South Lanarkshire Jag
-
Posts
3,937 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by South Lanarkshire Jag
-
-
35 minutes ago, Ben Reilly said:
Any suggestions of the best place to park near Firhill tonight? Preferably for free
Plenty of free street parking around Firhill - there are some sidestreets off Firhill Road which are "resident only" so wouldn't suggest parking there as they have a habit of double parking you in
If you get there early enough there are bundles of spaces round the back of the stadium next to the canal, go in behind the flats, but in reality if you are happy parking half on the pavement you'll get a space on Firhill Road no problem at all.
1 -
That was absolutely delicious.
Back in the hotel bar after a fantastic day around London and the drama at Wembley. While nobody wants England to win it, the atmosphere(while it was friendly and before the arseholes took over) wouldn’t have been anywhere near as good without them in it.
Discovered pretty quickly I was going to be surrounded by some of the more unpleasant elements of the England support so had to keep it tight lipped during the game but couldn’t hold back during the penalties - definitely thought I was going to get battered when I cheered the England misses.
Well worth the money and the trip.
Wembley Way and the walk up to Wembley was a disgrace but no surprise English fans were trying to break through the turnstiles without tickets - saw at least 20 people getting huckled in my trip to a gate and getting in the turnstile.
5 -
I've got a ticket for this so heading down to London on Saturday after the Thistle game with my dad - really looking forward to it. The only thing that puts me off is that I'll probably be surrounded by England fans and I'm not sure I can actually handle that.
I hope Italy absolutely do them but I reckon it will be quite a close game - 2-1 Italy after extra time!
What is the pub situation like currently in London for anyone who knows - is it booking central or do we have a fair chance of walking up and getting in somewhere(clearly not around Wembley as it will be mobbed)?
0 -
6 hours ago, Mick1867 said:
So, one week to go til our first home game of the season and still f**k all public communication with our supporters via our website, Facebook or twitter on arrangements for the game and how to purchase tickets.
An exclusive email to members doesn't cut it I'm afraid ( and last season's members and season ticket holders are still waiting for that follow up email / letter so we can actually buy the tickets mentioned in that email)
If it wasn't for members sharing that info on here then everyone would be completely in the dark
Not to mention quite a number of our hardcore support chose not to buy season tickets last season for obvious reason but instead paid for the streaming on a week by week basis. So we're actually choosing to lock out faithful fans for the two home league cup matches.
I trust that when we are allowed more in for the first home league game on August 7 - the traditional flag day for champions- all our support will get in to see that. Seeing as the target of Level 0 will allow a minimum of 2,000 fans. And if the same social distancing rules apply, will they refuse to open another stand to cater for more than the current 400 they are claiming can only fit in the Jackie Husband?
Jackie Brambles, more like!
Sorry, I haven't read the whole thread - who is saying only 400 fans can fit in the Jackie Husband Stand with the relevant social distancing?
0 -
2 hours ago, JudgeMudge said:
Is this the first time we’ve had to pay VAT on tickets? Can’t remember seeing it before. Bit misleading to say it’s £12 a ticket.
The ticket cost is £12 - VAT is included in every ticket. The additional £2(which is labelled as fee) is for delivery of the ticket.
The layout of how it is presented online is untidy and unhelpful. It's something that is already being addressed for our next game against Dumbarton.
0 -
2 hours ago, Bishop Briggs said:
Comment from WAT on Rudden -
"Rangers TV have apparently said in their commentary that he’s out with a “long term injury and they wish him well and a speedy recovery”.
Hopefully, that's just Sevco trolling us but...
Zak Rudden is scheduled to return back to training tomorrow. Zero truth in the long term injury line.
3 -
15 hours ago, ++Ammo - Airdrie++ said:
Still absolutely boils my pi*s he was left out of the under 21 squad, round about 2016/17 was it?
14 hours ago, partick_twinny said:Yep. He made the SPFL team of the year but didn't make the u21s. Thought he wasn't far away from the senior squad at the time.
Disappointed he's not kicked on as much as I'd expected since then. Stoke were too much of a basket case and I think he was made a bit of a scapegoat.
9 hours ago, Jacky1990 said:Same.
Cant remember if it related to Linsday or not, but I'm sure Scot Gemmill mentioned something about players progressing through the Scotland youth teams, basically indicating that players who had played at U17s and U19s for Scotland had a better chance of playing for the U21s almost irrespective of club form because....reasons.
I could absolutely have made this up in my head, though it does sound like the type of shite him and Malky were spouting at the time.
Liam Lindsay was considered for the qualifiers in Sept/Oct 2016(the club had to submit forms stating his medical availability etc) but never made the final cut when the squads were announced. In the early months of the 2016/17 season, Thistle were poor and were near the bottom of the league(I think after our opening day win, we didn’t win a league game again until October), so maybe it wasn’t surprising he wasn’t picked after a developing 2015/16 with Thistle. When the qualifiers ended in Oct 2016, Scotland didn’t qualify for the under 21 Euros to take place in the summer of 2017 - at this point Liam Lindsay became ineligible to play competitive games for the Scotland under 21s as he was too old. Liam was obviously a standout for Thistle in the first half of 2017 but I can understand why he wasn’t picked when the focus was on the next campaign when Liam was too old and he wasn’t close to being ready for the senior men’s national team.
1 -
18 minutes ago, Bishop Briggs said:
I pointed out earlier that Transfermkt says that Wright is out of contract at Rangers.
It is possible that we could sign him on a permanent deal if Rangers release him or will accept a similar deal to Rudden's.
Wright signed a two-year contract extension with Rangers earlier this year https://www.rangers.co.uk/article/kieran-wright-signs-new-rangers-contract/4gqmY6Pw6JQZb0rn0cKzo0
1 -
19 minutes ago, The Moonster said:
500 allowed in as of Monday I think, so yes fans will be allowed in. Not sure how many season ticket holders we have this year but I'd be surprised if it's more than 500. Seems the 500 includes everyone in the stadium though and not just fans, so club officials, ballboys and stewards will count towards the overall number I would assume.
Are you sure about that?
The guidance I've seen indicates "These numbers do not include any workforce/volunteers (including performers, exhibitors and participants) required to deliver the event, although consideration to physical distancing for workforce should take place, including in any back of house/non-public areas."
Which would mean 500 spectators alone with the rest being accounted for as part of the delivery of the event?
0 -
11 minutes ago, Taxi for De Massis said:
We're back to normal service on Twitter this morning with that Papa John's posting
In fairness, it is an SPFL contractual post that had to be posted by yesterday so they held it off as long as they could.
1 -
Just now, Mon_The_Fife said:
On a side note, who reports the goal scorers to Opta? I’m assuming its someone’s job at each club to enter this data?
Usually an Opta Sports representative attends the game in the press section. We’ve had one at Firhill for every match - data nothing to do with clubs.
1 -
1 hour ago, C. Muir said:
Aye Keltys potential play-off must have something to do with it (imagine they're going ahead as the HL and LL titles were awarded yesterday). I also notice Kelty haven't loaned out anyone else whereas the likes of EK have the majority of their squad out on loan so clubs options for potentially taking Kelty players on loan must've been either short term or no can do.
Loans needed to be returned to the parent club by 31st March to be able to play for the competitive club in any matches before 10th June.
We’ve got the same clause for our guys on loan from Lowland League so if, for example, EK were in the playoff, our guys would have went back to them to play.
31st March is an SFA thing so applies right down to WoS league I think. I’m a bit confused why loans are still being announced today(might just be as simple as paperwork being done last night and announcements just a little delayed).
0 -
13 minutes ago, knighthawk said:
Glad we all now know that McCall and co are to blame then.
I don't think that has ever been in doubt? The management team are ultimately responsible for the results on the pitch, like every other club across the world. Not sure what you are trying to get at.
1 -
4 hours ago, banditjag said:
Hard to argue with this. What is the worst crime here is how unfit and unprepared we are compared to part time teams. We have all day every day to identify an effective system and get it drilled into a first team. All day to work of fitness, stamina, skills, such as passing to their own team. Practice hitting a target even. The players can be seen driving into training anything between back of 9 and are all gone come 12. I'm not starting rumours but I've never seen McCall arrive or leave training. I'm not in the area every single day but have seen the car park emptying at 12 and have seen both assistants. Just wondering if our manager ever takes training. I might be and probably am naive to such things but what does a manager do at this level if the coaching team do the training.
Just to correct you on this Ian McCall has been at every training session since we started back in August.
3 hours ago, Midlife Crisis said:From the style of play you can see that it is Archibald that is in charge at training. It’s the same unadventurous side to side slow cautious rubbish that was played post top 6. Wouldn’t surprise me if he had a role in recruitment as well, as most recent signings are truly awful.
McCall, Archibald and Scally need sacking today to try and salvage the season.This is categorically wrong. I'm not going to defend or excuse the style of play, but if you think that AA just decides everything the squad do at training, you are completely wrong. I might have picked you up wrong though.
1 -
1 hour ago, Fuctifano said:
Must have been an Airdrie player lying on the pitch out of camera shot, guess I owe the linesman an apology.
The match officials confirmed after the game that they had only given it for offside as they thought Rudden had touched the initial shot from Penrice(he did swing a leg at it but he missed).
Having watched it back, Graham is onside when Penrice hits it but it is really tight - the left back is walking out to the 18 yard line with Graham walking towards goal. The LB's back leg plays him onside when the shot is hit - annoyingly a player is in the way for our camera angle so it can't quite be cleared up as conclusively as that but it definitely wasn't the "clearly offside" position the Airdrie twitter claimed!
1 -
8 minutes ago, David W said:
Surely our game v Falkirk should be moved to the Sunday, with Thistle on the Wednesday?
And when will we play QP in the Glasgow Cup?
Thursday 15th April is a "catch up" date which might be required for Thistle to use if we defeat Cowdenbeath and Dundee United in the Scottish Cup or if, much more likely, Montrose defeat Nairn County and Fraserburgh to play in the Scottish Cup on the 17th April.
0 -
2 hours ago, third lanark said:
In this window? So far it’s been only one player who may or may not be better than Williamson or a replacement for Williamson if he is injured- interestingly has Williamson not been injured a few times as well since he signed
I think you are being a bit harsh on Ryan Williamson. He was available for selection in every game up until November 2019 and missed 1 or 2 games with a slightly knock(although it has to be said Kakay was playing him out the team by his own good form).
He got his injury in the late stages of the Alloa away game at the start of 2020. He tried to play through it the following week against Dundee United(I think we were linked with about 3 right backs to replace Kakay before we brought in Lee O'Connor to compete with him and had no right back for that game). That game against Dundee United made the injury worse and he missed the rest of the 19/20 season - although he was around two weeks away from a return when the season was called.
This season he has been available for selection in every match until he got injured against Peterhead. Two serious injuries aren't what I'd term injury prone.
0 -
21 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:
I agree they should have a plan, and they could just impose whatever they want. But given clubs are picking a higher risk option, and that the usual solution of fixture rearrangement could well not be possible, I think they are right to ensure the clubs have a solution that they are all happy with.
What if the planned contingency the SPFL board came up with wasn't satisfactory with the clubs? They may want to go back and decide actually 18 is a better option after all. Or we'd be back to square one debating what to do. I don't see the problem with giving the clubs the choice here, if they want to hand over responsibility to the SPFL board to decide then I'm sure they could, but I doubt we'll see that.
The planned contingency would, I presume, have been circulated around all 42 clubs at the start of the season. If it is not satisfactory then it should have been challenged/adjusted/changed at the start of the season - the prime issue is running out of games/dates to play them. This could happen in any division so they should be treated equally. If it turns out to be 3-0 forfeits in Prem then it should be same for Champ and L1/2.
It is up to the clubs to decide how many they want to play. As a collective they have asked for 22 - the board should have, in my opinion, focused on whether they were allowing the restart date to go ahead and if they were granting the extension for season rather than batting it back to clubs to decide sanctions for an incomplete season since these should already be in place. Why should the consequence of not finishing in L1/2 be different from Prem/Champ?
I just think it is a bit unfair to be potentially imposing different sanctions for the same offence(not finishing games) when proposed league finish formats(split) between the prem and L1/2 will be practically the same and I don’t understand why this seems to be a sticking issue and has stopped it moving forward as much as it should have.
0 -
2 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:
Perhaps they could, but why not let the clubs decide, as they are with trying to do with deciding how to finish the season?
And also because the clubs in this scenario appear to be deliberately picking a scenario that makes incomplete fixtures much more likely. The top 2 leagues have more freedom to play postponed games at a different date - which would presumably be their first solution. That solution is unlikely to be an option for League 1/2 clubs.
I would argue that the fixture dates for the Premiership post-split phase are also picked at a scenario that makes incomplete fixtures much more likely. They have a midweek card(10/11 of May I think) and weekend card(15/16 May) to conclude. If a team(for example Kilmarnock) gets an outbreak before then, there is little room to replay the games and they could potentially be involved in relegation playoffs. Obviously you don’t have that issue if it is mid table sides(which could also happen in L1) - the SPFL Board must have a plan of how they would deal with this - why can they not apply the exact same to L1/2?
1 -
1 minute ago, Diamonds are Forever said:
If it is on the clubs to take responsibility for thinking up a new way of ending the season then it is also on them to come up with a suitable contingency in the entirely like event of not all games being played.
The SPFL board do not agree with playing 22 but are saying that is fine as long as you are all happy with whatever contingency you come up with. The alternative which you seem to be suggesting is that the clubs suggest a new system with a clear flaw and then ask the SPFL board to fix it, which seems bizarre.
For once I think the SPFL seem to be handling this well. They are giving the freedom to the clubs to decide things but also ensuring we do not end up with a farcical end to the season.
I’m not suggesting anything. I’m asking why, regardless of whether we attempt to play 18 games or 22 games, the SPFL Board cannot apply the sanctions, whatever they may be, that they would to a Premiership or Championship team if they cannot complete their season. I don’t really see a difference and why they should be handled differently(basically one decided by the clubs and one by the board).
0 -
15 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:
Because the Board do not want it. They want 18.
They are saying before they rubber stamp it, clubs had better come up with a plan if things go to pot. Seems sensible to me.
Why can’t they just apply whatever they would do to Premiership and Championship if they can’t complete? Don’t really see much of a difference to be honest.
0 -
15 minutes ago, Diamonds are Forever said:
Genuinely can't even think why they all want 22. I maybe get that the likes of Falkirk might as a bit of an insurance policy if they start slowly (although it could also be another 4 games to chuck the title away if leading after 18), but can't see why every other club would want it. For clubs like ourselves, Montrose or East Fife the less games the better - one hot streak of form could win you the league.
18 games is a fair split and it's virtually guaranteed to have time to fit the games in even with the inevitable postponements. 22 games is likely to lead to issues getting games completed, thankfully it looks like the SPFL are putting this onto the clubs to ensure no farcical end to the season - although it still would be regardless of whatever they come up with.
Can they not just get on and agree to 18 games, then we can relax and enjoy an exciting end to the season without worrying about getting games completed in a ridiculous schedule. Then we can move on and forget this season ever happened and start properly in July.
Why should it be on the clubs to determine what happens if someone can’t finish their games? What would the SPFL Board do in the event of a Premiership or Championship club getting a covid outbreak in the last few weeks and be unable to fulfil 38 or 27 fixtures in those leagues? Surely whatever happens in those leagues would apply to L1 and L2 as well if someone can’t finish.
0 -
Just now, ICTChris said:
Regarding zero Covid, the time for it was a year ago. Taiwan, for example, has had fewer cases in the entire pandemic than Scotland had yesterday. There are huge difficulties with dealing with a seeded respitory virus and trying to eliminate it via the sort of strategy that has worked for countries who have had a level of success with it. It's too late to do that in Scotland, or the UK.
Regarding the rolling lockdowns, like we se in New Zealand and Australia, I think that works because people there have a degree of confidence that it will be a five day lockdown. People will accept it more because they can have a normal life, generally, apart from that and international travel. Also people there haven't spent a year confined so it's easier to accept a week long stay at home order.
The mention of Taiwan reminds me that while I was working during Lockdown 1(which feels like a decade ago), I would tune in and watch the live streams of Taiwanese baseball which, I think, was the only live sport available anywhere in the world. It was a four team league and fans started getting in around June time so they were very successful doing it.
1 -
Watching on a US GamePass feed - can't wait for it. It always takes me ten days or so to get over the Packers being dumped out in the Conference game.
Got my NFL SnackHelmet purchased from LIDL and filled with snacks - got hot food waiting to be heated up for HT or before.
Supporting the Chiefs tonight but really just looking for a good game. Nothing can ever beat the horrific Rams v Patriots one from a few years ago, surely!
0
The Partick Thistle thread
in Scottish Championship General Chatter
Posted · Edited by South Lanarkshire Jag
Not strict at all. It's a condition of the licence we've been given by Glasgow City Council that we have to provide and encourage staggered entry times to try to mitigate against mass crowds gathering at one time but they won't be turning anyone away if they are too early/late.
If you park round the back of the Jackie Husband Stand next to the canal, the press entrance is a short walk in the north end of the gate. The same end of the gate should still be open when you're finished after the game.