RicoS321

I think that there is only one of him.

There is zero evidence that having the cost of a scouting network in another country returns a better calibre of player suited to the Scottish game. Name one team in Scotland that has a succesful european/scandinavian scouting network. The cost associated with that type of scouting network would far outweigh the benefit. It's not simply a case of getting Jimmy's brither to visit a few games in Holland to pick up the next Dave Bus, it requires in country knowledge and the ability to visit multiple grounds per week and see lots of games at a level that would be comparable to our own where the players are affordable. Laziness? Do you think there's a scout standing at the train station in Esjborg thinking "I'm nae sure I can really be arsed going to the Copenhagen game the day, it's raining"? It's pragmatism and cost. We might be able to pick up a good foreign player through well placed and trusted contacts and I expect we have some people in that regard, but to suggest we start setting up scouting networks shows no real understanding of the cost and associated benefits. There's a reason no other club does it. We may also manage to pick up the odd loanee/out of contract player via a tip-off that would be worth a gamble on like hibs did with the half-decent Kamberi (remember, hibs don't have some massive Swiss-based scouting network that have so far only managed to find one player, it was a gamble on a loanee that paid off). By all means suggest something different, but back it up with some evidence. Name one club in Scotland who has taken players from one particular area not in the UK with regularity that would suggest a succesful scouting network in that area/country. Alternatively, suggest an area that would allow us to take in multiple games per week where players in our affordable range would be regularly on show, that would involve serious cost and travelling hours.

The Tims are a significantly better football team than Burnley. Burnley are, however, massive units. They're a bunch of roided superfit fucks, but they really weren't particularly nice footballers. They didn't have the technical skills or movement of likes of Sociedad or even Kairat but they're absolute beasts. Thon Vokes is bigger and stronger than any player that McKenna, Devlin or even Shinnie will have played against before. Being in "the best league in the world" didn't prevent their midfielder passing the ball straight back out of play from a throw or their right back - who was absolutely pap - launching it away in a panic when under slight pressure. They might indeed be able to beat the tims (the sum of Dodds and Miller's "argument" was that "they play in England, they finished 7th"), but by fuck they're brutal. If that's what £119M of prize-winnings gets you these days then I'll happily stick to watching players getting paid £2K per week.

Aye, but he's a fat-headed bellend who deserves a club up his hoop.

I think Cosgrove was maybe told to go down to give time to get the sub on. He was definitely slowing though, but put in a ton of work. Given that was our first competitive match of the season too, it was a lot to expect of him. You're right about May, the passing was pretty aimless by that point in the game as the players tired. Also, by that point the midfield had stopped providing any support whatsoever. His pass to Wright was just slightly behind him so he had to check his run causing him to slip, but it was close to being good. He was also unlucky with one where he tried to lift it over the defender (then spuriously claimed for hand ball), which he did well to get to. I think that, as an impact sub, he's a little bit 100mph headless chicken as if he's trying too hard but hopefully that'll improve with more game time. Still need another striker though, obviously.

Aye, it was a good game, close to a very good game. We were probably unlucky as they didn't create that much, but then neither did we I suppose. At least I can justify going down to the away leg, even though we don't stand much chance. Top marks to Devlin, Ball, Logan, GMS, McGinn and Cosgrove. Thought Gleeson was poor when he came on, but a difficult game to come into in that position. McInnes was right to make the early sub too, with Ferguson a little niaive at times in positioning and possession, but he looks a find. Worrying that Forrester wasn't deemed good/fit enough tonight. From the Red TV viewing of the WBA game my impression was that he wasn't going to provide the coverage that we require of our midfielders, but perhaps that will just rule him out of games like these where we need to sit deeper. Peter Tobin looked okay at left back and was strangely better on his left foot than his right, but got his body in the wrong position several times, which I suppose is understandable given he's on the wrong side. Not sure what we do next week. Without a striker, or a high pressing midfielder we'll struggle.

Right.... but they also got Simon Murray (now left) and the boy McLaren (think that was his name), so a 1 in 3 success rate for their scouting. Neither were an improvement on May or Rooney. Even Kamberi isn't that great, but an improvement on what we've got I'd agree. However, their scouting hasn't picked up a goalkeeper that could lace Lewis' boots, or a fullback better than Logan. We have to accept that there is a lot of luck involved in signings, espceially loanees like Kamberi was (I'm 100% certain he wasn't the find of a vast Hibees Swiss-based scouting network). I'm not seeing hibs picking up consistently high calibre signings without error, nor any other team in the SPL (Motherwell or Killie perhaps). The reality is that we're both operating in a tight market with little funds to spend and the margins between getting a good player and a shite one are small, and they probably aren't the barometer of good scouting. Is there any evidence that backs up the assertion that widening the scouting network gets better returns? Are there teams who are getting a higher percentage return that us on their signings year on year? If so, which ones and in which period?

[ What's baffling about it? It's very clear that the position has been a priority, but also very clear that we're struggling to fill it. Striker is probably the hardest position on the park to fill (there are an abundance of shite strikers in Scottish - and wider - fitba), and the most expensive as they're the most in demand. I don't rate May or Cosgrove (yet), but they're not totally shite either. It's not as simple as going out and getting the first available striker safe in the knowledge that they'll be good enough, we have to get better - and significantly better - than what we've already got. We were apparently looking at paying £300K+ for Eoin Doyle who is, at best, a tiny improvement on May, which shows the difficulty. As soon as you get into the higher fees then you're outbid for guys like Marquis and the other options being looked at who might be an improvement. Also, there isn't a ready made striker in the SPL that we can pinch either where we know our wage offerings will be an improvement. The obvious signing last season was Moult, but there isn't an obvious one this season. Last season we also had a huge opportunity to immediately re-coup our signing fees through progression in Europe (if we'd bought a striker before Apollon), whereas with the Burnley draw we're likely (realistically) to get punted at the first hurdle and the purchase will be a sunk cost immediately - there is no option of a gamble with good odds, so it's unlikely we can afford to spend a huge amount (>£500K) on a player. I don't think it's baffling at all. I just think we have to accept that it's a very difficult market to operate in and that when we start to get down to our 4th and 5th choices then the margins for improvement make the purchase less worthwhile. We know it's a target, but it may take longer to get that target. There isn't a significant worthwhile gamble in throwing cash at a player for zero european return. We'll get a player before the end of the window, but we just have to accept that it won't be straight forward, and perhaps not before the start of the season.

"Loan" and "Wide" I assume! Took me a few seconds.

Cheers, just did them a second ago! Difficult ones like, they all could go either way. England are actually the most likely to get a result in my opinion.

14 goals and 11 bookings last season. That'll do nicely.

Watched Secret City on Netflix. Very good Oz production, with some good characters and a well scripted bit of political intrigue. Worth a watch.

Lower posh seats. Ususally only £20-24 I think. It's my season ticket seat, so haven't had to purchase for a "big game" for a while so maybe I'm doing them a disservice. It's maybe always that expensive. Just to let everyone know, I've safely secured my ticket for the away game #superfan #topdon.

Got my home leg tickets today. £28! Clearly milking the Engerland opposition with the assumption that we won't get further in the tournament. Fair enough I suppose, but whoorin expensive.

I've never been living proof of anything other than: being a cunt can sometimes be rewarding. And in this case I'm clearly a fraud too. Season tickets plus cup and euro games has got me where I am in points. With the purchase of the home Burnley leg I was able to break the 165 point barrier by a couple. Leaving aside my lack of attendance and refusal to sign up to DNA, wear or purchase any club memorabilia, I am pretty much the number one fan.

Not seen Widowmaker, will watch it. Seen some of his other videos like, but never subscribed to his channel. Will check a few more. He's a technical guy, but makes things reasonably simple for us simpletons. Easy to listen to.

Like owning shares in any other company, you have the redeemable value of the shares plus the opportunity to turn up at the AGM and voting rights. That anything more was ever promised was astonishingly stupid and short-sighted. Let alone that it would be promised in perpetuity. I understand any complaints though, entirely. Just to add, I'm over 165 loyalty points and I don't have DNA membership. It seems that DNA is worth significantly more than attending away matches though. It's problematic. Whether directly or indirectly, it'll be being used to fund Kingsford too.

Away game min.

I don't really go to many games these days. I'm just a points whore.

It's okay guys, I'm in phase 1. Sincerely, Superfan

Fuck, forgot my picks for yesterday (Uruguay v Portugal of which I'd have got right). Can I claim it anyway? That's the problem with these things for me, if they're not something you can do in one visit to the internet, I forget. Fuck knows how folk can do thon fantasy fitba shite, it must be like a full time job.

Is it just me that finds twitter a really shite tool for navigating? I don't really use it, but I'm part of the club. It took me about twenty minutes to find the full conversation and by that point it had lost its edge.

Transfermarkt has him signed for Dundee... https://www.transfermarkt.com/jon-aurtenetxe/profil/spieler/89726 Edit: Apologies, mis-read. Now without club (or as of this weekend). Was with Dundee last season, I don't remember him.

I don't think Rooney's done either, but it was obvious years ago that he was of limited utility against good teams due to his lack of pace, regardless of wide players. Hence why Stockley, despite being pap, was regularly given the nod. The jury is out on May, he hasn't been a good striker since his St Johnstone days in reality. I'd give him a bit more time, but it's an exceptionally high-risk strategy for an entire half season. I wouldn't go for any old Schalk for the sake of it though, but we need a striker that can take us to the next level. Everyone on here was screaming out for that prior to the Apollon away game (Rooney was injured but also in poor form) and it was glaringly obvious in the prior cup final (where we had Hayes and McGinn) and I don't see that anything's changed with the introduction of May. We simply won't win more than our share against the Tim, Hun (probably not Hibs either) or in Europe with the existing strike force. To me, it'll be the difference between finishing second or fourth.

I have a gripe with Shearer if I'm honest. Do you think he's ever left England to watch a game involving any of the other teams that he's commenting on? Given the presumed salary, do you think that should be the minimum expectation for a BBC commentor (similarly Lawrenson)? Given these guys are ten-a-penny (replace Shearer with any other previous England striker for interchangeable analysis), I think that there should be something extra that these guys should be providing - some useful insight. I rarely hear anything from Shearer that is anything other than you'd expect from a contestant on Catchphrase (see what you see, Alan). There certainly appears to be no expectation on him to do any research whatsoever into any of the teams and players he is watching, their coaching methods, previous games etc. If there is, then he doesn't bring it forward in his analysis. I think he'd be perfectly capable of it too, it's not a personal thing, he's nae stupid. It's just that his fame has allowed him to remain unquestionably ignorant. Compare with Sone's sister and Alex Scott who've clearly done their homework and been sent to do research. I don't know enough about Dixon or Neville to say. It appears that they've been matched on their personality rather than knowledge though (Neville the contentious knob, Dixon the reasonable one, Shearer flitting between both as it suits), which is maybe what more people are after I suppose. Maybe I'm trying to hold the BBC to too high a standard. They should have had it all on BBC4 with half time shortened Storyville documentaries detailing the political situation in each country and how it is mirrored in its approach to fitba.