While I am of the opinion it is time for a change at the top, I've tried to be as impartial as I can be, looking at both sides of the debate and examining the pros and cons for each argument. Not every point is a reason for backing or sacking, but helps add to the overall picture on each side of the debate. The first paragraph supports the statement in bold, the second is the argument against it.
FOR
Look how far he's taken us: Gus MacPherson was given the manager's job in late 2003 following the sacking of John Coughlin. If he'd said then that six years later we'd be in our fourth consecutive SPL season, having won the first division and the League Challenge Cup along the way, we'd probably have suggested he went for a wee lie down. Yet that's what has happened. We were fighting relegation from the first division when he took over, now it's relegation from the SPL. Ideally, we'd rather not be fighting the drop at all, but it's a major improvement.
However, how long can this be used as justification to keep him? Phil Brown is arguably the most successful manager in Hull's history as he took them into the top flight for the first time, but there was pressure on him earlier this season because of horrendous form. Just because Gus got us promoted four and a half years ago doesn't mean he is still the right man for the job. Alex Smith won us the Scottish Cup, does that mean he should replace Gus if he goes? We're in our fourth season as an SPL club - the relegation battles should be a thing of the past.
We've made two cup semi-finals: Last season we made the semi-final of the Scottish Cup, this season it's the last four of the League Cup. Pretty good going, especially when you consider the league form.
However, to use that as a justification to keep Gus would be to ignore the embarrassing defeats to lower league opponents, which have been numerous over the years.
A few wins will turn things around: At the moment we are just a couple of points off the bottom, but two wins before the end of 2009 over Aberdeen and Hamilton would give the place a lift and could have us pushing for a top six place. We just need a bit of luck.
How many times have we been here over the past two years? We go on a winless run and pressure mounts. We get a few wins. Pressure subsides. This is then followed by a winless run...
When the chips are down, he gets it right: Three times in Gus MacPherson's time in charge it has been do or die time - against Ayr in 2004, Motherwell in 2007 and Falkirk in 2009. Each time he got his subs or tactics spot on and we survived relegation.
But if he can do it on those occasions, why can't he do it for normal games?
He's made some good signings: A contentious issue, as both sides of the divide can point to good and bad pieces of transfer business. Beyond doubt are the signings of Paul Gallacher, Andy Dorman, John Sutton, Jack Ross and Charlie Adam. The jury is out on a number of others, with the rest consigned as duds.
Rather worryingly, the majority of the poor signings - such as Mo Camara, Tonet, Allan Johnston - have come in the last few years, suggesting the manager has lost his touch when it comes to bringing in the right player.
We can't afford to sack him: At the recent AGM it was announced we have no money for signings. Therefore, it can easily be deduced we have no money to sack coaches or pay off players. Plus, with the club up for sale, it's unlikely the board will stump up the money to get rid of a manager, instead leaving that for the new owner.
I seem to remember our financial situation was far worse when we sacked Tom Hendrie and John Coughlin from far longer contracts and we got through it, so it's hardly the most compelling of reasons to keep him - although the issue about the club's ownership does add complications. If you've decided to change manager, not having the money to pay him off doesn't change the fact you don't rate him.
Who would replace him?: As any money we have would be used to pay off the manager and his coaching staff, there would be nothing left to go and poach someone from elsewhere. That would leave us looking for someone who is out of work - and few managers without a job are any good. The good, available ones would probably turn us down.
This argument makes little sense to me. Once you've reached the stage of looking for a replacement and finding there isn't a good one, part of you is already given over to changing the manager. Besides, we had little money when we plucked Tom Hendrie out of relative obscurity, and that turned out OK (for a few years at least!).
You don't know what you've got until it's gone: There's no guarantee that a new manager would bring an improvement. Falkirk fans were quite keen to see the back of John Hughes, but replacement Eddie May has hardly set the heather on fire so far. We could discover that Gus has actually been doing a terrific job and it's being disguised by poor budgets and players.
But some sort of change is needed, and we aren't that far away from the stage where things can't get any worse.
St. Mirren fans have unrealistic expectations: With no money, what more do people expect than fighting relegation in the SPL every season? Gus has worked wonders with a small budget to get us where we are and to keep us up, after the best part of 15 years in the first division we should be happy with this.
Is it unrealistic to expect sensible signings, the odd home league win and a number of other things I'll mention later that aren't happening and show no sign of occurring any time soon?
The public perception is positive: Most non-St. Mirren fans will tell you Gus has done a good job and we are in good shape. The media also have a positive perception of the manager and any time pressure has begun to grow, it has been followed by editorial columns saying we'd be mad to get rid of him. Perhaps we're all blinkered and don't fully understand what he's done.
Or maybe these people should come and watch us on a regular basis, look at the stats and realise that maybe things aren't so rosy after all.
AGAINST
Our form is awful: A pretty simple one. One win in eight league games does not make good reading. Neither does one home league win in 2009 or five league wins all year - last year it was 12. There have been cup wins, but these have merely been papering over the cracks that have begun to grow bigger and bigger over the past few months. Two points since our last win and defeats to Hamilton and St. Johnstone have angered many Saints fans.
But the past eight games have included games against the Old Firm, Hibs and Dundee United. What more did we expect? It's a tight league and a few wins will see us leap up a few places.
The tactics don't work: For the past two years we have played 4-4-2, except when we go to the Old Firm and play 4-5-1. There's also the win over Rangers when we used 3-5-2, but that seems to have been a blip. The tactic involves playing four central midfielders and no wingers, so we have no width. Yesterday it involved a rightback at leftback, a centre half at rightback, a striker on the right wing and a left back and a left winger on the bench. We are incredibly one paced, our strikers usually have the ball played to feet or have to come deep to get it rather than run onto it, we seem to make four passes when one will do.
In recent weeks we've played some nice stuff at times and if the strikers were more clinical in front of goal, and we had a wee bit more luck, then things would be different - and we'd all be talking about how wonderful the tactics were.
He doesn't know how to use subs: Yesterday, despite being 1-0 down, we waited until there were 20 minutes left before changing things - and made two changes in the last five minutes. This was not the first time, and not the last time. Gus seems to refuse to make changes with the scores level as well, even though they could lead to us winning. Last season he subbed Jim Hamilton as he'd scored against Inverness Caley Thistle. As far as he was concerned, the goal changed nothing - Hamilton was coming off anyway. An odd approach.
It's the same problems season after season: As hinted above, the same issues have been present in the team for years and not been dealt with. No width. No pace. No threat from set pieces. No physical presence at the back. Poor crossing. Poor first touch. Wrong tactics. Nothing has been done to address them - we've had wingers and big defenders who have left and they've not been replaced. The situation doesn't look like changing any time soon
But money is tight, making it hard to bring in the right players. In a battle with other SPL clubs or ones down south, we'll probably lose.
He's made some duff signings: Mo Camara, Allan Johnston, Steven Robb, Tonet are just some examples of the horrendous signings made by the manager. He continually signs injury prone players who surprisingly get injured and felt the need to sign yet another midfielder in the summer in Johnston, despite the fact it was the last thing we needed. The signing policy makes no sense - where were the defenders we needed, or the wide players?
As mentioned earlier, every manager makes bad signings and good signings. It's just our bad ones seem to have happened more in the last few years.
He's stubborn: Last season Gus kept faith with John Potter and Mo Camara for far, far too long and it nearly cost us our SPL place. It was clear to everyone they needed dropped or rested and changes made, yet it didn't happen until it was almost late, resulting in both suffering huge drops in confidence. These were not isolated incidents - the same happened with Kevin McGowne and Andy Millen. In each case all got hooked in games and were jeered off the pitch. And, as mentioned earlier, the stubbornness seems to cover tactics too.
However, loyalty to players is a good thing and the manager may have been concerned dropping them would have had an even more detrimental effect on their confidence.
He doesn't use young players: With several other SPL sides using home-grown players, it is a frustration to Saints fans that it doesn't seem to be happening here. There were calls for the likes of Sean Burns to be used last season on the basis that they couldn't be worse than the underperforming first teamers. Last year he gave Ryan McCay and Mark Docherty new contracts and didn't use them, while Marc McAusland was used sparingly. Earlier in the season we were short of players so decided to go with six subs instead of putting a youngster on the bench. We were short of defenders after players left last season, yet let go of Sean Crighton - the most promising young defender at the club.
The argument falls down a bit when you consider Stephen McGinn and David Barron have been regulars over the past few years, as has Chris Smith!
Negativity - on and off the park: Our approach to games is, for the most part, negative. This was summed up in Gus's post match comments from yesterday when he said you wouldn't expect us to lose if we'd scored the first goal, rather than talking about going on to win the game. This negative attitude stretches further - he's usually moaning about a lack of cash making it harder to bring players to the club, training facilities and so on. John Hughes spent a lot of his time talking up Falkirk and making it sound like an attractive place to head for, even though they were in a similar situation to us.
But who cares if he moans and groans if the results are good?
It's all too predictable: Just about every other team knows how we're going to play as it's exactly the same way we've played for the last two years. We don't take the game to other teams, we just play the same style. Even the post match interviews when we lose have become predictable!
Other teams don't change their tactics either. If it gets a win, you might as well stick with it.
He falls out with players: This is more rumour than fact, but if internet messageboards are to be believed personality clashes were to blame for the departures of Ian Maxwell and Eddie Malone among others, while they could also be behind Stephen McGinn turning down a new deal.
Who cares if he has bust-ups? Maxwell and Malone have hardly gone on to bigger and better things.
Fans are being driven away: The crowds are getting pretty low at St. Mirren Park now the novelty value of a new ground seems to be wearing off. More and more fans are staying away due to the dross on display and fans are thinking twice about going to away games. There are people on messageboards considering whether to go to games or not who I never thought I'd see in that position. Entertainment value is nil.
But you choose your club for life, you can't pick and choose to support them only when it suits or the going is good.
There are probably other arguments and both sides that I've missed, but this article is in danger of turning into War and Peace. This should provide a good basis for the undecided to choose a side of the fence - and perhaps explain to folk just why so many of us believe a change is needed.