Sonny Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 If its a choice between Goal Machine or assistant then Farrell will need to continue taxi-ing (he'll get more money anyway as taxi drivers are all rich ). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 The problem might be there is no budget right now and he needs to move a few on first. We might still be paying for Spalding. It could mean come January we move a few out just to get his assistant in. We were paying for Murry and Miller the past few weeks so should be able to cope with paying Rae & A.N.Other I'd have thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 I thought Rae was being a bit optimistic to say there was budget for a couple of players on top of whatever can be created by punting some of the underachievers out on loan. We are probably paying Murray something, Spalding (and Craig, Teale etc), so I would suspect that he hadn't calculated whatever budget was being offered was to include his assistant as well. Just speculation mind, I know nothing... I doubt he was talking about their being upset players in the squad, surely that was taken as a given. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 We were paying for Murry and Miller the past few weeks so should be able to cope with paying Rae & A.N.Other I'd have thought. I thought Miller was doing it free? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSaints 12 Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Miller was Voluntary.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 I thought Miller was doing it free? Miller was Voluntary.... Yeah, that's what I originally thought. Not true though, he was being paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Ah well, just when you catch a glimpse of light at the end of the tunnel, you realise that it is an oncoming train.... We should know by now that nothing is EVER straightforward when it comes to the machinations of St Mirren FC, but I thought we might get through a week without any drama or jobbie/fan interface. This does have a whiff of slippery skitter about it. Edited December 22, 2015 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Graeme MacPherson did the article for the herald, he says he reckons it is definitely to do with the recruitment of his assistant. Maybe his choice (assume Farrell) is looking for more than the club is willing to pay, or a contract duration the club is unwilling to give. Dunno, but hopefully it gets sorted pronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Graeme MacPherson did the article for the herald, he says he reckons it is definitely to do with the recruitment of his assistant. Maybe his choice (assume Farrell) is looking for more than the club is willing to pay, or a contract duration the club is unwilling to give. Dunno, but hopefully it gets sorted pronto. Seemingly, Rae and Farrell worked as a very tight unit at Dundee, sometimes sitting up into the wee sma' hours pouring over tactics, selections, and strategies. It certainly looks likely that he would want his mate by his side. If so, then the BoD should grant him his wish given that they presumably appointed the guy on the basis they would be giving him scope to do things his way. Its hard to imagine that Farrell would command a huge wage, or be unduly difficult to negotiate with, given his current employment status (no disrespect to taxi drivers, but it is something he would have to work hard at to get a decent income, and he can always revert back to it should things not work out for him at Saints). Edited December 22, 2015 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 I thought Rae was being a bit optimistic to say there was budget for a couple of players on top of whatever can be created by punting some of the underachievers out on loan. We are probably paying Murray something, Spalding (and Craig, Teale etc), so I would suspect that he hadn't calculated whatever budget was being offered was to include his assistant as well. Just speculation mind, I know nothing... I doubt he was talking about their being upset players in the squad, surely that was taken as a given. Murray is supposedly due three months wages going by one of the papers last week. Miller was non-contract which I think means he was getting paid, however if he wanted to move to another club or we wanted to boot him there'd be no compensation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 In amongst all the media stuff today from Rae there's some interesting quotes: "There are the dynamics behind the scenes which maybe impact some things. That's out of my control. "One or two things haven't gone my way the last couple of days. Youou can't sit here and moan and groan, however. I'm of the opinion I've got to keep upbeat and positive. "I'm not even going to go into that. I'll deal with it internally." Like I said the other day "Rae will hindered" by the situation created at the club by the selling consortium as have other managers like Gus and Danny. And thats happened to him in less than one week! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Like I said the other day "Rae will hindered" by the situation created at the club by the selling consortium as have other managers like Gus and Danny. And thats happened to him in less than one week! Was Murray hindered? Just asking..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenhill Road Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Was Murray hindered? Just asking..... Not hindered, just hopeless.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Was Murray hindered? Just asking..... The players and support were hindered by his appointment. He was always destined to be a f**king bomb scare! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Its hard to imagine that Farrell would command a huge wage, or be unduly difficult to negotiate with, given his current employment status (no disrespect to taxi drivers, but it is something he would have to work hard at to get a decent income, and he can always revert back to it should things not work out for him at Saints). 100% this. The board need to look at the bigger picture - in six months to a year's time, when the cry is 'Taxi for Rae!'.... They're fcuking sorted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottd Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 The players and support were hindered by his appointment. He was always destined to be a f**king bomb scare! You were right about Murray. The signs were there for us all to see but I suppose we just hoped for the best because that's the best you can hope for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosferatu Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Like I said the other day "Rae will hindered" by the situation created at the club by the selling consortium as have other managers like Gus and Danny. And thats happened to him in less than one week! The reason the selling consortium have the shares they have is because they underwrote 3 previous share issues that were, by and large, ignored by the support and anyone else who might have been interested. This left them picking up the shares. The first share issue was 17 years ago. The club isn't being "hindered" by the selling consortium whatsoever. The selling consortium and a couple of others are the very reason the club is still in existence today and why its in a brand new stadium with no debt. To suggest that there are people out there who would like to subsidise St. Mirren is just ludicrous! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosferatu Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 The players and support were hindered by his appointment. He was always destined to be a f**king bomb scare! Yes, now that is true. Making ridiculous managerial appointments is how the selling consortium really is hindering the club! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 The reason the selling consortium have the shares they have is because they underwrote 3 previous share issues that were, by and large, ignored by the support and anyone else who might have been interested. This left them picking up the shares. The first share issue was 17 years ago. The club isn't being "hindered" by the selling consortium whatsoever. The selling consortium and a couple of others are the very reason the club is still in existence today and why its in a brand new stadium with no debt. To suggest that there are people out there who would like to subsidise St. Mirren is just ludicrous! Dont you think the continued support of the faithful and the other 48% of thevshareholders has had simething to do with the club still being in existence today? If it was simply down to five people then surely they would have had us playing champions league football years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddiecat Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 Reading the full article from the Sun would appear to suggest he is referring to the recruitment of his assistant. If the board are expecting David Longwell to do the assistant's job and run the Academy then they are making a huge mistake IMO. Let Alex bring in his own man and get on with the job of turning things around. Hopefully they are not insisting on David being the coach, he is working his socks off with the youth set up, his budget was slashed and he is still expected to deliver the same quality player, the biggest frustration he has is that working to a lesser budget means more time away from the kids sitting at a desk trying to make ends meet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosferatu Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 (edited) Dont you think the continued support of the faithful and the other 48% of thevshareholders has had simething to do with the club still being in existence today? If it was simply down to five people then surely they would have had us playing champions league football years ago? The club would have gone out of business in 1998 without the financial input of the 5.The rest of the support ignored the share issue. The rest of the support would not have had a club to continue supporting without the 5. Your last paragraph makes no sense. Edited December 22, 2015 by nosferatu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
div Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 It is also worth pointing out that the much vaunted "48%" is really no such thing. The selling consortium have options on over 75% of the current shareholding, having bought up a few of the bigger "small" shareholdings and agreed deals with messrs Scott & McGeoch. They did that of course to satisfy the requirements of the Argentinian bid at the time. I'm not sure what shareholding SMiSA have within that other c25% but imagine they will be one of the biggest shareholders left in the minority side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 It is also worth pointing out that the much vaunted "48%" is really no such thing. The selling consortium have options on over 75% of the current shareholding, having bought up a few of the bigger "small" shareholdings and agreed deals with messrs Scott & McGeoch. They did that of course to satisfy the requirements of the Argentinian bid at the time. I'm not sure what shareholding SMiSA have within that other c25% but imagine they will be one of the biggest shareholders left in the minority side. I wonder if those "Options" are as sound as the "Agreement" the consortium had with Scott and McGeoch that they would'nt be shut out of any proposal to elect to sell the majority shareholding in the club??? I say Agreement, but perhaps the consortium saw it as more a set of Guidelines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 The club would have gone out of business in 1998 without the financial input of the 5. The rest of the support ignored the share issue. The rest of the support would not have had a club to continue supporting without the 5. Your last paragraph makes no sense. The club would go out of business every year without the supporters! They pay in every year to fund the club, but dont expect to sell it and get their money back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kendo Posted December 22, 2015 Report Share Posted December 22, 2015 The club would have gone out of business in 1998 without the financial input of the 5. The rest of the support ignored the share issue. The rest of the support would not have had a club to continue supporting without the 5. Your last paragraph makes no sense. Possibly the best post that you've ever done. Well done ya trumpet "term of endearment". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.