bazil85

I'd probably be spending most of my time pointing out that his comments about 'make-believe' and 'dreamt up' don't make any sense, yes. Although I'd get plenty of sleep after that because he clearly has no argument at all to back-up his nonsense.

You do, in contract law, he would of had to sign to the change in terms. What Jack Ross was making in January was the same as what he was making in March- May. Same goes for the compensation. Would of been great if he signed a new deal that protected us more but I can see his point in not doing it.

Well you clearly never read my post did you? I was the one saying there was no contract signed in February

Tony has came out and said no contract was signed in February apparently.

Not even sure where to go with that, it's almost like you completely missed my point I was making about giving a bigger contract when the league was pretty much one and a tiny buyout... You're right thouh it doesn't matter because that didn't happen. Good thing it seems the board agreed with me that would be maddness and not you that it would be perfectly fine. Oh yeah I'm sure any contract talks with Jack wouldn't of included chat of more money

But we need to make sure they ask their oppinion on Sammy at the interview of course...

St Mirren 14 points clear at top of Scottish Championship in February St Mirren offer Jack Ross a new contract on a whole bunch more money with a tiny release clause allowing him to leave whenever a club can pay what is ultimately pennies for bigger clubs Soctty - Perfectly fine Fitzy - no such contract in February, that story wasn't true Soctty - Yeah but that would still be acceptable, you live in a fictional world No bother

Well it looks like Tony has confirmed there was no contract in February anyway. Kinda backs up giving him a huge payrise in February with a tiny buyout would be 'beyond ridiculous' don't you think?

I think it's either that or someone has been spinning lies about a new contract in February. Nothing offical came from the club.

Yes, I'm looking out for pigs flying currently. Not confirmed the £50k is accurate yet but if it is, whoever signed off on that deal needs training, disciplined or sacked... Or possibly all of the above. Fair play to Jack Ross and his agent for getting that gem of a deal if it turns out to be true. Big payrise for four months then offski for a nominal amount. The mind boggles. (again assuming it's correct)

Signing a deal with a £50k buyout isn't keeping your prized asset, it's packing his bags for him. At the stage in February we were in the position to negotiate based on the assumption we'd very likely be in the SP with or without him there for the rest of the season. It was very much job done. I can't think of one logical reason to make him the highest paid manager in our history for four months then give him the option to leave for pennies. Second & third paragraph, yeah working on assumptions. Like I said my first post was asking if someone could clarify it, I'm not saying this is 100% the case. I sincerely hope it's not true because if it, it's beyond ridiculous and whoever signed the deal off needs to have a word with themselves.

I feel we need to give him the benefit of the doubt on this. It's an assumption right now that he's done anything underhanded. Much more likely he's left it in the hands of an agent.

Possibly but it doesn't make great business sense at all. Giving someone a payrise and a clause that will mean you'll lose him in a few months for next to nothing anyway. The two are contradicting. No reason that giving the payrise couldn't of been on the grounds we protect our asset. £50k - £500k is nothing to a team in EC or Sunderland. On the same note, the amount we paid him extra for that few months will be a drop in the ocean compared to the Sunderland deal. I hope it's not true, it reflects a massive waste of money and a very poor business mind. A few people doubting the contract was actually signed in February. I'm starting to think that's more likely. No offical word from the club that it was I don't think. Maybe someone can clarify.

Oh aye dreadful. He got in the team of the week a good few times, made some massive saves (a few were absolutely world class) and broke a record. But it was all down to the defenders, we didn't even need a goalkeeper. I forgot you knew better than the MOTY, his staff and 99% of St Mirren fans The manager that got us promoted should of been sacked for offering a player a new contract, top trolling Shull. Have to say, back to your best.

Did Sammy do something inapproriate to you on the pitch after the Livi game or something?

Or another way to put it 'Jack Ross has been able to comand what he deserves for being a successful manager, that saved us from L1 football one season, then got us to the SP the 2nd. Him and his agent neogtiating a pitiful £50k release clause is a slight on whoever signed-off on the deal and not on Jack Ross in any way, shape or form'

If it has any impact on season tickets, the 'fans' than don't renew should be ashamed of themselves

I hope so, if someone signed-off on a £50k buyout clause and a massive wage increase for Jack Ross with us 14 points clear in February, they deserve to be instantly removed from their contract negotiation position.

This is my point, I agree with you. But why would we give him a new contract in February if it didn't offer us any further protection? Surely we'd just say stay on your same contract and go? It doesn't make any sense to get him to sign a new contract that offers us no further protection but gives him more money. If that's the case we'd of been better letting him leave, there's no way the league was being lost after February.

Sunderland AFC On 23rd May 2018, Jack Ross was named Manager of Sunderland AFC on an initial 2 year deal From Wiki, someone just can't wait

Can someone clarify the compensation situation? I don't understand it at all, some of the figures being quoted are shocking! According to most people Jack signed a new contract in February after the Barsnley interest when we were 14 points clear and the league was pretty much over. Surely anyone at the club negotiating with Jack Ross on this would be saying 'We'll give you more money but the league is over, we want a clause that means you can't walk away for pennies in the summer.' Win/ Win he gets more money and we get a fair compensation package. So where is the £50k compensation figure coming from?? If that's true we would of been better not giving him a new contract, saving the extra money we would of been paying him a month and letting him go if a club wated him in the summer for whatever the compensation was in his previous contract. I'm not saying this is the case, I'm asking if anyone has any more clarity on this?

Because they're in no rush and want to make the correct decison. they want to hear what Hurst has to say and make an informed decison on both candates. Saying they want Hurst more is only speculation and is based on nothing. He isn't available to talk right now it doesn't mean he's their number one. However in saying that, it looks like Ipswich have shot themselves in the foot by holding off. Very likely it'll be Hurst or back to the drawing board now.

After writting that big long message it looks like I could of just held off five minutes to prove this isn't accurate

Not sure how you can say it's accurate. Do you know something we don't? As far as has been made public, he could have been interviewed, they could want him and he's thinking it over, they're waiting for him to come back. These are all just as possible as your assumption. Which IMO is a needlessly negative one. As for the rest of your dressing down of our manager. Jack Ross won two MOTY awards, one by his peers. Your post is hinting at him not being as good as the other managers linked to the job which is simply wrong. I have no idea why a St Mirren fan would be so negative about our manager, when you can see the names he's up against. For one, there's nothing wrong with Linkedin, it's something I'm sure will be used in the future like for millions of businesses, it seemed to work seeing as the players he brought in January completed a great escape and for a considerable part of the end of the season were the most inform team, so what exactly is your issue with it? It's effectiveness? Looking at the managers linked: Rae absolutely nothing I need to say about him, lets be honest. Lennon, he failed miserably at Bolton, a team at a similar level. He'd of loved a 50% hit rate on signings, did okay this season to get 4th... With a team that had the 5th biggest budget Coleman has already failed in the role if we take LPM logic on JR getting Alloa relegated (as hilarious as that is) Mick McCarthy good pedigree but has moved Ipswich backwards in last five years, Michael Appleton doesn't have the most glittering CV and limited recent managerial experience and success. Are you saying all or at least most of these names are a better fit than the manager of the team you support? A team that's won their (much more competitve) league by a bigger margin than Celtic? And you base that assumption on Linkedin and an alleged 50% (given the number of players he signed, I'm assuming you realised he knew they wouldn't all be able to play/ break in like pretty much any manager at this level) signing failure... Curious

Haha a few more predictions for eight years from now: Pozbaird will be in his latest huff at being Sinbinned Stuart D will be on his 465th Username LPM will still be raging about that manager we had, that had the front to ask for a better deal and talk to other clubs after leading us to the SP and getting MOTY awards Shull will be furious that a 42 year old Samson has just signed a new contract in his testimonial year heard it here first