Hawk Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Please please please tell me he's not going to persist with just one up top!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Please please please tell me he's not going to persist with just one up top!! Why? We didnt lose the game today because we played one up top. We were two nil up and scored three goals at home. That should have been enough to win a home game 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Please please please tell me he's not going to persist with just one up top!! Why? We didnt lose the game today because we played one up top. We were two nil up and scored three goals at home. That should have been enough to win a home game Because we don't look half the team we are when we play that formation. Remember ALL of last season? Yes we were two nil up and scored three goals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 (edited) Because we don't look half the team we are when we play that formation. Remember ALL of last season? Yes we were two nil up and scored three goals. Do you mean last season when we won games with one up front and lost games with two up front? The same season when, arguably, our best performance came with one striker? Edited July 26, 2014 by Mr X 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Do you mean last season when we won games with one up front and lost games with two up front? The same season when, arguably, our best performance came with one striker? No I mean that after the first two months of one up top when we were poor to say the least. We then changed to playing two up front and then went on a tremendous run of consistent results and performances. Remember? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 No I mean that after the first two months of one up top when we were poor to say the least. We then changed to playing two up front and then went on a tremendous run of consistent results and performances. Remember? No, because that isnt what happened. A settled back four and the signing of Clark were the beginnings of our good run, not a change to two up front. During that run we played several different formations, including one striker. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthetop Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 The most concerning area today was the defence. Worst I've seen from Queens in many a game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toshson Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Thought Lewis Kidd looked totally lost playing as a full back ,decent looking attacking but woeful in defence ,if Mitchell is going to be out for a while Slattery or Hooper must be a better option unless Dowie gets moved to right back with Higgins back in to the centre! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sloop John B Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Fowler can play there I'm sure and spent time covering when Kidd bombed forward he looked good today , a calming presence doing the dirty work so McShane could push forward. And as mentioned, the defence was to blame for the result rather than the formation when we went down to ten (9 with Smith unable to get in the game) You have to be disciplined which we weren't and we paid the price. I'm beginning to hate extra time a lot now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUMFRIES_CREW Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Not sure whats the script wae Kev USA. Plays all pre season games and very well what I saw. First real game and he is dropped to bench Give the lad a chance FFS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Match highlights this season will be posted on Youtube clicky 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmy_cammy Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Presumably the poorer games will be shown on Vine? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Can you wear blades on Palmerston pitch or does it have to be mouldies? Supposed to be playing the Colts in a couple of weeks and need to know if need fork out for a pair or not! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QOS1919 Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 FAO MrX or Skyline Drifter, Was looking at the club shop online and saw the programme subscription for this seasons programmes was priced at £70 which includes all home programmes and shipping is stated as free, now maths is not my strongest point but...... 18 home games x £2.50 = £45 2 cup games (livvy and Elgin) = £5 Sub Total £50 This means Queens would need to play another 8 home games to take the total to £70 and although hopefull of good cup runs i cant see this happening, just wondering if anyone has taken up this subscription 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 (edited) FAO MrX or Skyline Drifter, Was looking at the club shop online and saw the programme subscription for this seasons programmes was priced at £70 which includes all home programmes and shipping is stated as free, now maths is not my strongest point but...... 18 home games x £2.50 = £45 2 cup games (livvy and Elgin) = £5 Sub Total £50 This means Queens would need to play another 8 home games to take the total to £70 and although hopefull of good cup runs i cant see this happening, just wondering if anyone has taken up this subscription The shipping is free in that there is no additional cost over the £70. Obviously, the £70 includes the postage of each programme, which are sent out separately Neither SD or myself have anything to do with the shop and its pricing, though, so you're really asking the wrong people Edited July 27, 2014 by Mr X 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden til i die Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 So shipping isn't free then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie S Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 The shipping is free in that there is no additional cost over the £70. Obviously, the £70 includes the postage of each programme, which are sent out separately Neither SD or myself have anything to do with the shop and its pricing, though, so you're really asking the wrong people So what they really mean is the handling is free. The shipping clearly isn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 It's extremely clear. There is no shipping charge at all, over and above the hefty shipping charge that applies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie S Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 I'd maybe get that changed. It's probably not that legal to state that you're not charging shipping when you are in fact charging shipping. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 I'd maybe get that changed. It's probably not that legal to state that you're not charging shipping when you are in fact charging shipping. There's no shipping charge on placing the order for the service online rather than in person. If you order a replica top in person you pay £40. If you do it online there's a shipping charge in addition to that because the product needs sent to you. If you order a programme subscription in person it costs £70. If you order it online it's still £70 since the service is no different and there's no additional postage for the fact it's an online order. That's all it says. In any event, I don't see how it could possibly be illegal? At the end of the day it's an invitation to enter into a contract to receive all home programmes for a price, in this case £70. It doesn't say that £70 represents only the physical retail price of the programmes if bought in person either. Quite clearly some basic arithmetic reveals it doesn't. The £70 factors in a cost for individual postage of programmes but if the club chose to market a programme subscription at £1,000 per season with postage uncharged that wouldn't be illegal either. No-one would buy it obviously unless they were insane but it would be a perfectly valid offer to make. It's a long time since I did Scots Contract Law but I don't see anything illegal in there. An offer is made, it can be accepted or not. And yes, several people have taken out programme subscriptions. 0 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.