WeeBud

He lived in Gourock for a wee while but not anymore

I don't think the overall intention is just to have it open only on match-days and will in time be used for the other things you mention

I think the rot had already started and the appointment of TC just made a bad situation a whole lot worse.

I agree with most of this BtB but what I struggle was the fact we paid a fee, indeed outbid Dundee Utd, for a player who wasn't a first pick in any position. Surely the manager should have a "nailed on role" in mind for such a signing.

elvis, on 24 Jan 2016 - 19:06, said: Not to be a stick in the mud, and I'm very keen to hear and consider the plans and whether to get involved when they're ready, but the wee bits quoted above is one of the concerns I'd have around "collective fan ownership". Any business needs business foundations in place, in St Mirren's case the board employ Brian Caldwell to all but run the business under their guidance and instruction. The idea of individual members, in this case Elvis, being given the floor to question individual members of staff's performances at a meeting to discuss buy-out plans and to discuss financial arrangements to fund the buy-out gives me the heebie-jeebies. It would, in my opinion, set the wrong tone for the whole process moving forward.

That is utter nonsense from start to finish Stuart, if you read all the posts around about the one I quoted you were sanctimoniously allowing us to understand how you knew more than everyone else due to your position with Wishaw Wanderers with regard to cancelling fixtures and the impending "sanctions" if things weren't done properly. From the post above the referee deemed the pitch playable in the morning (frost related) and again after lunch (snow related). St Mirren never "had" the match postponed the referee decided that due to deterioration in the weather since his previous inspection the pitch was no longer playable and he (the referee) postponed the fixture.

I may have paraphrased a little Stuart, you weren't talking about demands you were talking about sanctions. Stuart Dickson, on 17 Jan 2016 - 23:54, said:

A second inspection was "called" by the club due to changes in the weather (snow) not "arranged" by the referee after his first inspection to see if the pitch had "become" playable.

You yourself mentioned the demands of the governing bodies with regards to getting a game on so bearing in mind the referee had said after the first inspection "that subject to the pitch not getting any worse the game would go ahead" St Mirren should have stood back and done nothing to try and keep the pitch playable . If I try hard enough I can imagine the nonsense that would be tumbling from you had St Mirren not attempted to "keep" the pitch playable while other "local" games went ahead!!

How would St Mirren put the match off when the ref passed the pitch fit for play??

Just for shits and giggles old chap what is the common sense that St Mirren should have used after the ref's first inspection??

Just so I can follow your logic Shull..............what do you suggest that after the referee did his first check in the morning, declaring that subject to the pitch not getting any worse the game would go ahead, St Mirren should do at that point??

Whether that is right or wrong it was not a decision to be made by St Mirren but by the SFA representative (The Referee)!!

Maybe they (SMISA) weren't far along the road enough with their proposal to put an "EA" in place yet or maybe haven't asked for such an agreement but certainly not something (at least this bit) to hold against Douglas St.

He still is on a radio show albeit a different one..............

His final ball is dreadful on the odd occasion that he hasn't already lost it before deciding to try a pass!!

I wonder if it was LPM that made the anonymous call to someone in the media ??

I was replying to a post you thought worthwhile to compose!!

Whether they can be blamed for the fortunes or misfortunes is one thing but they can sure be blamed for the way they conducted themselves with threatening individuals, boycotts of anyone who even thought that the club/company had acted in any inappropriate way, the list could go on!!

From everything else you've said I thought it was the fact that they "have" done the bits in bold that were causing your disquiet!!

I've always enjoyed football at night under the floodlights. Some of my favourite games have been cup ties played at night in what seemed like wintry conditions.........Fulham, Feyenoord, Bristol City, Celtic, Motherwell (at the new ground) are games that spring easily to mind. I understand it might not be for everyone but I am really looking forward to tonight COYS

if only I'd stopped at two!!! Congratulations Davej

It was but it's a police issue regarding all-ticket at St Mirren!!

Although I have some sympathy with parts of your argument there was an option to buy at £12.00 and pick up your tickets on the night which was running for a while and also the £15.00 period. This , could have been done online or today by phone.

I'd guess the only benefit was that by agreeing his contract with a "buy-out" agreement (gentleman's I believe) was that we at least had his services for the first half of the season.......if the agreement was in place and the price was met then that's it, St Mirren weren't in control of the timing as that's the nature of these types of clauses.