Jump to content

Chairman’s Statement


javeajag
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Norgethistle said:

This is the crux of the matter, if we get wee bonuses we don’t budget for or rely on that’s fine, (Fund a loan deal etc)  the issue that can come for clubs is when the start to rely on these ad-hoc payments or support. Football is littered with clubs having issues when they have become reliant on an individual to fund and balance the books (Gretna, Morton, Rangers, County, Dumbarton, Sunderland to name a few), and the destruction it causes to clubs when the individual no longer want to or are able to.

Agree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2019 at 12:08 PM, Dark Passenger said:

Because you and a few of your mates are pushing that narrative?

Have  the Weirs given Funding to the Club on an ad hoc basis over the last few Years - as far as Im led to believe they have ( however happy to be corrected if thats not the case )  

Have Posters who are in direct contact with the Chairman via Twitter etc stated things like the Tenerife Trip were not funded by the Club - Yes

Therefore its slightly surprising that the Chairman goes out of her way to state we dont have a "Sugar Daddy " her words not mine - as the speculation or "narrative" could be put to bed very simply -with a clear unambigous statement - but it wasnt - it was left vague - therefore some may interpit this one way - others that funding however "ad hoc" exists - now the funding itself  ( if it exists ) its not the core issue -any"donations " etc  by whatever means outside Club Revenue  should be clearly declared - otherwise it skews the true Financial Perfomance of the Club - its as simple as that - we therefore dont know the true trading performance if funding exists - and given how tight small Clubs Budgets are - that is important ( in my opinion)      

As Fans do we have a right to know - well Yes - as Shareholders do they have a Right to Know -100% -and the Fans via the Trusts etc are the largest Shareholders      

The "speculation" only came to light as the Chairman chose to make a big play of it in her statement ?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Have  the Weirs given Funding to the Club on an ad hoc basis over the last few Years - as far as Im led to believe they have ( however happy to be corrected if thats not the case )  

Have Posters who are in direct contact with the Chairman via Twitter etc stated things like the Tenerife Trip were not funded by the Club - Yes

Therefore its slightly surprising that the Chairman goes out of her way to state we dont have a "Sugar Daddy " her words not mine - as the speculation or "narrative" could be put to bed very simply -with a clear unambigous statement - but it wasnt - it was left vague - therefore some may interpit this one way - others that funding however "ad hoc" exists - now the funding itself  ( if it exists ) its not the core issue -any"donations " etc  by whatever means outside Club Revenue  should be clearly declared - otherwise it skews the true Financial Perfomance of the Club - its as simple as that - we therefore dont know the true trading performance if funding exists - and given how tight small Clubs Budgets are - that is important ( in my opinion)      

As Fans do we have a right to know - well Yes - as Shareholders do they have a Right to Know -100% -and the Fans via the Trusts etc are the largest Shareholders      

The "speculation" only came to light as the Chairman chose to make a big play of it in her statement ?  

 

A couple of challenges for you JJ.

Please list the adhoc funding the club have received over the last few years, even if it is where you have been led to believe.

And where should donations by whatever means be declared, as it doesn’t appear to be a requirement when issuing annual accounts. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

any "donations" etc  by whatever means outside Club Revenue  should be clearly declared 

What a load of horsesh*t. 

And the Chairman's statement addressed the speculative posts made by you and others, even if it wasn't by name. It's not the cause of the speculation. This is the first time I've seen someone suggest that the Weirs paid Scott McDonald's wages. Is that true, or pure conjecture? 

Edited by Dark Passenger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lenziejag said:

A couple of challenges for you JJ.

Please list the adhoc funding the club have received over the last few years, even if it is where you have been led to believe.

And where should donations by whatever means be declared, as it doesn’t appear to be a requirement when issuing annual accounts. 

 

With apologies to the poster it was directed to:

 

In our relegation season, Paul McGinn was signed after the budget was spent. I was led to believe that was a deal partly financed by Weir monies.

Team building weekends to places like Gleneagles financed by Weir monies.

As to where ‘donations’ declared. If it’s coming directly from the Weir’s then my understanding it doesn’t need to be. We’re not bound by a salary cap.

In days of old when Rugby Union was amateur, you ought to have seen the amount the Australian groundsman was paid to cut the owner/committee’s grass.

Of course, he never tended any grounds but was always available to play at the weekend!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lenziejag said:

A couple of challenges for you JJ.

Please list the adhoc funding the club have received over the last few years, even if it is where you have been led to believe.

And where should donations by whatever means be declared, as it doesn’t appear to be a requirement when issuing annual accounts. 

 

Its not a requirement under Company Law - but then again a Football Club isnt a normal Company - and none of the Current Board are Investors or Shareholders 

As for listing the ad hoc Funding - I suggest you approach the Supporters Trust or the Club on that ...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dark Passenger said:

What a load of horsesh*t. 

And the Chairman's statement addressed the speculative posts made by you and others, even if it wasn't by name. It's not the cause of the speculation. This is the first time I've seen someone suggest that the Weirs paid Scott McDonald's wages. Is that true, or pure conjecture? 

The Chairmans statement didnt address it as it left open the possibility of ad hoc Funding by its Wording 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally got around to a) watching the Meet the Manager videos and, b) reading the Chairman’s statement. It turns out that all the denials about whether there was ever a ‘Power Point’ presentation at his interview were bullshit!

 

However, there seems to be more substance to Caldwell’s persona than his David Brent-esque (and occasionally Don Quixot-ic) one-liners would suggest. I’ll give him credit for the analysis of the game, tactics and formation, as well as his appreciation of the wider aspects of recruiting players. I’d accept that, as manager, he is not always able to articulate how he sees things publicly as this can provide comfort to the opposition. To some extent, this seems to invalidate the whole idea of the 'exclusive' Jagzone interview with the manager though – we know he is, for the best of reasons, speaking with forked tongue. Ditto about shouting things from the roof-top – his story about the Wigan director saying ‘we’ll get 100 points’ was class.

 

His dissection of the Ross County collapse after being 2-0 up at half time was interesting (though he could have applied the same analysis to the second last game of the season at home to Ayr); the complacency that crept into the team. At the Ross County game, it had started well before half time, though it looked more like fear to me than complacency. Fair enough. I personally would like to have heard more about his strategy for putting that sort of non-technical thing right – i.e. it was a motivation issue, but he didn’t say how he did or would tackle it.  He does appear to have learnt something from last season and was more self-effacing than I had expected. I wouldn’t in hindsight criticise his purely footballing decision to release Dools and Squiddy, but the Club certainly had a case to answer for how the latter was handled. I wasn’t really convinced by GB’s explanation and half-hearted apology (if indeed that’s what it was) about the handling of those issues.

 

Taking his performance at the Meet the Manager night, and the Chairman’s statement together, the Club seemed to be admitting that they were aware things have not been managed properly and will look to avoid that in future: again fair enough, though I agree with JJ that there seems to be a studied vagueness about what is/isn’t being said about Colin Weir’s involvement. Not a major issue for me, but if you are a ‘communications expert’ the end result of your endeavours should be, well, clear communication. I also thought her ‘Sugar Daddy’ reference was a bit rude, and anyway if Colin is funding the academy, does that not make him, ipso facto, a Sugar Daddy of sorts. As I say, the end result should be clarity. That GB and Jacqui do read this forum is obvious, so it should require no great effort to clarify.

 

I do think that GC deserves the opportunity next season to prove his critics (which so far has included me) wrong, and I am genuinely hoping he makes me eat my words. In fact, I wish the season was starting this Saturday and am already looking forward to whatever the diddy cup is called at the beginning of the season so we can hump Section B and the Gyppos.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Its not a requirement under Company Law - but then again a Football Club isnt a normal Company - and none of the Current Board are Investors or Shareholders 

As for listing the ad hoc Funding - I suggest you approach the Supporters Trust or the Club on that ...

 

You can’t get away with that. You are making the allegation. At least have the gumption to put some meat on the bones . Otherwise it does come across as just flinging muck and seeing what sticks.

And let me get this clear. You are only interested in seeing what the ad hoc donations are ? And not interested in getting a breakdown of all the income ?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am led to believe that Jennifer Aniston fancies me and wants to ask me out.  Some other posters have spoken to her and they are led to believe that is correct from the rumors they have heard (that I have spread).

"Led to believe..." FFS.

This kind of statement just switches me right off from listening.  It's like the boy who cried wolf.

Edited by Lambies Lost Doo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Semi Nurainen said:

Finally got around to a) watching the Meet the Manager videos and, b) reading the Chairman’s statement. It turns out that all the denials about whether there was ever a ‘Power Point’ presentation at his interview were bullshit!

 

However, there seems to be more substance to Caldwell’s persona than his David Brent-esque (and occasionally Don Quixot-ic) one-liners would suggest. I’ll give him credit for the analysis of the game, tactics and formation, as well as his appreciation of the wider aspects of recruiting players. I’d accept that, as manager, he is not always able to articulate how he sees things publicly as this can provide comfort to the opposition. To some extent, this seems to invalidate the whole idea of the 'exclusive' Jagzone interview with the manager though – we know he is, for the best of reasons, speaking with forked tongue. Ditto about shouting things from the roof-top – his story about the Wigan director saying ‘we’ll get 100 points’ was class.

 

His dissection of the Ross County collapse after being 2-0 up at half time was interesting (though he could have applied the same analysis to the second last game of the season at home to Ayr); the complacency that crept into the team. At the Ross County game, it had started well before half time, though it looked more like fear to me than complacency. Fair enough. I personally would like to have heard more about his strategy for putting that sort of non-technical thing right – i.e. it was a motivation issue, but he didn’t say how he did or would tackle it.  He does appear to have learnt something from last season and was more self-effacing than I had expected. I wouldn’t in hindsight criticise his purely footballing decision to release Dools and Squiddy, but the Club certainly had a case to answer for how the latter was handled. I wasn’t really convinced by GB’s explanation and half-hearted apology (if indeed that’s what it was) about the handling of those issues.

 

Taking his performance at the Meet the Manager night, and the Chairman’s statement together, the Club seemed to be admitting that they were aware things have not been managed properly and will look to avoid that in future: again fair enough, though I agree with JJ that there seems to be a studied vagueness about what is/isn’t being said about Colin Weir’s involvement. Not a major issue for me, but if you are a ‘communications expert’ the end result of your endeavours should be, well, clear communication. I also thought her ‘Sugar Daddy’ reference was a bit rude, and anyway if Colin is funding the academy, does that not make him, ipso facto, a Sugar Daddy of sorts. As I say, the end result should be clarity. That GB and Jacqui do read this forum is obvious, so it should require no great effort to clarify.

 

I do think that GC deserves the opportunity next season to prove his critics (which so far has included me) wrong, and I am genuinely hoping he makes me eat my words. In fact, I wish the season was starting this Saturday and am already looking forward to whatever the diddy cup is called at the beginning of the season so we can hump Section B and the Gyppos.

The meet the manager night was just an exercise to deflect the flak from the Kris Doolan scenario and fair play to him he fronted up .

Hopefully S.N . , you wouldn’t think it was just for football reasons that Erskine and Doolan were let go , think it would be incredibly naive to think that  was the case . Think we’re looking for 3 forwards for next year, I’d be surprised if we get anyone in the class of Doolan on the wages on offer , so that in itself makes it a strange decision.

If you analyse what Caldwell said at the Meet the Manager night , it really wasn’t very much , we run about more , we played better after January with the new signings , used buzzwords like ‘ character “ a lot 

Never spoke about how we bridge the gap in how we develop the young players and give them a pathway to the first team apart from some Glasgow Cup games ,bottom line Caldwell isn’t really interested in developing young players as his lack of interest in the u18s and the reserve team showed last year .

Watch it back again S.N . there wasn’t a lot of substance in what he said for the future of our Club .

Edited by jlsarmy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

The meet the manager night was just an exercise to deflect the flak from the Kris Doolan scenario and fair play to him he fronted up .

Hopefully S.N . , you wouldn’t think it was just for football reasons that Erskine and Doolan were let go , think it would be incredibly naive to think that  was the case . Think we’re looking for 3 forwards for next year, I’d be surprised if we get anyone in the class of Doolan on the wages on offer , so that in itself makes it a strange decision.

If you analyse what Caldwell said at the Meet the Manager night , it really wasn’t very much , we run about more , we played better after January with the new signings , used buzzwords like ‘ character “ a lot 

Never spoke about how we bridge the gap in how we develop the young players and give them a pathway to the first team apart from some Glasgow Cup games ,bottom line Caldwell isn’t really interested in developing young players as his lack of interest in the u18s and the reserve team showed last year .

Watch it back again S.N . there wasn’t a lot of substance in what he said for the future of our Club .

In footballing terms you can make a reasonable case that letting erskine and Doolan go is justifiable 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Dark Passenger said:

What a load of horsesh*t. 

And the Chairman's statement addressed the speculative posts made by you and others, even if it wasn't by name. It's not the cause of the speculation. This is the first time I've seen someone suggest that the Weirs paid Scott McDonald's wages. Is that true, or pure conjecture? 

Go read what I said - your now making things up - it was an example of the various things that ad hoc funding can cover - I didn't say it had I said could ... 

Edited by Jordanhill Jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, javeajag said:

In footballing terms you can make a reasonable case that letting erskine and Doolan go is justifiable 

Not sure if you can , Cardle for Erskine maybe , we haven’t got any strikers just now and time will tell whether Doolan can be replaced with similar quality.  Given decent service Doolan would still score goals for you in an offensive team , it’ll be interesting to see who the replacements are .

One of the criticisms of Archie used to be , letting players go with no real idea of how to replace them , Stevie Lawless being a good example.

Hopefully Caldwell has done his homework and knows who he is going to replace the strikers with but on Championship wages that’s going to be a tough ask .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

The meet the manager night was just an exercise to deflect the flak from the Kris Doolan scenario and fair play to him he fronted up .

Hopefully S.N . , you wouldn’t think it was just for football reasons that Erskine and Doolan were let go , think it would be incredibly naive to think that  was the case . Think we’re looking for 3 forwards for next year, I’d be surprised if we get anyone in the class of Doolan on the wages on offer , so that in itself makes it a strange decision.

If you analyse what Caldwell said at the Meet the Manager night , it really wasn’t very much , we run about more , we played better after January with the new signings , used buzzwords like ‘ character “ a lot 

Never spoke about how we bridge the gap in how we develop the young players and give them a pathway to the first team apart from some Glasgow Cup games ,bottom line Caldwell isn’t really interested in developing young players as his lack of interest in the u18s and the reserve team showed last year .

Watch it back again S.N . there wasn’t a lot of substance in what he said for the future of our Club .

Is it caldwell’s job to develop the young team. ? That surely, is the job of the Academy. ? And don’t you think he had a big enough job just keeping us in the league ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

The meet the manager night was just an exercise to deflect the flak from the Kris Doolan scenario and fair play to him he fronted up .

Hopefully S.N . , you wouldn’t think it was just for football reasons that Erskine and Doolan were let go , think it would be incredibly naive to think that  was the case . Think we’re looking for 3 forwards for next year, I’d be surprised if we get anyone in the class of Doolan on the wages on offer , so that in itself makes it a strange decision.

If you analyse what Caldwell said at the Meet the Manager night , it really wasn’t very much , we run about more , we played better after January with the new signings , used buzzwords like ‘ character “ a lot 

Never spoke about how we bridge the gap in how we develop the young players and give them a pathway to the first team apart from some Glasgow Cup games ,bottom line Caldwell isn’t really interested in developing young players as his lack of interest in the u18s and the reserve team showed last year .

Watch it back again S.N . there wasn’t a lot of substance in what he said for the future of our Club .

Probably best to wait and see who we sign rather that speculate that Caldwell won't make some decent striker signings. As for developing youth talent through to the first team I'm pragmatic on that one. It has rarely happened since 1971 and I doubt much will change. Anyway you want him hounded out the club anyway so why think long term when you are thinking short term continually? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Is it caldwell’s job to develop the young team. ? That surely, is the job of the Academy. ? And don’t you think he had a big enough job just keeping us in the league ?

Was talking more about the ‘ meet the manager ‘ night ,  I personally think for a Club of our size and with our Academy it’s important that we develop our own players and Caldwell is part of that process to get them to first team level .

We can get linked with players like Kris Boyd and Kenny Miller for short term but what happens in the future, short term solutions aren’t going to be the answer.

Caldwell showed very little interest in the u18s and the reserve squad last year , possibly only attended twice last year , maybe you’re right he was preoccupied about the first team staying in the league but for the future and with an Academy everything should be joined up to provide us with some sort of template going forward and Gary Caldwell I believe  should take part in that process .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, dl1971 said:

Probably best to wait and see who we sign rather that speculate that Caldwell won't make some decent striker signings. As for developing youth talent through to the first team I'm pragmatic on that one. It has rarely happened since 1971 and I doubt much will change. Anyway you want him hounded out the club anyway so why think long term when you are thinking short term continually? 

Possibly thinking of the long term future of the Club whether Gary Caldwell is there or not , maybe trying to maximise the Academy’s potential ?  , especially when we’ve been given a great opportunity through Colin Weir’s generosity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Possibly thinking of the long term future of the Club whether Gary Caldwell is there or not , maybe trying to maximise the Academy’s potential ?  , especially when we’ve been given a great opportunity through Colin Weir’s generosity.

This should always be a concern. I'd rather we take a few seasons getting back to the top tier than return next season with no sustainable plan. That understandably may conflict with the manager's planning. Much better on the CV to get a club promoted in your first full season.

This is where Britton &/or Low HAVE to have input. And this is where I don't accept the "he's the manager, he's got complete control" tenet. To take that argument to extreme should we sell Fitzpatrick for a sizable but undervalued sum to fund the Millers, Boyd's and/or bringing in big name loan players? That would most likely enhance our chances of promotion. Dependent on the success the manager moves on, his career in credit, or is moved out. Either way, adopting that sort of policy, I'd argue we would be in a worse state.

I'm not of course saying Caldwell will go down that route, tho' I'd be concerned if too many loan players hold key positions. I'm merely highlighting the possibility of two agendas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

The meet the manager night was just an exercise to deflect the flak from the Kris Doolan scenario and fair play to him he fronted up .

Hopefully S.N . , you wouldn’t think it was just for football reasons that Erskine and Doolan were let go , think it would be incredibly naive to think that  was the case . Think we’re looking for 3 forwards for next year, I’d be surprised if we get anyone in the class of Doolan on the wages on offer , so that in itself makes it a strange decision.

If you analyse what Caldwell said at the Meet the Manager night , it really wasn’t very much , we run about more , we played better after January with the new signings , used buzzwords like ‘ character “ a lot 

Never spoke about how we bridge the gap in how we develop the young players and give them a pathway to the first team apart from some Glasgow Cup games ,bottom line Caldwell isn’t really interested in developing young players as his lack of interest in the u18s and the reserve team showed last year .

Watch it back again S.N . there wasn’t a lot of substance in what he said for the future of our Club .

Agree with all you post here jls. I believe Doolan and squiddy were "let go" because our manager doesn't want players who are bigger or perceived to be bugger than him. Classic narcissistic trait. 

 

I also believe that Caldwell is at our club cos, well, no one else wanted him. After a few not too successful stints, he needed back into the game and we were the only or best option. Does anyone think even for a minute he would have chosen us over say Dundee, st Mirren, kilmarnock and we are a stepping stone. That is not me criticising him, just an observation. It's the way football and other industries are. I don't blame him. If a bigger club, or when a bigger club, comes for him he will go like a shot, and good luck to him. That is why he is not planning long term perhaps. That said, he has given three teenagers contracts so perhaps I am wrong and he's planning to be here for 5 or more years.

I thought he cam across well, knowledgeable and fairly insightful. As @Semi Nurainen says he deserves his chance next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jordanhill Jag said:

Go read what I said - your now making things up - it was an example of the various things that ad hoc funding can cover - I didn't say it had I said could ... 

wut?

As someone who claims to be ITK you're aware that folk pick up on the crumbs you scatter around and treat them as fact. It's totally irresponsible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Dark Passenger said:

wut?

As someone who claims to be ITK you're aware that folk pick up on the crumbs you scatter around and treat them as fact. It's totally irresponsible.

What is irresponsible is stating there is no "Sugar Daddy" supporting us - and then making a statement which is ambiguous regards the nature of funding we "may or may not" receive from the Weirs -if the intent was to lay the rumours of Funding to rest and  shut people like me up - a simple "we do not receive funding from the Weirs "  would have done that - instead we got an ambiguous statement with plenty of scope for interpitation as required - people can make up there own minds as to why no nice simple "we do not receive funding from the Weirs " statement   Funding for a small Football Club is the most important aspect - without it nothing works 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thistleberight said:

Agree with all you post here jls. I believe Doolan and squiddy were "let go" because our manager doesn't want players who are bigger or perceived to be bugger than him. Classic narcissistic trait. 

 

I also believe that Caldwell is at our club cos, well, no one else wanted him. After a few not too successful stints, he needed back into the game and we were the only or best option. Does anyone think even for a minute he would have chosen us over say Dundee, st Mirren, kilmarnock and we are a stepping stone. That is not me criticising him, just an observation. It's the way football and other industries are. I don't blame him. If a bigger club, or when a bigger club, comes for him he will go like a shot, and good luck to him. That is why he is not planning long term perhaps. That said, he has given three teenagers contracts so perhaps I am wrong and he's planning to be here for 5 or more years.

I thought he cam across well, knowledgeable and fairly insightful. As @Semi Nurainen says he deserves his chance next season.

I would much rather have an ambitious manager that thinks of us as a stepping stone than one that thinks managing Thistle is the pinnacle of his (or her) career. I hope that Gary goes onto win the Champions League as it will mean he has been successful with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...