rocket_scientist

Great detective work TDD but where can I look to see how often he's been subbed off? I also see something good in him and hope that spark is still there, which it looks like it is.

Yes but Tony Blair, Andy Burnham, Ed Miliband and these Chukka wankers were never Labour. They were and are pursuing the exact same agendas as Cameron and hatchet face, the exact same agendas as the EU and they were all serving the same western puppet masters (running the corporatocracy and going right through Israel and AIPAC in the US) and never the people. Labour and Conservative have been exactly the same for well over 20 years but Corbyn won't play their game so they're terrified of him. Then again, if they could assassinate JFK, JC will be a much easier target... if he ever got elected. This move today has been designed to break up the opposition vote and to guarantee continuing Tory corruption. They have been put up to this and I would guess royally entertained in the process, with excessive funds being generously given and promised.

That's one interpretation. Another is that Chukka is a spineless establishment puppet wank who has been used to split the party and almost guarantee more of the same Tory drivel, representing the deep dark unelected (sorry, self-elected) state. The anti-semitism smear on Corbyn and Labour was a lie and this is the result of it. We're being played. Again.

Your second issue was an interesting read and I never thought about how his deployment in totally different positions would have been a major factor, another piece of material evidence in the indictment of McInnes. You are totally correct, although the sheer infrequency of his minutes on the pitch v. seasons been here is the most damning in my opinion. On your first issue, I don't think he's lost just ONE year in his development. It's considerably more than that. He's 22 in 6 months time and I think we have lost almost ALL of the last few years. He's been at the club since Under 11 days. I also don't agree that it would've been "difficult to justify him getting game time" if the players who were getting played in his stead were consistently producing, which they weren't. The standard of opposition we faced was horseshit last year, excepting the runaway champions and a well-managed Wright should have been more than capable of doing better at age 20 than the journeymen plodders we had to endure at Pittodrie, had he been properly developed from the very start. We just don't know what he might have been capable of by now because he's never had the chance and I suspect, has never had any quality in his coaching and mentorship. Very interesting discussion on talksport this morning. The Ole Gunnar interview of him backing Sanchez and likening him to a bottle of ketchup was the trigger but an ex-Liverpool player - I wasn't in the car long enough to get his name but it sounded like Danny Murphy - spoke great sense about management and gave some superb examples from his days, including how one former manager was very good at sticking with you even after one bad game and would controversially engage squad rotation and drop a player for one game after he had played exceptionally well (which I couldn't even imagine being a thing). He also said that Stevie G got hooked at HT (away to Basle if I heard right) and didn't get picked for the next two games. The point he was making was that nobody was exempt, everybody had to be on their toes and even their best player wasn't too big to be dropped. Their talk about belief (in the player from the manager) and consistency (in playing them and in how the manager communicates with them) were subjects that would be alien to most managers and sadly, that would include every manager that Milne has ever recruited for AFC.

If it means 6 parts alcohol to 4 parts blood, I would say it's quite a lot actually. I've no idea what it means either but aye, I get ye, the yanks dinna ken their bevvy fae their elbow when it comes to pub pints.

I don't know how we can find out but it would be interesting to know how many of his 16 starts were league games and how many times he finished the game he started. I swear he's been subbed off the vast majority, certainly the very few SPFL games he's started. What McInnes the brain surgeon doesn't understand is what failing to give a youngster CONSECUTIVE games says to him and also what subbing him off ALL the time does to his mindset.

Surely not? It was less than two months ago that a gluepot was saying WE were going to win the league, aye, after beating the worst two teams.

I noticed Templeton scored at the weekend, another one we let go at 15/16 and we specifically said to him he wasn't big enough. I saw him come on as a sub for Stenny at Montrose aged 16 and he was electrifying. Think he developed a taste for partying not long after that, a very common Scottish affliction in footballers in particular.

Very sorry to hear that MBT but I'm afraid you have no choice but to make it work this time. For one very simple reason; There are cunts over here on this side of the pond who you've never met who are rooting for you. So fucking do it. All the best. We need a weekly update. Lots of love, rocket

I detest this "not big enough" attitude by dinosaur thinkers in football. Gordon Strachan wasn't a giant and Alexis Sanchez, possibly the most expensive footballer ever in the UK (in terms of wages) is the same height and 3 kg lighter than Wright. We either see his potential or we don't but at 22 this summer, he's one that should definitely have been managed better. Time will tell what he's made of.

He has played 90 minutes for Dundee 3 games in a row. He was never given 90 minutes on the pitch once in the SPFL this season from McInnes. This is the whole point, that we couldn't possibly know how good he might be unless he is managed correctly. Some people, particularly those who don't actually work with athletes don't understand the skills required to empower people to be the best they can be nor do they recognise key mental aspects such as confidence and belief that every top performing sportsperson needs. I would suspect that Michael Stewart's opinion is going to be far more valuable than fans who have never played at a decent level nor ever managed men, let alone sportsmen.

Michael Stewart just described Scott Wright as a sensational young talent following his setting up the equaliser and scoring a sublime free kick for the winner. McInnes and some of our fans don't agree.

Stevie May another spectacular example of a footballer going backwards under McInnes.

The manager's job description in relation to players will be threefold; 1. Recruit the right players, 2. Develop and improve them, and 3. Manage and inspire them to be the best they could be. There are other functions and roles of a football manager of course, including reviewing strengths and weaknesses of the opposition, making sure that practise and preparation works optimally, having the right support staff in coaching and scouting etc. etc. but when we talk about developing and improving players, there are some sad examples at AFC. Reynolds was POTY is his first season. It was possibly (or probably) his injury that set him back but from being one of our best assets, he's been a liability and a drain on our wage bill. Logan was fantastic in his first year and a half. He's been allowed to regress alarmingly. Stewart was poor for us last season and yet he was very good at Dundee by all accounts and he was excellent under Steve Clarke. Too early in this return spell to judge yet but sandwiched between his good spells at two other SPFL clubs, he was poor for us. McGinn was on fire once upon a time, scoring 9 times in 10 games including for his country. He has been allowed to turn into a pedestrian footballer, only very occasionally showing glimpses of the undoubted quality that he has. GMS was similarly rejected by Celtic and equally frustrating is that he too has magic within him. He also doesn't produce consistently and without being able to perform at a good enough level enough of the time, you can't possibly expect to succeed. Considine has not improved over the last 5/6 years. He's just an honest workhorse who has arguably been totally mismanaged but the biggest crime in relation to developing footballers has been our youth. Remember that this is the manager who didn't think young James Maddison was good enough to start, a superb footballing potential who became an England international. Scott Wright, Bruce Anderson, Dean Campbell, Frank Ross, Connor McLennan have all showed great potential in the last 12 months but none of them have been given a decent chance. A great manager inspires youth and fills their heads with belief and super-confidence. The very fact that McInnes doesn't ever give them a big run is tantamount to telling them the manager doesn't think they're good enough. On recruitment, McInnes is an obvious fail. On developing and improving, he is also a big fail for me. The Kenny McLean example isn't a validation for McInnes. He was always a good player (so a recruitment pass) but he was allowed to get lazy and only started producing when other clubs came sniffing around. After he signed for Norwich, we finally saw the best of him so it was player-motivation rather than man-management. Hayes was consistently good for us. He didn't improve under McInnes. He was always good and unlike McGinn, he never got lazy nor allowed himself to fail to produce. Ryan Jack was someone who never lost possession and was always going to be a valuable asset. Just because he got signed by them doesn't mean our manager specifically improved him as a footballer. Shinnie might have been the best LB in the country but has had too many bad games for us this season, mixed in with some great battling performances, which comes with his nature and desire. He's another potentially excellent footballer who isn't consistent enough under this manager. As for McKenna, who McInnes was forced to pick for Fir Park less than 18 months ago, he's always been a big unit who is very useful in the middle of defence but he's got his limitations and any improvement that he might be showing - and I don't see it personally, he's consistently been at this standard (so why wasn't he played earlier?) - will be simple maturation and more experience. Cosgrove is a £20k footballer and will never be a superstar. His "improvement" might not be a result of any technical coaching but the simple confidence that the first couple of goals give. I don't see any technical improvements in any of McInnes's footballers, ever.

Fixed it for ya! It is reasonable to seek sanctuary. It's ok to have the company of men only from time to time. It's not a crime to not want to listen to females spouting about a men's game they can't possibly experience. Political correctness is a tool. The deep state use anti semitism as a political tool to unjustly smear Corbyn. The gender bender lobby is an agenda implemented by big pharma to facilitate gross charges for injecting confused kids with drugs. Equality of opportunity is sacrosanct but equality in performance and of capability doesn't exist.

Interesting discussion about Chelsea by the Sky panel just now. Cascarino was interviewed too and he slated their lack of youth promotion.

I agree. It's the tone of their voices. It must be a recruitment thing, irritation being a by-product of the model they're looking for. It's quite remarkable how their male pundit panel are similarly offensive. Merson can barely speak English and Thompson's whiny nasal-ness are probably the biggest examples but being encouraged to shout out "GOAL" - in a patent attempt to make the product sound more exciting - just makes Le Tissier and Charlie look as bad, the latter being a good pundit in my opinion. Unbelievably, Radio Scotland thought this was a good idea and have encouraged the same goal interruptions in Open All Mics, their "commentators" being unbelievably thick and almost disqualified for radio work by their sheer ineptitude with the English language. Michael Stewart is the best pundit out there by far in my book though.

Two things happened in the last hour which reminded me of this thread. During a very moving documentary on Bowie's last five years on BBC4, Visconti gave a great description about the point of art in the context of him not giving interviews latterly. A friend sent me a pic where a quote attributed to Leonardo da Vinci said - There are three classes of people: those who see, those who see when shown, and those who do not see. I replied with - Those who make things happen, those who watch things happen and those who go "shit, what happened?" I guess Salmond might fall into the category of trying to make sex happen but he wasn't attractive enough to his target for consummation to take place. He only then could see, when shown by the non-consent that he's really not that desirable nor powerful after all. Sad old creep. Allegedly. Possibly.

Don't wind it up. It can't think properly. It can't read properly. It's granite thick. Interesting hypothesis about how the typical NE man is such a thick cunt. Traditionally men of the earth - fishers and farmers - they lack the imagination and education to consider anything outwith their (incredibly) narrow frame of reference. This leads them to reject anything to do with subjects such as religion and art, before they've even considered the arguments, incapable of doing so as they are.

1.575 m and 7.62 cm - when flaccid, unerect (hopefully). Get the converter App. Get with the beat. Use technology, don't be afraid of it.

He had a shit win percentage there and has a shit record generally. Very strange appointment, possibly as bad as Stewrat Milne's choices over 20+ years.

I didn't realise Banks was a decorated war hero, a jingoist nor a social anthropologist. Can we please keep it on topic fellow dandies.

Females are physically inferior to males in many ways and including football. This shouldn't mean that they are disqualified from watching or punditing on the men's game but when they do, they lack credibility in that the majority of men are listening to them are thinking how the fuck would you know? The lassie footballers on the mainstream channels are actually very good but without being capable of playing the game at this speed, at this intensity and at this quality, we still can't take them seriously or at least, as seriously as a man who has played the game. The scouse woman on the Sky panel is very astute and makes excellent observations but she's not there because of her ability in this regard, she's there because of the equal opportunities culture. I would far rather have a man doing it and leave the lassies to commentate and pundit on the female game, which nobody wants to watch cos it's shite. Bianca was the first one I remember and she only got the job because of Jeff was/is knobbing her. I have zero evidence for this, I certainly wouldn't stand in a court of law and utter this and again, she's a very good observer of football but I don't want to listen to her or any female talking about the male game so they can fuck off and get back in the kitchen and make me a fucking sandwich, the hoors.

Thuggery is rarely pointless. Even property vandalism comes from a place and therefore has a point, albeit often coming from social deprivation and/or individual boredom but "thuggery" in terms of people is a deliberate act to inflict damage on another, the whole point being to injure or destroy the recipient of one's ire. McGregor did what many keepers would have done and has rightly been banned as self-protection is no longer allowed, far less the taking of any opportunity to damage an opponent, a natural instinct for many. The assaults on Lennon were criminal acts which will rightfully be treated as such but these crimes don't inspire others to also commit crimes so nobody is "setting a bad example". We always have a choice how to conduct ourselves. The best law in this country is self-defence. In a day and age where the losing aggressor goes and klipes, it's important to think ahead and create the opportunity to invoke self-defence before battering a cunt who is sair needing it.

No you're not speaking in riddles nor Dutch but despite repeated requests, you are reluctant to explain yourself; Putting aside your insulting "grown man" and "tries to portray himself as an intellect", why does my use of "karma" in other threads devalue any points that I made? What interpretation of "karma" did you attribute to me and why was it so offensive? I think you'll find that I'm speaking in plain English too.