RicoS321

Ha ha, not on this occasion! It was aimed at the article writers, who are essentially putting out unquestioned PR, I suspect leaked from one of the two cheeks. However, I would absolutely include the number one broadcaster in my criticism. Doncaster has appeared on radio Scotland numerous occasions and never been adequately questioned. It almost always concentrates on a single small issue rather than the bigger picture of Scottish football. To the extent that things like league construction become an abstract concept that focuses on a number. You might as well ask a group of fifty kids what their favourite number is out of 10, 12, 14 or 16 and just go with the most popular. The format of the league in and of itself is largely irrelevant. Given that this is the fortieth anniversary of two teams solely winning our league - the worst period in Scottish football, if measured by sport - maybe you could write an article discussing the problem? If you were critical enough, and direct enough, then it might start some discussion. Do you think it would, hypothetically? Or do you think it would simply be brushed off (it's just the way it is, look at countries X, Y and Z) for tedious discussion about VAR or the Huns new manager? I think the latter. The point I was originally making is that fairness doesn't even seem to be a consideration by those that are paid to regularly discuss our game on the BBC (radio. Other broadcasters are exempt from criticism as they actively pursue the inequality as their business model). They don't see it as integral, when it should be the number one consideration. They should be discussing it every single week, and planning how to reduce the staggering inequality. Yet, it isn't even acknowledged as a problem. It's like some natural phenomenon that just happens, controlled by the gods. We can't even name the problem. Numerous discussions go by about the state of the game, or the state of the national side, but inequality has not once been pinpointed as the single greatest problem that underpins the rest. Which it undeniably is. Does it not seem ridiculous to you as someone who writes about the game that league reconstruction is being mooted without recourse to fairness? I think the answer is that it doesn't seem ridiculous, because fairness is so far removed from discourse that it would actually seem weird to hear it being discussed. My preference would be a 16 team league, so that we reduce the number of scum games per season and so that can never again be used as to strong arm clubs that apparently require the blue/green pound. It would also prevent TV companies from holding us to ransom in a similar vein. Thus, it would be targeting fairness first. I think 30 games is perfect, we could ditch three shitey midweek fixtures. However, if clubs require it, then create playoffs for European and relegation places. Second to fifth play off for European spots, and eleventh to fourteenth for third relegation. Teams in sixth to tenth have a set of playoffs designed to give young players a chance, with four youth players required in each starting eleven and two on the bench. Give it a promotional name like the youth presentation cup and get a sponsor. Fairness would come from the European spots being shared, with several teams given the opportunity to play champions league qualifying if Scotland has that route, and others given the opportunity to play Europa or conference. League winners could be given the opportunity for a lucrative fixture elsewhere, or bask in their glory for a few weeks. There should be no monetary prizes for league placing, as these exacerbate inequality (and no player is playing, or trying harder, so that their club can win X amount more money). European prize money should be declared a product of the league itself - because it is - and captured by the SPFL and apportioned equally. Again, this would negate the unearned compounding effect of European qualification that ruins every league in Europe (bar the English, who have discovered that the difference between having £200M and £100M in spending has a lessening effect). The steps towards something like the above begin with those paid to represent our game actually discussing fairness. Every time Brendan Rogers is interviewed, don't say "Brendan, how was that for you today?", say "Brendan, you have eight fold the budget of your opponent today, do you think a three goal margin is enough at home?". Celtic are one goal off of a three goals per game average over an entire season. That is horrific and something to be ashamed of. It's not sport. That should be the default position of anyone paid to discuss the game in our country. If they're not interested in sport, not interested in fairness, then they shouldn't be on our national broadcaster. That shouldn't even be remotely controversial.

The main driver? What about increasing fairness, and the competition as a sport? Surely that should be the number one driver of all changes within the game? We're going through the worst period in Scottish football history, with no end in sight, yet no journalist or commentator will ever address the root problem.

It was tongue in cheek, he's a better fullback than Shinnie. I think he'll feel he can get at least a year of higher earnings before returning to Scotland. In my opinion, if he goes abroad, he'll get a few good years. He'll get chewed up in the English lower leagues and be back in a year.

Bit expensive just to replace MacKenzie on the bench behind Shinnie IMO. I reckon he'll head down south, but I think he's about our level and would do a lot worse than signing for us. It would be a question of wages though, he could probably still command a decent salary in the championship and be a bit-part player in the hoofer league.

Consider it done. Would you like Barry Ferguson to be sent to the stands too? In the style of Mark McGhee? What about Hertz losing the previous day, consigning them to the bottom six?

Mats can stop being a total fanny. If it's not an assault worthy of a booking, then get up and get on with it. Kids in my day would play with broken legs. On shattered glass.

I think it means that they can mathematically lose the league at Pittodrie now though.

Aye, that'd actually be a good addition. Write to the lads at uefa

Aye, that sounds right. They did have a guy go off for about half a second. He was waved straight on as the ref was dropping it. Palaversa I think went to the dugout briefly when he was off, as we weren't sure if he was coming back on. I didn't pay attention to the other ones they had, as there was clearly fuck all wrong with any of their players.

We should settle for sixth in my opinion, then you'd get to see, perhaps, an Alloa game, or East Kilbride or some other giant of the game.

I don't think there's any way back for him at Millwall to be honest, or anywhere down South, I reckon they'll be cashing in at a significant loss. I don't think we'll get him for £500K either, but £750K I don't think would be unreasonable. I think the player himself will be the biggest sticking point. If he wants to stay then he'll probably try and negotiate his way out of his Millwall contract. I don't think he'll feel any particular loyalty to us though and will take who is paying the highest.

Wouldn't be totally outrageous. The problem we have is that other clubs would definitely fancy him at that price range, and I don't think he'd be too loyal to the Dons when it comes down to it.

I think I missed whether the player went off or not, such was the seethe at some of the shite he was giving. Although, do players have to go off when the ref stops play? I don't think there's any written rule. I know that they can't insist that they go off if there was a booking, not sure about the other way round. One of his worst today was when their centre half made his second attempt to get Gueye sent off. Threw himself to the ground holding his face, and the ref stopped play for a head knock. It's a nonsense, that rule should be for concussion, but the guy was clearly writhing around and had nothing serious wrong with him. There should be leeway to apply common sense for those ones.

Just back, great performance, probably the best of the season. Completely dominated them, despite an horrendous refereeing performance. Clarkson just immense again, and the player we signed. I'd be offering him an extended deal tonight. Nisbet also brilliant, leading the line superbly and organising the front four like a captain - I'd sign him tomorrow if possible. Shinnie really good on the left and Palaversa did well in the middle. Knoester is a class act, and Dorrington is a comfortable right sided defender. Jensen was okay and Okkels too. Gueye was really poor in the number ten role where he started, but Thelin seemed to switch them at a point and Gueye improved the more he was kept out of the way, winning some good headers and creating space for others. Doohan did well in goals, dealing with some difficult crosses. They were pish, as was the ref. That decision to not play on when Morris was away should see him reffing league one for the next five seasons.

Should be an enjoyable one today. Time to unleash the secret weapon in midfield: Polvara. Biggest worry is that they play a high press and we have Doohan in goal. I can see us losing a goal via dicking about trying to draw them in. We'll need at least two today I reckon. Hopefully Nisbet returns thoroughly pished off at the abysmal Scotland performance, and gets torn into this weegie pish.