Azteca1903

If he wants to play for Scotland I don't see the problem, hopefully he'll be able to make the step up to the full squad eventually.

Can't remember tbh, still a fairly impressive figure.

I think this'll be an interesting one. We should be looking for nothing less than a win against bottom six teams and by all accounts the Hibs performance bodes well in terms of effort and commitment. Seen saints a couple of times this season and they play a very open game, so hopefully conditions will allow for a wee bit of good football Defensively they looked pish earlier on in the season but have changed out 40 year old Main for ex-hun Smith in goal and have captain Rutkiwicz back - who'll no doubt be fired up. Lack of numbers worries me, losing Ross and Fyvie is massive and I think the result will depende on whether Kerr, McDonald and Miller can be arsed to turn up. If they do and we screw the nut at the back we should be strong enough. For those who are interested, this is what we looked like last time this fixture came about: 1st December 2001 Aberdeen 1 St Johnstone 0 Aberdeen: Kjaer, McGuire, McNaughton, Whyte, Anderson, Mackie, Bisconti, Gunitveit, Winters, Zerouali, Thornley. Scorer: Winters St Johnstone: Miller, Kemble, McBride, Lynch, Murray, Lovenkrands, Dasovic, Hartley, Falconer, Russell, Connolly. Att: 17, 369...amazing what a winning streak can do

I think the point that AFC were trying to make was that a referee with experience would have followed a 'common sense' approach, i.e. having a word with players rather than simply brandishing cards. Refereeing should never just be black and white, it is all about dealing with people sensibly and making sure that the laws of the game are adhered too. Cautioning players for borderline offences (particularly if its their first foul) only sets a dangerous precedent where every similar incident must also result in a caution - as seemed to be the case on Saturday. I can only assume that because it was Nicholls' second game at SPL level (and by all accounts he fucked up the first too) that he wanted to stamp his authority by sticking rigidly to the letter of the law. Hopefully he will adopt a more 'common sense' approach in time, as AFC are suggesting.

So the ref who was the decisive factor in our game due to two unjust red cards is a 'poor rookie', yet the individual who oversaw the massacre of the huns (part I) without making nearly as great an impact is an 'oaf'? Nice logic, Chick.

And people suggested our youth development was poor...

The financial statistics are like miniskirts.

True, but the point is that we learned a lot about the squad/manager and their 'bottle' in these bigger games. While Dundee pissed me off, the real test for me is to see whether the new crop (albeit with much the same players) falter whenever they get within sight of silverware. This is why, to some extent, the QoS game for me was more disappointing than the QP exit two years beforehand.

Without wishing to make excuses I think the scumdee game was a different kettle of fish, with us being in a period of transition and them riding the crest of a money wave. We all knew that it would be a struggle and given that it was an early round not nearly as much was at stake. My positive slant on this may be down to the fact I wasn't there, but I was present for all of the previous cup fiascos. It always hurts a bit more when your hard-earned goes down the swanny as well as another season of cup failure.

Being even more specific than that, I think he'll be judged heavily on the big games, i.e. the games that change a season. Matches versus Rangers at Pittodrie aside (not to say I didn't enjoy them), Calderwood made a habit of not delivering in these. The team looked spineless in the Qos and United semis of two years ago, and this is a legacy which has stuck as they were both so crucial. At the end of the day, if he had won either of these he'd still be here today (not necesarily a good thing) so McGhee's performance in such games should be closely scrutinised. Semi finals are only worthwhile if your team turns up for them.

I've watched the incidents a few times now, and with every view the decisions seem more baffling. Not one of the tackles was malicious at all - its football FFS, players will collide with each other several times over the course of 90 minutes. Ross' first cautionable offence looked worse than it was I believe, his foot was raised because the ball was a little off the ground. It didn't help that the Hibee involved made a meal of it, but certainly a quick word from the referee would have sufficed. His second wasn't even a foul - he made no challenge and accidently came into contact with the player after he released the ball. I know its an old line but football is a contact sport; once again the referee upon giving the foul would have been wiser to remind him of his earlier booking and move on. Maguire's first was clumsy, and under the FIFA vocabulary of "careless, reckless and excessive force" it perhaps merited a caution. The straight red however was bizzarre and growing trend in the game just now. The 'studs up' challenge has been bastardised in the sense that it is no longer about ensuring a player does not inflict serious injury, but it is now a game in which the referee sprints towards the incident brandishing a red should a player's studs touch another's foot in the process of tackling. If treading on someones foot is always punished with a red card then it'll be a strange game that we end up wth. The referee on Saturday clearly set his stall out early - his first caution was in the tenth minute. Although all incidents should be judged individually, reching for the pocket that early sets a dangerous precedent which he clearly felt obliged to stick to throughout the game. I am confident that a more experienced referee would have dealt with the (fairly standard) incidents better and we perhaps would be sitting here with a point or three and without needless suspensions on an already fragile squad.

Quite strong but perfectly reasonable article on the official site: http://www.afc.premiumtv.co.uk/article/dons-appeal-for-common-sense-20091102_2212158_1844992 Can't help but wonder if the club will be reprimanded for this, managers have been penalised for far less in post-match interviews... EDIT - Ta for the merge, beaten to it

That I agree with. It's just a little repetitive that each victory/defeat becomes a comdemnation of the previous/current management, rather than a result which affects this season. It'd be quite nice to have a Messiah though.

Being positive you could say that things were never going to get any better under Calderwood, yet in this period of heavy transition we don't look any worse and there is still potential for when McGhee builds his own squad. On the other hand it could be argued that we've spunked the best part of a million quid on no noticable difference. You can realistically spin it either way. The point I was making earlier on in the thread (nae very well) was that any conclusions are best left till the season's close at least. Fan's confidence will peak and trough between results, so to judge McGhee now seems a little premature.

Only got into it fairly recently and now I'm hooked. If only for Capaldi's performance and the sheer weight of wall-to-fucking-wall swearing it's worth a watch. The latest episode's a cracker too.

No, I am merely a Darren Mackie enthusiast.

I love going to Pittodrie.

Behave yourself. The fact that anyone's referring to the previous management after any defeat is pathetic. We're here for the long term folks, the sooner we all realise that the better. No-one in the SPL is cutting back as much as us, no-one is relying on youngsters as much as us and no-one is in a period of transition as great as us. But fine, if you want to jump to conclusions after getting beat by United, fire away. I'd rather leave it to the end of the season at the very least. By all means, criticise factors which affected the outcome of this afternoon's events, but for the sake of our sanity don't bother judging the current management against the previous. It is an irrelevant discussion. Also, consider this a 'bite' if you wish, I imagine that 'fishing' occurs at a level above this pish.

I don't. Young was signed from a mid-table First Division side, having not made the grade with us first time around and only pleasantly surprised us to start with as our expectations were so monumentaly low. Ross on the other hand failed to fully establish himself at the best team in the country at a time when the league was better than it is now, earned a few Scotland caps, has since spent time accross Europe (in leagues which are all better than the Irn-Bru, arguably than the SPL) and has been signed on probably for very little. Other than the fact he's been tarred by the brush of hunnery, I don't really see the problem.

Probably more pointless due to the 1st Division being slightly above his level.

Although it perhaps substantiates the rumours that we're signing a white Russian.

Fair shout, I imagine the precise details of the article have more basis in pish than fact anyway.

Aye, but would dropping them not be a sufficient kick up the arse rather than leaving ourselves with a paper-thin/badly patched up squad?

I doubt it. The article, however, suggests he would be prepared to get rid of a number of players in January, when it will be exceedingly difficult to replace them properly.

Is that not cutting off your nose to spite your face though? Binning everyone who doesn't meet this required standard is not nessisarily going to be productive, as even these guys have something to offer. I agree with you that a culture of complacency amongst first teamers seemed to have set in by this season, but that doesn't mean that getting rid of a large chunk of the squad without bringing in replacements is going to help.