RicoS321

It's not too bad. It's early in the season, and we're still in the transfer window, so some guys will maybe find new teams. If anyone, like Dykes, has had an injury you'd expect them to have less minutes under their belts at this point. The others will hopefully break in at some point. Good to see the young lads like Johnston, Doak and Forrest getting an opportunity.

Why? He's been good for Scotland, generally speaking. The red card wasn't something that can be blamed entirely on Porteous either, the rest of the defence and midfield went completely missing and he threw himself at the block. It was a rash challenge as a result of chaotic defending, nothing more, nothing less. He got his punishment.

I assume Max Johnston will be right back. Started the last two for Sturm Gratz. A serious lack of forward planning from Clarke, guys like Barron and Johnston should have been with the squad in the summer. He's not offered any bedding on or transition for this campaign. Needs to react quickly and establish a good squad of guys for the next few years. The only ageing player I'm not concerned about is Gordon.

FTFY

That's what happens when you don't force him to do the work of two players. It's testament to his fitness and attitude that he wasn't badly injured last season, which could have had consequences at this time in his career. It really was atrocious management by Robson, I don't think it can be overstated. When you're not arriving late to every tackle and not really having to worry about where your midfield partner is, you're timing has a far greater chance of being successful. Not only that, but the increased efficiency means that you make better decisions and gives you more time on the ball, so it's no surprise to see him deliver telling crosses from space. He'll still tire in games, I'm sure, and his style of play will always result in bookings, but he's been good at managing that throughout his career and will continue to do so. He's a very good SPFL player that I reckon has another season beyond this one at the level he is now. Edit to add: it was very frustrating to hear "the legs have gone" nonsense from our own fans last season, without the basic understanding of our team setup. It's not always clear on the telly I guess, you might just get an angle of Shinnie arriving late constantly, but numerous folk at the game could be heard questioning the player over the manager.

Poor man's Ringo in my opinion

Actually, you could be correct, I would fundamentally disagree though, but that's fine. The point I should have made was that it isn't what anyone wanted VAR brought in for. It was absolutely not a clear and obvious error by any normal person's view point, and not in the spirit of the game. The referee had a clear view, with full context of how the tackle was made, the entire movement, the speed, the intent, the force etc. He was in full possession of the facts when he made the call, and that incident was re-refereed. You might have walked away from today's game saying "that guy could have had a red for that tackle", but nobody in their right mind would have been calling it an outrageous decision and asking for retrospective punishment for the player. The creep of VAR in every country and tournament is undeniable, and it's ruining games (we were very comfortable today but the red ended it as a contest). Yet again, because nobody can define clear and obvious, we're getting re-reffing by slow motion replay. Inevitably, of course.

Another honking VAR decision today in our game. Re-reffing once again and making the final part of the game a nothing affair. Nobody was calling for a red. Because it wasn't one.

Aye, a good game for the Dons all round. No passengers today, but Sokler was quite poor despite putting in the work. Shinnie and Nielsen very good in the centre, Shinnie with another lovely assist. McGrath probably top Don. Couple of great strong headers from Gueye, who put in a good shift. Ambrose had his best game for us yet, holding onto the ball for more than three seconds at one point. Nisbet didn't get much opportunity, nor Palaversa, who's quite a big lad. McKenzie played well, and Devlin started well but stopped making the runs beyond Keskinen which meant we didn't get much going down that side. McGrath makes McKenzie a better player.

The attitude issue isn't just because of his Millwall stint. He was also a young player at Hibs. That does things to a man.

No! There a lot of potential negatives with him, with the positive being that he might be a temporarily good striker for us. If he is, then he'll go somewhere else most likely! It's pragmatic though, he's been good in this league before, and we need a striker in, but probably don't want to commit to anyone long term with so many in the current squad, fighting for one position essentially. Again, though, we need to see players going out the door. There is no need to have four strikers and potentially five when Duk returns with tail between legs after the window closes. If there are any minor attitude problems with Nisbet, we don't need another two or three guys making things difficult behind the scenes because they're not playing. We certainly don't need to be juggling minutes on the park for them either. As Jute mentions, Ambrose on loan would be good, he's very clearly not ready for the SPFL. He doesn't really look ready for playing football if I'm honest. Maybe we could send him offshore?

I think he'll drop Morris and play Vinnie (assuming Palaversa isn't ready yet). It's notable that Morris has been subbed in reasonably short order so far, I think he's been found out. Maybe not though. Also, surely this is the one game you want Rubi starting? Up against thon Vassell lad, I know I'd want him.

Yep, the BBC once again showing its impartiality. Let's ask two teams how they think Scottish football can improve youth development. Two teams who always want what's best for Scottish football.

First, they were all absolutely shite options. Secondly, none of them were ever happening (which is really what I mean by shite, as in "full of shite", that wasn't very clear). My memory is a bit foggy (like loirston) on Kingswells, but there was no way that the SFA were helping build Aberdeen a new stadium, nor the government. The area was opened up for development. Loirston would still have been going through re-writes to amend the capacity to 15,000 with a design similar to St Darren's. Instead, it was conveniently - and in no way linked - opened up for development. Kingsford was ditched as soon as Cormack actually funded the training ground in return for chairmanship, as he even he could recognise how ridiculous it was. I expect to see that area opened up for development in the coming years. To add, the beach development, much like Dundee's pretty rendering, will not be happening either. I'm ten year's time, both Pittodrie and Dens will still be going strong, and both clubs will be ten years down the road to not moving.

What I mean is that we stayed at Pittodrie because the alternative was shite. We waited for a better alternative, because sometimes doing nothing is better than doing something just because you feel you have to, which was the case with Milne. The beach would be fantastic, but Pittodrie is fine for a good while, we don't need the shiny new thing. If I were a Dundee fan, I'd probably think that the heart was being ripped out of the club by some US bellend, and rather stay put until something better comes along. It's the next 100 years of the club (football will still be being played in the smouldering ruins of the planet), it's better to get it right rather than immediacy.

Just stay at Dens, just like we're staying at Pittodrie.

It looks like an artist rendering of a boring industrial building, with ugly hotel attachment. The location is what makes it. If it is a shite location then it will be shite. I don't get folk that are happy to overlook that because of a shiny new thing. It's the weird attitude that would have had us playing in Westhill.

"For me, it's a horrendous decision. It's extremely harsh. I don't think it's a clear and obvious error. It surprised everybody when he was asked to go over." So, Derek, can you tell us what clear and obvious actually means? No? It's just the Scottish referees and down South though. They just use it wrong. The system is fine.

Do you go to games? Speeding up decisions is essential, it's fucking awful sitting through a decision (unlike watching on telly, when the space is filled with the actual VAR process with various replays). The general consensus around me at games is that everyone is ground down by the time a call is made, and nobody gives a fuck by the end of the process. There is no such thing as a correct call for most things VAR intervenes on (offside excluded, of course), they are all contextual and subjective, and could be argued either way, usually convincingly. They have not changed the handball rule, just the advice to referees, but that misses the point. They changed the rule specifically because VAR was introduced, and have now partly backtracked because it was so fucking shite. What they've backtracked to, is less VAR, because VAR was fucking shite. We can take handball as a good example, the number of actual handballs, clear and obvious in the spirit of the game, that referees miss is miniscule. The last two I can think of involving the Dons were Jenks against St Johnstone and Shankland for utd against us. Anything else is just contrived shite that are accidental, point-blank, nonsense. The point about middle ground is nonsense too, there is no middle ground unless you can define what clear and obvious means. Can you even define what a middle ground is? There is no such thing, and it is an ever moving position, because if the Tims get a middle ground decision one week, then the Huns will claim their non penalty was middle ground the next, and then everyone complains about consistency, officials then start intervening more and so on. If you can define clear and obvious is, with examples, you'd be the first. In terms of offside speed, there is no such thing as an obvious offside call. What people think is obvious is usually not nearly as obvious after the lines are drawn because of parallax. If offside is certain (as opposed to obvious) then the play is stopped by the linesman flagging, this happens regularly. The rest are not worth his job to be getting it wrong - they always have to err on the side of caution. The process then has to be exactly the same whether it's two millimetres offside or a metre onside. You identify the last touch, the lines are presented and the decision made, alongside any calls on interfering with play etc. You can't just look at a camera and claim "daylight" or some pish, because that isn't remotely accurate. Technology is the only possibility to improve the speed of offside calls. Unless you have some other method? Then it comes down to whether you want to spend an absolute fortune on the latest technology. Even then, you still have the game being ruined for a 3% increase in accuracy. It just hasn't been worth it. The reason I get annoyed by and say that we should bin it, is that all of these things were stated in advance and evidenced wherever it was implemented. There is no middle ground and never could be for very obvious reasons (hence why nobody can ever define what that would be). The supposed increase in accuracy is only ever going to be incidental, with the detriment to the game for the actual people in the ground, significant. That gap will never be bridged, ever. Not without changing the rules to suit the technology (thus making the game shite). The most frustrating thing is that we didn't need to do it. We could easily have insisted that broadcasters tone down their discussion on refs, and managers, players and interviewers. We could have made a point of discussing missed chances or poor defending in the same breath as poor refereeing decisions. For there to be a general acceptance that refs make mistakes. We didn't, we let lazy arseholes decide what's best for the fans. Again. The TV elevating the VAR soap opera to a thing in and of itself.

Maybe it's a way of luring Duk home? He's maybe self conscious about his weight, so they're getting Nisbet in to help him feel better about himself.

Was she dead?

Ah, the "its not the technology, its the people using it" line. VAR is the people using it, because every decision is subjective (although offside to a much lesser degree). I don't understand why people think that a product of poor referees isn't going to be poor. It was pointed out a thousand times before it was introduced, with evidence from all over the world. It's shite in every country and at tournaments, with supposedly the best refs in the world on the best version of the technology, it still adds absolutely nothing to the game, with the negatives far outweighing the positives. The only way to get VAR to work would be to have sensors all over the players' bodies and make it a non contact sport, with every touch a foul. Offside would have to remove any notion of interfering with play, and just return to offside being yes or no. The decisions would be lightening quick and undeniably correct. The game would be shite. Until someone can define the parameters of clear and obvious (which is impossible), it cannot work as an effective system, and that has been obvious from the moment it was mentioned. The next point people make is that it should only be used when it's really obvious, which cannot be defined either, but what they usually refer to is something so infrequent that the cost of the system could never justify it (it then becomes a goal-line technology equivalent). It probably does work for offside, if you're comfortable with the three minute wait, but it goes entirely against the spirit of the rules. It has been an overall negative for the fans of the game in every country in which it's been introduced. It needs to be binned.

Let's not talk about that. Although, in the spirit of conspiracy, when that draw was made it was just essential they got a scum game, and there was no way the Huns could be trusted to make it to the final.

I don't think they could plan for every eventuality, because some games are on Tuesday, and St Mirren might have got through instead of, or as well as, Kilmarnock. That said, you're right, they knew Hearts were playing in Europe this week and they could have just made an assumption that the next best placed team in the league would maybe get the furthest and so have arranged for them to be playing each other.

In his last season, or half season, I can't remember, Nisbet bulked up considerably and started playing like an actual number nine. He was good then, and he'd very much improve our team on that form. However, it was a 6-12 month part of his career that may not ever be replicated. He's also got Hibs in him, which means he'll automatically be a lazy, overweight jakey, who'll spend more time in the physio room.