RicoS321

Straight swap for Maddison....

Mods, modddddddddddddddddddsss The January transfer windae thread in the Dons page has turned into a discussion about a hun signing, with this one being turned into a dons' signing discussion. It's a disgrace. We look like amateurs. In terms of forum discussions. I despair.

Yep, he's a cracking player. Unfortunately - for us - they still have a big hold on players in this country through supporting them as a youngster. Obviously they'll be paying him a wedge as well, but the move is helped along by his childhood allegiances. It'd be interesting to see the stats on young kids coming (have come) through the ranks over the last decade and who they supported. I reckon you'd be 30+% hun.

Can't believe we've nae bought 3 centre mids and a striker yet. Fuck sake. Maynard, Ball and Storie out for me (I'd give Tansey until the summer just in case he's not pish). That would do nicely. If we can't find a striker, then get McLennan back fae Brechin and give him Maynard's minutes to make it worthwhile (560+ minutes, or 6 games). I think that there is a risk that May will be injured enough that a third striker is definitely required. Centre mid has to be the priority if we can get one though. I think we'll struggle in January to get someone of the right calibre, but perhaps a loan or something will come up. I can't think of anyone in the SPL that's good enough. I don't rate Dylan McGeouch at all, that's like replacing Jack with Tansey for me. He's nowhere near as good as McLean as was shown recently when McLean and Shinnie dominated McGinn and McGeouch. On McLean, we shouldn't be letting him anywhere near the door until we have a very good replacement in, and I doubt we'll do that in January. It would be extremely risky to let him go given our record in the transfer market lately. We need to be signing 3 midfielders to perhaps get two good ones if we're lucky. If we get one in this window, that'll give us the option to move Shinnie to left back, then we aim for a McLean replacement in the summer. We have to be realistic, and realistically we'd be a far worse squad without McLean than with. Priority should be ensuring that we don't have to play O'Connor in midfield too often, and Shinnie at left back most often.

What exactly is your point? Nobody on here has suggested Rooney is having a great year, or is the answer to all our striking problems. You've got some bizarre thought in yer head that because everyone is saying that Maynard is absolutely shite and shouldn't be getting a game ever, that that means we're suggesting Rooney is the messiah. Nobody is looking for excuses for Rooney, we're all looking at it understanding that he's our only option right now, so we have to play to his strengths. There were no options other than play Rooney through the middle today. None.

Clearly a little retarded. Shouldn't be in charge of her ain social media account.

They haven't proven it, because it will only increase car use as it's designed entirely for car use. However, I think it'll go through at the first hurdle (then get appealed). I hope it doesn't, obviously. The location would actually be fine if it was part of a plan to expand and re-design the city. If it was part of something. That's the issue for me, this isn't a decision for AFC and it never should have been. The cooncil should be creating a design for the city and allocate the dons the space for a stadium and another for training. We shouldn't be a law onto our own, and we need to integrate with the city. I suspect the cooncil have done something which the club have ruled out. I also think that - post stadium approval - we'll see significant new development of mair shite hooses in a non-joined-up fashion appearing around the area. It'll be like in and aroon Rugby park.

Aye, 3.5 years is a long time for a 30 year old. But it's fine, it gives him the security he needs at that time in his career. We're nae obliged to keep him if he starts to play badly in a couple of years time, and ye'd hope he'd need a limited pay-off to go elsewhere if that were the case. Be interesting to see if he's fit for Saturday. I'd be inclined to leave him out until after the break to ensure he's a hunner percent - based on nothing. It puts Wright further down the pecking order again, which is a shame, but he's not taken his opportunity to the extent I think he could have.

Fuck, that was a cold one. Nae a great game, but a good 15 minute spell did the business. Christie, Stewart, McKenna and Considine top performers. Also O'Connor was okay and as was McLean. GMS struggled in the second, and Wright came on and did okay in places. No need for the Ball introduction, it's supposed to be an entertainment game. Ross should have been on for Stewart. Interesting to hear McInnes interview after the game, clearly focused on points' targets, which is nice to see. We've done well so far this season in that regard, and that could be the difference between finishing above the huns or nae. 45 at the break would be phenomenal, although Hertz will be difficult to play given their propensity for booting shite out of athin. Looking forward to it, hope it's warmer.

You're completely biased towards Maynard though. He shouldn't get 70 minutes because we don't need to risk it. There's no part of his game that has shown he's worth 70 minutes. Cammy Smith is a better player and showed more in the similar game-time he got and he's - deservedly - at St Mirren. You then seem to be mistaking our suggestion of Maynard's unworthiness of lacing Rooney's boots as bias towards Rooney. It's not. Rooney has been poor this season by his own standard. It's just that Maynard is really fucking gash. If you look back to last January's transfer window threads you'll see me and others arguing that striker was the most important position on the park for us to get sorted. I think everyone recognises Rooney's abilities and limitations. None of that is ever an excuse to play someone as turgid as Maynard.

Reynolds did a job against the Tims, he played alright. Several times he came across and cleared up, as he did unfortunately for their second. I'd have McKenna everyday, but Reynolds is reasonable squad backup without being brilliant. He's an intelligent tee-total, hard working professional too, which might just be good for the squad and a decent example to the youngsters, which is possibly why he got the deal. He's easily good enough for 90 minutes against Partick and most other SPL opposition. It's further up the park where we're not winning the games, but I expect that won't be an issue against Partick either.

I'll explain. He deliberately runs where he knows he's not going to get the ball, because when he does get it he panics and gets it caught in his feet. He makes it look like he's putting in effort, while all the time hiding from the ball. He never makes a run which will put him in a good position as he'll get found out (it even happened against hibs at 4-0 up at home when he could have played with a cigar in his mouth). He's a complete charlatan, as I and others have tried to explain. I'd rather we dragged McLennan back fae Brechin and told him to dick about for 20 minutes a game. Maynard has to be shifted in January, it's not fair on either party for him to stay. He needs to go and re-learn his fitba somewhere much lower down that the SPL (I said after his first two games that he'd be playing non-league fitba next, and he's proved that right), anything else would be unfair on himself and whoever signs him based on playing a few games for West Ham once. Whilst it was a joke, I don't actually disagree to an extent. At 1-0 down vs the Tims, we had so few options on the bench it was impossible. Given that Maynard is the answer to nothing (other than: which fitba'r joined the dons in 2017, scoring 0 goals in 600 miinutes before being paid off in January?), we should have been a bit more creative in our thinking. Whilst I wouldn't have played 0 strikers, I would definitely have played either Stewart or McLean in the striker position, allowing Wright or Ross to come on earlier. I'd have done the same in the Apollon game away instead of playing either Stockley or Maynard. There comes a time when you have to understand that playing a player out of position can still be better than playing a shite player in that position, and that's what McInnes has to do with striker. I find it strange that he's happy to play Shinnie in midfield and Considine at left back when neither are their strongest position, but he recognises that they're better than the other options in those areas, but that he won't consider playing a player in the striker role for the same reasons. Playing Maynard just because he happens to have "striker" labelled on his CV won't make him anymore of a striker.

He wasn't pish, he was okay. Just not much use in that type of role where he has to chase the ball around for much of the game. But then I'm certain May would've started had he been fit/sober (I thought he wis tee total?). Bringing Maynard on made us ten times worse, unsurprisingly. At that point, I'd have brought on Wright or Ross and moved McLean or Stewart into the striker role. I think we needed something completely different and Maynard is a known pointless replacement. Not sure what else I'd have done different in the circumstances. We really need a young striker coming through that could come off the bench and hassle folk. We haven't even replaced Magennis in that regard.

Playing four wide players and a left back at right back would have given us a better shape? Hertz played young players in their correct positions, we'd have been shoe-horning them in for the sake of it. Wright has been pish lately, and Ross was given a chance against Dundee and didn't perform. I'm no fan of Ball, but he had a decent game. Jute, we didn't exactly sit back and let them come at us. We were ridiculously unlucky for the first two goals, we set up with a 4-2-3-1 and had plenty of the ball. It was a distinct improvement on recent performances and setup against them. Would you genuinely expect us to go all out attack against them? We pressed them high up the park when they had the ball at the back, which is what we've been crying out for. With the options of Rooney or Maynard, we weren't exactly going to be peppering their goal. I'm interested to here what you'd have done differently in terms of personnel or formation given the injuries? That was night and day from the performance at Pittodrie and Ibrox recently.

Name your team. Did you even watch the game?

Aye, fitiver. Are you going to name the team you'd have picked in the circumstances, or just be a dick?

Sounds like a Romanian guy trying to steal yer money. Dinna trust it. Happy christmas...

Utter bollocks.

Decent half. Pretty unlucky to be 1 down. At least we're pressing them high so they haven't been significantly dicking about at the back and taking the piss.

Interesting. He's a dirty fucker is King. Backed to the hilt by the press when he turned up (again) of course. Await the storm of abuse for those taking up the 20p offer.

I keep the youngsters I work with up to date with the acceptable uses of the word poof. It's important not to let tradition die out. I've used poof and gaylord since before I knew what poofs and gaylords were.

But, we all got you something.

Ahh, two separate products. I should have read yer post properly. That makes sense. I thought the record player had built in bluetooth speakers like in a hi-fi style arrangement. Thought it was one of those technology-shoe-horning moments, like washing machines with wi-fi and the like.

Given the function of vinyl (you have to change the record manually), what purpose does the bluetoothness of the speakers serve? I'm sure I'm missing something.

The one in the middle looks like Jamie Oliver.