chapwithwings

Oh dry up, you tiresome gammon. Thistle showing solidarity with a cause isn't a bad thing. It's the club using its position of visibility and privilege in the public eye to provide support and exposure to people or organisations that need it. Having the rainbow flag on the shirt last season was no different to us giving over shirt space to the Beatson a couple of years back, or having a pink breast cancer ribbon front and centre of the away kit a couple of years before it. We're not the first club to do it, we won't be the last, thankfully. Frankly, I wish we'd do more in this vein. When we have the ugly sisters and their venal tribalism and sniping dominating the city, anything which makes us stand out above that as better members of the community should be applauded. Even on a basic publicity level, do you honestly think we'd have had all the folk at the Women's World Cup plugging our away shirt last summer if it was just plain white? We probably sold a couple hundred more shirts than we would have previously because we had Eilidh Barbour, Hope Solo et al plugging it on their social media accounts. It's 2020. The only mindset that sees a club doing something to support the communities that support it and surround it is one that belongs in the 1970s along with repeats of Mind Your Language and Bernard Manning.

Emailed them yesterday to ask exactly that, as I'd not heard anything either. Greaves' reply: I get they may be struggling to handle the volume, especially if they increased the number available to order based on demand, but the messaging - given they've been very happy to retweet and share lots of images of folk who've received theirs, isn't particularly sound - if they're running at a delay, they should be making that much clearer up front rather than just waiting for folk to get in touch.

You certainly implied it in the 'smiling all the way to the beach' comments in the posts above. But presumably all you meant was he was just happy at getting in some sunbathing?

A potential lack of transparency which puts people on edge. It's been stated, repeatedly, that Jacqui isn't officially involved in the boardroom - done so, as has been indicated elsewhere, presumably because her presence is seen as divisive among certain aspects of the support. However, we also know she's still an advisor to the new owner, her PR firm are involved in the club, and now a former board member from her previous, short but undistinguished era in charge has returned to the board. So there's a legitimate question to be asked about whether she's unofficially involved, or advising, the club and its new owner regarding the current situation or the next phase of the club's transition. I've no probem with Smillie rejoining the board - it makes sense we establish partnerships with other small-to-medium sports teams in the city, given the dominance of the ugly sisters and the off-field benefits of having those relationships. Frankly, I've even got no problem if Low is back on the board officially - she's a successful businesswoman, has a good contacts book and is someone who appears to care about Thistle. But equally, all I expect is transparency about it. If we're to trust the interim board and new owner to do the right thing by Thistle - which they've certainly started strongly with - then openness and honesty are essential. Much of the distrust and issues last time round came from the poor comms and transparency last time - the Doolan departure being the most obvious example, which was handled (whether you agree with the decision to let him leave or not) in the most cack-handed way possible. We've a period of uncertainty over the next few months while the new structure and fan ownership terms are sorted, and then a further period of the same going as the new structure gets implemented. Going into all of that with the added spectre of 'is there someone pulling strings behind the scenes?' doesn't help.

Low's company is doing the PR for Weir's takeover, she remains an adviser to Weir and is listed as a director of the company that now owns the majority shareholding in Thistle. She might not be an interim director but it would be naive to presume she hasn't an involvement in all this. John Penman is a founding member of TFE, as listed on their Facebook Q&A recently, and now sits on the interim board - presumably helping to facilitate the eventual transfer of shares. So no, there's absolutely no official boardroom role with TFE or Thistle for Low. But there's a legitimate question to be asked over whether, especially in light of Macklin's tweet and its subsequent removal, she is directly or indirectly involved in what's happening.

Indigo are handling the PR for TFE and for Weir. So she's already involved in that respect.

This. The takeover is to be welcomed in the sense that it resolves the issue around ownership of the club that's led to 227 pages of bitter sniping, resolves the issue of Propco and potentially gives fans a long term stakeholding in running the club - something that's been problematic over the various trusts and fans groups in the 20 years since STJ. Until we know the make-up of the short-term board, and their respective experience/skills, it's entirely fair to reserve judgment. We're also entering a crucial few months for the club in an odd position. Will Weir be bankrolling substantive personnel changes for the new management team in January (something, let's be honest, that's absolutely needed), or will any changes come from the existing budget? The former means we'll likely be subject to higher fees as folk look to milk our new owner for an extra quid or two, the latter means we're probably going to struggle to shift Caldwell's dead wood. The interim board will be presiding over the club at this point, if the transfer of shares is likely to take a few months - therefore their experience and understanding of football operations, business and revenue is crucial, as is knowing what the short term running of Thistle will be like. It'll also send a message to the fans, and to the new management team, what support they have from the people running the club. Longer term it's essential we know the make-up of the fans group ultimately running the club per Weir's statement. There's still huge unanswered questions about the full make-up of TFE. There was, rightly, lots of grumbling from certain quarters about the lack of clarity over the Barnsley takeover and what their plans were for the club going forward, but beyond fan ownership TFE hasn't said much of their strategic aims or goals yet either. It's very easy to say in a statement to folk who've bunged your a few quid 'Everyone now needs to get behind us' but it's fair to ask what it is we're getting behind in the first place. Day one answers are a bit ambitious perhaps, but clarity needs to come quickly and clearly from those now in charge of the club. This might end up the start of a glorious new era, it might be the first step towards STJ2, it might end up business as usual. But getting good communication from the people now looking after the club we all care about regarding their intentions shouldn't be something we need to ask repeatedly for.

If they're aiming to run the club eventually should they not be speaking to all the fans, not just the ones who give them money?

Well, let's hope that vehicle isn't driven off a cliff by the people being installed behind the wheel.

As I understand it no, you have to have been released before the end of the window to sign as a free after the window closes. So if Tam and Banzo were released from their contracts today, they'd be unable to sign for anyone officially until Jan 1.

My first ever game at Firhill, this. It's been a long 25 years...

At this point - and this is purely speculation - we don't really know what the terms of any negotiations between the returning board and any prospective new owners are. They could well be covered by some kind of non-disclosure agreement (not wholly uncommon), which limits what they say, hence a limited press release which unfortunately ends up raising more questions than answers. Too much of this absolute bunfight has played out through the press - the initial interest was reported by McGowan at the Mail, wasn't it? - and since then feels like exchanges of sniper fire between the ousted board and the current incumbents through their newspaper proxies. The downside of that, beyond the obvious obfuscation on both sides of what's really gone on, is that it just ends up pissing off everyone caught in the crossfire. It's very hard to sort the actual, credible information from the circular arguments, conspiracy theories and ITK claims being floated on here, P&B and elsewhere. That's the kind of nasty behaviour we like to berate the ugly sisters' supporters for. Maybe, difficult though it is, it's worth taking a step back, clearing the heads and seeing what can genuinely be pieced together in terms of what's going on without it dissolving back into factionalised warfare?

I wrote a tribute to Dools in the last issue of Nutmeg. Now horribly out of date by virtue of this week's news, but the sentiment stands. Gutted he's gone - a figure whose legacy at Firhill, both as a player and as a gentleman, will be remembered for a generation to come.

If you're serious about doing the book via crowdfunding you might be better doing it via someone like Unbound.co.uk, or alternatively just writing it and publishing it via Lulu, then people can pay a reasonable amount for it. The former will also help you set a realistic fundraising target and incentives goals for it - with all respect due, £20K is a huge amount to fund a book.