RicoS321

Shame, he's had a fair time of it like. Every injury under the sun.

I do see that, that's what I'm saying. I agree with your last part, I don't need you or others to tell me that's why I brought up the NHS clap originally. What I'm saying is that the whole experience is political whether you like it or not. By supporting Aberdeen in Scottish football, you're taking a political position. I don't care if most people feel the same way or not, it's a simple fact. Your agreeing to everything about Scottish football by paying your money to watch AFC, and every decision made by the SPFL and its setup is political, unless you can point to any of the examples I gave and say they're not political (or propaganda)? The football match you attend doesn't exist in a vacuum, whether you pretend it does or not, it's just a subset of capitalism. You're buying into the "AFC family" narrative. What you're actually saying, then, is that you don't want a particular type of political action to be practiced at a football match. I'm saying that you're choosing an arbitrary cutoff point. I make a choice to ignore the fact that AFC play in a fixed league designed around two teams (that's political, just in case you thought otherwise) when I turn up at Pittodrie - to suspend the belief for 90 minutes. Whether I extend that for another 30 seconds prior to kick off or not is arbitrary, and would miss the point entirely.

Who are its shadowy backers? Who owns the movement? More importantly, who doesn't? As I said before, any player wishing to not comply would easily get to make their point in any of the national tabloids in this country, there would likely only be the Guardian and twitter/social media that would hold the opposing view. You entirely miss the point. You're not simply there to see a simple 11 vs 11 and you are having propaganda shoved down your throat every time you attend a football match. Whether it be the lining up of the players in front of the dugouts, the billboards at the side of the pitch, the players on one team earning six times that of the opposition, the chairmen colluding on media deals, the segregating of a club and the company that owns a club, the community work that a club does, the holding up of red cards for kick racism out etc etc. You can't opt out. You're objecting to a single form of propaganda because it falls outwith the propaganda you've already bought into.

Nobody's stopping them. I'm not suggesting otherwise in any of my points. What the fuck does becoming the target mean? These guys are perfectly able to get their points across if they can articulate them. The daily mail, the express, the telegraph will happily print them if they don't amount to basic racism. There's no shortage of platforms for them.

It's got fuck all to do with who pays who's wages. They're not the property of Millwall fans. You couldn't get a more naziesque mentality if you tried, that's how shallow your argument becomes. To exclude politics from anything is political. Millwall fans don't control players, the FA don't control players, they're human beings with their own opinions based on their own experiences. I'm more than happy for the Millwall fans to boo, and it would be terrible if they were censored or fined, but insisting that players conform is equally as bad. If the Millwall fans have the understanding and conviction to back up their position then that's great. They should be happy to take the flak like adults and articulate their position. I doubt that's the case, and I think using the "no politics in fitba" excuse to make up for their ignorance is fairly pathetic. It would be good if Millwall could organise some sort of forum with their supporters and players to state their position on the issue.

Just checking, will no deal mean we get to send Ojo back?

I haven't shifted the argument, I'm making exactly the same point as I was from the beginning. Football is politics, and fitba politics is an exact mirror of society. BLM, regardless of how you feel about it, is about equality of opportunity at its very essence. That's why the grid iron shite is equally as applicable in this country as it is in America, where stop and search is more of an issue than police shootings, poverty equally so. The structural inequalities that prevent Hamilton ever being able to win a trophy and, without a miracle, even finish top six are exactly the same as though those that make it harder for a black child (statistically speaking, and I personally think it would be better to substitute class for skin colour, but it doesn't make it any less correct) from becoming prime minister or a lawyer. You get just enough breaking of the mould that people can say "well Livingston managed it last season", but you'd never see Livingston, St Mirren and Hamilton in the top six at the same time. That's structural inequality - by design. If players can see that in society, they're right to challenge it. You can disagree with their right to say it, but it has every place in society and football.

Yep, though I think they've actually got worse since we last played them. A fairly good draw all things considered, we're capable of an airse up against Israel or Moldova, but we could also pick up wins against either of the top two.

Moldova.... that's our fuck up right there.

Faroes too. Awesome.

Fucking Israel! Good group though.

Interesting you draw equivalence with the Nazi salute rather than the raised fist of Tommie Smith and John Carlos. Weird, I'd say. As for the rest of your post, I just gave you examples, which were pertinent to the whole of football and not the sideshow of religion. Scottish football as a whole is built entirely on politics. Was Stewarty retaining the 11-1 voting system political? What about Hearts' attempt at not being relegated? Scottish football needs a strong Rangers? But the biggest thing that is political is the duopoly and, as stated, the idea that the betterment of two teams will be beneficial for the entire game. It perfectly mirrors the "wealth creators will just leave!!" bullshit that we're fed in other walks of life. If you have any interest in the betterment of the Scottish game, which you seem to, then you're political. That you shouldn't bring a Palestinian flag to a match is just a specific form of politics that is frowned upon, the rest is the game itself, from the size of the league, whether Celtic can fuck off to a training camp, how the finances are split and so on. All politics.

It looks a lot less of a yellow on the BBC coverage than it did watching originally on Red TV it has to be said. The fact that they were on the break, and he wraps his arms around the player suggests a yellow isn't unreasonable, but the player does step back into Ferguson too (something Ferguson does all the time). Given that Ferguson had 3 or 4 fouls after his initial yellow, I immediately expected the ref to book him. If it had have been the other way round, I think we'd have accused the ref of bottling it. To me, if you give the foul, you give the booking as it was to prevent a breakaway. I thought Ferguson looked a little off the pace at the weekend, and I think it showed in the way he approached that challenge (after a shocking pass fae Shay). He ran directly toward the back of Obika instead of aiming to get back in play and approach the player from the front. Ferguson is easily faster than Obika and could comfortably have got back in and faced him up, but it looked to me like he was either concerned by the breakaway (in which case he deserves the booking) or he was too tired to make the extra five yards to cut Obika off further up the park. In doing so, he allowed himself to be had in the way that he does to his opponents on a regular basis.

Football is completely political, what in the world makes you think it isn't? It's designed in capitalism's image with Scottish football illustrating that perfectly. The trickle down economics of Celtic's champions league cash, the blanket coverage of the scum on the national broadcaster and all mainstream media... I could go on. The inequality angle is just as much a feature of fitba as it is race/class/gender etc. If Scottish football isn't political for you then you're probably not doing it right (but given your opinions on Sevco's return to the top and the bought and paid for Tims, I'd say you are aware of that). No it isn't "by its nature" racist in itself. Just as feminism isn't sexist. It might be the wrong way to present an argument - that's certainly my opinion - but that's not the same thing.

Met him once, seemed a nice bloke. Good innings.

Or like being told to wear a poppy, or join in a minutes' silence on remembrance day. Of course it's political. Everything is political. Why wouldn't it be? If players and managers want to make a political statement then that's up to them. Fantastic to see them getting involved and having an opinion if you ask me. As long as there is an avenue for them to opt out, that's fine. Stand free is just a fucking song, sung when other English teams were singing it. It gained its political mythology sometime thereafter.

Perhaps slightly distorted by going down to ten men? Would be interesting to see those stats at 11 v 11. I'm surprised St Mirren are where they are though, they're streets ahead of Hamilton, county etc. They've actually got some decent players. I don't know if they've been suffering with a lot of injuries but they should be higher than they are, easily pushing utd for top six.

I disagree with your first point, as it takes the beginnings of the BLM movement and suggests that those reasons are its only purpose, which isn't the case. It's about structural racism, which is a problem in the UK as well as the US. Similarly the notion that because somebody pays for something absolves them of responsibility for their actions is quite a horrible, but widespread, belief. I'm of the opinion that taking the knee is a bit like clapping the NHS or occupy. It's a nice sentiment with no end product that will eventually, quietly, fizzle out with nothing changing. I don't think we're a mature enough society to be discussing these things without recourse to labelling a racist or a virtue signaller.

We're more direct because the players in front aren't making the same runs. We barely made the quick pass to Cosgrove today, it was always at the end of a laboured left to right and back again passage, and the pass was generally awful. Similar to when Main was on. I mentioned last season (or two seasons ago?) when Wright had a few great games ahead of another injury that his movement was the best part of his game and offered so much more to the players around him than the tricks and pace. It's noticeable that Hedges has played almost exclusively wide since Cosgrove returned too, taking him away from the central partnership with Wright that was working so well. It's frustrating, McInnes does this so often. When Anderson was coming off the bench, you thought he could work well with Cosgrove, but he'd take Cosgrove off two minutes later for Main, allowing Anderson to work up a partnership with a fucking rugby player. Hedges and Wright regularly moved apart, similarly Hayes was always going to give Cosgrove his best chance with his runs down the line, as he did with Rooney, but he gets moved up front where he is ineffective. Then he changes it every three minutes thereafter. Our good performances came with a settled team and not too much dicking about during the game. Hayes, McLennan/Kennedy on their favoured foot wings, with Wright and Hedges close to Watkins was a great setup. Slot a fit Cosgrove into that and it should be an improvement because of Cosgrove's finishing, but he hasn't had that opportunity. He's been pap too, of course, and Watkins would be first choice at present if fit. But I think we'd still struggle to score, because we're not creating.

I'd have given both. They certainly weren't horrendous decisions. The penalty is the result of a shite rule, but it's very much the rule and the ref was right. Ferguson came tanking through the back of his man and my immediate thought was: I hope the ref lets him off the hook here. He didn't. I'd have been raging if one of their players stayed on the park with that shite challenge.

Cosgrove has been pap, but we haven't changed our style of play, we've simply lost the connection between Wright and Hedges that was generating a lot of our good play. Cosgrove's return has coincided with the injuries and covid fuck up, coupled with the fact he doesn't look close to being fit. Our style of play was equally as shite with Main and Edmondson on the park and would have been with Watkins. The problem, for me, is that McInnes just keeps dicking about with the up front combinations throughout the game as of we're fucking Brazil. Cosgrove hasn't had the same player alongside him for a single ten minute period since he returned. Hayes should have been on the wing to get the most out of Cosgrove, with Hedges close to Cosgrove dropping short and bringing him into play. Kennedy should have been on the bench behind McLennan. That said, we'd have won that game with eleven men.

Have we got any more subs? I'd take Main off.

I thought it was a yellow. Deliberate foul from behind when they were on the break. Soft, but a stupid challenge to put in. Main on now though, that'll help...

Logan on. Guessing Taylor not quite fit as he hasn't been terrible.

Top 5. Well done sir. 25 more to reach McKimmie. Impressive.