RicoS321

Do I have to look back through the thread to find the quote where you stated that you don't attend Pittodrie because of the hassle involved in the commute from Garlogie? I'm not quite sure what makes you think that the opposite won't be true? But you're really just backing up my point, I'm suggesting that the displacement of existing loyal fans must be replaced with a similar number of new fans. You clearly think that will be no problem, I don't. Basic foot-fall figures would suggest that out-of-sight-out-of-mind is more likely to occur in Westhill than in a city centre. Westhill as an attraction in itself holds absolutely zero. My wife isn't going to spend three hours in Costco or the magnificent Greggs and surrounding shops while I head to the fitba. It's basic logic really. My opinion is that in ten years time we will have a lower core support than we do now. The point about McGhee, Paterson etc is about understanding the dynamics of Scottish fitba. Our crowds were significantly down in those years because the fitba was pish. Building a new stadium, with our level of support, is not suddenly going to turn us into league challengers. As long as the hun continue their slow but steadyish rise, then the dons will become more of a bit-part in the game and crowds will dwindle again. Indeed, if the scouse tink manages a return to the helicopter Sundays then the interest gained over the last few years will quickly diminish. We can afford that at Pittodrie, it's proven over a century that crowds can wain without permanent decline because it's still there and still visible. I don't believe that same robustness will exist at Westhill, unless something drastically changes on the way the city is designed and the stadium becomes enveloped in new building, developed in a completely new way (i.e. nae another Kingswells). I think that the opposite will occur in that the core support will be closer to that of Kilmarnock than Hearts or Hibs in ten years time (again, ignoring the undoubted initial large crowds, they will be a blip).

A touch patronising. I'd suggest that DD is more likely to be able to think for himself than those attracted to the shiny new thing for the first few years of its existence. Take me for instance: I've said I'll go to the Westhill arena when it's built. However, I'm also know that I wouldn't have travelled to Westhill during the Paterson, late Calderwood and McGhee eras. Whilst we may be replaced by others, you're very reliant on those "others" being as "hardcore" as the likes of me and donsdaft. That generational thing for us, that may or may not be acquired by those that come after. What I, and others, are saying is that we'll find it a lot easier to give up as there just isn't the same pull toward Westhill that makes the trip worthwhile. Hopefully Westhill will breed the next generation of super-fan, as folk like me and DD will need replaced when the time comes. It's clear that there is a very small window in which to do this, and anyone who understands the dynamics of Scottish fitba would probably realise that the odds of this aren't great. There is a good chance that the core support (let's say season ticket holders for sake of argument) will be less than current after ten years at the new stadium, and that is the measure it should be held to. Out of town developments are not the future.

Nah, the really shite, mass-produced pish will continue to sell as they're the only ones that make money. It's progress, ken?

It's a good point LA Don. We were always pap under McGhee and Brown, so playing youngsters was easy as it couldn't get any worse. We've not quite got the balance right though and there is a lot of time afforded to cunts like Maynard, Nwakali, Tansey and so on how simply aren't better than our youngsters but given time because they're "experienced". That type of dross just needs to be filtered out. Wright should be in for GMS tomorrow night, but definitely won't be, and so shouldn't appear on our bench. It's an evidenced mistake not sending Wright out on loan in January, and McInnes should be held to account by someone at the club for that decision. We should have targets in place for minutes played/experience gained which can be fulfilled by loan if necessary, so that McInnes is answerable to someone/something for his judgement on what should be a sellable asset.

Fucking hope not. Useless little cunt. Not sure why he's still here, nor Maynard. GMS will be a miss. That assault fae the little Hibee Scott Brown probably didn't help.

Fair play to Gerrard, he's obviously signed on those terms. Expecting to raise £6M fae the duped masses (again) from a share issue next month. That'll turn into about £3M. I'm guessing nobody at the press conference asked King where his £11M takeover money was?

I don't think that's a true statement. Anyway, looking forward to it. A fantastic end to the season in terms of the meaningful games, and hopefully see a full house for it. I'm struggling to think of our best line up for this one. They'll play a back three, with Tavernier - who's been their biggest threat against us this season - pushing very high up as wing back. I think we should try to match that formation, as I think that gives us our best chance of winning. We seem to really struggle when playing 4-2-3-1 against a five in midfield and I think that most decent teams will know that (the huns aren't pish by any stretch). I'd go: ---------------Lewis-------------- ----O'Connor----Consi----McKenna-- Logan--Ball-McLean--Shinnie-McGinn ----------May----Cosgrove----------- With McLean pushing right through from midfield like he did against Hertz, as they'll try and take it short from the 'keeper. Swap Ball for Christie as and when required. Get McGinn pushing Tavernier back as much as possible. May in for his pace (i.e. faster than Rooney) only, which will be required against a better passing back 3.

I reckon the Bread Maker in Rosemount's were hard to beat in recent times. Although it's actually been a while since I've had one from there due to not being in the area that often these days. They were massive too. My in-laws give me rowies to dip in broth. It's actually really fine.

Good luck. Think you might need to whisky-up that tea in order to make sense of it.

Aye, it was actually quite an enjoyable game. Good bit of bite about it and a decent battle. McGinn should have been off for that challenge on GMS, it was off the fuckin pitch. Shinnie top performer for us. Cosgrove did well again, May pap and Stewart also pap (although Stewart was also lazy). Ball okay, but generally agree with DD about him. O'Connor was gash, should have closed the player down for the pen. GMS good first half but should have been off earlier. Wright shouldn't have been at the club since January, complete waste of a player. Really missed McLean, very obvious even from little things like no-one being available for throw-ins. Anyway, not the worst result or performance. A bit more cutting edge on Tuesday with the same fight and we'll be in with a shout. Will likely need something against the Tims now though. To add, in response to Chick, Lewis started way behind the line for the pen and didn't really finish that far ahead of it

Four years. Gerrard played a blinder there like. I bet he's been down to B&Q for a sturdy trowel and fork combo that'll last a good 3.5 years.

I had a bit of respect for Duncan, quite liked him really.

Nobody gives a fuck about the WANKS, the question was raised about financing though, and some incorrect statements raised. Given it's a forum, surely worth discussing? What sort of mortgage/debt level do you think would be acceptable for the new stadium for example? If we can't get investment for £20M of the stadium cost, should we land ourselves with a £20M mortgage while the chairman is repaid his debts and walks away (this is an example, not my understanding)? Who do you think are the investors, and what will they get in return that they couldn't have had over the last 25 years where they didn't choose to invest?

Clearly, because that wasn't my argument, hence the "if".

Maybe, but if no that's what donsdaft believes then the notion that he should blindly "get behind it" is surely a ridiculous one?

People do understand that. The issue is that those barriers have not been tested. There is also a regulation that says that you can't build on green belt land, yet that was tested via application at Kingsford and successfully passed. Your suggestion, therefore, that "all the evidence being [has been] put in front of them" is - as you know - completely false. The closest I've had to evidence as a 20+ year season ticket holder is a drawing fae TW on here. I've not seen a 12,000 seater stadium drawing that show the sun/daylight trajectories, the detailed drawings, the detailed reasons as to why the giant road behind the main stand cannot be reduced in size to accommodate a larger stand (yet can be completely removed to build the planned flats). Nothing at all has been produced that could possibly ever be classed as evidence, we've only ever been told to trust the club. Most importantly - and as one of the councilors at the planning consultation for Kingsford pointed out - they have never brought forward a plan to the council that could be tested. That's because - and this is the only reason - the club do not want to, and have never wanted to, stay at Pittodrie. That's not conspiracy theory or even criticism, that's just a statement of fact. Feel free to challenge any individual point I've made here. Except that's bollocks. Of course it matters where it is. If it's difficult to get to and in an non-enjoyable location then folk won't go. People like me will go every week, because fitba is what we enjoy doing, but we've only got - at best - 10K of those folks. The happy-clapping bullshit of group thinking: "they need to get behind it" will not persuade the occasional fans to turn out 3-5 years after its built if the location is shite. We don't "need to get behind it", we need people to think for themselves and evaluate the proposition based on the evidence. This is no different to saying "Scottish football needs Rangers". People don't need to be told what to think, it's fucking insulting and exactly the sort of attitude that results in the biggest unfairness we see in society as a whole today. If the club build a shite stadium in a shite location, then the club goes the way of the hun and that's the way it should be. The club is not more important than its fans, and the decision to exclude them from this entire process is a dangerous one.

Derek Ferguson's son. That'll set the hun cat among the pigeons. I actually don't mind Derek Ferguson, comes across as a decent bloke and talks quite passionately, and knowledgeably, about the championship and other lower leagues in his BBC coverage. Ian Ferguson on the other hand.... Will we be regularly welcoming his uncle Barry along to the games to sit in the comfy seats?

Thank fuck yer playing Heikkinen in midfield. Ridiculous shoe-horning by others. Even Arnason only played a handful at centre half first time round. I think it's fair to say we've had a lot of very shite foreigners. Delomeaux was a good player like, very decent centre half who was screwed over by the ref in the Hertha game. Surely if we're including Hayes, then Mixu is oot for Rooney? I'd go Snelders Heikkinen Gillhaus and probably just take my chances with those three.

Depends on what you mean by "got into trouble". Coventry being a reasonable example. However, using "Britain" is stupid. Scottish fitba has as many similarities with Spanish as it does Spain. Backing for new stadia in England is generally premised on the fact that they can push for the EPL on the back of it, which offers huge returns on investment. There is nowhere that Aberdeen investors can go to get that return. It's those unknown investors that are the issue here. They haven't been here since Milne arrived, not in any great number (investment) anyway. Indeed the recent DNA investors (idiots!) have now put in as much money as some of the recent board appointees with zero shares/rights in return. With the DNA proposal, we appear to be diluting the potential returns that any rights issue might raise too, so it seems there is a direct conflict here between on the park investment (DNA) and stadium investment (share issue). That leaves us with the question: what it's in it for them? We're talking big investment here, naming rights aside, for zero return. It could be argued that WM Donald could see a return on their initial £3M investment by getting the construction job on the stadium or the pittodrie flats, so there is tangible benefit for them if that were the case. Who else, and what are we giving them in return? I don't believe Milne does something for nothing - indeed, as far as I'm aware, his/SMGs preference shares are payable upon sale of Pittodrie, meaning he could walk away evens - and I don't believe he'd expect others too either. We've seen the debt added to Man Utd for example, or the various spivs getting their tuppence worth at the hun. There must be some similar opportunity at AFC. Watch those flats carefully, watch the stadium project, and follow the money. I expect the fans - through whatever mechanism is available - will end up paying for any investment over time. We are the ones that will pay for this eventually. Yet we didn't get a choice. If you told Stewarty 25 years ago that the dons would be playing in Westhill and it wouldn't have cost him a penny he'd have told you that you were a lunatic.

Bang! and the huns are gone

Fucking hun cunts.

Ye'd better be quick with yer Arnie one min, he'll be gone very soon. See if you can corner him on the final home game of the season, he'll be kicking about then. As to your new regime, it's pretty impressive I'd say given the distance you have to go. I haven't been to an away game for two seasons now (outside semis/finals). I've only missed two home games this season though - due to child-birth - which is better than in past seasons. I generally make about 20 games a season roughly speaking, that'll be about 22 this season. I think that puts us both in the super-fan category.

Did you nae get yer photo taken with Nicky Maynard SeeBass? If so, that's more dedication then I'd ever consider as a dandy.

Aye, I laughed at the cheap as chips comment. McInnes seemed to pause for a second like he knew he'd used a poor turn of phrase. It's the one side of McInnes management - the interview - that he's got down to a tee. He's well above yer average Calderwood type cunt when it comes to handling the press, so it's unusual for him to slip up. The players seem to have a lot of respect for McInnes though, and he'll sweep something like that under the carpet pretty quickly - the minor infringement that it is. I sort of agree tlg. I thought their games complimented one another, without producing anything. It certainly has potential to be a good partnership given time if May can begin to produce some form. A goal in each of the next two games for May would certainly stand him in good stead for next season.

Friday certainly begs the question as to why he didn't appear from the start in the semi. He allowed us, on Friday, to play a more suitable formation against the back 3, with two genuine front players as a partnership. I don't see that being required on Saturday, however he'll definitely be required from the bench if we want to shake things up a little. The monotony of the Rooney/May switch where zero changes was something that should have been dealt with in the summer by ditching Maynard immediately after our Euro exit and getting someone like Cosgrove in at that point. Stockley seems better than he was with hindsight, but I remember saying on here that we should start McLean up front against Apollon because neither Maynard nor Stockley would cut it at that level; it was clear Stockley's mobility isolated him against better teams. Whilst slightly slow and gangly on the turn, Cosgrove seems that little bit more mobile than Stockley and that will work well in our system, where Stockley's greater physical presence - useful down South - only really returned red cards. Still early days, but he looks to be the third option we've been crying out for, and I reckon both Rooney and May will get returns from playing alongside him. Perhaps our hit and hope strategy of signing players is finally paying off.......