RicoS321

You should have cashed oot min.

So they should just give up because Stewart Milne - representing the company building the thing they're fighting against - suggests that it might be in vain? Do you think his is an impartial opinion on the matter? Regardless of your opinion on Kingsford, you must surely understand the importance of the process of being able to object in the courts? You'd have to be fucking stupid not to see that one day you could be on the Wanks end of a planning application that means a lot to you. Why is the "impartial" interviewer not asking Stewart Milne to explain the 20 years of hold ups on his side, and what fucking difference an extra few months makes to him, or the 3 month or so delay that happened already in this application because AFC didn't get their shite together. Just let the folk have their legal right as a citizen of the UK and stop the bullshit concern for their life savings*. As for the partisan crap fae dons fans, fucking hell, not everything the club says or does has to be pandered to, as if anyone that disagrees is some sort of enemy. They're very, very capable of getting things wrong, and the more scrutiny they get the better. *Aye, savings are weird like DD.

Why would you never use cashout? Is there an alternative? I'm not fully up to speed with modrin betting, but unless there is an alternative - like selling a bet to a third party willing to take those odds for the difference - then cashout is the only option. That bookies love it, or try to use it to their advantage in terms of sowing doubt in a punter's mind, is neither here nor there. If you have a specific objective from your betting, a knowledge/awareness of the game(s) that you're betting on then you simply choose when to use it. Knowing that the bookies are giving you crap odds is neither here nor there (no different to the original bet). If you believe that a game is going to change against your favour you wouldn't simply say "I da' cash oot min, fucking bookies" and then proceed to lose your money but not your betting-pride. That would be minorly retarded.

Yet it's strange that we all believe we should be taking points from the Tims and (to a much lesser extent) the Huns. I agree with Rocket when he says: I actually think the squad we've assembled is really poor this season. Worse than Hibs, probably somewhere between Killie and Hibs. That's why I'm really surprised by the level of expectation that fan's have for our performances against the better teams (I'm going to include hibs in that so as not to dwell on the "points against the old firm" shite as if it should have any relevance - points against better teams would be more appropriate, with Limassol etc included). Based on our squad, I'd say that we should be winning our home games against the huns and hibs (and hertz) and getting in the region of 3-4 points against the Tims). Anything more would be unrealistic in my opinion as we're really not that good. Outside our first 11, perhaps 13 players, we're way off what we should be. If we're missing one of our influential players (McLean, Shinnie or McKenna lets say, Christie earlier in the season) we should immediately revert to underdog against any of the top 4 at home. 2 players, we're looking at about Hertz's level and 3 we're a mid-bottom-six team. The thing about McInnes is that there are no surprises generally. He gets the team to perform at the level they should perform over a period of time with little variance (the odd really shite game, the odd really good game). I don't expect the sort of run you might get from a more inspiring manager. He's very technical and very cautious in approach to the game, and leaves little room to chance. We've come from behind to win just 3 times this season (although a bit harsh as we've had numerous clean sheets too). He's built a squad this season with glaring holes over last. The first 11 is decent, probably better than hibs, slightly worse than the hun post-January, but take any decent player out of that (I dinna mean swapping Arnason for O'Connor) and we're fucked. Look to the bench in any individual game and we're fucked. I don't think we have any right to expect to finish second this season, and I think it'll take a huge effort to do so. We need to keep everyone fit (McLean already suspended for Hibs I think?) and I don't think that's likely. With our squad, I think third would be about right if we were looking at it objectively. 3 home ties might just help us out though.

I suppose it's about scale. If Cove were moving their stadium to Westhill (which sounds absurd because it's Cove, which is nae in Westhill, unlike Aberdeen...) then I suspect there wouldn't have been that much complaint. It would a couple of hundred cars max to the area and could be easily contained within the stadium car park. The ruggers wouldn't build a 20K stadium, it'd be 5-6K max, so whilst there would be obvious complaint, it wouldn't be quite as vociforous. Everyone knows that ruggers hilariously dare each other to drink their own pish, and so no pish goes wasted. It's an hilarious public school jape don't you know? Like pig-fucking. It's hilarious in every way. Don't you understand humour?

I've spoken to rugby* and they said that Westhill was a shite location for any sporting arena. *whilst being careful not to get bummed

Yep, he played a good portion of his first season there. I think that when he signed his new deal it would have been with a desire to be playing in midfield in the majority of games. We've been a victim of his success in that role though. He's marauding as fuck when he plays left back, and we've missed that. Last season it wasn't an issue as we had something different. Hayes could rely on Considine to get hard up the airse of a winger as Considine could rely on Hayes to cover and he'd never be left two on one or in a position where he had to "split the two" which is where his pace lets him down. On the other side, Logan was playing well and getting high enough up the pitch that McGinn could come inside and offer more in there (to the detriment of Christie is has to be said). With Logan having a poor season (although he's improved lately), that's really exacerbated the issues on the left caused by Hayes' departure. We really needed Shinnie in left back this season and due to the signing of Greg Fucking Tanscunt, we weren't able to use that option enough. Anyway, I couldn't care less if we got a new centre mid instead of Shinnie or a new left back and keep Shinnie in centre mid. He's an asset in both areas for different reasons (my preference would be left back if pushed, as I think it's harder to get a player of that quality in there).

That's far I ging in the summer. Do you deliver yer burgers?

Bottler. Was it McInnes?

Whatever, I've seen a recipe on the internet, so I think I have a little bit more experience in Rowie making. Interesting post min, do you have the ideal recipe ratio? 5 parts dough to 3 parts vegetable shortening? And do you dee the whole folding type thing like yer deein puff pastry?

Yep, lard. Rendered pig fat. Unless yer crazy...TheDeeDon.

Has it changed its name/owner? Go in quite regularly, but have never noticed its name. It's good like. Marginal between there and Cognito, both decent. Ferryhill hoose recently. Dire. Service pish and food average at best. Busy though. Edit: went to Coppa at lunch time, seconded, was nice. Sat ootside, cracking day for it. Is the owner the manny that used to own Awakening Restorations in Torry? Used to be a great place for doors.

Interesting. The dilemma we have is O'Connor. Completely pap last weekend, and that should rule him out of being in centre mid. However, with Considine out it would have been ideal to get Shinnie into left back. The quandary that is Harvie is another option. I thought he looked a little lost when he played last and wasn't convinced, but I think we go for it and get him in. I think McInnes might go for a back 3 with Wright wide left or something (i.e. hanging him to dry by asking him to play wing back after weeks of no appearances). I'd go: ------------------Lewis----------------- Logan---Arnason---McKenna---Harvie ---------McLean---Shinnie------------- Christie--------Stewart---------Wright -------------------May------------------ I'd fire Ball, Nwakali and O'Connor into space.

Got post Tom, although a cursory glance at any vehicle in any traffic jam anywhere would put this myth to bed! The club's figures that showed 3-4 people per car for parking were ridiculous. The vast majority of rides are single occupant in any line of traffic, and I don't believe fitba will be any different. The exception will be parents taking kids, but it would probably be harsh for them to be charged £4-5 in parking fees by their parents for their day oot. That said, with agreement from companies in Arnhall there should be very little issue. In fact, it could be used as a way to benefit the local community. Get companies to allocate spaces in their car parks for fan usage on match day, paint them a different colour or something (or paint the unallocated ones if there's less) and put up signage to make it clear the rules of parking. Attach a meter to the sign with a voluntary donations - suggest £1 per car - system in place with those funds going directly to the community council for local projects as a thanks for their putting up with the disruption. It doesn't require any monitoring or policing and is a simple system that benefits the local community and utilises otherwise wasted weekend space. It keeps fans away from the town centre for parking and ensures that there is one route they all walk along to get to the ground so it is easy to cater for/police. Get the local companies to buy into it and get them to back the idea that it benefits the local town. Arnhall epitomises the entire thing for me like. Absolutely soulless place to work, completely cut off from the town, designed only to be driven too and driven away from. It's exactly what the stadium (location) is. I still can't believe how shite the location is, and how many people are in favour of it.

Works for me This is the gist, the rest just partisan bollocks (from both sides, with one given the lion's share of the piss&j article). It isn't clear how long the review could take, just that they have 90 days to launch it. It's taken the club 20 years to get to this point, so I don't see the issue in waiting another for it get the go ahead. It's far better than the alternative which the Chamber of Commerce chunt is suggesting that we ignore due process and that it's some sort of affront to decency that these things are challenged. I hope someone builds a road through the cunts living room. Bearing in mind that the club themselves delayed for 6 months, I don't see the big deal. The stadium, when built (and it will be IMO) will be around for 100 years (re-built after 20 due to SMG construction). It's right that people have due process to air their challenges, it could easily be something different next time. If this can be used to reduce further the time it takes for these legal challenges in future then that can only be a good thing too. At no point should anyone be calling for people to stop their action due to the fact that it delays things. They cannot be held to account for a crap legal process, and one day it might be something mair important to any one of us.

Pish. They're like beards in that they're an arbitrary fashion accessory particular to the times. For example, it was all thon jaggedy edge black shite on the shoulder and tit about a decade or so ago, then it moved to that colourful flowery full arm pish of more recentness. Thon 80s tattoos were distinctive as were the birds' lower back ones of the late 90s. All massively regrettable as the owners find themselves locked into a particular time period forever I'm sure.

Those are two pretty loyal, and probably professional, huns it has to be said. They love shiting on their own. Wallace is a good left back and Miller was their only player last season. Shambles of a place.

Year on year, we've probably made >£1M from our exploits in Europe (prize money plus a couple of close to full houses per season) and it's the only thing keeping us ahead of the pack right now in terms of revenue. This season, but for McInnes' (or perhaps AFCs) failings in the transfer market, it would have been significantly higher. So, yer right, there's definite culpability there, but missing out on Europe would make that failure even more significant. All this misses the point though. Nobody that I can see on here is arguing that the league is more important than the cup. That's just a strawman argument that seems to have been built, probably over comments I made. People were suggesting that we should have "tried out" the semi team. We've narrowed that down to one player that hasn't been tried out that was available and that was Ball. The argument we're then left with is: Would playing Ball for 90 minutes or so prior to the weekend's game have made a difference to his performance in the semi final? I don't believe so. All I was suggesting was that, rather than helping us on Saturday, it would have just fucked up a couple of league games instead - cutting our nose off to spite our face. There was zero upside and only a downside. To me, it wasn't a case of saying: playing Ball = greater chance of semi success. It was: playing Ball = lose league games. I'm really surprised that people are seeing the upside of playing Ball and the effect that it would have had on his semi performance. The argument seems to me to be: "we should have tried out the team first", with little or no detail behind that. When you dig into the detail your left with just Ball who wasn't given time, and he's pap.

It's frustrating that a guy can't voice a genuine opinion (if it was him etc) and not be hounded because of it. He might have a point, but I doubt Aberdeen fans are worse than those of any other club. At least he should be able to say so though and perhaps even lead to a discussion on how it wasn't helpful or whatever his point was. That said, the obvious problem with it is timing, as he should have said it after a decent result rather than a shite one. I don't think he's regressed under McInnes, just remained constant. Decent backup centre half, who's inability to kick with more than one foot and sever lack of pace means he's a liability in midfield. Won't miss him. Had about 3 good games at the beginning of the season but has proven to be no improvement on Ash Taylor.

Chidi was unavailable through injury. Arnason got plenty of minutes in right centre half and O'Connor got a run in midfield for parts of a couple of games too (Hertz I think). Ball was the only one who would have benefited from a run out, but that had to be weighed up against the risk of him fucking up in one of those games too. So it was Ball or nothing really. Which is a horrible choice for anyone to have to make. I suppose there is an argument to say that he could have tried out the system before Saturday, but he's played Rooney and May lots up front together. He's done it enough to know that it doesn't work and it should never be tried. Given the additions of pish like Ball and Chidi (and O'Connor in midfield who was fucking awful), it was definitely a step too far to try and shoehorn those two in at the same time. He should have been reducing the number of differences from our normal line up, not increasing. We played large parts of the first half with nobody on the left hand side of the pitch other than Considine. Christie and Stewart were clearly both told to run wherever the fuck they wanted. Due to the changes, it was a time for complete positional discipline, and we got the exact opposite.

No it doesn't. The league was over in October (or something). That Celtic took slightly longer to officially win it isn't something to be proud of or to even highlight. Our game isn't a sport and hasn't been for sometime. Anyway, a tight 3-1 win. McKenna, GMS and some other cunt.

In hindsight, that would have been the better option. A back three with McGinn or Christie as wing back. Given their two brutes up front, three at the back would have been a better shout. I'd rather have had a shite wing back than a shite right back in Ball. Out of interest, which game would you have sacrificed in order to test out Ball?

Fair doos, my apologies. Yes, I think it would have made a difference. Or, I think it would have had a far greater chance of a negative effect on our league games than it would have had positive affect on the semi. Weighing up the risk, I don't think the extra benefit gained from giving Ball a run out at right back in our league games would have been worth it. It would have been the same if both Rooney and May were out for yesterday. I wouldn't have used that as a reason to play Maynard at any point ever. Ball at right back = Maynard up front (in terms of ability). I think that yesterday we just had to throw him in and hope that he wouldn't do too much wrong and the other players could cope. Having said that, I think that our biggest issue was the changing of the system when we were already struggling with the personnel. I think that if we'd stuck to our more normal 4-2-3-1 we would have stood a far better chance. I think our personnel issues were further compounded by a terrible set of tactics. I was disgusted when I saw Rooney and May on that pitch at the start.

You're missing the point. I'm not comparing one with the other, I'm saying that there was zero point in jeopardising one in the hope that it might have made a difference in the other. You've suggested that we should have "practiced" with the team from yesterday, but not backed that up with any suggestion of how that would be done. Chidi was unavailable recently, so the only thing we could have done was give Ball more minutes at right back. I'm saying that no amount of minutes would have made a difference there and that - if anything - it could have lost us more points in the league. There was no useful preparation (in terms of personnel in previous games) that I could see that would have helped for yesterday. I think he got the formation completely wrong on the day, and I would never have played Chidi, but that's neither here nor there. Agreed, I've said that on heaps of occasion, and I think it's the reason for all our big defeats this season. You seem to be mistaking my suggestion that McInnes was right to do one thing with absolving him from his other mistakes? I'm nae, the squad is entirely his fault. The formation (Rooney and May up front) was entirely his fault. Playing a shite midfielder was his fault. The entire approach was his fault and he's completely to blame. I just don't believe that giving Ball extra minutes was a remotely useful exercise.

That's not what I said though. However, the "possibility" of winning a cup isn't worth throwing away our league position, because it's just a possibility, which we'd inevitably fuck up in the final anyway. Would I rather win the cup than finish second? Of course, only an idiot wouldn't. Would I seriously dent our chances of finish second (or even in a european spot) by giving Dom Ball more minutes on the park than is absolutely necessary? Would I fuck, it'd make no difference anyway. We gave O'Connor some minutes in midfield in practice, Chidi was injured so couldn't play any more minutes. The rest have had plenty of game time together. We've got a shite squad with a half decent first 11, we can only play our strongest team every week and hope for the best. Our supposed strongest team was way off the mark today.