Jump to content

bazil85

Saints
  • Posts

    9,544
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by bazil85

  1. 14 hours ago, Scott-Leeds said:


    That’s a response from people who want to keep having votes until they get their desired result

    It was said, in their own words

    So , twice in 9 years is ok obviously, forgive me….. lets see the 2032 result as well? emoji2.png

    No man, woman or child has the right or power to demand once in a generation/ lifetime democratic votes. If it was ever said, it was as opinion not a factual view. 
     

    We live in a democracy & democratic votes are down to the will of the people. The question on votes always comes down to the mandate, not throwaway comments during a campaign… like such comments as,  a no vote is the only way for Scotland to stay in the EU or Boris Johnson won’t ever be PM. 

  2. 2 hours ago, Warrior Saint said:

    And your point is? I have watched him in youth team and never stood out there for me either.

    Well he has stood out to scouts from teams including Benfica, Bayern Munich & Rangers. I imagine they are better equipped to gauge his potential than you. 
     

    I can also only assume they’ve seen far more of him than you. 

  3. 1 hour ago, W6er said:

    If you're correct, what relevance does a contract have?

    I thought if his contract expired and he walked, we'd effectively be entitled to a development fee, but that would be negotiated and even decided by a third party in the event we couldn't agree.

    A contract protects us beyond next year, if he doesn’t sign one & leaves, yes it would go third party (if both sides don’t agree). 
     

    What that third party agrees would be based on a number of factors but we can compare to a few other examples. If Rangers got £500k for Gilmour, I can’t see how we could possibly be entitled to any less. 

  4. 3 hours ago, pod said:

    Goes to Rangers now, he won't get into first team. They'll bide there time until his contract ends. We'll carry on with his development.

    Maybe but this is risky on their part. If he continues to improve & attract interest, they increase their chance of missing out on him. 
     

    Again John McGinn is a good example, Celtic had the chance to sign him pretty much unopposed the second last year of his Hibs contract but chose not to meet the valuation & wait until the end of the next summer window & he attracted interest from Villa. 
     

    Will be interesting to see what happens but if they want him, we are in a strong position for a very good fee. I would be bitterly disappointed if he went for anything as low as £500k this summer. 

  5. 3 hours ago, W6er said:

    We should be looking for him to sign a new contract, but if he won't I'd cash in and ensure we get a decent sell on clause.

    No need to cash in with one year left on his contract at his age. We can let his contract expire and still get a decent amount of money & potential sell on because he’ll be under 23. 
     

    John McGinn as the perfect example. I would say an offer would need to be massive (easily 7 figures) to let him go this summer. 

  6. 1 minute ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

    Don’t see what relevance his age has in this.   Lambert & McGinn we’re both 17 when they were in the first team and attracting interest .

    fwiw, I think the lad has something about him , he must have for these clubs to be sniffing around.  I hope he does well at Saints and wherever he ends up , I hope he makes us a lot of money in the future .

    How many times can you possibly have seen him to conclude above teams like Benfica & Bayern Munich who have been tracking him? 
     

    Just because he hasn’t regularly played in the first team, doesn’t mean he isn’t a great prospect. He was one of the stand out in the game against the champions Celtic last season for example. 

  7. 8 hours ago, W6er said:

    Given his age we'd get a development fee regardless, wouldn't wee?

    Exactly, £400k this year can get in the sea. Surely when looking at comparables, the compensation we’d be owed would be higher than that at the end of his contract next year. 
     

    Billy Gilmour for example, never kicked a ball for the Rangers professional team, left at 16 & similar Scotland youth experience. They got £500k and add one for him. 
     

    Dylan Reid if he keeps progressing would likely have played a bunch more professional games, two years more development experience & have even more Scotland youth caps. We would have a strong case for larger compensation if he really looks like a prospect. 

  8. 2 hours ago, antrin said:

    The vote was based on what people knew then.

     

    things changed.  
     

    By all means have a new vote every time things change.

    THAT makes sense… in an ever-changing world.  It doesn’t matter, really.

    This for me is where the argument sits. Has there been enough material change to merit the SNP/ Greens going to the Scottish public at elections with a manifesto promise of a second vote? 
     

    My persoanl view is EU exit is enough of a change given it was factually one of the main arguments Better Together used for support & the Scottish voting publics more pro-EU stance.
     

    I think that’s significantly change rather than just general change that goes along with the world we live in. I wouldn’t support a second referendum just because we are in an ever changing world. 

  9. On 6/15/2022 at 12:17 PM, antrin said:

    Almost true, but not…

    London, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle Wirral, Sefton and so on… and also NI voted to remain.  Scotland losing that democratic vote is nothing special.

    if Scots votes were based on believing what they are TOLD by politicians, then they only have themselves to blame.  And it's not just English politicians who can be fuzzy with the truth.

    This is certainly true but it’s not a valid reason to stand in the way of democracy. ‘Should have known better the first time’ isn’t a good enough reason not to have a second vote. 
     

    Democratically the SNP & Green’s have stood on mandates for a second vote & they delivered a seat majority in the Scottish election. 
     

    Scottish voters can feel cheated about the last one based on the messages that were given by Better Together at the time but there was no real wrongdoing from what I can tell.

    It’s still a bit irrelevant regarding the mandate for Indyref2. The ask is only for the people to have their say based on what we know now. Don’t see any valid reason to why anyone would be against that. 

  10. 1 hour ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

    & if they do start trouble or kick spout any sectarian bile it will be easy to identify and eject them , a lot easier than ejecting 1200 when the party songs start .

    But far more risky if our fans react and start fighting because there isn’t the separation. 

  11. 8 hours ago, HSS said:

    I expect any away fans in the home ends will be ejected……….

    There will be plenty of them who will go undetected. Suppose this isn’t much of an issue if they’re keeping their heads down. It’s the risks from the ones causing trouble.

  12. 35 minutes ago, Scott-Leeds said:

    Scottish people voted against independence, but those for it still won’t accept the result

    Similarly, the collective vote was to leave EU and remainers still won’t accept it

    See, the theme is , 2 results were decisive and yet the argument seems to be ‘oh,well, lets not rest until we get our way’ from those who lost the vote

    We having best of 3 or is 1-1 ok ?

    Democracy doesn’t stand still. 

  13. 43 minutes ago, Rascal said:

    Good to see that you agree with the democratic decision to retain the family stand for home fans only. Fans were also asked if they would support others financially to come along to games. I see  this as a package deal where both come into play so will chip in.

    if we Increase our home crowd by 300 per home game, charge the OF, Hibs, Hearts and others who charge us more to attend their games and we will raise more as well as improve our match atmosphere. 

    Agreed, I assume enough fans have said they are willing to help out to bridge the gap on this & now I expect them to make good on that promise. Fingers crossed they do. 

  14. 2 hours ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

    You admit yourself it was a democratic decision so why would you or anyone else opposed not respect the democratic will of the majority and chip in now that it's clear that this is the feeling with the bulk of the support.

    I suspect those opposed will be willing this to fail just so they can score petty points. Even if we are relegated this is the right decision. No way should any club rely on money from sectarian bigots to stay in the league run by that Sectarian bigot cartel. If we cant then so be it, we watch us play and enjoy days out to Thistle, Ayr and Morton rather than sitting listening to utter bile coming from both ends of our stadium or at their heaps half a dozen times a season. There's more to footballing life than the OF scum.

    Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
     

    I don’t agree with that premise whatsoever regarding a democratic vote on a sports team. I pay plenty of money to St Mirren with my season ticket & SMISA membership. I’m not willing to pay anymore which is my right over & above any club decision. 
     

    I absolutely do not will anything to fail regarding the good for my club. I’m just not willing to pay extra money because fans have chosen empty seats.

  15. 50 minutes ago, Scott-Leeds said:


    Absolutely delighted also

    I appreciate however, we do have collective responsibility to address funds shortfall

    If our 4000 fans give just £2 donation each set of 11 fixtures each (£6 total) there’s £24k immediately ( prior to split )

    Obviously a better initiative than that but you get the idea

    Some fans won’t be willing to give any extra (including myself) as they were happy with the bums on seats. 
     

    In saying that, great the club has engaged supporters & made a democratic decision. I hope the fans who were screaming about this for years will now put their money where their mouth is & contribute more, including attending these games. 

  16. Latest spending ask (club pot) from SMISA 

    St Mirren women’s team ballot 

    The St Mirren women’s team is heading to Germany next month to take part in a tournament as part of their pre-season preparations. They have covered their own costs for accommodation, food and airport transportation but have asked if SMISA members can help cover the cost of their flights which, for 15 players and coaches, amounts to around £2700.

    The previous £2 Spend fund and ballot has been discontinued and was replaced in the new funding structure with the Club Pot, which can be used to cover this type of request subject to members' approval. 

  17. 7 hours ago, W6er said:

    Anybody can have an opinion. It doesn't mean that it's correct. You could claim the earth is flat or the moon is made of cheese. Our opinions as individuals do not count for much, but UEFA's opinion does matter, as they're the governing body for football in Europe.

     

    1122852330_Rangers.thumb.jpg.d2fd8179c0953b01a2e00b039a7ce3d6.jpg

    It isn’t opinion that the process for allowing a new club to join the league was followed. The below are statements of fact 

    - teams finishing 2nd in Scotlands top flight, don’t need to apply for membership the following season 

    - the governing bodies had no power to keep a liquidated member in the league, a new member would have to vote to join as we are members led 

    - the professional league being members led & members overwhelmingly voted (10 to 1 with 1 abstaining in the premier) that new members start at the bottom. This was also the view of the other 30 member clubs who voted democratically. 
    - the 1 vote for, was old Rangers who at the time were still a member. They voted on the new entity taking their place which shows a clear break in history. They couldn’t vote on themselves due to conflict of interest rules. 
    - the premise already exists in other clubs that have been liquidated  Gretna 2008 for example is not a continuation in anything other than spiritual successor 

    - UEFA don’t have the capability to undo any of the above regarding history & can only give their opinion. 

  18. 9 hours ago, W6er said:

    620695703_Screenshot2022-06-0721_13_30.thumb.png.22fee168475ab5bdb6c6292473ef9d81.png

     

    It appears UEFA see Rangers as the same club. @faraway saint what's confusing about that?

    Same club in spirit I’m sure, UEFA, FIFA, SPFL, SFA can have any opinion they like. They can’t change the factual nature of what happened in 2012 though.

    A new club was voted into the league structure. The Scottish member clubs voted democratically to allow a new club to join & that is key in this. 
     

    They aren’t special, they don’t get to continue where other clubs did not. Governing bodies opinions on the matter is irrelevant to fact. 

  19. 10 hours ago, exiledfan said:

    Agreed however put it in perspective only 211 MPs out of 650 in houses of parliament support the PM. That's tough to survive. 

    Around 70% backbenchers wanted him out as well. Survives through MP’s that are on the payroll. 
     

    Both May & Thatcher got stronger results and ultimately left. I don’t see him resigning though, the man has no shame whatsoever. 

×
×
  • Create New...