RicoS321

I don't think this thread should have started until after the international break. Bad luck. I thought Taylor was suspended.

Is it not quite traditional to have a job before retiring?

Dykes and Adams both fall ill, paving the way for the return of Oliver Burke?

Kingsley is a great player, McKay not so much.

Great result. Strachan would have lost us that, as would many managers before. Good resolve and a deserved win. Tuesday will be tough with a few out by the sounds of things. Taylor and Ralston a definite downgrade. McTominay, I think, suspended.

Never an international footballer....

68, I was just informed by text as I was reading this by an equally surprised dandy. Mental.

Miovski scores in his nation's 2-0 loss to Georgia.

There probably aren't any available right backs better than Ralston and he's not as good as Hickey is playing there. Doig is a very good player in my opinion and as good an opportunity as any to get him involved in the squad. Having to choose over having a third choice left or right back probably isn't a decision Clarke spends a huge amount of time on.

Other than our game, he's apparently been very good for St Mirren, who are doing well I suppose. I'm very much for players in our league getting called up if they're on form and Clarke has generally been quick to do so, so even though I was glad to see the back of him I think it's fair enough. Right centre back is a problem position for us it seems, hence likes of Kingsley at the diets not being called up first. That's more than a little biased.

A quick Google search suggests he's making Joe Gomez, whoever that is, excited, whatever that means.

Not before time, Dons legend, Declan Gallagher recalled to the squad (and Josh Doig).

Some performance. Really battered them, and the result possibly flattered them. The 4-2-3-1 worked really well, that's the best I've seen McTominay for Scotland, and McGregor was excellent too. McGinn's airse just gets better every match. Fantastic to see Dykes getting a couple too, he deserves it. McKenna and Hendry didn't put a foot wrong all night either. Hickey was an improvement on Patterson, class. Great team performance.

Good half from Scotland, by far the better team. They should be down to ten. Total shocker of a challenge. The commentary team (and perhaps the ref) focusing on whether the other defender was getting back or not, but that's irrelevant. The challenge was reckless and out of control. He could have easily knocked the player out. It's weird that challenges of that body check nature are treated differently to a lunge with a foot, both are dangerous. Playing well though, McTominay and McGregor looking great in that 2 (4-2-3-1, we should have guessed) and Christie's movement been very good. Adams doing well and especially that run at the end.

Missed the applause. Guessing it was impeccable (mics turned down).

3-5-2 I think. McGinn maybe up front with Adams? Keep him out the way.

You'll make it in time for God save the king though. Hopefully those bastard Ukrainians will show some respect at our time of grief and sadness. I suspect they'll never understand what it's like to lose someone important.

Aye, that's maybe a good way to get the crowd not to boo through the applause, assign them a boo quota and make them aware that they may need to save some for later.

And remember to tune in early with your clapping hands at the ready.

Yes. Isn't that the way it's used though (the wrong way round)? The ref makes his decision as he sees it, then VAR corrects? I'm guessing that a ref is less likely to make a call knowing he has VAR as a backup, so that could indeed have happened on this occasion. There's little doubt though that the ref did spot what he thought was a clear foul, and it's very likely that he saw Scales put his arm round the player, hence he was pretty quick to give the penalty. Unless you think that refs are holding back on decisions under the VAR system? I've only seen it once in the flesh, so it's difficult to tell without seeing the actions of the ref. In the Scotland v Israel game, for one of the goals, the gave a foul (by Dykes for high feet, from memory) but immediately signalled that he was going to VAR. On that occasion, it looked to me like he wouldn't have given a foul but for the fallback of VAR that he knew he could rely on. However, on the telly it looks like refs are making decisions and then being asked to look at them by the VAR team. Your suggested way sounds like how it should occur, are you certain that's how it does happen? I don't know, as I say. That said, I could well imagine the ultra slow motion VAR cunts seeing Scales' arm go round the player and give the pen. I'm basing that on decisions I've seen in England and internationals, where the merest of contact in a contact sport is penalised.

I do agree, it's good to here him be forthright in his opinion, but he doesn't "tell it like it is", as that would suggest there is only one way to look at it. He doesn't spot Scales putting his arm round Porteous after he loses him, which I think is fairly clear (apologies for the poor screenshot). A fairly glaring omission from his analysis, despite the fact he says it in a firm manner. Again, I personally don't think people should be getting penalties for minor tussles like this. When considering VAR, I think that we have to remember how refs (and all humans, especially me!) are wired and how difficult it is to get them to change their mind once they've decided on something. When a ref goes to the TV screens having made a decision like that, he's not going there to change his mind (unless he's already having doubts and looking for a way out, which I don't think was the case yesterday), he's looking for something, anything, that will back his original decision. For me, it's another fault in the giant list of faults that VAR posseses. I don't think it's clear and obvious, because Scales puts his arm round the player's neck as soon as he loses him. The fact that Porteous drags Scales down is utterly irrelevant at that point, because Scales would already have fouled him (in the ref's eyes), which nullifies most of Stewart's analysis. Thus the only thing that VAR can legitimately look at to overturn the decision would be the initial tug on Scales, and I think if we're giving fouls for that then the game's gone. I think this highlights VAR's ineptitude perfectly. If I can make a good case, then so can the ref. I'd hate to see VAR being used to turn over decisions like this, it really isn't obvious enough to warrant it. There is no correct decision here, merely an interpretation of the incident. The number of incidents that can be "solved" by VAR is minimal. Similarly, I could build a very good case for McRorie and Polvara's incidents not being penalties, but had VAR existed I think at least one of those would have been given.

Yes. Madrid is often described as the home of socialism....

Selling their soul (and club) to move 12km out of town, chairman Stewarto Milneta hailed the move a complete success.

It's initial tug bit that I think Scales fucks up on. You get grappling like that all the time, but he's virtually face on to a player that's running in the opposite direction. Porteous just uses his strength to get past him really. It's something (the grappling) I'd want our defenders doing when attacking at a corner, and something Considine and Taylor both did well. He gets beyond Scales far too easily and as soon as he's behind him, Porteous can either dive or attempt to connect with the ball. The reason I don't think var would have overturned it, is that when Scales initially lets him past, he sticks an arm around him to slow him down. That triggers the dive from Porteous, pulling Scales with him to make sure. In a contact sport, that should never be a penalty, but fitba is virtually non contact these days and pens are given for that sort of shite all the time. We've had a lot worse given against us (Bates v Huns last season), and I don't think it was a clear and obvious error from the ref. I suspect that of somebody like McFadden was in the studio rather than Stewart, there'd likely have been the opposite argument made. That's not to say one is right and the other isn't, just that it wasn't that clear either way. Put it this way, if people think var will solve issues like this one, as Stewart hints at, they're deluded. The fact that Goodwin made such a massive thing of it is the most disappointing aspect, that's some serious deflection going on in a game he mismanaged throughout.

That's what happens when you disrespect the monarchy. Horrendous choice of strips I noticed.