RicoS321

I think the "going rate" for CEOs is unacceptable and not based on anything other than perceived self-worth and cronyism. I don't think charities need to, or should, follow the practices of the rest of the private sector. In the same way as the BBC should set its own news, rather than taking its guide from the papers.

I don't agree that Reynolds has lost his pace, I'd say that's nonsense (these things will be tested and worked on in training every day and McInnes would base his thinking on this data Reynolds is only 30, ye dinna lose huge amounts of pace at that age). He's still one of the fastest central defenders in the league. Also, I don't remember Considine being "exploited" once last night because of lack of pace. His positioning and strength make up for it. I think both are more than adequate for our purposes in the SPFL. Agreed about Harvie, but I think it's important that guys like that are the first backup in order to get them opportunities. If we're still in Europe, I'd agree with you, but we're nae, so I don't see the point in clogging up our first team squad with more players at this stage unless we look to offload Reynolds. Striker is far more important, because our first team options are simply inadequate. However, if we were unwilling to up our bid to sign Moult prior being knocked out of Europe, then I struggle to see the validity in upping it now.

I can see the dons taking 40K down to this one.

Nah, yer probably right. Being slightly less pish isn't the answer though. But you and Ten Caat didn't address the fact that there's no way on earth that Maynard would have lasted 90 minutes, or even 45. Basically, I don't think McInnes starting with Stockley over Maynard was really the issue; between a rock and a hard place I'd say. Maynard starting wouldn't have got us through, I'd be surprised if you or Ten Caat believed that. The problem lies with McInnes identifying a target and the board not backing him. We haggled over £100K or some shite, to the point that we're missing out on £100K by not getting through.

Stockley did the same as Maynard for his first 15 minutes on the pitch. Won a few headers, took a few balls down and then did fuck all with it. Maynard was gash, and no way on earth could he have started, because he simply isn't fit enough to play 90 minutes, as was shown by his "effort" in the home game. I suspect that was why Stockley got so long, Maynard is a mile off the pace. Nice ball through to McLean though admittedly. It fairly backs up my suggestion of not playing either of them however, which I thought was pretty fucking obvious.

The bitter nonsense fae the red tv commentators was getting annoying, going on and on about it. Who gives a fuck really. Just some Cypriot retards being retards. Anyway, all too predictable unfortunately. I think if we'd signed Moult we'd have been through. Interesting to see if we sign him now. Interesting, also, to see how close our bid was and if the extra cash would have been worth it. I'd have given Motherwell another 100K for the chance to get to the playoffs. We clearly went into this tie with a dearth up front (Maynard equally as pish as Stockley) and didn't address it.

Hmmm... we're struggling a little. Not really created anything. Neither have they like. Stewart shouldn't have been left one on one with thon guy who skinned him - something he did on several occasions in the home leg. Still, a little unlucky to be one down as they haven't created anything either. Stockley's yellow going to cause us problems. Very harsh like, nothing in it. Christie's was worse though. Stockley doing okayish, but I don't see him scoring. Not sure how I'd change it to be honest. Stewart nae looking great either, nor GMS. Shinnie, McLean and Christie doing okay. Can see this one petering out at 1-0 unless we make some changes. Maybe get Arneson on and change the shape completely. with a 3-5-2 of sorts.

Nobody is. I'm suggesting playing McLean as the front man. He's played there before, has a good first touch and will bring others into the game. Happy to challenge in the air and will make decent runs to accept the ball. Will go down and win us free kicks too. That's my reasoning. Struggling to think of any for the other two. Edit: apologies, noticed nips mentioned 4-6-0, but I think he may have just been joking.

Aye, you put it better than me like. It does seem like it would just be through convention that we'd play either Maynard or Stockley. Maynard looked out of his depth completely last week. Stockley was atrocious against Brijeg and hasn't done anything in his time here to suggest he'd lead the line well. His hold play isn't great, he rarely brings others into the game and his limited harassing of defenders usually results in a card of sorts. I think playing one of those two just because it says "striker" on their CV could be the difference between us going through or not. I'm interested to know what people think either of them bring otherwise that would justify their place?

McLean has played striker for us before (once), and St Mirren (several times). Rooney is injured, and the other 3 are not as good at football as McLean. Stockley was gash against Brijeg away (looked better last week admittedly), Maynard was gash last week and Storey is the wikipedia entry for gash. If Rooney was fit, it'd be him. He may go with Stockley like, but his lack of movement will be a huge issue away from home (as it was a fortnight ago). Mclean has a great first touch to bring the ball down, and will hold on to it until the team break. Exactly what we'll need. Not me crediting McLean as an amazing player, just recognising that our other striking options aren't great.

Agreed. Not 4-6-0 per say, but McLean as the striker. O'Connor in as part of a back 3 but just in front of them where he played well in the latter part of last wik's game. I'd go --------Lewis--------- -----Arnason------Reynolds------ logan-------O'Connor-------Consi -------Christie------Shinnie------- Stewart------McLean---------GMS A bit similar to what we do already bus just shunt everyone up a little, while making things congested in front out our defence. McLean and Christie interchanging throughout. McLean being better at heedering and holding it up than Christie.

I'll go for Kenny McLean against Kairat Almaty.

Exactly. Given the opposing position is "we need to move on", both sides are a stuck record until the evidence is actually presented. Ten Caat, as for the Pittodrie street services, I'd guess a million or two? I suspect Stewarty's housing developments are rarely held up by such a concern. But the fact that we don't know is the biggest concern. The fact that, as fans of the club, we haven't been presented with a statement of cost for the ground to be re-developed. £35M is a lot of money for re-development of Pittodrie, and that's the non-Pittodrie-sale-related funds being found for Kingsford. I'm certainly surprised more people aren't against this. If this were the hun being moved from Ibrox by Dave King (or Hertz with Romanov), we'd all be laughing at them getting screwed.

Hemmin. Who removed this thread? Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

2-2 draw with Dunfermline sees Hearts go out in a group with 3 part time teams. Hilarious.

It's never been tried. Insurmountable apparently. Unlike bussing 6,000 people out to the sticks every week. It's amazing how quickly the hurdles were written off as impossibly large when discussing re-developing Pittodrie when those facing both Loirston and Kingsford are seemingly simple inconveniences. I'm not suggesting re-routing Pittodrie street is any way easy of course, but it certainly isn't an avenue that has ever been explored in detail. Even turning it into a single lane, with zero parking on one side (and zero on either on match days) would greatly allow room in what is a reasonably wide road (4 cars wide currently). Anyway, there are plenty of reasons why it would be very difficult, just as there are plenty of reasons why Kingsford is. The problem is that we're not looking at the two side-by-side, and what little presentation given of Pittodrie is not given equal weight.

If you don't see the connection between the shenanigans at Ibrox and the demise of Scottish fitba, then that's because - as you admit - you haven't followed it. Don't disregard history, as you say. I'm with you on the Milne thing. In terms of Cyprus, they've been ahead of us for years. This isn't something new. We've had years to get used to it, and so it's no longer the argument as we are we are today. It's no different to understanding that we can't pay higher than championship teams anymore. I accepted that years ago and adjusted my expectations then.

Fit's wrong with Cyprus like? Got a few decent teams in their league. Scottish fitba has been shite for years, we have no right to beat teams from Cyprus.

Siroki caused us problems because we were way off the pace and it was our first game. Apollon were controlling the game the entire second half up until they got their man sent off, and I think we may have gone on to lose another if it'd been 11v11 for the full 90. They were working their way closer and it wasn't a surprise when they got their goal (McInnes unfortunate that he couldn't make the change in time). Agreed, they didn't exactly batter our goal with shots, but they certainly showed enough to see that they're better than anyone (bar the Tims) we'll face in the SPL and that they're good enough to beat us if we're not careful over there. I suspect we'll see a back 3 (or two with O'Connor in front) and maybe even McLean as the striker over there. It'll need 90 minutes of putting them under constant pressure and putting them off their game to keep them from scoring. We'll beat them though, as they didn't like it up them on the break.

Exactly. They just take them differently to us. Maybe one of them was a foul throw last night, but the majority weren't. Although I'm surprised we haven't adopted the technique in the UK, because bending yer heid forward allows you to direct the throw quickly to a player's feet as opposed to the loopy shite we've perfected, which gives the opposition time to close down and the player an awkward ball to take.

Think yer drunk. They were a good team like. We didn't give them a moment's peace for large parts of that game. The moments we did, they moved it quickly and very well. The boy's cross for their goal was top drawer. Need to keep it tight over there, I'd consider keeping the back five that slowly got us back in the game. Some fantastic performances tonight, the front three of GMS, Christie and Stewart fantastic in the first half, McLean and O'Connor coming onto very good games in the last twenty. Consi and Lewis solid as always, with Arneson, Wright and Stockley decent enough from the bench. Shinnie, however, was fucking immense. That's a captain's performance. The very harsh booking didn't stop him for one minute, he covered the entire pitch and capped it with a peach. Only one poor performance tonight for me, and that was Maynard. Way off the pace, breathing out his airse. I'm hoping that tiredness was the only reason he appeared unable to control a ball or play football in any way at all. He was Storey bad tonight. That position gives us a big dilemma at the moment. I think it could be the difference between us going through and not. Rooney still the best at the club.

That isn't a statement of fact, because you're entirely incorrect. You don't need to argue whether it's old,new Rangers, it's entirely irrelevant. Argument doesn't affect facts. A new club applied to become a member and Dundee were given Rangers' SPL membership. That is a statement of fact. No demotion of any club. That is also a statement of fact. I could capitalise "fact" if you think that'd help? Seeing objectively and sensibly has nothing to do with anything. It's a cut and dry case of right and wrong. Decades of legal fights and arguments would have no effect on AFC whatsoever, just as Inter Milan haven't been adversely affected by Serie A's decision to do the right thing. If it turned out that AFC cheated to win the ECWC in 83, or even the more recent/relevant 2014 league cup, I'd want that title stripped. That's not a punishment. Everyone had their enjoyment from those occasions, and will remember them fondly. It's simply a case of updating the records to acknowledge the cheating that took place. The absurdity that title-stripping is a punishment and that it can, in some way, reverse feelings that occurred on a day many years is a strange myth to be perpetuated. It's simply an updating of history to reflect new evidence. Think of it as a bit like removing Jimmy Saville's knighthood.

Good shout. I'm imagining some screaming idiot (me) hopelessly trying to remove a sock through a shoe while abusing fuck out of the team before finally realising that it's nae working, removing a shoe and having the thrown sock blown straight back in my face. Like the mongs that throw their scarves at the pitch after a bad result only for them to land about three rows in front, or those that throw their season tickets away (the old books, nae the identifiable modern cards) in disgust on the final home game of the season.

A new decision, not new evidence per say. The first court (tax case) ruling dubiously exonerated der hun (actually, it wasn't dubious, it was just technical - and recognised as wrong) from any breach of tax rules. The SPFL/SFA swiftly moved to appoint Lord Nimmo Smith and form an inquiry despite the fact that the HMRC had already registered an appeal. Like all whitewash inquiries, the terms of the inquiry were severely limited and were hugely influenced by the findings of the initial tax case. Several people at the time suggested (myself included, so it wasn't like you needed to be an expert to notice) that the LNS inquiry could only produce limited results without waiting for the final settlement of the tax case in court. That was the case (I believe that to be deliberate opportunism in terms of the timing on behalf of the SFA/SPFL). The tax case was finalised recently with the hun losing spectacularly. In that case, it was ascertained that the players signed would not have signed for them if they had not been given the EBT loan - i.e. massive sporting advantage was gained - they couldn't afford them otherwise. That was not recognised in the LNS inquiry, hence the paltry fine for an already liquidated company. No other punishment was handed out. Newco was handed a ban on signing new players upon being given favourable membership of the SPFL (i.e. bypassing the normal required process) and was ordered to pay all oldco's previous footballing (transfer) debts. There has been no official recognition of Rangers' cheating with regard to signing players with a side letter to gain sporting advantage. No punishment has ever been handed to them for this.

I have my red socks on. If we don't win, I'm ripping them off and throwing them on the pitch in disgust.