RicoS321

Good enough for me. Manc, can you remove the goal from Hedges' tally and award it to future dons' centre half Stuart Findlay?

It was on target, not an own goal. I have no problem with a player using his wrong foot if he can get his feet sorted out quick enough. I'd say either chance today was acceptable for a left foot, not so much the one against the tims. It's not something a primary school footballer, exclusively, would do though, it's rife in the modern game at all levels. Weirdly, it seems to be much more of an issue for left than right footers. It's fairly regular to see a left footer with a fantastic technique on their left, with a right that just hangs there. It's like they shape their bodies the wrong way in order to get more action on the ball but struggle to pivot onto their pish foot. Robson was gash on his right, Mulgrew was only latterly at the Tims acceptable on his right. Hedges is actually okay on his right but he just seems to approach the ball with his body already opened up. Would be difficult to coach out now.

Leave him alone, he's ace. He was probably expecting Sam to bury it like he should have. Good to see Cosgrove scoring, he looked nervy when he came on with some poor touches. Although when it mattered, for both the missed chance and the red card his first touch is excellent setting himself up nicely, which isn't something I think we'll often see from Main (who had a decent game today). McLennan was good today, but also just lacked that composure near the goal. Good to see him playing well further up the pitch. A good game for us all round.

Might as well leave this here Dick

This is mindset, and the nature of chairmen in general - having made their money in the way they have (in the main). That's not a criticism, more an observation. However, it is also the nature of having football clubs setup as companies rather than, say, charities or some other bespoke type of entity. Cormack's job of ensuring that AFC returns a profit to its shareholders does not square with that of the promotion of a healthy sporting competition (in the short term). An entire league of competing interests, without a single unifying cause (Scottish football) all run by men with similar views by and large. I disagree that Scottish football has been made a laughing stock by naked greed and corruption, we're just not as good at it as our neighbours to the South. Each and every league is setup in the same way, whether its the English league and the 6/7 teams that want to create a closed door European league, the Spanish with their top two, the French with PSG bought and paid for with dubious funds etc etc. We're not a laughing stock because nobody is watching us. Which is why there's such a huge opportunity in my opinion. It's not just Scotland that's crying out for a healthy sporting competition built on fairness, its all of Europe. If we could create a league that works together for the betterment of the league, where European money is split evenly, funds are not distributed on league placings, wage caps, co-ordinated youth development programs where no child is ever contracted (surely this is a basic human rights issue?) before hitting 16 or playing first team football (whichever comes first) and so on. It would make people sit up and take notice. People down South would tune in to our SPFL internet/TV channel to see things being done differently, with an emphasis on fitba as a sport and railing against players who get paid 5 times the national average wage every single week. It may even get players with a conscience coming here to play that wouldn't normally consider it. To make a league where everyone benefits from the success of the rest would be fantastic. I'd have no problem supporting the scum in Europe if it was something that would better Scottish football, and an ultra competitive league would do wonders for the game. Unfortunately, I suspect most Scottish football fans would disagree. They'd much prefer to blindly follow us to Westhill and beyond to the Atlantic league, picking up the crumbs from the scum-table and benchmarking ourselves uncritically against an ever widening gap.

I thought Anderson looked reasonably accomplished on TV the other night, but he's playing alongside Moffat who is slower than a dead cat. Anderson was making some nice runs and trying to play off a guy who was basically static (he's a hero at Ayr though, as he's a good finisher). It's a pity he couldn't have got a better suited team. Even Raith would have been a better setup for him. Ross' crossing for Raith was fairly pap on the telly too.

Entirely agree. However, I'd add that it gets ignored by our own fans too, and the constant focus on our results against either scum over anything else simply compounds the issue. We are a massive part of the problem.

Nobody stated league record, nobody would ever think in that manner, that's just stupid. Unless it were the case that the huns put out crap teams in the cups, which they don't. The huns have only been alive and in our league for a few years, so there's a very obvious cutoff point. It's not poor in comparison to Motherwell or Killie, that's not true. Motherwell have only beaten Rangers once since they returned to the SPFL, and Killie's record is much the same as ours since the hun returned. It's pretty obvious stuff, the problem is, if you take your dislike of McInnes aside, you're putting unfair targets on him - objectively speaking. I think four points is a reasonable aim, do you think more, and if so show yer workings? For aviodance of doubt, I think four is the minimum target we should be aiming for and he should be cut a bit of slack for not winning every single game against them and that type of thinking is seriously unrealistic and unhelpful for the resasons Tup states.

Come on for fuck sake, show a little bit of objectivity. Why in the world, when we're discussing performances against a team, would you miss out the two cup games where we won (especially when we're discussing St Mirren's cup win)? Other than to make a shite point, and because it inconveniently doesn't suit that which you were trying to make. We're discussing a team here that is odds on favourite to beat us in every single meeting, who have a budget 4 times ours (objectively/factually). We shouldn't expect to beat them in every single game, we shouldn't expect to get the better of them in head to head over a season - that would be entirely unreasonable and completely unfair on the manager. Just as it would be to expect St Johnstone to get the better of us in head to head over a season. That's not to say it won't happen on the odd occasion, and there will likely be one (different) team who manages it each year, just as happens to us. I think a reasonable expectation would be one win at home and a draw in the other remaining fixtures and a free for all in the cups if we get them. Four points per season against a team with the budget disparity would seem about right, just as St Johnstone fans wouldn't grumble about getting four points against us in any one season (I'm not sure why we think we have any right to expect more than St Johnstone fans in that regard). McInnes didn't know his team on game one, which was extremely poor, but the second meeting was a complete write-off that nobody could have been expecting points from. We need at least one win against them this season to be respectable, and I think we've got a good chance of that if we have our best 11 (McGeouch for McRorie) available. We also can't look at our results against the hun objectively without looking at everybody else's. Only two teams have drawn against them this season in Hibs and Livingston, so there isn't a manager out there getting the better of them - Goodwin included (obviously). What we saw last night was a one off shock result, which happens to every team at some point. Why would you take last night's result and say "see, that's how you do it, it's nae difficult" and ignore the other 25 games they've played? It's just ridiculous. Here are our prior seasons' results versus the hun: 19/20 0W 2D 1L (one fixture not fulfilled) 18/19 3W 2D 2L 17/18 0W 1D 3L 16/17 2W 0D 2L So 17/18 season stands out as the one we were poor in, making up for that by finishing above them in the league. For the record, McInnes talks about winning the game in every game we play against them, but for some reason it gets ignored. Similarly against the Tims. Also, when you're using the measure of how a team performs versus what the manager said before the game, you have to include all games where the manager said they were there to win the game but then went on to lose it. Unless we're saying that not one manager has said that they're there to win the game before every Rangers game this season? The arguments just get more and more ridiculous.

Pretty certain McInnes has a better record than most against the Hun. He's done very well against them. The opening game of the season was a shambles, but the last game was to be expected. As we subsequently proved, a dons team missing multiple first team players isn't as good as St Mirren. I like Goodwin, I think he's an intelligent guy with good knowledge of the game. St Mirren have a good first eleven, that'll do well against most teams, and they should finish top six if they can keep them all fit.

Fantastic, well done loon. Even if we end up just having him as backup next season or beyond, it's money well spent. Should hit number 4 in the all time charts no bother.

Surely.... McInnes, former club etc. Thought I'd get in early.

I don't think narrow mindedness holds our game back at all, it's lack of fairness, lack of discussion and openness and agreement on what we want from our game as supporters, predominantly. The notion of being held back suggests that there's some sort of target or point to our game, which I don't believe there is. It frustrates me when people parrot terms like these, as it's clearly through lack of thought and it leads to situations like moving to Westhill. I think that's where Cormack has a poor understanding, but I think that probably stems from being a businessman rather than a football fan, as opposed to nationality. That said, the American dream and it's overbearing free market principles aren't something I feel Scottish football would benefit greatly from, but then our side of the pond certainly doesn't stand up to scrutiny in that regard either. I have little knowledge of the US game, but the notion that Americans can't bring technical expertise is ridiculous, I'd agree. More importantly, the people who run the game, manage the teams or provide punditry in this country have shown little ability when it comes to improving our game for the majority here, we exist purely to provide a training ground for the scum whilst looking dolefully down South at money. In that regard, the US involvement is as useful as any other.

Accepting a massive payout from a TV company with zero financial scrutiny is so 2009.

I agree, however I think the two need to be separated into their distinct failures. I've said for years that recruitment needs to be removed from McInnes, as he already has too much responsibility at the club. We should be targeting a 50-60% success rate in signings, accepting that not all of them will work out. I accept guys like Ojo and Bryson, not gleeson, Maynard and Wilson (second time) and definitely not tansey, storey etc. May is borderline as a player, but we definitely massively overpaid. Overall, there's enough mistakes in there to justify the segregation of recruitment like they do at the Tims and Huns, with the manager simply getting the final say. That doesn't mean you subcontract to a bunch of clueless yanks however, there's a happy medium here. McInnes' mistakes were all comfortably within budget, he didn't bring in any Megabucks superstars (maybe Wilson first time round?), or break the bank on transfer fees. It was a sensible strategy, badly executed. These guys seem to be winging it on championship manager. Hernandez simply didn't fit our signing profile and showed a complete lack of competence and strategy.

Hopefully the extent of the mistake will make them wisen up a little. It was bordering on a money laundering scam, such was the ridiculous cost for such an obvious dud. To take us that far out of our normal price range (nearly double what we paid for May, and he was a huge risk) was completely reckless. It risked completely undermining the squad, especially when you factor in just how crap he was. Imagine the other players seeing this guy turning up in training with that price tag (and I'm assuming associated wage) and being horse shit? On one hand we were lucky that he was that dire, the players probably quickly moved from resentment to feeling sorry for him. It's no use Cormack doing these one sided updates, serious questions need to be asked about how this happened. Somebody who clearly has zero understanding of the Scottish game was involved in this, and they're exactly the type of idiot that would promote an Atlantic league.

I got the impression that the signing was for Atlanta's benefit rather than ours. They can have him. Weird partnership, us and Atlanta, I don't like it.

"Sold" would suggest a fee. No chance anyone's paying money for him, he'll be shipped out. Unless Atlanta stump the cash for their mistake.

Apologies to the BBC, the analysis is up there now, just took them a minute, which is to be expected.

I didn't think they'd be allowed to given that the ref had already dealt with it. It's a definite red. It must be frustrating for a manager to see an obviously talented player do that sort of thing, it was such a ridiculously stupid action, and not even hard enough to hurt the player either. In fairness to the ref, from his angle it possibly just comes across as "leading with the arm" rather than what it was, which was an actual deliberate elbow. The former being a yellow in most cases. Edit: more importantly, what about the BBC coverage? I didn't watch sportscene, but I'm guessing they discussed it properly, but normally you'd have the "was this a red card" video singled out (like happened for Ferguson, correctly, the other week) with the incident shown on its own and the pundits view. Instead it goes with a "there's no elbow there" headline with Gerrard's view on the incident. Blatant pandering, again. Concerned they'll get accused of picking on the hun, or specifically, Morelos. Any objective coverage would show this incident in its own right as it merits it - it's the very obvious controversial talking point of the games which likely had a significant impact on the result.

I am, you're right. He does deserve his place, he's earned it. I don't think it was good movement for his goal, it just came to him. A fantastic turn and hit though, he can hit a ball. Given the fact that it seems he's a part time bouncer, I'm not surprised he gives defenders a hard time. I think he's very reactive and gets beaten to the ball too often, hence he ends up fouling. Anyway, he's doing well as you say.

I disagree, I thought he was painful to watch. He's just not a footballer, his reading of the game is atrocious, he's like a shit Josh Magennis. Head down and charge. Not what you want to pay to watch. I don't think it has anything to do with Cosgrove though, it's entirely the way McInnes fucks about with the team. Since Cosgrove came back, Wright has been injured, and/or Hedges had been shifted out wide, the obvious covid issues ruining our midfield and Hayes missing. Despite that, when we had a nearly full selection to pick from against St Mirren, he cunts about with the positions like we're a Dutch team from the Cruyff era. All of that leads to lack of forward movement and players in each others way, so the defence have to hit it long after five minutes of passing it between them. As soon as Cosgrove is dropped, and his confidence ruined, he gives Curtis Main the opportunity with the exact team and system (Kennedy in place of Wright) that got us playing well in the first place and he scores two goals, including an excellent finish. But Curtis Main isn't making amazing runs or using his deft touch to draw defenders in, it's the fucking obvious tactic of playing Johnny Hayes down the wing, McLennan on the other side and giving Hedges (and Kennedy, sort of) freedom to roam high up the park - none of which was offered to Cosgrove. The problem we've got is that Cosgrove is going nowhere in January on this form and McInnes is setting up the team to play against his better attributes, meaning we're missing the best of a talented young player (again) who has the potential to make us significantly more watchable than Curtis Main ever could.

Agree with your second paragraph. Thing is, it doesn't need to be without the scum, that's just an option! Their elevated position has been entirely manufactured over the last thirty years with ridiculous levels of spending based on funding gained from their participation in our league. I'd far rather see we tackled that part of the game first and create a truly competitive league first, because that's what sport should be about. I wouldn't want a 16 team league where we become the new Tims or Huns. Make it a truly equitable setup, with the only entry qualification being that you're a full time club. I think your right about Cormack too. The frustrating thing is that, like Milne, he's never asked the fans what they want. He's unilaterally deciding what's best for AFC and Scottish fitba. Millionaire pays his money, gets to choose. Of course, like the move to Aberdeenshire, it would be presented as the big shiny new thing with no possible alternative. They'll be a big fanfare, that'll win over the gullible, with the "opportunity" to pick the new Atlantic league theme tune to be belted out when the players line up, along with various meaningless consultations to make it seem like the fans are involved, conveniently ignoring the fact that the only decision that matters has already been made on our behalf (would you like safe standing in your atrociously located new stadium?). Like it or not, we have absolutely zero say in the running of our team or league.

Agreed, don't think Cosgrove was ready to come back, way off the pace. When he was banging in the goals at the beginning of last season his work rate was noticeably high as was his awareness. His form dipped when we moved to Westhill, almost like he was doing too much too soon in training, like the infamous "burnout" attributed to younger players by pundits. With that in mind, you bring him back in slowly and allow him to build up an understanding with the new formation and players around him. McInnes didn't do that. Main did well yesterday, but he has zero game intelligence, regularly making shite runs, getting caught offside and giving away ridiculous fouls. Cosgrove gives away stupid fouls when he's knackered or frustrated, Main just does it as a matter of course. What was really annoying yesterday was that McInnes finally decided to play the correct players in the correct positions and do that for almost the entire second half (I only listened to the first on the radio so couldn't say). He hasn't done that for Cosgrove once since he returned, constantly switching Hedges and Hayes, Kennedy and Leigh or McLennan throughout the game giving the returning striker no chance of finding his feet in a new setup and building confidence. If we're bringing Cosgrove in when fit, we need to retain a shape for a good hour or more, with Hedges and Kennedy or McGinn alongside with McLennan and Hayes wide. I guarantee he won't though, it's almost like he wants to make it as hard as possible for his players. He needs to give Cosgrove the same opportunity as he did Main yesterday. It worked well for Main, it's fairly simple stuff.

It was/is the obvious next step, hence the yank investment in our game. There was always going to be some elaborate scheme. It's clear there's been an attempt to create a second tier of teams with enhanced budget for likes of us, Hibs etc. making a bigger gap between us and the rest. Basically doing what the scum do currently, gaining access to a league where being in that league allows you to buy your way back in yearly. More trickle down pish. It's a shame, but Cormack is just doing what Milne would have had he the support to get it through. I don't really see eye to eye with AFC on most off the field matters, I have long accepted that they are not representative of my beliefs, and maybe that's fine. This is just another step in the widening gap.