RicoS321

Why would going out in Glasgow until the early hours be in breach of club rules? Players are out in Aberdeen reasonably regularly without issue. I doubt it'd be a problem, especially with the international break. However, jumping in a river is an issue, especially when it leads to hypothermia and being rescued. Hopefully there were mitigating circumstances, like he'd just split up with his boyfriend. He's a wee bit glaikit like, so I think we should cut him some slack. Hopefully it'll have given him a kick up the airse and he'll get his head down and concentrate on his fitba. He has the potential to be a good player if he sorts himself out - has a lot to offer the game as soon as he works out how to play it. Hopefully that'll be with us.

I think the reliance on Hayes by Considine is overstating it massively. Most of his defending is done hard up against the winger, which is where he's best. Regardless of Hayes being there or not, if he gives a player a chance to turn and run at him out wide, he'll have difficulty. It'll be interesting to see what we do after the international break. I didn't see too much in the highlights that suggested our centre halves were dodgy at the weekend, with May and McLean losing their men at set-pieces and Shinnie making a woeful pass for the first. It seemed that the general tinkering caused us more issues than the individuals themselves, so perhaps a couple of weeks in whatever McInnes decides as his back line will do us good. The quandary is definitely the left side of defence though, and Arneson doesn't solve that issue unfortunately. That said, the defence we have of Logan, O'Connor, Reynolds and Considine has proved that it's good enough to beat any teams at SPL level outside Celtic, and I think we just need to go with it - at least until January. I think McInnes does need to pick a settled back line though. Also, that pass from McLean and shot by Christie was top class. If that had gone in, it'd have been goal of the season material.

If he's deid, do we get our money back?

He looked pretty weak (physically) at times when he came off the bench in previous seasons. He should still have got more of a chances last season. The biggest thing for me is McInnes' willingness to give youngsters from other teams more game time than our own. Compare the minutes Christie and Maddison got last season to that of Wright and it's obvious. We had that spastic McLauchlan too, as well as the decent Hector and the shite Donervan Daniels. They all got time where our youngsters are overlooked. We actively helped in progressing other teams' youngsters. A little weird.

Good stuff. A decen't window overall from McInnes (assuming Stockley leaves). Getting rid of Storey and Stockley was imperative. I can see Maynard joining them in January for another punt for 6 months. However, he was right to bring in Maynard given we hadn't got May in and overall it's been quite decent given the departures. Hopefully we have enough between Stewart and GMS to make up one decent player!

To be fair, every reply on the thread gives the op abuse for the ridiculous suggestion. Makes for quite good reading actually.

I've heard "his legs have gone". A player that was off form, but still capable of scoring when required, such as the semi against Hibs. Looked in need of a rest last season, and just a wee bit of form returning. Hopefully this will be the start of that.

Not sure what you mean? It would reduce the capacity. Takes up more space.

I said "generally". He does occasionally. He does go in for ones I don't expect him too though, and challenges for everything in the air. He's nae McGinn, put it that way.

He's had some pretty awful games at left back when deployed there randomly every so often rather than every week (he was ace there when he played that role every week of course). Similar happened a couple of seasons back when he played there against the tims and had to be shifted into centre mid with Considine moving left after about half an hour. I'm guessing that losing 3 goals had a lot to do with him not being in midfield too. Tansey and McLean both great passers of the ball and don't shirk the challenges generally, but don't have the in-your-face work-rate of Shinnie. That said, it's nae a bad position to be in, and it's good that Shinnie is willing to move to left back when required. His best position is the one he's playing in every week I suppose. I'd say that's left back, but in our team it's centre mid.

Ahh. I only listened to the second half. Fuck him then, hope he fucks off to the huns.

I agree, however it's not McInnes's style like. Generally our two up front involves one of the two actually playing wide, which means we don't get the best out of one of them. Having seen May dropping to collect the ball and bringing others into play last week, I wouldn't be averse to seeing the two of them together. It'd just be up to our defence and midfield managing to hold it together without the extra person.

Partick down to ten. Sounds like McLean having a decent game.

Aye, he's ace. Surprised to see him on the pitch alongside May, thought it'd be either or. Good stuff though. Hopefully that'll give him a kick up the airse that he's been needing. Either way, fantastic player to have on the pitch or bench. Top of the league...

Rooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnney

I've never suggested I was an architect, nor a change manager. Nobody has been solicited to provide drawings of the 12K seater at Pittodrie as far as I'm aware, ergo, noone is qualified to "pass fact". If you can point to anything relevant I've said that's unproven, then go for it. If you can point to any evidence of a 12K seater stadium, then I'll happily be persuaded. In fact, the only thing of any importance in this thread that remains unproven is the 12K figure.

I don't think that's how it works Pedro.

Good line up. I like it. On Partick TV too for 5 or 6 quid.

Or you can fuck off with the patronising bullshit? Fear of change? Nervousness. Thanks for putting yer fatherly arm round us frightened souls, but it's fine, I'm happy to evaluate the plans like an adult and call them out for simply being a shite idea. It was the same with the UTG pish. People were accused of being frightened of change and needed to be led by the business people of Aberdeen. Again, it was just a really shite idea. Just to clarify, I'm very open to change, I get paid everyday to implement change, it's pretty much what I do. I'm even suggesting re-building Pittodrie because it's a shitehole - I have no attachment to the stands. I think Kingsford is a really shite location for a football stadium in comparison to the existing site. It's pretty simple stuff. If we were moving the other way, I'd be over the moon. Out of town offices, shopping centres, stadia, exhibition centres are inefficient retrograde steps not fit for the 21st century - Kingsford is no different. Thousands of people pointing their vehicles at the same location to spend money and then drive back again is shite. We're not B&fuckingQ, we're better than the Kingsford shite.

Apologies, I didn't explain that properly. I meant the search for one individual "superfood", when every person in the food industry already knows what a healthy diet is. I was criticising the elevation of one individual food above all others every so often so that they can make a killing from it. Kale was a recent one, avocado, beetroot, goji berries, blackcurrants etc. They've all had their time at the top in someone's interest over those that actually grow them.

Firhill? At which ground did Stevie May score his second hat trick for Aberdeen Football Club?

Fennel is a bulb. I wouldn't say it's that trendy in the UK, not that I've noticed anyway, I've had them for years as they grow pretty well in this part of the world. Not like Avocado (tasteless shite) and the "superfoods" (kale) balls. I agree though, the constant searching for the individual food that can fight off disease and make us healthy is typical of the vacant society we live in.

I genuinely think we'd have won if we'd had May. Frustrating like, should have done the business.

I'm not asking the club to explain the 12,000 figure, I'm asking for evidence (and evidence that this is the maximum figure). I'm asking for drawings. There's a huge difference. For example, I could explain part of the 12K by saying that the South Stand has to be the same height. That doesn't show me what they've done to investigate ways round that issue, which flats would be affected etc. Anyone can explain a reason for them doing something that they want to do, that's easy. I have asked DST before, they are in support of the club - as per their surveys - and are happy with the 12K figure. I haven't asked the club, because I don't want them to appease me, hence the reason I'm just commenting on a forum and nae camping ootside the cooncil with a banner. I'm simply stating that a new stadium project should have had the full input of the fans and the club should have been largely agnostic and completely transparent; neither of which they have. Hertz are spending money because their main stand needs renewed (like ours). They've not added significant corporate hospitality and, from memory, no pitch-facing corporate. I would suggest that with three new stands, we could easily increase our corporate hospitality. With the location of Pittodrie, I'd expect far more customers through the door during the week than at Westhill (next to the business park with more than adequate facilities), but if we're looking to make a killing on that then I think we'd be sadly disappointed. There's a saturation point for meeting and conference facilities and I think that both AFC and Aberdeen city have probably hit that. It certainly isn't worth moving stadium for the extra revenue. I think that's hugely over-stated. And indeed costly if not used. Also, it's not about history for me, and not a single shuttle bus. It's about location and transportation. Massive issues. Unresolved at present.

I think a 17K stadium at Pittodrie over 15 years would get more in total attendance than 20K at Kingsford. The initial glut that would tank up to a new stadium would put Kingsford significantly ahead for the first 2-3 seasons, however I think this would be quickly overtaken as crowds settle back down to a lower level (which they will). In Kingsford's case, we'll lose as much paying for the over-capacity as we gain from those games with the larger crowds (after the initial 2-3 season's excitement). I think we'd be more likely to get larger average crowds at Pittodrie @ 17K too because of the decreased supply and more tight atmosphere that it would create (a bit like closing dick's end improved our crowds). Finally, I don't think we'll get 20K at Kingsford. The club, initially, were very sketchy about the 20K+ thing. They kept saying "around" 20K. It wasn't until fans started questioning/complaining that they set out the 20K thing. I think that once we get into the build, they'll cut that down to 19K (which was mentioned at one stage) to save cash through the back door with some dubious explanation.