WeeBud

Sooper-Dooper Human Rankpuller!!

I agree but that thought might be for a different day as contracts generally have a "term" length.

Is it possible that the club are in a commercial contract with the company that runs the shop and therefore only they can make use of the opportunity?

Although I agree with what you've said I think it would be fair to say that had we started the season with Jack Ross and the current squad we wouldn't be fannying around with relegation

Incorrect, please see above

Dillon didn't have to leave the pitch as the player who fouled him (Morgan) was booked

I think it was pretty cleverly worked IrvineBuddie and straight off the training ground. From our seats we could see Loy and a couple of others peel off to the back making it all look like it was a deep free-kick Their defenders went with them and I think that took Bell, and his concentration, away from the front post. The best bit is that on reading the match thread at home last night someone suggested it was just a cross that everyone missed and bounced in at the near post!!

McGinn was suffering from illness last week but asked to be considered for selection............I'd agree he didn't shine but didn't think the game passed him by either. Hopefully recovered by Wednesday night.

Don't really disagree LPM but I don't believe any of us know what conversations re "expectations" etc have gone on between GLS and Jack Ross or what the consequences for the current management team may be should they not realise the board's expectations. There has certainly been rhetoric around about our situation but what business truly opens itself to having those conversations in public. With regards to the so-called "JR's team" I would consider that the Dunfermline away draw as the start of seeing his players on the park. I have been at every game since and with the exception of Falkirk at home I'd say we've done OK, no better and no worse. That would be 3 wins, two away draws (to teams in reasonable form) and a disappointing home loss but in general and OK return and certainly a lot better than what had gone before it.

It was even worse for the Hamilton Scottish Cup tie, the goalies were up to their ankles in mud and they had tried sanding the goalmouths.

And missed a penalty which could/should have been 5 in the half

The pitch at East End Park is a shocker especially in the goalmouths.

OK, what claims are you concerned about with zero hours contracts (the bit you brought up)?

What kind of claim ?? You're mixing up zero hours contracts and NMW/NLW issues. Paying below NMW is illegal, utilising zero hour contracts (although in some cases immoral) isn't.

Can you imagine a keeper wearing whichever shirt he chooses and with a different supplier than the rest of the team today??

The costs of which they add to the hourly rate of pay..........they are an employee on a temporary basis and in the very vast majority of "agency" situations they are on zero hours contracts. Not direction AND control but direction OR control in your third sentence.

Except you can't be self-employed if you are working under supervision, direction or control and that the agency has no obligation to find them other work. You end up paying a "premium" on top of wages and only achieve an increase to your costs.

I think you are mixing up zero hours "employment" contracts and self-employed "contracts for service" here.......a lot of what you are saying is correct but all contributions for hours worked should be met under "zero hours" contracts as they are "employed" for the hours they work.

LPM, definitely agree with the bit in bold that ultimately priority is driving attendance figures towards where St Mirren get the benefit. I guess the argument at this juncture would be that if, in this one instance, a large away support benefits in the fight to stay in The Championship it will be easier to get people down to the 2021 in the higher league. It doesn't affect me personally as I'll unfortunately be driving (and my car is full to anyone looking for a lift) although as a SMiSA member I have an interest obviously.

Would it be good use of the "community spend" part of the monthly payment (the quarterly spend if you like), it would be difficult to argue that it wasn't being spent on the community that SMiSA is providing for. If there wasn't currently enough in the pot possibly it could be provided for "up front" and taken back from the next quarters generated funds.

I'm not sure I entirely agree Faraway.................I like debate and disagreement as long as it is carried out in a reasonably respectful manner ad I would actually avoid a dull/safe forum. For the record I don't think in any way StuD was the only person behaving in this manner and there was, in especial, a group of around 4 or 5 who followed him round the forum behaving in exactly the same manner as they criticised him for. There are also plenty of examples of the same kind of rubbish between other posters where threads were hijacked simply for opportunity to launch petty attacks and insults as opposed to discussing/debating whatever the thread was set up for. Unfortunately debate had become more about point scoring and abusing, at every opportunity, rather than discussing, debating, arguing whichever point was the order of the day.

Maybe he was on some sort of gardening leave with ICT and financially, at least in the short term, it didn't make sense for him...............it may be that subsequently a deal was reached between himself and ICT to come to an accommodation. There could be a million reasons!!

Even then I'm not too sure that some will accept him.

A piper either playing an "F" or striking a "G" or high "A".........................

From what I can gather the club agreed a fee with Barnsley and gave them permission to speak with Mallan, his bags were packed on the Thursday night waiting on the phone call.........it never came. It may also explain why his head maybe wasn't "in" the game on Saturday afternoon.