Tam M

We will be relegated, there's no doubt about that. 3-4 players won't be enough to save us.

The decision to bring on Clarkson was absolutely baffling. Has JR not been watching what happens when he comes on?

A few people had a go at me when I got torn into Clarkson today. He was stood getting torn into McAlister for something he had done. The lad is what 17? and has done more than Clarkson has done all season.

I can take getting beat but there was no fight from the team today something we've seen too often this season.

We will be relegated, there's no doubt about that. 3-4 players won't be enough to save us.

The decision to bring on Clarkson was absolutely baffling. Has JR not been watching what happens when he comes on?

A few people had a go at me when I got torn into Clarkson today. He was stood getting torn into McAlister for something he had done. The lad is what 17? and has done more than Clarkson has done all season.

I can take getting beat but there was no fight from the team today something we've seen too often this season.

We will be relegated, there's no doubt about that. 3-4 players won't be enough to save us.

The decision to bring on Clarkson was absolutely baffling. Has JR not been watching what happens when he comes on?

A few people had a go at me when I got torn into Clarkson today. He was stood getting torn into McAlister for something he had done. The lad is what 17? and has done more than Clarkson has done all season.

I can take getting beat but there was no fight from the team today something we've seen too often this season.

We will be relegated, there's no doubt about that. 3-4 players won't be enough to save us.

The decision to bring on Clarkson was absolutely baffling. Has JR not been watching what happens when he comes on?

A few people had a go at me when I got torn into Clarkson today. He was stood getting torn into McAlister for something he had done. The lad is what 17? and has done more than Clarkson has done all season.

I can take getting beat but there was no fight from the team today something we've seen too often this season.

Even game so far, I think we've had most of the ball but not done much with it. Defence looks very vulnerable and it was a poor goal to lose.

The next 45 minutes are massive.

Aye, it's called an app on yer phone.

You can't buy on the same day as the match online - need to get them from ticket office.

Dundee United stream is pish. Not a patch on St Mirren's.

Didn't vote for the money to go to the players budget, but my issue was the lack of alternative options. I hope we can get more options on the list going forwards.

I wouldn't have Sevco or Celtic in Scottish football at all.

On the under soil heating,a £15k loan to fix it in time for the Morton game, which going by the almost 5000 crowd at the last one, means that for this match the club could take in £40k or more on top of the average gate receipts so far this season, led me to vote that it was given this time and that it be interest free,because i do not believe SMiSA should be making money from the club.I was initially against the idea but then considered the figures and decided it was better to loan it than not,because if the game was not able to go ahead then the re-arranged game possibly being a week night game would almost certainly have reduced the amount of gate money by a significant amount,and even if that was not the case,i believe the money would be of more use sooner rather than later,and on my other concern,i was advised that the repair work could be done within a week and have the heating ready if needed for the derby match.So all things considered i decided it was best to loan it and lose a very small amount of interest (approx., £5 a month as Div said) from the bank.
The money surplus noted in the accounts for the year ending in May 2016 has more than likely been spent by now,i will not know when and how until the next set of accounts are published and even then it may not be clear,but i can see that it was possibly spent on the managerial change or even on new contracts given to players before Gordon actually took ownership,i simply do not know.I do know that the club has a budget and that every penny gets allocated within that budget.Which takes me on to the request for additional funding for the player budget,the money could be used to part fund new players or to get young players signed to a new contract.The club asked for it to be considered for the £2 pot spend due in January and that is what the members have been asked to consider,spend on player budget or keep it in the bank.The majority vote will win and i will accept that.The manager would get that money and it's up to him on how it's spent.
I agree that ideally there should be more than a "spend it on only 1 proposal or save it" option every quarter,so i would ask all supporters to use the contact methods on the SMiSA website to suggest options,and be aware you don't need to be a member to make contact with SMiSA.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

If you had said three weeks ago we would have picked up 7 out of 9 points then I would have bitten your hand off.

As expected Ayr sat back trying to hit us on the break with us having most of the ball. I felt we needed either Sutton to give us someone to aim for, or Hardie to get the ball in behind. I thought Shanklands done ok (apart from the penalty) but he's not someone you can play up front himself.

Had we scored the penalty we would have went on to win. Sadly we lost our concentration after that until Ayr stuck one in. To be fair our heads didn't drop, we got stuck in and managed to get a point.

Sadly the results around us didn't go our way, but we can only focus on our own results and hope things go in our favour elsewhere.

But it's nice to look forward to the next game again.

Just received the latest SMISA mailing regarding the next £2 pot to be spent.

"There are other types of project we want to and will put before you in future – but we feel if there was ever a time to prioritise investment in the playing budget, it is now."

If the majority of members want to vote for that then fine. But it shouldn't be an option between investing in the playing squad or keeping the money. It seems that the SMISA committee are making a decision then giving us a yes/no vote on it. Instead of letting us vote on all available options.

It's been mentioned on here several times that the various spending options would be put forward to be voted for. Why are SMISA preventing us on voting for some of these projects just now? The £8k pot could allow us to purchase the disabled shelters for the corners at the time of year the weather is at its worse, something I would rather we paid for now instead of the playing squad budget or keeping the money.

If the majority still voted for the playing squad then that's fine, that's where the money should be spent, but the alternative options should be available to be voted on. It seems like SMISA are deciding what options to give us, instead of giving us all the options.

We have also loaned the club 15k to fix the USH, I have no issue with this. But it should be a decision for the members to decide. I appreciate it was a matter of urgency but could the club not have waited 24 hours? In this day and age where Mailchimp takes 5 minutes to issue a quick mailing, and most people emails are linked to their phone, we could easily have carried out a flash vote.

This doesn't sit well with me. It's not the committees place to decide what takes priority it's for the members to decide.

There are posters on here today celebrating that we have lost a £25 per month member.
Unbelievable.

Just received the latest SMISA mailing regarding the next £2 pot to be spent.

"There are other types of project we want to and will put before you in future – but we feel if there was ever a time to prioritise investment in the playing budget, it is now."

If the majority of members want to vote for that then fine. But it shouldn't be an option between investing in the playing squad or keeping the money. It seems that the SMISA committee are making a decision then giving us a yes/no vote on it. Instead of letting us vote on all available options.

It's been mentioned on here several times that the various spending options would be put forward to be voted for. Why are SMISA preventing us on voting for some of these projects just now? The £8k pot could allow us to purchase the disabled shelters for the corners at the time of year the weather is at its worse, something I would rather we paid for now instead of the playing squad budget or keeping the money.

If the majority still voted for the playing squad then that's fine, that's where the money should be spent, but the alternative options should be available to be voted on. It seems like SMISA are deciding what options to give us, instead of giving us all the options.

We have also loaned the club 15k to fix the USH, I have no issue with this. But it should be a decision for the members to decide. I appreciate it was a matter of urgency but could the club not have waited 24 hours? In this day and age where Mailchimp takes 5 minutes to issue a quick mailing, and most people emails are linked to their phone, we could easily have carried out a flash vote.

This doesn't sit well with me. It's not the committees place to decide what takes priority it's for the members to decide.

Whilst I don't agree with putting the money towards the playing budget I am happy to accept what the majority vote for. However, my concern is that the members are not getting all the options available put to them. For example getting the shelters for the remaining disabled people for the corners, especially at this time of the year would be a priority for me.
I'm pretty sure on the USH thread it was mentioned several times that all the options would be put forward and then they could be voted on. That's all I want and thought I was getting... But instead I'm left disappointed that we either have a Yes or No poll for what the committee deem as being priority.

According to a St Mirren director who engaged on a Tweet of mine last night stating the club need to live within its means, if we lived within our means Alex Rae would still be the manager.... Bit concerning he's implying we're not living within our means - who is picking up the loss then?

My view would be that reducing expenditure elsewhere to pay off a contract is living within means, but SMISA topping up a wage budget isn't...

With regards to the loan, again, don't have an issue with loaning the club money and don't necessarily feel a need to vote on this as the money would be returned. But to state that they wanted to consult the membership but couldn't because of time restrictions is lame. It takes five minutes to send out an email to the members.