CvB

fucking multi millionaire weedgies jumping in to financially secure the future of that grey fucking shitehole. Actually makes me even more pissed off than just the standard corrupt incompetent pricks that normally fuck everything up.

Nobody else of the opinion that it's fucking pathetic to see us clamouring to fit Robertson & Tierney into the 11? I appreciate both are very good Left Back's, but Robertson is the superior one, by far. Callum Paterson & Stephen O'Donnell are 2 good enough Right Back's, neither should be forced out of the 11 just to play Tierney at RB, and we shouldn't be adopting a formation we don't suit or can't play in just to accommodate Tierney, boils my piss, can't understand it. Just my opinion and general feeling on the matter.

My general feeling is that it's no surprise. Tierney has been touted as the next big thing so it would be suicidal to drop him as the press and no doubt Rodgers would go mental, neither Patterson or O'Donnell are such media darlings, so they are expendable.

I see the hun cunt McGregor is touted to play tonight, not bad for a prick that was given a life ban from the international team.

Sturgeon I do not believe was behind this but privately I'm sure will be quite happy in the knowledge the only person currently capable of stopping her becoming the leader of a newly independent Scotland.

I would have thought that the only people stopping Sturgeon from being leader of a newly independent Scotland would be the candidates put forward by the other political parties in the democratic vote to elect an independent Scotlands leader.

It wouldn't just default to the SNP.

The Tim clearly (and most likely deliberately) had McGregor's leg trapped under his own and McGregor kicks him off it. Similarly Morelos takes a couple of shunts from McKenna and gives a petulant tap back. These things aren't difficult to judge, we all know - objectively - that there was no risk of injury on either occasion and they were both mitigated incidents in response to something else. The phrase "there was fuck all in it" springs to mind on both occasions. There is far more of an issue in the game with people feigning injury in an attempt to get others sent off (something I think thon Tim was doing on Sunday) than there is with players dangerously hoofing others and risking injury. Yellow cards all round and get on with playing the fitba.

So what we are saying now is that something is only an issue if it's likely to cause injury?

If a player slides in for a tackle and gets the ball but does it in such a manner that the studs are showing, regardless of whether he actually violently and dangerously hurts his opponent, he runs the risk of a yellow or red card because of what might have happened,  but actually striking out can be regarded as inconsequential because it may not be "violent enough"

That's one seriously fucked up rule. Basically what is being advocated here is that you can, with impunity take little kicks out at an opponent during the course of a game and goad him into reacting.

Take a hot headed (and strangely misshaped headed) hun striker as an example. Rather than giving him a couple of little pushes as they both vied for the same space, lets say McKenna just gave him a little tap or two around the ankle, then that's OK. He could, in theory, as long as it's not violent, continue to kick him until said hun gets so pissed off he strikes back, and that's OK and in keeping with the rules of the game?

Nope, the rules have been changed after UEFA decided it would be a good idea if actual players were invited to discuss amendments to the rules and....

if that's the case, and i have no reason at all to doubt you, then it's a worldwide change to the rules. Rules are, in general, open to individual interpretation by a national refereeing body.

That being said, it's interesting to see one club pushing those rules to the limit and that's the same club whingeing on about wanting to be shown respect...absolute cunts to a man.

Straight from the Horse's Mouth.

 

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/4112/reasons-fast-track-tribunal-morelos.pdf

He was trying to recover his footing 

Allan McGregor will not face any action from the Scottish FA after an altercation with Celtic's Kristoffer Ajer on Sunday. It was alleged The Rangers goalkeeper kicked out at the Celtic defender during the first half of the 1-0 win for Brendan Rodgers' side.Three former match officials were consulted but did not reach a unanimous agreement to take the matter forward.All three of the ex-category one referees must arrive at the same decision for a notice to be raised.

 

Alleged, it was a definite kick out, how on earth can they not see that from the replay.

As soon as morellos got off with it on the first weekend, then the clear message was that this is now tolerated. By pulling one player up after very publicly letting another one off the system would be seen as inconsistent.

When you see some of the shite that players pick up cards for, it's quite interesting that this is deemed to be acceptable. What else is OK?  A slap round the back of the head, little love tap to the kidneys? Be interesting to see where the line is drawn.

I guess that's why you need to have all of these pesky planning requirements these days, access routes, concourses to let crowds out into etc, etc...

McGregor (yet again) has a sly kick at Ajer after a corner in the first half. Had ref seen it then a definite red card. As no action was taken the Compliance officer can take retrospective action if he sees fit.

 

The incident is very clear. What's the odds on fuck happening though?

the odds are minimal because the bar was set when they rescinded the red card for that hun cunt with the odd shaped heid.

what's most fucking galling is the fact that we bust a gut to finish above the cunts over the course of a season and then watch as they get beatable teams and we get drawn against fucking Burnley.

:wave:

Huns down to 9 men - Flannigan gone.

:rofl:

Loan till January is a bit of a puzzler. Doesn't really make a lot of sense unless the club are playing down the length of absence McKenna will be missing for. Or as Rico has said, if McKenna is offski tomorrow.

 

If DM was really serious about going with a conventional left back/wing back surely the loan would have been for the full season?

I suspect that Derby want to see how their other 2 left backs are playing come January and then re-asses the situation. Lowe signed a 3 year extension with them just before coming here, so he's still in their plans. If we have him and don;t play him then he'll go elsewhere, if he's playing regularly but not required back at Derby for the second half of the season then he maybe extends the loan.

Do not get why we are signing another defender. Unless one is leaving of course...

I don;t get why we are only now starting to look at signing defenders. It's been one of the weakest positions in the team for the past few seasons. Fitting center backs all across the back 4 when somebody is injured or suspended has been absolute madness. 

I do have a feeling McKenna will be away.

No chance, we wont sell McKenna to the tims, not even for £6m

(hoping to fuck that statement doesn't age quickly over the next couple of days)

I would hope that our manager sees that there is a real gap in having either

a) A actual real mannie left back or

b) Cover for the left back that isn't Shinnie.

c) We are away to accept a £3m bit from timmy for Considine 

Not sure about the validity of this report, but it does seem a left back may be on his way in...

Derby County defender Max Lowe is poised to join Scottish Premiership side Aberdeen on loan.

Lowe started the season as Derby's first-choice left-back after impressing new boss Frank Lampard in pre-season.

The 21-year-old, who has come through the youth ranks at Derby, started the opening two Championship games of the season against Reading and Leeds.

However, the recent arrival of Scott Malone from Huddersfield has pushed him down the pecking order in Lampard's first-team plans.

Craig Forsyth has started the last two Championship wins against Ipswich and Preston at left-back meaning Lowe is third-choice in the battle for a place in the starting XI.

Derby's English defender Max Lowe (L) jumps against Leicester City's Ghanaian midfielder Daniel Amartey ® during the English FA Cup fourth round replay football match between Leicester...

Lampard is willing to loan out Lowe so that he can continue his development with regular first-team football this season.

A number of clubs have expressed an interest in taking Lowe on loan, but Aberdeen have moved quickly to agree a deal with Derby for the defender.

That's the whole point of going to the fitba isn't it.

 

Let off some steam, bawl and shout, go apoplectic at the RIDICULOUS  refereeing decisions.

 

Get to be part of a crowd baying for blood.

 

I mean, you don't go for the superior catering.

You're forgetting the changing dynamic of the average football punter though.

Watch what you sing...it might offend somebody

What what you do....it might offend somebody

Remain seated at all times as it may inconvenience somebody

Remember to politely applaud the opposition incase you offend somebody

having caught some of that Motherwell game it just emphasises that you need to pressure the cunts in the middle of the park, don't let them dictate the pace of the game.

For all the ££m the hun spent on defenders, they're not all that good.

Standard hunnery though, sly little digs and elbows but as soon as they feel a motherwell player anywhere near them they're hitting the deck.

Saw somebody on twitter saying that Wright, McKenna and Reynolds were doing some work in the pool at ASV yesterday, so that would suggest a knock.

Cos he most certainly IS for sale if a club bids a figure that the board deem acceptable. If the Dhims (or any other club) went to £6 million I think the board would find it very hard to turn down......McInnes would probably be handed £1 million of that to sign a replacement with £5 million going straight into the new stadium pot.

 

Dhims could sweeten the deal by throwing in either Allan or Christie no doubt.

I don't doubt he is for sale, what i would question is whether we see that sale being made to a Scottish club. A stronger Aberdeen is better for Scottish football than an even stronger Celtic.

The rumour market claiming Celtic are coming in with a £5.5 Million bid.

 

That would be hard for AFC to turn down.

 

Time will tell.

It would be hard to turn down but it depends how much we need the money.

If we have bills to pay and creditors banging on the door then selling now is a temptation, if we don't then is there any rush to sell?

£5.5m now or a similar amount in January or next summer. The mere fact that the tims are offering (if they do) that type of fee will raise his profile. By turning that down the club lay a marker for any potential suitors telling them where we see the players value.

What part of NOT FOR SALE does Celtic not understand.

their attitude of superiority means that they cannot accept that somebody would say no. Like one of their drunk abusive supporters once he gets home after a glasgow derby.

I would be amazed if Ross starts. Shay back in, Ball beside Gleeson is my guess. No way will DM be as cavalier against the spoonburners as he was last Saturday

No way that Hibs will give us as much time and space as St Mirren did last week, so a slightly different set up will probably be required, but hopefully not so different to cut off our creative outlet.

We are, as showed last week, capable of playing some nice stuff when we're not lumping it forward to a hapless target man.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45271654

 

BBC reporting a bid of £3.5m has been turned down.

That's not a report. A report would have facts to back up statements, that's just cut and paste from weegie orientated guff like HITC and celtic blogs.

Except that's nonsense, as outlined in what I posted above. Do you genuinely think that the huns and tims regularly command significant fees for players that we'd say our no better than average because clubs in England are stupid? Or is it a conspiracy? Or they're doing it because it's the fashionable thing to do (pay elevated fees) down South.

 

A player is valued at what someone is willing to pay for them. If we had offered Maynard £20K for 5 years, then that is what we have valued him at because that was what we were willing to pay for him at the renewal of contract or purchase time. Whether or not somebody else is trying to buy him or not is irrelevant. But you missed the key part: there are two types of player, one that we want to keep and one that we don't. If we want to keep Maynard, then £5M is the minimum we'd expect a club to pay for him as that's what we are willing to invest on him. That value will reduce as the contract expires. If we don't want to keep Maynard, then we'd accept less than £5M in order to get that cost off our books. But your point doesn't work, because we're talking about players that parent teams do want, and so do other teams, which begins the bidding process. You also rarely get extreme examples like you mention precisely because transfers are wages linked (you don't want to pay someone significantly more than their peers).

I was thinking about that the other night as I contemplated how the fuck somebody (Wigan) valued Windass at however many millions.

I do actually believe that the fact that they are playing for celtic or rangers adds a million or two onto their transfer fee because of who they are, because of how they are marketed to the world and because the rest of us clubs are seen as an irrelevance.

A rodgers exit strategy perhaps? Bidding for a player with an amount he knows will get turned down and then point to John McGinn and McKenna as examples of the board not allowing to sign the targets he wants?

Anyway, celtic GTF.

weegie press going with a timmy bid for McKenna. Nothing to stop them bidding I suppose, but if it's true I hope we tell them to ram it.

McKenna himself must know that he can do better than that in a year or so....unless it's a "boyhood dream" or such pish.