, the £2.00 fund that has ever bothered me....it's the fact that without prior consultation re "proposed changes to the constitution" with the membership they have had a vote on borrowing "ring-fenced" money against future quarterly spending proposals. I allowed my heart to over-rule my head.......with my heart I voted for the proposal but with my head I know that it was "poor governance" for it to happen the way it did. In hindsight and on reflection I allowed the emotional attachment override my true feelings on the matter

I believe that to be the case BoK, Davis would have been guaranteed an extra season had he played a certain number of games as it would have automatically triggered his extension. As he didn't the club now have the choice on whether to keep him or not. That's how it was explained to me anyway and I think Davis said something similar on "Buddievision" and also that he hoped it would happen as his family are happy here (that was certainly my daughters take on the interview). Maybe the club are using his second season as a bargaining chip and re-negotiating to get him to effectively have a third season here ie a two year deal from now.

The closest I can think of is Dumbarton but its got the black and gold hoop in the middle

That's good news Ian, I've just run it past the good lady and she thinks popping over for the festival is a great idea. I love the Bistro and the food is very good....the hotel is our hostelry of choice most Friday evenings and occasional other days, the food in there is excellent too and the dining room (usually open on Friday and Saturday evenings) is a great environment for a meal out. Pop into the Station Bar every now and again as my pal lives across the road from there but never had a blether about the football with the owner, I will next time though. I'll also pop in and say hi the next time I'm across in Rothesay, Ally

As it isn't running the same weekend as "TMF" this year I may well pop over IoBS. I've seen Skipinnish, Roddy Woomble, The Hoosiers and Dougie MacLean at festivals in the last year and all were excellent. I'll probably wait to see who a few more of the acts are before making a final decision..........does it usually sell out or are there tickets usually available at the time of the festival? I live in Inverkip so it's just a walk to the ferry terminal and onto the ferry for me so I'd definitely head over if the weather is decent....maybe see you there!!

Can you remember how that worked out EAB??

possibly more accurate now!!

I know it's not quite the same but I've been thinking quite a lot about this and also how a similar kind of situation at my Golf Club would be dealt with. The main difference is obviously that we pay "subs" to be a member and use the facilities of the club. However, those that can afford, can choose to put extra cash into various funds ie tree fund, continuous course development fund, clubhouse development fund and a couple of others. All of these funds have the monies ring-fenced and, as per the club constitution, cannot be dipped into or loaned from to cover any other costs within the club. There would have to be a vote to change the constitution first and if passed then new rules would have to be drafted and passed before any potential proposals for loans, gifts or any other disbursement of funds were even considered from "each" fund. All this is for very good reason, to make sure that a) it's not a simple decision to take and gives everyone a voice at each stage of the process to either agree or disagree with each aspect in turn. What I find staggering if I follow the process above is that we have to go through all of that to deal with the "discretionary" funds rather than the main funds of the club and yet in our current situation it is the main funds that we are changing the process for with an apparent disregard for good governance and due process. As I said earlier, despite my misgivings I voted yes but my real concerns now are what this disregard for due process and good governance could lead to in the future!!

I wasn't criticising Drew but was probably our best chance on the night, it was right in front of where were sitting/standing and his shirt was also being pulled by the defender.

If only he had stuck his chance away on Tuesday night we wouldn't need to have this bit of the discussion....it would also have been a fitting end to his time with us!!

It isn't due to it's attachment to Part 2, they are two very separate questions. One is very simply about whether we should change from the original plan and should be voted on purely and only on that basis.

Thanks Tsu, small change but should still be accurate!!

Surely the short-sightedness is within SMiSA by making such a ham-fisted problem out of a very simple situation. Absolutely none of these people should be lost by poor decision making and riding rough-shod over the membership. It should so obviously be a two part scenario if the legality of what is proposed is watertight:- Part 1) Does the membership wish for the £10.00 (or £21.00) part of the monthly contribution to remain absolutely ring-fenced for purchasing shares as was the original process. No mention of what the monies might be spent on should have been mentioned or that the club had plans for the money.....if answer is yes then that should be final, if no then...... Part 2) Does the membership agree that £50,000.00 of "ring-fenced" money should be given to the club (again not sure of the legality here but honest enough to admit it) in a lump sum and replenished from the next 5/6 quarterly "pots" with the understanding that it will leave no room for any other "community" or "club" based projects. For the record I voted Yes but to me it is obvious that if that process had been followed, without the emotional knowledge of what the money would be spent on, at least the members who may feel aggrieved from the current deviation from the original plan could have put their "due process" opinions into the debate at the correct stage. Any loss of numbers, in my opinion, lies at the feet of the SMiSA Board..............when I signed up my hope was that we would have "supporter" influence on the St Mirren Board and not the other way round. You may well be working in "Risk Management" Baz but your debating style may need re-modelling if you wish to carry others, with differing opinion, over to your side of the fence.

Was that not Mrs Miller??