BobbyBiscuit

[quote author= link=topic=7238.msg110710#msg110710 date=1231496962] On a serious note though, weren't we linked with him not long ago? I'd imagine so...

Aye, god forbid we do that, eh? He wasn't sent off, was he? That's a couple of times I've read that from the EE/PJ and I'm positive he wasn't sent off. Or am I tripping?

See also; Nicholson, Barry

I was thinking the same re the cover for the positions he plays but then I thought of us lining up without him and there's just something not right about it and it's probably the lack of experience as you say. With no Anderson or Hart or Nicholson, I think it would be better for us if we held on to him. I do get a feeling though if he gets any sort of half decent offer from down south he'll be offski.

According to some guys on Mad, Seve was on North Tonight and he didn't sound too positive about signing a new deal. Giving it a lot of "we'll need to see how finances are" etc. That of course doesnt mean that he's leaving or otherwise, but, how much of a loss would this be to us now?

what's the point in him staying when he's not getting a game? It hinders the player, West Brom and our own players, as he's taking up a first team squad place that could be used for one of our own.

Brilliant.

We have struggled for quite a few reasons so far this season, to pin it all on the absence of Nicholson is a bit much I reckon.

It was a genuine question, as I wasn't aware the media didn't like him. I knew the general feeling amongst the public wasn't too positive towards him.

Do they? Got any examples of this?

Of course we have. If we weren't, we wouldn't have lost Strachan, Rougvie and McGhee straight after winning the domestic double. We wouldn't have earlier sold Archibald to Spurs, or even earlier with Buchan, Graham and Harper all going South after the Scottish Cup win of 1970. Leighton left and even Snelders, Wright, Jess, Glass etc. We are in a position, and always have been in a position where there will always be far bigger fish who can take away our best players. Of course, some of our best players - you mentioned McLeish and Miller - will make the choice to stay, but in the main, our players will jump ship. Whether that is because of the amount of money offered for the player, the personal terms offered to the player, the career prospects of the player improving or if it's for all of those reasons it still amounts to us being a selling club. There isn't a team in Scotland - the OF included - who isn't a selling club. I said earlier that we stopped being a selling club for a time, but that was tongue in cheek because with the "talent" we had no-one in their right mind would pay for them. Unless Trump puts a veritable fortune into us, we will never stop being a selling club. I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here. What "2nd chancers" or "young run-arounds" have we gone for and not signed? Did we not just sign Charlie Mulgrew a few months ago? Mark Kerr looks a solid signing and there have been flashes that Gary McDonald could be a good player for us. Sone Aluko would maybe fall into your category of "young run-arounds", and I'd say I was pretty pleased we signed him. Serious question - who or what are you expecting us to sign? Are Mulgrew, Kerr and Aluko not good signings?

We've always been a selling club, just that for a few years we had no one that we could actually sell.

Who here is happy with yesterday's result? I think you may be confusing "happy" with "keeping things in perspective".

Not likely to happen if he continues to make the most idiotic decisions like the one yesterday for their penalty.

I'm going to start charging. What was it this time?

He was fucking dreadful at the end of his Celtic stint, they even opted to play Balde instead of him! He is way, way past his best. It's a no thanks from me.

Aberdeen are at a very tempting 21/20 with Hills. I know we've got concerns over flu victims, but we're defending well and we should still have enough to deal with Accies...shouldn't we?

Very correct in that every league has a few big clubs, but if you think that the SPL is no different or worse to La Liga, Serie A, Budesliga or the EPL then you're tripping out your eyeball. Of course it would be right to point out that these are huge leagues with much more money, but as my point was about the standard of football and entertainment value being less in the SPL than other leagues it stands. 25 years ago we were beating the best these leagues had to offer, there is no chance of us doing that now.

Would you care to point out where I've been "extremely naive"? It is an inferior product though. I don't think there are any grounds to argue otherwise. There's nothing wrong in saying it's an inferior product, but the "entertainment value" of the SPL is pretty low in comparison to other leagues. It's possibly not as bad as some make out, but it's certainly not great.

He did look quite lethal on certain occassions, but for the most part he was just a lazy cunt.

Time to bin Smith I think. He could be Zinedine Zidane, all totally irrelevant if he's never fit to kick a ball for us.

Every year, without fail:

Gus MacPherson is a fucking twat. That's all. Thanks.

Extremely idealistic. Because of the way the game is these days, we need TV money, and simply, without the OF the cash would be a pittance. It may well make the league more competitive, but the standard would drop even lower than it is now because attracting players to a league where there are no "big" teams to play against would become very, very hard. The knock on effect of that is that sponsorship money would be down as the audience is reduced. One team would get CL football, how long would that last though as no doubt whoever was in the CL would get royally pumped, meaning the co-efficient plummets and eventually the league champions would no longer get automatic qualification. They are an odious shower, no doubt. But there's nothing better in football than beating them. I'd miss that if they left.