RicoS321

It's an unenviable task like. We reached a high point a couple of seasons back when we were banging in goals for fun and got ourselves a record points total. Each transfer window since we've regressed. It's making it harder and harder each summer to replace those who are leaving. Shinnie will be a massive loss. One of the best midfielders in the league and will be the equivalent of losing Hayes a couple of years back. GMS has, unfortunately, been unreliable (and brilliant, at times). Max Lowe is also huge. I'm not convinced we'll be able to keep him and I think that will destroy the balance in our team. It's going to be a further summer of getting numbers in. It's a big turnover. Not only is it a big turnover, but there's a huge question mark over those who remain. May and Gleeson are three who I'd rather have an alternative in place but I think with their contracts as they are then we'll struggle to offload. Paying off Gleeson would be money well spent as he'll get a contract somewhere else and we can just pay the difference; he won't want to hang around here and he's behind Campbell at the moment (although I think he might play on Saturday as McInnes tries out options for the semi as Campbell clearly wasn't ready). I'd like to see May offloaded too, but I think we'll have to keep him just to avoid having to sign even more players. We have to be pragmatic, so I'd definitely keep Stewart if available because he's a decent player who we can get more out of. Most importantly, he's a known quantity. I'd also keep Ball on the same basis. That leaves us still to sign a Left back, a centre half (or two if McKenna leaves), a central midfielder (I disagree with TC, Ball wouldn't even be a tenth of a replacement of Shinnie - although I suspect that wasn't you stating your preference just what you think might happen), at least one wide player and a striker as a minimum That's a minimum of 5 first 11 players that we need, which is huge. At roughly 50% success rate (which would be an improvement) then we're looking at 10 players in during the summer. That's a real problem. With Wright an unused sub for Dundee last night then it doesn't look like we're getting back a ready made first teamer either, but Anderson seems to be progressing nicely and will hopefully take the place of May as first sub up front (I think Cosgrove has his limitations too, but I think we have to go with him).

Exactly. His distribution and lack of confidence on the ball was his weak point. He struggled after Anderson left. Whilst Devlin is a physically stronger defender than Reynolds, I think his lack of confidence and distribution will be an issue too - I think the two are quite similar. Both far from shite like.

Signs for Utd on a 3 year deal. Good luck to him, a solid professional that provided a good few seasons for us.

I suppose the problem that McInnes has is that every one of his wide players, bar GMS, would probably give their best performances through the centre. McLennan struggled out wide last night, specifically with the tracking part of the game (and tripping over the ball) because - as a youngster - he reacts to every knock or losing of the ball with a 3 second pause (like Magennis used to do) to complain or contemplate before chasing back. He was anonymous once Stewart came on. To an extent, Stewart does the same, which is why he's preferred in the centre. However, as a senior player, he should be disciplined enough to do the graft out wide as and when required. I have no doubt that if Stewart had played from the start last night, at some point he would have been shifted out wide, which he'd never have to have done at Killie. McGinn has proved (and improved) under McInnes that he has the work ethic and ability to play wide and centrally, which wouldn't have been the case under Brown I don't believe. At the moment the question is whether it's best for the team for Stewart to play centrally at the expense of McLennan (who may continue to play out wide, but he'll be the one playing shite instead of Stewart), or does McInnes try and keep all three front players happy by allowing them to switch around throughout the game. If Stewart keeps up his form from last night and brings McGinn into the game like he did, then it's undoubtedly the best option to continue through the middle and McLennan will just have to be content getting minutes and learning his discipline, getting involved where he can.

Maybe, maybe not. I think that if you're trying to motivate your players to beat a better team (or any team) then you need to deploy these types of tactic. I don't mean the tactic of playing to either of the above, but the tactic of getting your players to believe that they are. If you're playing Celtic for the nth time this season, then it's important to differentiate between what you did last time you lost to what you're about to do that's going to get the win. These descriptions of formation are useful tools in motivating your team or individual players within that team. They don't have to physically manifest themselves on the pitch in order to perform a function. I don't doubt that Ferguson would have described a player as playing off (or behind) the front man in order to get across to that player that they had to track back from the front more than usual. That said, what your describing is the punditry use of these terms I expect. The good thing about last night is that when Stewart came on, he played very high up the park and centrally, giving the effective 4-4-2 in which he was succesful with at Killie. It worked.

I liked it. Bit stupid in places, but original enough and good. Brit Marling very good.

Just back, a deserved, good and vital win. We made it difficult for ourselves at times, and we never look like scoring up until the point that we actually do. Good early sub in the second half, bringing on Stewart which really turned the game in our favour. He brought the anonymous Cosgrove back into the game by actually running onto his flick ons, held the ball up and made a couple of good incisive passes to bring McGinn into the game too. That gave McGinn the time and space to have an excellent second half. Alongside Lowe, they were the best two on the park. Stewart and Considine with good performances and Shinnie did the work of three players in midfield, which is extremely worrying given he's missing for the semi. Ferguson was largely anonymous and Campbell did okay but was right to be subbed. McLennan was fairly pap and needs a good boot up the arse and told to stay on his feet and concentrate. Ball was gash and gave the ball away too many times, which is worrying given he's likely to be in midfield for the semi. Thought McInnes poofed it by taking Devlin on at home, but then we did get a third so perhaps we can let him off. An absolutely sublime goal which justifies staying until the very end.

Didn't know there was a game. Fuck sake. Fucking midweek pish

I wish our board would make an imaginative appointment like Kurt Russell. He'd be an ace manager. Good though SeaBass, inspiring stuff. That said, how do we know that the Russian manager didn't make just as heartfely a speech? We'll need a lot more than a good team talk to beat the Tims. I think we can, but we need everything to go right - no mistakes, no injuries.

Some folk somewhere - I canna mine (maybe TC on here?) - were suggesting that we had a 22.5% sell-on clause. That'd be some fuckin deal if so, but I doubt it. What sort of figure do they pay for the likes of Fraser doon Sooth? Must be near £20M given he starts every week (I think)? Even at 10% it wouldn't surprise me if we end up getting more for Fraser than we do for McKenna.

That's not appeasement, that's just not using the sensationalist term isn't it (i.e. the correct approach)? If they'd said punch and it was McKenna or Cosgrove then you and I would be complaining - correctly - about the BBC's biased when reporting on non-scum teams. You're asking them to angle their bias in our direction instead rather than just be impartial. If there's evidence that the BBC writer saw what he thought to be a punch, but toned it down then fair enough, but I'm saying that I see a shove too. Anyway, I don't actually care in this case, I just think that over-using terms such as propaganda makes actual propaganda be taken less seriously. I actually think that across the board managers and players get too much respect from the BBC and the line of questioning is too often weak (rather than impartial).

Not when I use it isn't, hence why I added context. In the context of this particular incident it is misuse in my opinion. Why it annoys me is because when you use a term as loaded as "propaganda machine" you have to be specific and accurate. In my opinion, the term (conspiracy theorist) gets used to discredit anyone (and I agree that it does, and it also annoys me) because of the platitudinal nature of the accusations that get thrown about lazily without evidence. It basically gives people the opportunity to lazily reply with the term "conspiracy theorist" to anyone questioning the established order of things. It's like crying wolf. If you want to question "the deep state and/or presstitute media", then do you think it's advisable to give them easy fodder like this? In my opinion, you immediately put off your reader and you hurt those who bother to provide more in depth examples. Is the BBC used as a propaganda machine? Yes. Is this an example of that? Absolutely not. Not even slightly. To me, a conspiracy theorist is one who finds an agenda in absolutely everything and refuses to take any other point of view (I'm not suggesting that is you, Tyrant). A conspiracy theorist is not someone who questions the extablishment. I find it a very easy distinction to make, and it is very much possible for one person to be/do both (me. probably).

The council have never been given the option to reject a proposed Pittodrie re-development, so I don't believe we'd have to wait 5 years. We'd just need to apply.

It's similar to McKenna's one, but the actual hit out is with excessive force given that it's in Brown's face (without even looking) and a decentish clout, so it's completely consistent with the rules. Totally agree with the bit in bold, that was my first thought as soon as I heard the comments without having to think. Again, it's fucking frustrating that proper journalism can't take place - that question should have been immediately posed to Gerrard. In terms of Brown being "clever", I actually don't think that he was even trying to be clever in that incident. I assume he would have thought he had to be significantly more clever in order to get a reaction, it was embarrassingly inoccuous

It is a shove though. It's of the push variety. Nobody would actually punch like that unless they're a total fanny. It's aggressive and worthy of a 2 game ban, but nothing in the lik suggests otherwise. Annoyingly, you've used the phrase "propaganda machine". There are some excellent examples of this in the BBC, but this clearly isn't one of them and it makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist when you use examples like this. It's actually a very impartial phrase to use. They've attached the clip where the pundits agree that it should end in retrospective punishment. It's pretty standard journalism. If anything, "punch" would be sensationalist tabloid pish.

I'd hope that's what we give all our players to be honest. To me there's little difference between an injured player and a charlatan like Nicky Maynard who spends his entire time on a bench. Yep, it could just be bad luck or injuries that are unrelated. We'd have regretted not getting Anderson back despite his previous injuries for example. Sometimes a player just goes through a spell of incidents. We could get a couple of years out of him injury free if there's no underlying issue. Similarly, we could sign someone without injury problems who tears a cruciate the next week. Basically, if the medical staff thinks there's no reason to be concerned then get him on board.

Aren't these the risks we have to take in our position in the world of fitba? It's no different to taking a punt on an unknown from the English leagues for me. Ultimately, we've had more use out of Hoban than we have from Gleeson, Forrester and Wilson combined despite neither of those having injury issues. In other words, you can take a punt on a guy that you know to be a good fitba'r that could miss games through injury or you could take a punt on a guy that you think might be a better player than those you've got but should remain injury free. Hoban would be an improvement on what we've got (at right centre half) in my opinion so we could I quite like it if I'm honest, it makes things a bit more interesting. It would be shite if all our signings were ace. Part of what makes fitba exciting is that opportunity to make mistakes. We're probably one or two signings in budget ahead of Hibs and Hearts at the moment so to have that pressure on yer recruitment is the way fitba should be.

It's a weird one like. I was reasonably positive/hopeful when he was appointed until I heard his first couple of interviews. It was like he had completely forgotten why he wanted to be a manager. He's never been the most articulate, but there was always a visible confidence and determination about him and that just seemed to have gone. To the extent that if you'd interviewed him there's no way that you could have looked beyond it. Nothing like the manager that we had first time around. Shame like. His approach to playing players from Scotland was refreshing (and exactly what many fans have been crying out for) and, annoyingly, the next manager will revert to championship subs further distancing the national game from the league game. A better manager would have managed those SPL players to a far better standard, so it's frustrating that playing SPL players will be the easy target. I think Strachan will get the gig again. I fucking hope not, obviously. You could be right with Malky though Rocket, but I don't see him as any better a manager than some Owen Coyle chunt. But that is based on very little evidence whatsoever, I've never paid that much attention to him.

Indeed, it's almost exactly what you would have expected his national manager to say.

It strikes me that McInnes might want a player who feels he has something to play for in his remaining games. A bit of encouragement/psychology or whatever you want to call it. Good management if you ask me. If he gets 16 minutes between now and the end of the season but we still sign him, then I reserve the right to retract that comment.

Maybe just a bit nervous playing out of position....

So what percentage of violent extremism is Islamist led?

Just caught the end, it looked good. Did you continue on to watch Storyville's Silk Road/DPR documentary? Seen it before like, but a good watch. Anyway, a great point about the phones Seabass: "Just bloody LIVE THE MATCH rather than becoming desensitised to it with a concrete memory of some play on your phone". Great quote sir, nicely put. I genuinely believe that people like Milne think that they are pulling in the same direction with regard to the new stadium. I don't think they appreciate the plastic environment they're creating for plastic fans. A manufactured day out in the car. I suppose that when you spend your life building soulless housing estates with zero redeeming features, perhaps you begin to believe in it.

It's not practically on anyone in Aberdeen's doorstep though, that's the thing. It is the very definition of soul destroying. It's a fucking trip to Ikea. If Ikea was a lot shitter. Sheddocksley number 2 would retain the soul of a city club. I'd move there no bother.

The "I pay my money, I can be a dick" attitude that surrounds life in general is a bad thing. It's not just football. Entitlement at its worst.