RicoS321

Miovski was past him and could have got a shot in. It was a deliberate pull back and would be a yellow most weeks. I agree that the player makes a meal of it. There were a couple of times prior when Rubezic was in a similar position and he let the player go, which is what their defender should have done here. Great to see Miovski taking them on though, he should do more of that.

The biggest problem with Sokler is that it's difficult to tell the difference between him and Miovski. The club have either got to stop playing them together or force one of them into a drastic haircut. Miovski was here first, so it really should be Sokler that takes the punishment.

Into its second season and VAR still an absolute abomination. Last night was a disgrace, with all goals ruined by shitey checks (of nothing). Miovski's especially, even the player looked like he'd stopped caring when the decision was finally made. However, maybe it's time to separate the handball rule from the VAR issues. We know that the rule was changed explicitly for VAR's implementation, so it's still to blame. The rule itself is a disgrace though, and we can use McKenzie's apparent handball last night as evidence (among many others). That pathetic decision is the equivalent of having a player dive to win a penalty against you. McKenzie has no idea that Rubezic is missing his header and no chance to get his arm out the way (he wasn't even looking at the ball). Upon hitting (glancing) his arm, there is zero advantage to him, and zero disadvantage to the opponent. There are numerous examples where this is the case, and now anytime the ball is in the box, dickheads are screaming "handball", hoping to win this shite lottery. Instead of taking in a rule that prevents cheating, this rule endorses it. By cheating, I mean unsporting behaviour. It's just a shite way to win or draw any game. It's knowing you've won by diving or getting a goal when you're ten yards offside (no longer a thing). What strikes me as strange is that nobody is talking about it. Everyone talks about it in the past tense "well you just can't have your hand out in the modern game". As if we, the people who watch, play, pundit the sport are completely incapable of influencing those that make the rules. They should be raging about it and asking for a return to the previous rule. This one has very obviously failed, by introducing an unsporting result to the game. The previous rule, where the referee decided on intention, was significantly better and less prone to unsporting decision. Just take it back. It's bizarre that the supposed experts in our game aren't kicking up a real fuss about this. It's anti-sport bollocks. It'd be interesting to see what VAR would be like if it wasn't tainted by the shite handball rule change that accompanied it (still shite on last night's viewing!).

What sort of thread title is this? Who are St Mirren away to? Mods? Delete thread and start again.

Even if he is, McKenzie was very good last night. Defensively very strong, and once MacDonald provided the balance, he began to get forward a little. He gets zero marks off for the penalty, which is just a failed change to the rules that nobody seems to accept. One shite cross field pass in the second too (which Morris neither went for, or tracked back after), but otherwise solid.

Hearts basically where we were under McInnes. Come up against a very good side and put in a spirited challenge but ultimately lose. Bit ridiculous really, but nevermind. They looked good tonight and will be very hard to beat at tynecastle. Shankland looks like he's finally good enough for the national squad.

Aye, it'd be a far bigger loss than Duk in my opinion. Hopefully neither, of course.

Miovski has been outstanding. Some player.

That fucking VAR pen was an absolute disgrace to football, sport ruining pish. Must've riled the dandies like, because it's been some response. Devlin is fucking ace.

An okay half on a very fast pitch. Duncan and Polvara struggling a little, as is Duk defensively. Otherwise we've done okay and should have scored. Probably a fair score so far though.

That's just Robson having a laugh. He'll be starting. Captain. The new Anthony Stewart is how he's being billed.

Planes are always falling out of the sky. Could have happened to anyone. Nothing to see.

McKenzie isn't a wing back though, he's basically a traditional left back (in a four). In fact, I'd say he's much more of a left centre back than a wing back. Lack of real position is probably his biggest issue but, conversely, it makes him versatile in a "fine in a few positions" type way.

What sort of boring nonsense is this. Get him in there. Even better if he's got a beer belly after a wild summer.

Throw him in up front.

I assume you've reported the UFO sighting?

Exactly, comparing him to another big black guy just because he's big and black, rather than his footballing attributes, it's pretty disgraceful. Hopefully he doesn't turn out to be the next Calvin Zola.

Nah, I think you're right. McLean continues to play further back to this day.

He's only 27

I like McGrath, he's a technically gifted footballer (although so is Dean Campbell). He could be of an age where he's learning to dominate opponents and get the best out of his obvious attributes, but he's certainly not done so to date. From what I've seen of him, exertion seems to be his limitation, but if he's ready to focus and work on getting up and down the pitch, he could be a fantastic signing. We need a number eight to replace Ramadani unless we're getting a really good number ten (McGrath doesn't currently fall in that category, perhaps the Croatian lad did). If he can get his finger out, there's nothing stopping him doing that. Ramadani converted well to a number eight at around the same age, so perhaps McGrath might. He's cheap and a known quantity, good for the squad.

That's a euphemism for: he's pish.

I think he's just pish. We're bound to get one or three duds (Dudia). Hopefully we're now taking the approach of just quietly pretending that they never happened.

It's 3 or 4 players away from being decent. A centre midfielder could transform into a good side. We know how it is with transfers. Personally, I'd have met the asking price for Scales a few weeks ago given the money we're taking in. Maybe McGarry might be amazing. Or Or Dadia. It's the way it goes though, transfers are difficult to complete in a timely manner. Who knows how many we've missed out on and how close they were. We could already be down to the dregs.

Sounds like you're being overly dramatic

It does and it doesn't. There are obviously some that are too small to reach the extremities of the goals (like the loanee at Aberdeen last season), but I suspect they are in the minority. The height of the England goalie is about 5ft8 according to the internet, which is enough to reach a crossbar. She was good because of the way she spread herself as well as overall agility etc. Given that goals weren't exactly flying in, it's clear that any disadvantage in stature is offset by power/accuracy of shooting, so I'm not convinced there's a requirement to decrease goal size or anything. The biggest factor seems to be the professionalism of the leagues in the various countries, much as it was back in the 70s-90s (and earlier) in the mens game. You see it within leagues too, where in Scotland, the top few professional sides are streets ahead of the others. Goalkeeping is the one specialism that highlights this the most I think (although overall fitness is also a big factor), and that is clear when you play/watch men's amateur football too. The lack of dedicated coaching leads to a lot of concentration and rudimentary errors that are significantly rarer in the men's professional game these days. The problem with that approach is that goalies need to be good footballers these days. Given the likelihood of any player actually making it in the game, it seems to me that every player should be tested and coached in goals, much the same as any other position. In theory, you shouldn't really define any player positionally until they've been playing for a good number of years. I think it's around 8-9 they start playing with goalies in Aberdeen/shire boys/girls football, before that they're encouraged to just play. I think that at about aged 10 they allocate a goalie and they continue there until they give up or whatever. That does seem short-sighted. Although it does seem to work, as we're not short on goalies in the game. I wonder how it works in other countries? I wonder if, for example, Roos was just a generic footballer up until a certain age? They were mentioning goalkeepers' abilities with the ball on the radio at the weekend (discussing the Tims of course), and mentioned something about some goalie (De Gea maybe?) coming through the Ajax system so being a good footballer, so perhaps they do things differently over there. Either way, I'm guessing the approach will be fast-tracked through the women's game, and they'll go straight to the current training methods.