Onthefringes

Fair summation.

🤔 It’s parochial in its truest sense of narrow, limited, or provincial outlook, focusing only on those issues rather than broader perspectives Transport logistics being described are an issue for Ravenscraig and been there since early construction due design and bad management in an area that was the largest development site of its kind in Europe when created. Would be remiss of the club not to explore opportunities. Were the decision made to stay at Fir Park, it’s arguable it’s not the win the insular of thinking are proposing - nothing in their argument I’ve read is of major benefit to the club.

Basing opposition due existing transport configuration and an unwillingness to envisage what could be, the parochial views don’t add any value to the discussion. How much redevelopment do some think is achievable at current locale? For example, footprint will never afford parking facilities. Is access likely to be improved? I’d hope feasibility study would take cognisance of the future development of the link road that will pass by the stadium as traffic flow removes the already limited crossing provision. I certainly got the impression at last years’ AGM our board hadn’t it marked for consideration. Closing statement is poor analogy in my view. Hardly ripping the club out a community and ‘decent pub incorporated and some office blocks’ for use are ideals that our board have alluded to as bridging operational gaps we experience in the here and now. Still, far too many variables even before we discuss funding which I feel is for another debate.

Fucking hell. Thats’s not what was being said. It’s easy to discount the wild theory of some in favour of listening to those tasked to do so. I’ve offered plenty of opinion on the matters you say, I’m appreciative my thinking aligns currently and enjoying it while it lasts. Disappointed as we all are, fact is we had no better chance than we do any other year.

Disagree with Jens all you like, there’s a reason he’s in post and you’re offering opinion on a forum.

You’ve obviously not been listening to the manager… ‘load management’ is often mentioned. Given hectic schedule, I was comfortable with changes. We get it, an opportunity missed. A lot of variables went against us tonight. ‘All on Jens’ and questioning Matty Connolly’s inclusion is quite the stretch. Maybe some should look at the bigger picture…

Knicker wetting in the extreme. Invest in pampers

He’ll have a better idea after 3pm inspection today… Falling as sleet currently

When the seating is replaced unless Mr Caldwell is a dead ringer for Pinocchio. A return to match thread will be most welcomed

It’s as if the club hierarchy weren’t open in their explanation of preserving lifespan of current seating infrastructure 🤔 Wear and tear, refreshing by blow torch take your pick 🤷‍♂️

Same outlook as Hibs the other week. Physicality and brute force. We got wise and moved the ball quicker. Game over

Not aesthetically pleasing to the eye, but, it’s certainly not cutting up and plays fast.

Bore off

Morally superior? Entitled? Hypocritical? Strange takes, but, as you say you’re on your high horse. The SPFL being ‘uncomfortable’ and government approach analogy was relayed from inside the club. Nobody mentioned it doesn’t matter nor covering up and dismissing any behaviours dangerous or not. The club certainly didn’t & dealt with the matter on their terms ahead of any sanctions. As has been said it has to stop which I support to avoid further censure. And again, rights and wrongs of its use are for another debate.

Don’t see allocations how big or small affecting the decision making - these are token amounts, the uncomfortable approach to appease government. I’d doubt the authorities would have known of any offer to pay penalty by another party. Wanting fans banned would only serve to raise statistics when representing to government. Refraining is the only option to avoid future censure. The rights and wrongs of the issue are for another debate.