The Big Queen's Park FC Thread

[Grumpy Soo-sider]

Good work out for the guys today and a great result. Played pretty well against a big physical County team but were occasionally bullied off of the ball. County were probably the better team early on but the first three or four chances came to Queen's and their keeper was busier than Calum. The County goal came after sustained QP pressure and a break upfield saw Murray on a one to one with Ferrie. Keeper came out to meet him but Murray pushed the ball round him and went on the score into an empty net. 

Second half was better from Queen's with us having bit more of the ball and both goals were well worked. Both Thomson and Paton took their chances well.

Still playing the ball out from the back each time and sometimes I just want to see the ball booted upfield as County started to crowd us out a bit at the back.

Spong, Turner, Bruce and Paton all looked good with each of them putting in a fair shift. Bruce looked completely knackered at the end as he gave it his all. Didn't see much of Hepburn as he was only brought on during the second half - what he was involved in looked good so we've done some good signings over the close season if we can keep this up.

A pleasing result even if it was a pre-season friendly.

 

 

[GloriousHoops]

8 minutes ago, Grumpy Soo-sider said:

Good work out for the guys today and a great result. Played pretty well against a big physical County team but were occasionally bullied off of the ball. County were probably the better team early on but the first three or four chances came to Queen's and their keeper was busier than Calum. The County goal came after sustained QP pressure and a break upfield saw Murray on a one to one with Ferrie. Keeper came out to meet him but Murray pushed the ball round him and went on the score into an empty net. 

Second half was better from Queen's with us having bit more of the ball and both goals were well worked. Both Thomson and Paton took their chances well.

Still playing the ball out from the back each time and sometimes I just want to see the ball booted upfield as County started to crowd us out a bit at the back.

Spong, Turner, Bruce and Paton all looked good with each of them putting in a fair shift. Bruce looked completely knackered at the end as he gave it his all. Didn't see much of Hepburn as he was only brought on during the second half - what he was involved in looked good so we've done some good signings over the close season if we can keep this up.

A pleasing result even if it was a pre-season friendly.

 

 

Thanks for the report 

[Grumpy Soo-sider]

Nicked this - shows the subs too.

Some County guy saying the average of their starting 11 was 22? Not sure about that.

[Bring Your Own Socks]

34 minutes ago, Grumpy Soo-sider said:

As I understand it, we were not allowed to build terracing as it is deemed a 'new round' by the SFA so had to be all seated.

Yeh, we’ve done this numerous times. The SFA license requirements have been sliced and chopped by many fans of many clubs and as the original application was for the Bronze standard there is no requirement for seats anywhere in that stadium. It was said at the meeting that plans have been assessed for temporary stands at both ends, either or and both. But we can’t afford to build the south stand at the moment. Of course, we might gave been able to if we hadn’t spaffed a million quid on the aborted original contract. 

A direct question was asked  about “the west side of the stadium” and the answer was there’s no more work to be done there. Not no more planned, no more to be done. The entire west side.

Another direct question was asked about how long the Hampden deal would be in place. Mumble, mumble,  faff, faff. “I’ll be keeping close to our new friends across the road”. So a year, to be reviewed. If it suits the SFA.

Another direct question was asked about why it had taken 3.5 years to not yet complete the stadium. Response was a story about rocketing costs and black bricks that were on a long lead time. The costs rocketed late 21 and across 22. So if we’d built it to the original programme, no problem.

I could go on but the defensive behaviour of the committee guys, on every subject, plus their blanket denial of any failings led me to conclude thus:-

• there is no plan; we are completely in the grace of Willie Haughey

• the numbers given about revenues from members, ST and away fans made it very clear that away fans are the most important group to The President. The Hampden plan is all about increased revenue on the back of large away support. The example given for turnover if we had been playing the top six clubs this season makes it clear that’s how we survive. 

• the short-term desperation of the committee is in conflict with the long-term plans for the first team

Just to be clear, the football part of this wasn’t discussed. Everyone involved on the operational side of the business was in Inverness. However Beuker and his team definitely have a plan. But the club’s business side, the leadership and administrators, are making it up on the spin and stuck in the nineteenth century. It’s been like that since we went pro you might say. The bigger problem now is that with each passing month we are more and more dependent on one wealthy man. That’s not what we voted for in 2019. We owned two grounds then, now only own one, have huge commitments and debt, can’t use the stadium we have and our biggest revenue target is fans of other teams. And it’s everyone else’s fault, nothing to do with the jolly old Queen’s. 

If only those black bricks were available to make it all better.

[EaglesandSpiders]

Looking at today's team, I guess we didn't sign that young right back after all. My gut feeling is that we're looking for a last-minute opportunity loanee. 

[qpfc]

Good to see Bruce getting minutes but that right back slot needs sorting. Would rather be patient and find the right player as we went through far too many right backs that weren’t up to it last season 

Makes it all the more confusing as to why Davidson was released. Hopefully Beuker has a target ready 

[EaglesandSpiders]

11 minutes ago, Bring Your Own Socks said:

Yeh, we’ve done this numerous times. The SFA license requirements have been sliced and chopped by many fans of many clubs and as the original application was for the Bronze standard there is no requirement for seats anywhere in that stadium. It was said at the meeting that plans have been assessed for temporary stands at both ends, either or and both. But we can’t afford to build the south stand at the moment. Of course, we might gave been able to if we hadn’t spaffed a million quid on the aborted original contract. 

A direct question was asked  about “the west side of the stadium” and the answer was there’s no more work to be done there. Not no more planned, no more to be done. The entire west side.

Another direct question was asked about how long the Hampden deal would be in place. Mumble, mumble,  faff, faff. “I’ll be keeping close to our new friends across the road”. So a year, to be reviewed. If it suits the SFA.

Another direct question was asked about why it had taken 3.5 years to not yet complete the stadium. Response was a story about rocketing costs and black bricks that were on a long lead time. The costs rocketed late 21 and across 22. So if we’d built it to the original programme, no problem.

I could go on but the defensive behaviour of the committee guys, on every subject, plus their blanket denial of any failings led me to conclude thus:-

• there is no plan; we are completely in the grace of Willie Haughey

• the numbers given about revenues from members, ST and away fans made it very clear that away fans are the most important group to The President. The Hampden plan is all about increased revenue on the back of large away support. The example given for turnover if we had been playing the top six clubs this season makes it clear that’s how we survive. 

• the short-term desperation of the committee is in conflict with the long-term plans for the first team

Just to be clear, the football part of this wasn’t discussed. Everyone involved on the operational side of the business was in Inverness. However Beuker and his team definitely have a plan. But the club’s business side, the leadership and administrators, are making it up on the spin and stuck in the nineteenth century. It’s been like that since we went pro you might say. The bigger problem now is that with each passing month we are more and more dependent on one wealthy man. That’s not what we voted for in 2019. We owned two grounds then, now only own one, have huge commitments and debt, can’t use the stadium we have and our biggest revenue target is fans of other teams. And it’s everyone else’s fault, nothing to do with the jolly old Queen’s. 

If only those black bricks were available to make it all better.

I think this season is going to be make or break for the club. If we do not start creating some revenue from player sales, it can get pretty dark pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised if MB and RV decide to abandon a sinking ship.

[EaglesandSpiders]

4 minutes ago, qpfc said:

Good to see Bruce getting minutes but that right back slot needs sorting. Would rather be patient and find the right player as we went through far too many right backs that weren’t up to it last season 

Makes it all the more confusing as to why Davidson was released. Hopefully Beuker has a target ready 

I really liked Oakley. I wish we had him for another season. 

[ExiledLichtie]

3 minutes ago, EaglesandSpiders said:

I think this season is going to be make or break for the club. If we do not start creating some revenue from player sales, it can get pretty dark pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised if MB and RV decide to abandon a sinking ship.

One thing that confused me a little bit, you have apparently signed some youngsters on loan?  How does that fit in with the plan?  Surely if you were going to be getting people in on loan, it would be experienced heads to play alongside your much vaunted youth plan?

[qpfc]

3 minutes ago, EaglesandSpiders said:

I really liked Oakley. I wish we had him for another season. 

Felt quite indifferent towards Oakley by the end of the season. Started off really positively but seem to regress (as did everyone else in fairness) quite rapidly. Stopped going forward with the ball and I struggled to forgive the manner in which he gave the penalty away at Morton. Completely sold the jerseys that day 

There’s definitely a player there and maybe as a young guy, he struggled to showcase his full ability when everyone around him was underperforming 

[EaglesandSpiders]

4 minutes ago, ExiledLichtie said:

One thing that confused me a little bit, you have apparently signed some youngsters on loan?  How does that fit in with the plan?  Surely if you were going to be getting people in on loan, it would be experienced heads to play alongside your much vaunted youth plan?

We actually discussed this briefly here. To answer your question: it doesn't. That seems to be the reason why, except Hepburn, all the other new pre-season signings agreed to 3 year contracts, which shows an intention to develop and sell them on. I don't like the idea of having too many loanees in the squad. 

[Spiders For Life]

9 minutes ago, ExiledLichtie said:

One thing that confused me a little bit, you have apparently signed some youngsters on loan?  How does that fit in with the plan?  Surely if you were going to be getting people in on loan, it would be experienced heads to play alongside your much vaunted youth plan?

Only 1 so far. 

I’m not convinced Beuker and Veldman see  lots of experience as a necessary asset to be honest.
Lack of players who had competed in a title race clearly let us down last season IMO, but I think squad wise this will be the first year we see a group more representative of what the ‘new model’ is supposed be. 

 

 

[ExiledLichtie]

19 minutes ago, Spiders For Life said:

Only 1 so far. 

I’m not convinced Beuker and Veldman see  lots of experience as a necessary asset to be honest.
Lack of players who had competed in a title race clearly let us down last season IMO, but I think squad wise this will be the first year we see a group more representative of what the ‘new model’ is supposed be. 

 

 

Ah okay, for some reason, I thought you'd loaned more.

[TheHitman]

40 minutes ago, EaglesandSpiders said:

I think this season is going to be make or break for the club. If we do not start creating some revenue from player sales, it can get pretty dark pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised if MB and RV decide to abandon a sinking ship.

I’d suggest we calm and temper our expectations of the plan. MB’s contract length indicates he’s aware that this kind of plan takes time. I don’t see the next season or two being anything near make or break. 

[EaglesandSpiders]

3 minutes ago, TheHitman said:

I’d suggest we calm and temper our expectations of the plan. MB’s contract length indicates he’s aware that this kind of plan takes time. I don’t see the next season or two being anything near make or break. 

I meant financially and more importantly administration-wise. I don't care if we get relegated as long as we are financially afloat and independent enough to stick to "the plan". That's make or break for me, and I suspect it's the same for MB and RV. 

[TheHitman]

12 minutes ago, EaglesandSpiders said:

I meant financially and more importantly administration-wise. I don't care if we get relegated as long as we are financially afloat and independent enough to stick to "the plan". That's make or break for me, and I suspect it's the same for MB and RV. 

I see. Thanks for clarifying. 

[Ben Reilly]

1 hour ago, Bring Your Own Socks said:

Yeh, we’ve done this numerous times. The SFA license requirements have been sliced and chopped by many fans of many clubs and as the original application was for the Bronze standard there is no requirement for seats anywhere in that stadium. It was said at the meeting that plans have been assessed for temporary stands at both ends, either or and both. But we can’t afford to build the south stand at the moment. Of course, we might gave been able to if we hadn’t spaffed a million quid on the aborted original contract. 

A direct question was asked  about “the west side of the stadium” and the answer was there’s no more work to be done there. Not no more planned, no more to be done. The entire west side.

Another direct question was asked about how long the Hampden deal would be in place. Mumble, mumble,  faff, faff. “I’ll be keeping close to our new friends across the road”. So a year, to be reviewed. If it suits the SFA.

Another direct question was asked about why it had taken 3.5 years to not yet complete the stadium. Response was a story about rocketing costs and black bricks that were on a long lead time. The costs rocketed late 21 and across 22. So if we’d built it to the original programme, no problem.

I could go on but the defensive behaviour of the committee guys, on every subject, plus their blanket denial of any failings led me to conclude thus:-

• there is no plan; we are completely in the grace of Willie Haughey

• the numbers given about revenues from members, ST and away fans made it very clear that away fans are the most important group to The President. The Hampden plan is all about increased revenue on the back of large away support. The example given for turnover if we had been playing the top six clubs this season makes it clear that’s how we survive. 

• the short-term desperation of the committee is in conflict with the long-term plans for the first team

Just to be clear, the football part of this wasn’t discussed. Everyone involved on the operational side of the business was in Inverness. However Beuker and his team definitely have a plan. But the club’s business side, the leadership and administrators, are making it up on the spin and stuck in the nineteenth century. It’s been like that since we went pro you might say. The bigger problem now is that with each passing month we are more and more dependent on one wealthy man. That’s not what we voted for in 2019. We owned two grounds then, now only own one, have huge commitments and debt, can’t use the stadium we have and our biggest revenue target is fans of other teams. And it’s everyone else’s fault, nothing to do with the jolly old Queen’s. 

If only those black bricks were available to make it all better.

Are we in debt? Who to? How much?

I'm not saying your wrong, just that I don't know about it.

My understanding was that the Lesser build was paid for by the money already received from the sale of Hampden. The playing budget is being taken care of, as was the arbitration fee.

Not sure where the Lochinch investment is coming from but possibly the same sources as above.

Obviously there are numerous other outgoings, but are these covered by normal income?

[qpfc]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Soo-sider said:

Nicked this - shows the subs too.

Some County guy saying the average of their starting 11 was 22? Not sure about that.

Not that it counts for much but Bannon being given the number 4 suggests he’s going to play a fairly influential role in the side for the upcoming season. Great to see as I thought he was fantastic last season. Looked like a 19 year old going on 28 with the level of maturity shown in his game 

[Ben Reilly]

1 hour ago, EaglesandSpiders said:

Looking at today's team, I guess we didn't sign that young right back after all. My gut feeling is that we're looking for a last-minute opportunity loanee. 

A few gaps in the squad numbers, assuming that the numbers used today are for the season ahead. #2 (right back) and #10 (forward/playmaker?).

There could still be a few more signings/lians in the pipeline?

[qpfc]

Just now, Ben Reilly said:

10 (forward/playmaker?).

10 might be Savoury I feel