RicoS321

Nah, I think it took a while. Our game was suspended by Sturgeon very quickly, but I think it took a good few weeks for the players to be found guilty and they didn't even get a ban.

Elgin's suggestion probably best for something like that, it wouldn't be worth insulating I wouldn't suggest. Make sure it's well secured to the base and put some metal or wooden covering around the outside of the raised base to stop beasties and the wind getting in.

They took ages to decide on the soul 8, didn't they? Given the offence is outside football, and with police involvement, it's probably not as simple as a red card at Hamilton. If anything, given they were all subs, the SPFL would have taken swift action to show hard they can be on sevco (having first received their permission).

Good shout. Saying that, my in-laws neighbour had a chicken shed done in that fashion, had been there for a decade or more, but about ten years ago there was a really strong storm and thing was blown half way across their driveway (about 20m). Took four of us to put it back, we couldn't believe something that size and weight could be moved by the wind in this country. If yer in a built up area, you'd likely be fine though.

Exactly what Tom says. If you're insulating then you need to be doing the roof properly and insulated slab below. Doing the roof properly (warm roof) will likely raise the height and you might be subject to planning (not sure what the rules are to be honest). A garden room is a totally different structure to a shed. Do you need the insulation? Bearing in mind you'll be jumping about like a feel on yer gym equipment, you'll soon warm up. I'd be inclined either to knock it down and start again or fix the slab as per Tom's advice and just put the existing structure back in place and keep the equipment covered to prevent rust.

There's another element to it too though. It should be done the next time he speaks to the press. It's no use waiting until he arrives at the club, it has to be now, because it has to be an apology that goes above and beyond partisan club affiliations. At the moment, Brown's position is that Logan lied about being racially abused. If he makes an apology when he joins, he's saying that Logan didn't lie, but Celtic's handling of the situation was fine (in other words, Celtic is bigger than racism towards an AFC player). In order for his apology to be in anyway credible, he has to call out his current club now and apologise for his part in the overall handling. Anything else is just political whitewash. It'll lead to a player/coach coming here knowing that he's bigger than the club. The fact that the club hasn't mentioned it is classless as fuck. It's exactly the sort of shite we'd expect from the Huns. For anyone unsure about the whole thing, it's the equivalent of someone saying that a girl who has been sexually assaulted by a teammate probably made it up, or probably deserved it. That's the victim blaming offence here. Also, it isn't, and never has been, the responsibility of a captain to justify the actions of his club. If that had been an AFC captain coming the cunt at the time, I'd have been launching my season ticket in Milne's face. He can be excused for making the error of judgement of course, but he's an adult now with ideas of becoming a coach, and needs to apologise for that. If that offends the "club with no affiliation to Celtic boys club" and he's afraid to do that then AFC should take the high ground and tell him to go fuck himself.

I think I'd be telling the club to ram that phrase up their cunts if I was Logan.

McKenzie signs a two year extension. Wisnae even on yer out of contract picture. Despite his error, he showed good promise. Just need to get Shay (Hearts on loan?) on a three year extension to coach him into the role.

Sort of, aye. They're quite similar managers in many respects. They like to second guess the opponent and setup to nullify them first. However, none of the players last night should have struggled in the roles they were given, they've all played them before. Clarke just made the McInnes-esque mistake (and that of every Scotland manager this century) of not recognising the fine margins in international football. The league setup is so condensed that if you lose a single point that you needed to take your qualification chances are reduced massively. That should be at the forefront of the Scotland manager's mind throughout every game. Last night was a perfect example. Clarke decided to try and see out the first half. It was a risk in the game itself, but an even bigger risk in terms of the entire qualification picture. We were on the back foot and they'd had several shots on goal before the opener, it was inevitable that something would happen. It was a classic example of not balancing risk correctly. Making a sub on 40 minutes and changing shape (as we did at halftime) could have led to the players not understanding the switch and caused confusion leading to a goal, but it could also have changed the flow of the game, saw us through to halftime without conceding. I can guarantee that Clarke knew what changes he was going to make at halftime but he chose to wait until then to make them (he might not have even made the change if we hadn't conceded which would have merely delayed the goal). It was a McInnes-like case of not managing the game as you see it happen, but by a series of predefined managerial rules and timings (canna make a sub before half-time, that's crazy), with a huge bias towards what you normally do or what is normally the done thing. It's like playing in Europe, you're playing against players you don't normally face and in international football you're alongside guys you're not normally alongside and the standard of individual players (not every player) is fairly high in pretty much every team. I dare say that in club football in your own league that game could have been seen through until halftime, but we had so much time under pressure the goal was a big risk. One that's likely ruined our campaign before it's started.

Surely it's fairly special for everyone else to have been absolutely pish or injured? Should we give young player of the year to Anderson for his efforts and performances for Hamilton?

No chance you're keeping tup away from the Wright vote.

Taylor for me. Been very consistent.

I don't think he's the ultimate warrior we need.

There's a difference between learning from and being led by, or being a leader though. Most folk on here have been saying that we need a leader for quite some time (not me). But nobody would suggest that younger players couldn't learn from guys like Considine, Lewis and Taylor. There are thousands of examples of players who are very good at football but couldn't coach or lead. As for Brown, he's undoubtedly a fantastic leader on the park. However, as happened with Hartley, if his legs don't aspire to his head then will he command the same respect and trust? Will he manage to transfer his on park leadership off the park into coaching and will he know when to stop playing? It's not straight forward, and there's associated risk. That's before the risk the club has taken appointing a racist apologist.

Newell was horse shit, but did score in a 1-0 victory against the Hun (I think). Robson was decent. I'd say it's more like Hartley than Robson though. Except Brown won't be on pens. Hartley was signed at the right time for us as a team, similarly Robson and even Aitken. They were the guys to get us up the league a little when we were in bad shape. Whatever we think of McInnes, we're nowhere near the Brown side he was left nor the McGhee side that Hartley dropped in on. Brown as a player, for me, isn't good enough anymore to take us from third or fourth best upward and could have the opposite effect, becoming a millstone. Hopefully he'll add something from the coaching side of things. It remains to be seen how good he is at passing his own obvious determination and drive onto others.

I don't think we'll get a good enough offer for Ferguson to be moved on and a less cautious manager will get much more dynamic performances out of him. Sell January or next summer. Keep Ross. Move McRorie back to defence to save retaining Taylor or Hoban (although another year for ash or two for Hoban would be fine). Would be happy keeping Anderson just to see if he could prove himself under a new manager, but I don't know if another season of uncertainty is best for him. The 9 players remaining is a fairly good base for any manager, the natural end of some of these contracts is good timing.

Aye, you simply can't afford mistakes in these qualifiers and not winning this will be one of them. We took an age to get going, and I think the initial lineup wasn't correct. Looked better when McGregor came on and McGinn moved forward. We've actually got a fairly decent first 14-15 players but it almost looked like we were too cagey and not that confident we could beat them for about an hour. As soon as they scored we then showed what we're about. Weird to be supporting a team that scores actual goals though, very unsettling. Is that Scotland scored more than us this year?

Keeping him fit for the big games. Extremely surprised to see Hendry ahead of Gallagher and Hanley ahead of McKenna. Not much need for those changes.

Why the fuck would anyone elevate those trivial irrelevancies over the racism incident?

Jesus fucking Christ.

Fuck sake, we're not talking about about somebody being a dick as a player, we're talking about the gaslighting of our black player. The two are poles apart. To dress that up as fans getting sucked into the emotion of things is gaslighting in itself. It's ridiculous that these things need to be explained in the 21st century. To be clear, it's not something that directly affects me, and I believe that Brown made an error of judgement, but if the club are projecting itself as a club that stands against racism - and it does - then it's a fucking humongous elephant in the room to leave unaddressed.

A good interviewer/journalist would be presenting evidence to Tam McManus to prove that he's talking absolute shite. A quick Google images will give you evidence of more than one meeting of the two. I'd be highly skeptical if it was suggested that the training ground and beach photos were from the only two meetings between the pair too. A conspiracy theorist would be asking why either McManus is playing down the relationship, or Glass is to McManus. The point is one of process at AFC - I see absolutely nothing wrong with Glass as a person or coach. If Cormack is friends with the player, or has earmarked him for a while then he should have removed himself from the process and let others give an objective view. Somebody asked on twitter or somewhere if fans would have had an issue if we'd appointed another up and coming manager from the premiership or somewhere and I think that gets to the heart of the issue. The obvious difference is that we'd know that candidate was part of a balanced process without prejudice. Was Glass elevated beyond other candidates because of his relationship with the manager? In my opinion, yes. There's further evidence too. Listen to the interview with Cormack after Glass' first interview. He says that they whittled down to a shortlist after identifying that the manager had to be "emerging talent". That's a serious case of setting the criteria to fit the decision rather than the other way round. It's as arbitrary as saying that they need to be foreign, or not foreign. There are zero specific attributes that a manager that is an emerging talent has that a manager with experience couldn't. I'm guessing the next item on the filter was "pictured on a mountain bike at Hampden". That's it guys, it's been a fair process, but only one candidate fits the profile of being usable in a number of window based puns. Again, my questions are not with Glass, they're with the chairman and our Atlanta relationship. There can be zero defence of the Hernandez debacle, it was a signing double anything we'd done this century. That is all we have to go on with the Atlanta link and it's extremely important that fans raise questions when things aren't transparent. We've just been through a process, over a sustained twenty plus year period, where our previous chairman tried to move us to ridiculous parts of the city to the extent that we had actual fans of the club (and lots of them) saying "we just need to get on board" with a decision to move our club out of the city to the most inappropriate location possible. We now, hopefully, can all see that for the ridiculous decision it was. The Glass appointment isn't in that realm of course, but the relationship with Atlanta is something that none of us understand and isn't transparent. None of us understand the long term goals of the link, how it benefits AFC and in which direction its bias leans. It's critical that fans keep raising these points, and critical that people recognise the difference between questioning a process and questioning a manager. In my view, and based on the evidence, the process was biased. If Atlanta weren't in an English speaking country, we'd be disparagingly comparing it to a Romanov appointment from his base in Lithuania. I don't think we're close to that of course.

Hate to shite on yer fash, but yer talking out of yer airse. McKenna played 3.5 games for us this season. Won two, lost one and were drawing in the game he was subbed at half time. At the very worst we'd have been six points behind where we are now. He had little bearing on the games we won from memory. His head was up his covid airse as I recall. Scoring one goal this year is clearly the issue.

The place is riddled with Hun though, isn't it?

The England boy won't join until after the Euros and our assistant manager will weirdly be playing against us and others for the remainder of the season. Glass will have had his tests in preparation, and he's got family over here so will have at least temporary accommodation after his two week quarantine. I'm guessing his family were all geared up ready for him to move. We've got plenty of time, so I'd expect him to be in for the next league game. After that, ten remaining fixtures for him to get his ideas in to practice.