RicoS321

Well, aye, but also given that we've got a new board, they'd probably like to give the guy a set of targets, some new ways of doing things and an appropriate opportunity to perform in those conditions. If he fails then he is paid off in the final year of his contract with some form of gardening leave offer. Does anyone really think the club is any fit state to be changing manager right now? Seriously? Do they think a new manager will have the right level of support and the right conditions behind the scene to get anywhere beyond the initial new manager bounce phase? Ayrshire's point about McInnes' recruitment is correct (although he's made a profit for the club, in total, in the years he's been here, so the nonsense about bankruptcy is - nonsense), but it spectacularly misses the point. We need to be taking recruitment away from the manager to a large degree. The club needs to have a network of people and an in-house team that are knowledgeable and skilled enough to do the vast majority of recruitment work, with the manager providing the final say and using their knowledge of individual players on the odd occasion. We can't have a system that relies on "well eh, I know Jaap" or "Derek's mates wi' Jody Morris, ken?", or Broon's ex-Scotland mates (Naysmith) or..... nah, there isn't a single player in world football who liked Mark McGhee. If a manager is at a club for more than a couple of years (McInnes) then their past experience of players is out of date and shouldn't be relied upon. If our club's scouting network thought Gleeson and Forrester were players then we've got bigger issues that will persist after McInnes is gone. In my opinion, we need Cormack to get the club into a good position for the next manager coming in before McInnes leaves. Christ, I've been on about succession planning since before McGhee joined, so I hope to fuck Cormack sees it (I think he does). There's a lot more to a club than just the manager, and we can't keep going from giving one manager all the power, to giving the next guy all the power, to the next guy and so on in perpetuity. Let's get our house in order first so McInnes can have no excuses and we don't face the next Mark McGhee straight after him.

It is a shitfest of fucks. But you're right, it has a lot of good stuff on it. You just need a very good filter, and reading around 90% of the comments on any individual thread suggests that a lot of folk don't. You're statement that "every weak cunt wants to be offended" is exactly how I'd have categorised most of the comments I see on Twitter. I find it difficult to get through the swathes of pish and hysteria to get to the good bits, but I've generally nae tried hard enough. I'd have actually put Bowie getting pelters for his tweet in the category of people wanting to be offended. The photaes, indicative of the unnecessary voyeurism (me included) of the modern individual.

I'm guessing he deleted his tweet because of the pelters he was receiving, rather than its content, along with the fact that circumstances have significantly changed over night. Lack of prescience isn't a huge crime, neither making a poor attempt at humour. If he'd tweeted at 9am this morning, then understandable that he'd get pelters. I don't think it was a good example of cuntishness on this occasion, but as you say, makes it interesting! I don't think posting pictures of a train on fire is particularly responsible, given that it hasn't appeared in news outlets. I'm guessing that there are protocols that even the scummiest of rags adhere to before posting that type of thing, such as checking with local authorities to see if loved ones have been informed and so on. If you were the son or daughter of the train driver seeing that picture before any contact was made then you'd pretty much know/assume that your parent has died, similarly if a relative is a passenger. Random on the internet in a race to get the first picture out isn't something that should get someone in trouble, but it lacks sensitivity and I'd expect that person to be called out. It's just a far more thoughtless and insensitive act than Bowie's fairly innocuous tweet, that's all. To be clear, I'm not criticising you posting it on here, where the audience is far more limited, and the post already out on a larger platform, but Twitter is a shitfest of fucks.

Much as I despise the cunt, seems a little harsh given he wrote it last night. I would think that whoever posted those pictures of the train crash should likely be in line for far more pelters than the Tory cunt.

In what way?

Here's a fine starting point from last year: http://nautil.us/blog/omniviolence-is-coming-and-the-world-isnt-ready

Agreed. I think you should start a thread to get some ideas going!

Fash? Fucking hell. That'll decimate Peterhead if true.

I'm not talking about system enforcement, I was talking about public reaction. Interesting, not sure I'd agree. I think the NZ approach makes perfect sense in their position. They've pretty much eradicated it, and they can quickly and efficiently deal with local fallout, with minimal disruption (which I assume will get even better over time). I would expect most companies to be able to handle the short term disruptions of a few days here and there, with restaurants and cafes and so on likely fairing better than they are here. How it applies to the UK/Scotland is a bit of a minefield. We've not tried to eradicate it in the UK, so each outbreak is going to be a complete new experience. Given testing here is also fairly pish it seems, we'll likely see a lot more disruption all because we didn't do what the WHO said to from the start. Is there any evidence that the strain of the virus has changed? That certainly hasn't been mentioned. I'm guessing the age demographic of the Hawthorn visitors was trending towards the least affected groups too and it's not spread too far either it seems. I'd rather see us trying do exactly as NZ are. Eradicate the disease and deal with small clusters. Quarantine for all foreigners until a vaccine arrives. There is nothing in that approach that would ruin an economy, whilst doing a lot to stabilise it, and allow normality to resume in country.

Ah, so Aucklanders are like Weegies? Fair enough. As I read it, 4 people have tested positive, but they don't know who the four people are, is that right? The system is anonymous I'm guessing? Or is it just the press that don't know who they are? Either way, it sounds like they're belting out the tests in Auckland just to be sure.

I wasn't suggesting their system wasn't fantastic, it clearly is. Just that the reaction to when the inevitable infections occur seems to be a bit vociferous. Perhaps it's just because of the opposition party, but when even mild mannered manc (as he's known) is calling them selfish pricks and saying that Auckland ruined it for everyone without much evidence yet, it does seem to be rubbing off. I have very little evidence, other than manc and a couple of reactions I read online of course! Someone has to find fault with their system. What about looking after all those old folk they've saved from dying? Who's going to pay for that, New Zealand?

There seems to be a fair witch hunt every time someone gets struck down in NZ, or am I just imagining that? No wonder folk are frightened to tell the truth.

Fuck me, is that it? If that's your idea of a clear statement, I'd hate to see a cryptic one. Players should have known, but they made a minor mistake like everyone has done. They're not idiots and this should have been handled much better by Nicola Sturgeon.

The Tim is an outlier. The dons were not idiots, and the hysterical overreaction to their minor infringement has painted Sturgeon into a corner, as now all breaking of the rules is the same, despite the fact that the Tim's breach was spectacular in comparison. Although, it is hugely important to note that no player broke the procedures laid down (specifically) for the return of football, they broke rules that were for the general public. Three weeks ago, Timothy could have travelled to Spain and back. Eight dons players could have entered the same pub and [would likely have] contracted covid, sitting at three tables of three. The dons incident should have been treated as the learning experience that it was, rather than act as if they'd joined the EDL. I've made a couple of errors of judgement during lockdown, I'm sure we all have. Maybe even cut a couple of corners, who knows.

I'd like to congratulate Hibees on their league success.

I don't think Sam is a cart horse, I think Stockley was a cart horse, and there's a pronounced difference between them. Cosgrove has a decent touch and can bring others into the game. He was excellent in the first four months of last season, really worked on his movement and fitness and his finishing was excellent. Exactly the sort of season-on-season improvement you want to see in a young player (he's nae much older than Anderson remember). Seemed to me that when we moved to the new training ground, he faded dramatically. I don't know if the extra shifts at the training ground were having an effect on his overall sharpness at the weekend, but he started to tire in games (like he'd done in the previous season) and that affected his touch, his temper and his concentration. He needed dropped and he eventually was. Unfortunately, his post November appearances stick in the mind for most, rather than his early season performances where he dragged the team along with him with his goals. I think it's a ridiculously harsh judgement of a guy for whom we've had a €3M offer and who has improved every season he's been here. Long way to go? Of course. Will be interesting to see how he handles being out for a while. I agree that he should have been offered a wee nudge to go when such a big offer came in though, as I think that should be our business model based on our finances just now. I also think the fans don't like him, so get rid while you can. I think the criticism levelled at McKenna is similar - and similarly unjustified - and I'd like to see him move on too.

There wasn't a single compliment to McInnes in my post, just for clarification. You might have read a defence of McInnes, but that definitely wasn't what it was. I just wasn't sure what you meant by "not a McInnes type of player". Now that you've explained, I just disagree with a lot of it. I completely agree that his recruitment (full-stop) in the attacking department has been poor, but I just don't see the "type" that you mention. We definitely don't play to win flick-ons, as we never ever have a player running beyond the striker to collect them. Cosgrove has been our only striker under McInnes (I've removed Zola from history) that holds the ball up. Rooney was pish at it, May worse, and Wilson worser - none were signed with that intention either (I wouldn't think). I'd put Wilson in the Nisbet category, and maybe May, from McInnes' point of view (I'm guessing) when signing them in terms of type of player (not quality). I don't know what the fuck Main, Storey, Parker, Church, Goodwillie etc etc. would be categorised as, but they're definitely nae guys who hold up the ball or win flick-ons and wouldn't have been signed as such. I agree that the current mindset would have seen the loon struggle had he come here. Basically, I think he'd fit perfectly in the way that McInnes wants us to play, but not in the way that we actually play. I also agree that he'd have been worth forking out for, but as I said, I don't think the board would have spent any more money after spanking £400-700K on Hernandez (depending on who you believe), which I think was a mistake. I don't think McInnes just didn't fancy Nisbet, or wasn't aware of him, I simply think he wasn't within our budget.

I was at the home game, completely forgot the scoreline in the away. Kiriakov and Rowson, the dream midfield (unless Rowson was fullback that day?).

Don't be a lunatic. Grab the first in the 8th minute, then sit tight. Don't get carried away. Respect the opposition, and so on.

In what way is he not a dons type of player? McInnes has signed all sorts over the years. What's a McInnes type, and why doesn't Nisbet fit into that? He's a 6ft1 striker, I'd have thought that would be perfect for McInnes? Obviously, once he'd got him here he'd have been converted to a wide player, but I'm guessing the issue was more of a funds one than not fitting. Having spanked a wedge on Hernandez, and with the Covid situation, there was no way we were paying a transfer fee without first moving someone on. January was the time to move for him, to get ahead of the opposition (even loaning him back to dunfermline for the remainder of the season), we spent ridiculously heavily on a right back instead. We can't sign every player that is a prospect, and Hibs will be our main competitor in that regard. The issue for me is signing pap like Curtis Main and James Wilson, which then makes it difficult to fill up the squad further with acquisitions like Nisbet. To me, Cosgrove was a solid enough striker - with a 20 goal return - that we could have taken some risks on a backup, either giving Anderson more time or looking down the divisions for a gem. Recruitment is a major issue for McInnes, but I don't think it falls into "types" of player, I think it falls into just pure bad signings and the overloading of different areas of the park, along with a weird fixation on players who've played well against us in the past. Guys like GMS, Stewart, Maddison and even Wilson (possibly Hernandez too) are players you wouldn't think had the workrate to be here, but they were signed regardless. With the Hernandez acquisition, it looked like the strategy might change in recruitment, with McInnes being less involved, which I'd like to see. However, I got the impression we might turn into some weird feeder team for our US "partners", trying out unsuitable foreigners whilst ignoring talent on our doorstep. I think Covid will see us revert to type and McInnes just in full control again. Something definitely needs to change, but we also need to lower the expectation that we can sign every single young/good player out there too and remember that a lot of players don't want to come North too - there is a premium to be paid in that regard.

I suppose it did happen to a lesser degree at Grenfell, and the more recent coronavirus handling shows that it absolutely could happen in the UK. Sellafield? How's it looking these days?

No, it doesn't have to be looked at with common sense. That's the whole point about the coronavirus, what we think is safe and common sense (we're sitting at a table, everyone will be socially distanced, we've been together all day anyway etc) is not applicable. That's exactly why the hand wringing pish has to stop. It's like listening to folk (not you tw) who two months ago were grassing on their neighbours for taking two walks, the hysteria that's been raised. The only rule that they broke was going out in an 8. Three groups of three could have gone to that very same pub at different tables and been within the rules, but would still have got the virus (in other words, breaking the rules had no bearing). It's a very, very minor transgression that has had a large impact. It's like driving at 35 in a 30 and hitting a dog that ran out in front of you. We've all done it, but most have us haven't hit the dog. I went to the park yesterday in a covid free part of the country and there were folk of all ages queuing for ice creams and a train ride. Bunched together, most without masks. I can guarantee they weren't all office workers. They would have all thought that "common sense" would dictate that because they were outside they'd be fine. Had there been a spreader in the queue, I'm almost certain they wouldn't have been. The players had a table for something to eat in a pub. The likelihood is that pub wouldn't have been busy when they went in, hence they got a table. I've heard from various people that soul bar (which I believe is where they were), was allowing people from different parties to share tables because they were busy (this could be gossip of course). They allowed a massive queue to build up outside (as per photos). There should be no queues at any bar, full stop. Sounds to me like the pub were most at fault here, putting their customers completely at risk through bad practice (common sense, some would say). They're a business that's had to close it's doors entirely because it didn't do what the people would declare common sense. They made a mistake, just like most folk. There'll be plenty more on the way. Sturgeon talked about not putting the blame on folk, before blaming the Aberdeen players. I think the player's statement was very good, I'd have been a bit more aggressive given the hysterical reaction and the singling out by Nicola Sturgeon. She should have said: "this virus doesn't respect common sense. You might think that the rules defy common sense. This incident shows that a relatively innocuous thing can have a major impact when plotted across several people in several locations. It highlights the need to not waver even slightly from the rules, because they are there for a reason". Or words to that effect. I think her reaction was pathetic, the sort of thing I'd expect from deflector in chief fae doon in Westminster. She could really have used the dons players' example to get people to really think about what they're doing. As I say, a minor incident with a major(ish) impact. I'd be saying the same if it was another club too, I'm nae some nut job partisan AFC wank.

I agree MBT. Was shouting it fae the rooftops when the scum went bust. Too late now though. It would be a ridiculously unfair target to give McInnes without serious cash for players and that isn't happening. There's something bigger (I don't mean better) at play in Europe I reckon though. The American cash coming into our game is preemptive (or at least it was pre-covid). They're expecting changes.

Fair doos min. Each to their own, but your suggestion of obsequiousness would be countered by me suggesting that yours, and others, reaction is evidence free, hand wringing and hysterical. The moral outrage flying around over this is social-media-age weird. Or I'm missing some key information. If I am, then it's because this thread is completely evidence-free and so was the information provided by Sturgeon. Can anyone tell me what actually happened and in what way it broke the rules of the "social bubble"? From the only photo that appears to be circulating, the players were sitting in a pub at a pre-booked (I'm guessing, given pub capacities) table in a group larger than that allowed for the general public (which I assumed the social bubble dispensation allowed; they'd spent the entire day together on a fitba pitch after all). Can anyone say which rule was broken? Are you allowed to socialise with 10 others only on a fitba pitch? Not allowed in pubs? Is there any ambiguity at all over the rules? Has anyone seen a copy of the rules? Should I be reporting any footballer I see out in a restaurant on their own or with family? Should I report three fitba players in a pub together? What I find outrageous is that the leader of a country can give people a telling off like some over-bearing mother without actually making clear what rule has been broken, and that no "journalist" saw fit to ask. It will - definitely - result in footballers being harassed for being in public together despite being within the rules. Feel free to disagree, of course, but if you're going to then tell me exactly what the rules of the social bubble are and exactly which rule they've broken. If anyone has any evidence of players partying until 3am, with their arms round the general public whilst off their tits, then please share. Something that would take a minor infringement, perhaps even misunderstanding of the rules, to a real offence deserving of the level of outrage. Again, I'm not saying they didn't make a mistake, I'm just questioning the gravity and the disproportionate outrage (if 5 Hibs players did the same in Edinburgh at the weekend, they'd have been fine because there wasn't a covid outbreak there, for example).

Lads in their 20s and early 30s have a quiet pint/juice/whatever together and unfortunately pick up a deadly virus. They're nae premiership superstars who need their every single move scrutinised to within an inch. Just a case of wrong place, wrong time. I expect it'll be the same for a lot of folk. I went for a round of golf at one of the infected golf courses. Had it been a few days later I could have been down with the vid too. If I'd been 20, I'd have had it 48 times by now. Hopefully it'll allow us and other clubs to implement a better set of rules for their players going forward. Live and learn etc.