RicoS321

McInnes's team for tomorrow night then? I don't believe McInnes will stick with Storie against der Tim, unless as part of a 5-4-1. I don't think he'll trust him. I think he'll go with: ---------------Broon------------------ ---------------------------------------- ---Taylor---Reynolds---Considine--- Logan-------------------------Shinnie ---------------------------------------- --McGinn--McLean--Storie--Hayes-- ---------------------------------------- --------------Rooney----------------- Not sure what I'd go with. I'd have signed a f'n central midfielder.

Really? If he was our top target, with a release clause, then he'd have been signed immediately after Flood and Jack got injured or even before the cup game. I'd say McInnes was given a budget to spend (possibly more than 200K), he identified 4 or 5 players and Tansey was 4th or 5th on that list. I suppose you could still call him a "main" target, just not the main target. Punt was probably a bit harsh - in fact completely the wrong word - as he's very much a known quantity, it's just that I think that he'd have had to play to the very best of his ability in order to improve on Jack or Flood when they return. I think the 200K would have been worth it just to replace Storie in tomorrow night's team to be honest (I don't think Storie is quite there yet). I think we took a risk on trying to get our other targets (who couldn't be tackled until the ended of the window) assuming we had the fall back of Tansey's release clause, and in the end we failed because his clause wasn't water-tight.

Seems to me like we've been a victim of the system a little. I suspect our first targets were missed previously, and we were left with further scouting to do. From that we identified another few targets and failed on them. I reckon Tansey was a punt, and pretty low down the list. The 200K bid suggests that cash was there for the right person, but by the time we got to Tansey ICT weren't ready to replace him so Hughes kicked up a fuss (threatened to leave apparently!) and we were left with nothing. Agents and players normally hold all the cards in these situations - that's why all deals are usually late in the window(s) - so it's unusual for a transfer like this not to go through. I think a centre midfielder was the key to us pushing the Tims all the way, and I think we'll regret not getting someone in. I don't think Storie is good enough to play there against the vermin. Hopefully Considine turns out to have been a midfielder all along and we can play him there.

Goodwillie is proven pish, at least Church is someone that isn't Goodwillie. Welcome aboard loon.

Aye, maybe he is more solid than I'm giving him credit for. As I say I've only seen him against us, when he looked the more creative play-maker type, but it could be that I wasn't paying huge attention, but it was always Draper who I saw making the challenges (I think Tansey is a better player than Draper, who I wouldn't want). That said, he's significantly better than Irvine at County in my opinion, and he certainly isn't shite. I just hoped for a stronger player, like Biton at the Tims (but cheaper).

From what I've seen against us over the years, he's more Kenny McLean than Stuart Bannigan. Good fitba'r, but not particularly strong in the challenge. I'm a bit underwhelmed, especially at £200K, he seems a bit "4th target of 5" on our list if you ken fit I mean, but I suspect we're getting desperate to bring a centre mid of any quality in and at least he'll settle in quite quickly having played in the SPL for a number of years. Also, he has scored several times against us. I'm hoping it's all a front, and we sign the Dutch/Australian/born in Stoke guy from Roda, just for that exciting unknown element. I'd still expect us to get one more in too, on loan at worst, a striker. With McKenna coming back, he's clearly risking the defence of Taylor, Considine and Reynolds to last the season which I think is the right thing to do.

Didn't think much of Irvine for County today (or in previous games), hope he isn't a target. Thought Woods look good like. Edit, to add: he also swapped shirts with a Tim (Lustig?) at the end. We don't want that sort of jakery in our team. That's for when a 2nd division team plays the dons or some shite.

I'm not convinced by that wifie if I'm honest Rocket. She publicly spoke out against her employer on the Spiers affair and then got fired for that. If I went online and said anything against any of the companies I worked for (regardless of how right it was - in her case I totally agree with her), I'd expect to be dismissed. It distracts from the real Spiers issue, where his paper hasn't backed him. As I say, she's right in her assessment, but I think she could have played it better and let it go as she's got too much previous with der hun. It's a shame that no other journalists were willing to say anything.

Much like Locke, Billy Davies is a thick loser. Hopefully they'll get him. Much as I'd find it funny if Utd went down, I think they'd stand a better chance in a play-off against der hun if it came down to it. McCulloch in charge temporarily too, cunts. A sign of how shite a manager Locke was - the purchase of that cretin.

What a run fae Vernon. Was more pleased to see him doing well than Grimmer.

Finished him off nicely. Hopefully the wife will give me peace to watch the final on Sunday.

Yep. Murray's a machine, this boy just isn't quite there yet. Double break in the last, should be over shortly. Another final for Murray, fuckin impressive. He's one hell of an athlete.

Canadian goes off court for a Barry Robson, and returns a little bit worse. Murray breaks. Looking good for going the whole way. Pain in the airse as I haven't had time for a shower yet because it's been on all morning.

Aye, the Canadian looking very good. Not a case of bottling it from Murray, just the boy playing very well. Hopefully Murray can turn it round. Watching it on Eurosport like, and they're following on the BBC tradition of ruining the experience by fucking about with the viewing angle on the deuce serve. Showing the first few shots of the rally at net height from the back of the court behind the returner. Impossible to see anything. F'n irritating.

Never read Vonnegut, Rocket, but I have Galapagos on my kindle which I've not read yet (someone recommended it a while back). Have you read it? Is it worth moving to the top of the pile?

Did Leighton not go in a huff when we ditched Bain as he thought he was a good keeper? Could be wrong, I'm sure someone mentioned it. Brown did well, although I thought he could have been slightly quicker of his line at times. The one that sticks out was when the ball went under Considine's foot (it took an horrendous bounce to be fair to him), Consi got a touch toward him, and Brown seemed to hesitate before diving on it, nearly injuring himself in the process. Seemed to be a lot sharper after that though, so probably woke him up a bit too. Agree with the Goodwillie comments, again the ten minutes to make a sub is f'n frustrating too, and will definitely lose us a goal at some point in the future. Hopefully Goodwillie will be replaced in this window rather than next. Thought McGinn worked really hard tonight despite not having a great game. Tracked back well and pressured their defenders, showing that there's a lot more to his game than just his attacking skills - something he rarely gets credit for. Mclean MOM for me - for us. Bain for them.

Josh Walker min? Josh Parker was this season's dud.

Yep, good to see them trying it though, the perfect antidote to the ridiculous non-pay-at-the-gate queues at the ticket office. They should have had this available from the start of the season. 2-0 the dons, Rooney and Considine.

It'll make fuck all difference to Goldman, just like their six figure donation. They'll short the out outcome too. Being seen to be doing something is what it's all about for them. What their game is, I've no idea.

Agreed, went to see it on Tuesday night, enjoyed it. Think it helped that I was with a group of folk - perhaps a better vibe or some shite. I liked the violence, I think it's taken to such an extreme level that it becomes a parody of itself. Good one for the cinema I think, like most Tarantino films, he just provides something a little bit different that is worth leaving the house for.

Watched it last night. It suits both parties to remain where they are. How are the government supposed to curtail people's freedoms without dicks like these guys to justify it? The main pretenders in the programme looked like little fuds who'd get their heeds to play with in minutes if they moved to Iraq.

Aye, Hitler had some pretty sound economic views, despite his penchant for jew-killing. It's a shame that the former can't be discussed sensibly without accusation of condoning the latter. One of the articles on that site takes a quote from Mein Kampf, which nails it: "The absolute separation of stock exchange capital from the economic life of the nation would make it possible to oppose the process of internationalization in German business without at the same time attacking capital at such, for to do this would be to jeopardize the foundations of our national independence. I clearly saw what was developing in Germany, and I realized then that the stiffest fight we would have to wage would not be against the enemy nations but against international capital." (my bold) A bit like how we can't discuss the merits of Sharia compliant finance without hysterical accusations of terrorism. Both Hitler and Sharia law deplore/d usury/riba (in Sharia compliant finance, actively prohibiting it). In the West, it is the key to power and how the banks retain that power in a relatively simple fashion. Corbyn's suggestion of "people's QE" is in many ways a challenge to that power. He's effectively suggestion a route to the economy - for new money - where the seigniorage doesn't flow directly to the bank. Imagine that had been done with the £375Bn of QE to date? It wasn't, obviously, it was thrown into mortgages and instruments at no risk to the banking industry, with the interest returned as clear profit. Anyway... good films.

Yeh, I mentioned it a page back, thought it was a dive. Not to blame the referee like, I didn't think it was something he should have spotted in real time. Weirdly, I expect if we challenged it on those grounds, it'd still get a red card for touching the player. Fitba is a contact sport, and I think there has to be more focus on whether a player tried to stay up or not. I think there should be a change to put the onus on players to stay on their feet, with the benefit of doubt going to the defender. The contact should have to merit the player going down. Difficult to judge I know.

It was meant to be tongue in cheek. But never mind. I was going to put a wink smiley at the end, but I've got a weird hatred for emoticons. Edit: tongue in cheek not the correct phrase, more in compliment rather than in insult.

You're quite correct. The "we" I refer to is: on one side, the government of the day. On the other side, some form of uprising/fundamental change that isn't already being proposed - i.e. a "we" that doesn't currently exist, politically. Not Dave or Jeremy. PS. it's a fitba forum, I'm not scribing the constitution. I'll write how I choose to write, to suit the environment I'm writing in. Just as you choose to be offended, but at least consistently offended by stylistic immaturity - you weird cunt.