Yes it is numbered on the back. Is the same sort of paper used for all David Shrigley screenprints from Jealous Gallery and is also stamped on the back (Saturday night special)

Yes indeed I have already called Jealous Gallery but they are very hush hush about the print. The nice lady who I asked the question too just laughed politely and said sorry but that wil stay a secret till the sun goes out!. So she was not allowed to give any information as to the makers of the different Saturday night special unsigned prints....Very Banksyesque but also rather exciting. HOWEVER I am quite a big Shrigley fan and I personally am 99,99% sure this is a Shrigley creation....Who else  otherwise

must admit the brush strokes do look shrigleyish - but as Happy Shoper said that could be just to get people talking.
now that people are talking - lets see if that inventory on Jealous gets to zero pretty quickly

Obviously not signed and unlikely to be acknowledged as such.

where did you purchase that print?

Was a truck records- monorail music (indie record shop in Glasgow but may have been available from others) release from couple of years ago. Came with purchase of a trunk records vinyl release. Sold out quickly from what I remember. Signed on back but not numbered, it's not a screenprint however.

Very Banksyesque , why would you write such a thing in its description ?

No it's not that annoying because I understand the idea of an 'anonymous art show' however I'm convinced that in this case the maker of this particular print can't be that anonymous....it's Shrigleys style absolutely, it's also a gallery that releases a lot of his official screenprints (on exactly the same sort of paper??? Coincidence??? Me thinks not! And why on earth would an another artist acting anonymously copy the very exact same style of David Shrigley??? It's got to be him for sure

By Banskyesque I was referring to the anonymous artist approach by the gallery 😉

I think we all know it is but that link doesn’t prove anything (it’s an old exhibit and the new prints did not exist/feature). And being unsigned/suggested it won’t ever be formally attributed to him technically means it’s not.

am i right to say this is only 15cm x 15cm and you have to guess that it might be Shrigley? What a load of bollocks

It's too bad that shipping to the US is over $35 for something the size of a postage stamp. Otherwise I quite like it.

At 62 UK pounds this little beauty is a steal. Comparable David Shrigley prints that are about as small as this have been selling voor between 350 and 2000 pounds. For example take a look at the sales of the small print titled 'Its OK' (from 2016 and measures 21 x 15cm in an edition of 100) or the very cute 'Small Print' small linocut print from Schaefer (it measures 10,5 x 10,5 cm in an edition of 100 and costs 400 euro) 
Just to show how affordable this print is NOW.....whilst still available....