beyond our ken

Really, cos one of the said soldiers sits right across from me at work and according to him the UK members of the UN PEACEKEEPING MISSION never once went on an offensive

How much better would life had been if your dad had found a rubber, even a dingy(sic) one, on that fateful night, decades ago?

So tuned in to BBC Shortbread to cast an eye over Hibs, trying to gauge how we might fair against them if they miss out on the play off spot. Feck me, never mind the Hibees! Could we live with Livvy if they stay up?
Then it struck me, they play as a team, and this season certainly post TC we look anything like a collective trying to pull together, and the departures this week speak volumes for where we are! Even injured players are willing to cut their losses and go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

if the contractual balance is paid up as a lump sum for severance purposes then the first 30K is tax free, so maybe the club offered a lower sum and the players agreed to split the difference as as 80% tax free is probably more than 100% of their due subject to tax
none of these players would have been due 30K but it would still be worth their while
As regards the OP, it makes me laugh when a complete non-entity labels a well-intentioned player like Osbourne a failure. I'd like to see how he reacted to being in the same situation
Thoroughly bad form to crow over someone geting their jotters, whatever the reason. I wonder if he will display the same glee when non playing staff are let go.

I have recently contracted Blepahritis, giving me very sore eyes.
the doctor thinks it is an infection, but I suspect it is reading too much of this kind of shit that's causing it

I have recently contracted Blepahritis, giving me very sore eyes.
the doctor thinks it is an infection, but I suspect it is reading too much of this kind of shit that's causing it

How bitter and twisted
Pretty much backs up what i said about him being an unpleasant drunk who seems to be just as unpleasant when sober
and look at the twisting and turning he indulged in until the evidence was produced-it would have been far more credible to fess up.
always funny to see a liar busted

How bitter and twisted
Pretty much backs up what i said about him being an unpleasant drunk who seems to be just as unpleasant when sober
and look at the twisting and turning he indulged in until the evidence was produced-it would have been far more credible to fess up.
always funny to see a liar busted

I'd think you'd find that the bottom club will still go down Colin

any chance he has been moved ahead of a big event of some sort,

Most of those were post-lennon signings
the one you give pass marks to was a Lennon signing
You could argue ( I would) that Wylde was an excellent player in the last few matches he had under lennon and has disappeared since
I think grainger was a reasonable punt given the level he had been at before his injury and he was moved on when it clearly wasn't going to work for him.
All in, you learn more in the hard times than you do in the good and Lennon could have been give another 6 months to see if he had taken his lumps and moved on.
One thing is for sure, if he keeps Alloa up and gets them a good start to next season his name will be back on a few short lists when managers start getting pumped in October

Signings have been a problem-we've had more than our fair share of bad ones, but whose fault has that been? i find it hard to believe that the managers who got us Thomson, Teale, Dummet, Newton, Concalves et al have suddenly lost their ability to spot a prospect. There has to be more to it. just as a good player doesnt go bad overnight a good manager and coach doesnt lose their grip in a few weeks. What would be interesting to know is, what is the club's signing policy? presumably (maybe a big assumption) they have tiers of salaries that are available to the manager each year. for the last few years, Goodwin, Thomson and Teale have probably been the top earners and all were on the tail end of their useful life. this means that it was very likely that the players we could sign were all middle or lower tier salary targets, the available pool of which will always be made up of
Journeymen under acheivers who have something to prove and are therefore (possibly) worth a gamble players on the down-slope who can add a bit of experience and sparkle kids unknown quantities from abroad & the lower leagues All of whom represent an unquantifiable gamble. If this is the case, as i suspect but cant prove that it is, then even Craig gets cut a wee bit of slack. Given the way Newton and Dummet played it was worth taking a risk on Adam Campbell and the MC kids. problem is that our safety net of talented old-timers no longer have the legs to cover their mistakes and bring them on, young players under pressure can go off very quickly.
I would quite easily believe that if GT went to the board and said he could move on 2 players taking £45k a year each and asked to bring 3 x 30K players in to spread his bet then the board would say "we'll have that 90k, but just pick your best hunch and sign one of the bargain boys".
As i said before, we need a proper review, as business men should be able to do for themselves, of all of the decisions that have been made. I'll thow a contentious one into the ring, has the money pumped into the Ralston complex been the best use of our resource? When you look at the likes of hearts and Hibs, ploughing capital into off-site training and academy facilities has been part of their downfall and it could be argued that that money might have been better spent on a couple of real up & comers every couple of years, or maybe on decent corporate facilities that took advantage of our strategic off-airport location and then supplied a St Johnstone style flow of funds that support good signings and youth development. When you look at it, how much have we recouped in transfer fees from the Ralston outlay? It has helped make us so potless that we end up seriously underselling our pre-academy talent just to make ends meet (everybody else knows this and takes full advantage).
You have to embrace risk as the return on a safe bet is usually negligible. Unfortunately, our prudent model has almost certainly contributed to our downfall. The only saving grace is that our assets are useless as anything other than football infrastructure and will be unlikely to be stripped off, one key reason why there is no credible bid in 5 years could be that there is nothing to secure an investment against.
What looked like a shiny new future 5 years ago quickly turned into disappointment as the support were intorduced to the new stadium and people said then that this could be the death of the club as we knew it. We are now a husk of that shiny wee dream.

Signings have been a problem-we've had more than our fair share of bad ones, but whose fault has that been? i find it hard to believe that the managers who got us Thomson, Teale, Dummet, Newton, Concalves et al have suddenly lost their ability to spot a prospect. There has to be more to it. just as a good player doesnt go bad overnight a good manager and coach doesnt lose their grip in a few weeks. What would be interesting to know is, what is the club's signing policy? presumably (maybe a big assumption) they have tiers of salaries that are available to the manager each year. for the last few years, Goodwin, Thomson and Teale have probably been the top earners and all were on the tail end of their useful life. this means that it was very likely that the players we could sign were all middle or lower tier salary targets, the available pool of which will always be made up of
Journeymen under acheivers who have something to prove and are therefore (possibly) worth a gamble players on the down-slope who can add a bit of experience and sparkle kids unknown quantities from abroad & the lower leagues All of whom represent an unquantifiable gamble. If this is the case, as i suspect but cant prove that it is, then even Craig gets cut a wee bit of slack. Given the way Newton and Dummet played it was worth taking a risk on Adam Campbell and the MC kids. problem is that our safety net of talented old-timers no longer have the legs to cover their mistakes and bring them on, young players under pressure can go off very quickly.
I would quite easily believe that if GT went to the board and said he could move on 2 players taking £45k a year each and asked to bring 3 x 30K players in to spread his bet then the board would say "we'll have that 90k, but just pick your best hunch and sign one of the bargain boys".
As i said before, we need a proper review, as business men should be able to do for themselves, of all of the decisions that have been made. I'll thow a contentious one into the ring, has the money pumped into the Ralston complex been the best use of our resource? When you look at the likes of hearts and Hibs, ploughing capital into off-site training and academy facilities has been part of their downfall and it could be argued that that money might have been better spent on a couple of real up & comers every couple of years, or maybe on decent corporate facilities that took advantage of our strategic off-airport location and then supplied a St Johnstone style flow of funds that support good signings and youth development. When you look at it, how much have we recouped in transfer fees from the Ralston outlay? It has helped make us so potless that we end up seriously underselling our pre-academy talent just to make ends meet (everybody else knows this and takes full advantage).
You have to embrace risk as the return on a safe bet is usually negligible. Unfortunately, our prudent model has almost certainly contributed to our downfall. The only saving grace is that our assets are useless as anything other than football infrastructure and will be unlikely to be stripped off, one key reason why there is no credible bid in 5 years could be that there is nothing to secure an investment against.
What looked like a shiny new future 5 years ago quickly turned into disappointment as the support were intorduced to the new stadium and people said then that this could be the death of the club as we knew it. We are now a husk of that shiny wee dream.

there are no options to the status quo
Best scenario would be that the board hand over day to day control to someone else
Fan's best involvement would be to raise capital to invest in revenue-generating facilities
I can't think of a single"fan" (or "customer") that i would want to see within 100 miles of the boardroom

Nobody saying he is making a good job of things or that he is not partly to blame, what I am saying (though it should have been plain just from reading my post but I'll make it clear for those struggling with it) is that just getting rid only serves the purpose of punishment
at some point, a manager will be appointed by St Mirren who makes a few mistakes, gets time to learn from them and grows some success at the club as a result. Until that time we will continue to surge up and down the leagues on an erratic basis
Suddenly, there is a rule that says having friends is a bad thing.
i don't think Brian Caldwell is the problem at the club. And I'm not sure that making those decisions is anywhere near his remit anyway. i know some of the people you associate with have a problem with Brian, but that is based on their petty gripes about not getting Brian to do their beck and call. The guy is focussed on the bigger picture at the club
The risk we face is that constantly firing off scattershots at those working at the club will probaby move those people on, but they will be replaced with lesser indiviuals or people who have it ALL to learn. That really will be dark days.
What we need is some leadership and an open, honest review of the last 5 years so that people can pick out the lessons to be learned and get us back on track with a plan.

so get rid, but not necessarily replace?
are you only interested in punishing him? Remember he took on a thankless task, probably knowing his old job could be on the line if he refused. He gave it his best shot knowing that if he wasnt ready he could be risking his future reputation and career as a coach?
OK, it didn't work out, but advocating he be made an example of is pretty poor form

so get rid, but not necessarily replace?
are you only interested in punishing him? Remember he took on a thankless task, probably knowing his old job could be on the line if he refused. He gave it his best shot knowing that if he wasnt ready he could be risking his future reputation and career as a coach?
OK, it didn't work out, but advocating he be made an example of is pretty poor form