Distant Doonhamer Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Be good likes might pop along as said why no play Murdoch or even bring him on instead diddy pickard Wasn`t there today but Pickard was MOM against Alloa and deservedly started today. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmy_cammy Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) The AGM is definitely the right place to be discussing substitutions. Edited February 6, 2016 by palmy_cammy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Wasn`t there today but Pickard was MOM against Alloa and deservedly started today. He also played well today, in a more advanced role. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trotsky27 Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Maybe was mom but need consistency from him likes and it's just a point that is he going be like coggans and hardly play 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Pickard was man of the match again for me today. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmy_cammy Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Pickard was man of the match again for me today. We should drop him to make him more consistent IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUSTY1111 Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 My Man of the Man of the Match was Crawford Allan, as I believe he wanted everyone there to pay twenty quid to watch him....LOL......and all joking aside I'd say Pickard also. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERSOUTH Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Young Jake and Jordan have been the success stories of this season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERSOUTH Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Why not pub in Dumfries name change to Queen of the South, is this pub linked in any way to our club or Directors? Noticed that Dickies bar is now part owned by former director M Roberton and current directors Hewitson & Patterson. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Why not pub in Dumfries name change to Queen of the South, is this pub linked in any way to our club or Directors? There is no link between the former Wh? Not pub and the club. That particular pub was called the Queen of the South Bar in the 70's though and has simply returned to a former name. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUPERSOUTH Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 There is no link between the former Wh? Not pub and the club. That particular pub was called the Queen of the South Bar in the 70's though and has simply returned to a former name. remember it, Sure it was called Queen O' the South bar at that time. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjc-1988 Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I am not sure that young Jake has played enough to be classed as a success just yet. - he has started a handful of games and played well at Ibrox and in the last two matches. Jordan on the other hand has been absolutely excellent throughout the season and for a young guy has been one of our mainstays. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTulip Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I help with the Queens Trust but am just writing my own views here. It has now been 11 years since the Queens Trust was formally established. During this time I would say the Trust has had a good relationship with the club and has worked hard to support and promote the club as best it can. Two of the main objectives in the Trusts founding constitution are: To encourage Queen of the South to take proper account of the interests of its supporters and of the community it serves in its decisions. And To encourage and promote the principle of supporter representation on the board of any company owning or controlling Queen of the South and ultimately to be the vehicle for democratic elections to the board. The Trust wrote to the council to see if they were supportive of the idea of fan representation being added to the agenda for the Queens AGM next year. If they are supportive then this issue will hopefully be added to the agenda for the next AGM. The clubs owners (the shareholders) will then be able to vote on the issue to decide if the Trust Supporters group should have representation on the QOS board. I think this is quite a fair way to decide if it is something the shareholders want or not. As far as I am aware the clubs directors have always said that they are not against the idea of fan representation. The minimum share requirement to become a director is 250 shares and the Trust currently has 904. Of the 800 to 900 shareholders in the club I think this puts us as one of the top 20 largest shareholders. Membership of the Queens Trust is open to all Queens fans. Supporter representation can make fans feel more connected and closer to the club and this could result in greater time and financial investments by both fans and businesses. As membership secretary I have been told by some people that they won't join the trust as its pointless as you don't have a say and I have also had members say that they will not be re joining the Trust if it is seen purely as a 'cash cow'. So I think both the Trust and the club would benefit from fan representation on the board and work well together for the maximum benefit of our team during the good times and the bad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUSTY1111 Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Are Trust members with shares, are their shares total included in the Trust's total shares? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUSTY1111 Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I am not sure that young Jake has played enough to be classed as a success just yet. - he has started a handful of games and played well at Ibrox and in the last two matches. Jordan on the other hand has been absolutely excellent throughout the season and for a young guy has been one of our mainstays. Only Jordan has played every minute of every one of Queens' 26 games so far this season. Robbie has started every match but was replaced away to Dumbarton with a cut above the eye in our 2-0 league win there and replaced by Atkinson. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 I help with the Queens Trust but am just writing my own views here. It has now been 11 years since the Queens Trust was formally established. During this time I would say the Trust has had a good relationship with the club and has worked hard to support and promote the club as best it can. Two of the main objectives in the Trusts founding constitution are: To encourage Queen of the South to take proper account of the interests of its supporters and of the community it serves in its decisions. And To encourage and promote the principle of supporter representation on the board of any company owning or controlling Queen of the South and ultimately to be the vehicle for democratic elections to the board. The Trust wrote to the council to see if they were supportive of the idea of fan representation being added to the agenda for the Queens AGM next year. If they are supportive then this issue will hopefully be added to the agenda for the next AGM. The clubs owners (the shareholders) will then be able to vote on the issue to decide if the Trust Supporters group should have representation on the QOS board. I think this is quite a fair way to decide if it is something the shareholders want or not. As far as I am aware the clubs directors have always said that they are not against the idea of fan representation. The minimum share requirement to become a director is 250 shares and the Trust currently has 904. Of the 800 to 900 shareholders in the club I think this puts us as one of the top 20 largest shareholders. Membership of the Queens Trust is open to all Queens fans. Supporter representation can make fans feel more connected and closer to the club and this could result in greater time and financial investments by both fans and businesses. As membership secretary I have been told by some people that they won't join the trust as its pointless as you don't have a say and I have also had members say that they will not be re joining the Trust if it is seen purely as a 'cash cow'. So I think both the Trust and the club would benefit from fan representation on the board and work well together for the maximum benefit of our team during the good times and the bad. Is it the case that if the current directors were in favour of the idea, they could appoint a director without it being put to a vote at an AGM? Is it not only the case that a 5% shareholding is required before somebody could be proposed as a director if they hadn't already had approval from the current board? Therefore, the support of the Council is only necessary because it is thought that the board wouldn't give their approval?My point is, if the current directors are receptive to the idea, why is it necessary to involve the Council and require their support? Why could the board not be approached directly and a director appointed by them? Also, if it is put to a vote at an AGM it won't matter if hundreds of shareholders are in favour of it. If the 10 biggest shareholders are against it, it won't happen. Apologies if I have misunderstood the position from the BBC report and from looking at the Articles, which looked like a very old version. And I have no strong feelings on the matter one way or the other. Just looking at the practicalities. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Are Trust members with shares, are their shares total included in the Trust's total shares? No. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUSTY1111 Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 No. That's what I thought, thanks for that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 My point is, if the current directors are receptive to the idea, why is it necessary to involve the Council and require their support? Why could the board not be approached directly and a director appointed by them? I suspect you've answered your own question there. 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.