RicoS321

Yep, he was rank in that game. Before January I was certain we should be shipping him ASAP, it was like he was disinterested, and made lots of errors. A few games at pittodrie where he really did assert himself and take a hold of the game and I thought he'd maybe turned it round. Then the game against the huns this season where he's back to square one. He's capable, I think, but I'm not sure we'll see it again. Expensive mistake if so.

But that wasn't the Ojo we saw from January to March though. He was the worst player on the park against the hun, and I thought the same in the European games last season, but he had a good run of 8-9 games where he was showing for the ball and getting stuck in post January. I'm not sure twitter is the best medium for analysis, but a fair effort.

Yep, he had a great final appearance last season, I was basing it on the fact that he didn't feature in the Huns game and Campbell came on, but I'm guessing that was because of injury. I didn't think he was as good an all round player as Shinnie. Better on the ball, maybe, but not as involved. Jack Ross couldn't get the best out of him at Sunderland, and I'd say that his purple patch at Hibs has been the anomaly in his career to date. Again, hope he proves me wrong etc etc. You should also be aware that I didn't want him here in the first place (too many midfielders) and so am probably a little blinded by that.

I'd say that it's fairly obvious. Reason is that I'd like us to offload before we take in players - but I accept that is difficult and McRorie was available right now. The reason I'd prefer it this way round is that I think that having too many players competing for so few positions will have a negative impact. I see guys like McGeouch, Bryson, Gleeson previously, as detrimental even being there. Any minutes they get in an attempt to make them feel happy are wasted minutes, that should have been given to a young player. If guys like Campbell and Virtanen can't see a clear path to a regular first team spot (I think Campbell probably can now) then it is unnecessarily de-motivating. McInnes is quite good at getting rid of players he's signed, but if often takes him a long time (Gleeson, Main, May), because nae cunt wants them. We need to limit squad size and have a better/enforced balance of youth. Happy with the signing if it's swiftly followed by exits. I'd agree about McRorie being an investment, but then so was Ojo. Ojo didn't look match-sharp against the Hun, but there were some good performances last season.

Is there still an issue up here? It seems to have been drowned out by the even more spectacular fuck ups doon Sooth.

No fee, he's just there to help them with a door that's jammed.

Good stuff, welcome aboard etc. According to that article, we're still on the look out for a striker, so fair enough. As Panda says, he scored against us previously, which is why McInnes is signing him, as that's how he decides all his transfers (one good game against us is all it takes to become a dandy). I think he'll be a very good addition. Although if anyone can pick our midfield for the next game, they'll get a virtual pint. I reckon it'll be McRorie sitting behind Ferguson and Campbell. The annoying thing is that we really only need that type of sitting midfielder against the scum, and he won't be able to play in 50% of those this season, I'd like to see McGeouch moved on in the meantime, I think there's a strong chance that Campbell's game time will be limited again by a surplus of "talent" in the midfield, for no apparent reason.

It's fairly standard in most industries. Just as if you went into yer work's office with Covid and passed it to some ithers and they found out that you'd been to for a meal with yer mates and caught it, it very much widnae be a sackable offence.

Reading it back, you're correct. I clearly didn't make it past the "bankrupting the club" pish. Apologies Ayrshire, you're correct, we've made a loss in the transfer market.

Interesting if true. "Cormack wants some shipped out asap" is a bit worrying though. The tims were really lucky that it was one of their gash players, so they can ditch him and make it look like they're taking a tough stance (although they didn't ditch the racist, so who knows). The dons can't really ditch the shite ones and keep the good ones and still look professional! The club needs to come out and say exactly what happened with the rule breaking. There's a definitely a cut off between where the players have fucked up and the club have fucked up. If I were a player, I'd be unhappy with paying a fine too. There's a statutory fine already for people who break the 4 household rule, which they should pay. If I were someone like Bryson or Hayes who'd already had a good career, I'd walk away from the game. Fuck being treated like you're somebody's possession and subject to a witch hunt for a minor offence. They don't get paid enough for that shit, we're nae premiership.

No it isn't. The initial thread was about his legacy, not performance in the transfer market. If he's changed the subject halfway through, then I'm in complete agreement that McInnes has been poor in the transfer market. Nobody ever stated otherwise.

The club has made a profit overall in the years McInnes has been here. It doesn't matter if players signed > players sold. If you were to include that, then you'd also have to conclude that the squad value is significantly higher than when he joined too. If we'd sold Cosgrove, McKenna and Ferguson at the start of the window, we'd have likely hit 8 figures. Nothing close to that occurred under Brown (maybe Fraser, if handled correctly). I think his signings have been way under par, and I've mentioned it a thousand times, but his financial legacy is fine because our results have been good (performances, not so much). What would make his financial legacy tank, is if we made the stupid decision to pay him off this season before crowds return. It'd be whooring expensive. That's the club's legacy though, as is allowing McInnes complete control over the football budget.

The club is either bankrupt or it isn't. You can't "further" bankrupt it. Both are in the final year of their contracts, we'll likely end up paying them a small amount to top up a salary they get elsewhere (i.e. gardening leave). There was no real evidence that Bryson would fail the way he did, he had a minor injury when signed which wasn't the reason Derby were letting him go. Devlin was exceptionally high risk. I was surprised when I first saw him at how poor he was on the ball. He shouldn't have been signed on that basis rather than his medical history. The comparison would be Hoban. It's clear he can defend and also comfortable with the ball at his feet, so worth the six month deal. I'm actually not that concerned by the injured players, more the sheer volume of unsuccessful signings in general. Leigh, Ojo maybe, were successful last season, with the jury still out on Kennedy and Hernandez. I think it's been a bit of a blessing that we can't afford to sign anyone this summer.

He'd probably be classed as a more traditional defensive midfielder, so maybe a bit like when Ball or Hobban played there (but better). The sort of guy you'd see in a 4-1-4-1, rather than a 4-2-3-1 if you like. Unless he can play right back well of course, as I still think Hernandez is high risk and could turn out to be shite. Either way, it's nae a striker, which is really our requirement right now.

Edit: Of course, we don't really need him, but then that's the way we work it seems and until there is pressure at board level, it's difficult to see it ending. I always thought his best position was in front of the defence, with a particular focus on tackling (as opposed to say Ojo or McGeouch who are ball carrying types). That would be particularly useful in games against the hun or tim and it could allow us to play with a more attacking midfield overall by playing perhaps McGinn centrally and have Ferguson play higher. However, unless we offload at least one other midfielder, we're ridiculously heavy in that area. Strikes me as a "he's available, we better make sure nobody else gets him", McGeouch type signing.

I think he's a great player. I'm surprised the huns haven't made more out of him. I'm pretty uncomfortable loaning from the huns (although Andrea Velicka was a fantastic bit of business) but that's slightly alleviated by the agreed fee. Or.... perhaps if we injure him in training and send him back and ask for another player, continuing the process until all their players are either injured or dead. Then Hibs might manage to finish second.

Sounds about right. Boring probably a good way to describe it. Reminds me a lot of East Aberdeenshire, which was indicative of its surroundings. Some cunt at portlethen tried to enforce the "collar" rule when I was there, that put me massively off. Will maybe try it again sometime, but I'll maybe get some practice in first.

Aye, a weird thing titles, more so those that use them on themselves. Fit's your thoughts on portlethen course? I hate it, find it very dull and the dual carriageway close by just grates. Then I'm fairly pish at golf which likely doesn't help and I found the rough used to be a little too unforgiving for someone who thinks using the fairways is cheating. It plays quite long when yer hacking about.

I made a fine sourdough yesterday (one for the other thread perhaps). Will make for great toast for today's lunch. I have to admit, I'm a decent cook, but I really struggle with ideas for lunches as someone who grew up on sandwiches. I make wraps most days (proper send, fae scratch) or flatbreads which allow for a broader variety of ingredients than her sandwich, but it's still a variant of the sandwich in effect. I should really consider swapping my big and little meals roon and make more effort at lunch, like they do on the continent.

It's military pish. A day set aside for playing at sudjers. Not sure how it translates to its modern day equivalent. I'm guessing it'd be like a day free of consequences perhaps?

Nice one, thanks. I'll check out A M Smith like. I like the sleepers for convenience, but reckon the wife would prefer the steens, as they do look cracking. Probably a similar size bed in my garden like, although we've got a fairly big front garden too if I ever get round to it. I'll likely start and give up half way!

Stunning garden Elgin, love to do similar masel. Far did you get her steens? Did you build the dyke yersel and how much earth did you need for the borders? I've just got a shit ton of bland grass, and I really need to dig up at least a third of it for planting. I like the wall idea, as it'd save digging up grass, o could just earth over it.

Fuck that. Why would we let the best manager we've had in 25 years, with 2 years left on his contract, go for less than £6M?

Yep, very reasonable, it's a shame we only ever get half the story. I think I remember reading it was one or two days to get tests back. Remember, Hibs didn't get tests returned in time for a pre-season game to go ahead? In retrospect, I think you're right, perhaps 4 game ban wouldn't be that unreasonable because if the games hadn't been cancelled then that's the number of games they could have missed (3 in the dons case, but there are some 14 day periods that have 4 matches). Hopefully they'll sort out the time it takes for future offences as, had the games gone ahead then the players could have faced missing 7 matches in total which would seem mental. You'd think that the rules would have been drilled into the players, but that clearly wasn't the case at AFC, given Johnny Hayes explanation. You wonder if the testing part and match day and training protocols have been drilled in, but they didn't pay much attention to the out of office guidelines, which would be basically the same for all of us. They'll definitely be aware of them now.

He's reassuring, without actually saying anything reassuring. I don't trust him. Seemed to quickly turn into a politician when asked difficult questions on the radio a few months back. He suffers from the same issue as most in that the questions he gets asked are shite, so he doesn't have to answer with any particular insight, which is not his fault at all of course. In the Aberdeen case, I've heard both him state that the rules were clear, but not once has either fully articulated those rules and how they were broken. Nor were they asked to, of course. The questions I'd like him to respond to: Which rules were broken? What caused the cancellation of the games? What would be different in genuine cases of covid that were not detected until after training had resumed that week (say Thursday)?