RicoS321

The Virtues. Best thing I've seen on the telly in a long time.

I couldn't give a fuck about the name. In terms of the tournament setup, I've always preferred the knock out style unless it's a league format where everyone is invited (which it couldn't be at european level obviously) such as the League Cup here and is designed to help smaller teams by giving them bigger games. I think it's okay I suppose but - like the Europa league - the tournament design results in exponential rewards for reaching a particular level (the group stage) of that tournament rather than an incremental bonus per round like the Scottish Cup for instance. Yep, exactly as I suggested, not suggesting the CL is shite in terms of quality (obviously), but examples like yours above are what is critical. It basically underpins the entire thing. I'm pretty certain you don't need explaining as to how detrimental the CL is to football in this country for instance. I just choose not to separate the fitba from the political element of it so it doesn't interest me (not to the extent I would ignore it if it was on in the pub or whatever, but I wouldn't actively seek it out to watch). I don't believe that is the purpose of sport. From a "purity of football" perspective then obviously accumulating the best players in the world and playing them will result in the best football by-in-large. I think that there is far more to sport than that. Indeed, what makes the CL special from a footballing perspective is exactly what makes it so damaging for the sport in general. In much the same way as land and property accumulation does in every day society.

The remainder of his contract (3 years?) will be worth about £200K probably. Edit: apologies, miscalculated, probably £350K

I don't think he's worth it. He's in that middle region that makes him not really suited to the English game. Not as strong as a Stockley type, not as mobile as a Magennis type and not good enough to play high end championship where his attributes (at a better level) might suit. He's not as good as likes of Steven Fletcher for example. That said, he has the potential to get there and could probably get to the level of a Steven McLean or Lee Miller in their prime. Despite the fact that he scored 20 goals this season, I don't really see him as a finisher. He doesn't ping the ball, he uses more of a swinging leg approach, which makes him that little bit slow to be a poacher. Transfermarkt has him valued at £225K, I would think that somewhere in the region of £500K with some well structured add-ons would be appropriate given length of contract. He could end up earning us close to £1M but I don't see any clubs risking that sort of straight outlay on him at the moment. He's a hard worker, and with a bit more intelligence and maturity he could easily increase his value again this season.

I don't think Main is that bad, he's probably an upgrade on May. But we now have to actually get rid of May. Otherwise you're right, we've got a shite load of squad players. I appreciate that players come available at different times and that you have to get fall-back options, but I assumed we'd be signing our main (excuse the pun) targets first and that if they turned out to be shite we could then go for the guys we've signed.

Has anyone ever argued that the standard of football in the CL is shite? They're just individual games of fitba featuring the world's most expensive players, so games are equally as likely to be shite or good as any other level of fitba. I think most people have an issue with the tournament itself, the way it's setup etc. which fits nicely with the anti-English agenda, because it is largely similar. They don't like what it is rather than what it produces. I don't dislike a champions league game, I just dislike (or am not interested in) the tournament itself. Isn't that a pretty reasonable stance to take?

That's a bit of a stupidly general rule. The fact that Taylor returning isn't the issue, it's the fact that we know he's not that good. Considine is miles better than Ash with the ball at his feet. Devlin too, for that matter. That's the issue. With one right sided defender who is poor on the ball (Devlin), we needed a player who is far more comfortable on the ball than Taylor (Hoban-type). Devlin and Taylor are both uncomfortable on their strong foot, so to consider a partnership of the two of them with one playing on their wrong side is seriously playing to our weaknesses. I can only assume McKenna is staying and so Considine and him will cover left, and Taylor and Devlin right with little need for cross over.

For those that don't believe KFP.... https://www.afc.co.uk/2019/06/04/ashton-re-joins-the-dons/ Fuck sake dons.

McInnes Hedges his bets on Welsh wonderkid.

But it isn't the dream. Certainly not of the EU. If you read the article above by Rocket then you'd know that. Followed up by the Lisbon treaty and its surplus requirements. Did you complete ignore what happened to Greece? Stripped of everything, accused of being lazy, pension-dwelling scum. Public sector absolutely trashed. Then trashed again. All part of the globalist expansionist neo-liberal carve up. All because they lost the ability to produce the money required themselves. Only an utter moron would suggest a country join the Euro in its current form. It would either destroy the UK, or someone less well off would get destroyed on our behalf (more likely). It's an absolutely disgusting setup, and not even remotely like the USD. The US looks after its states. It recycles its surpluses. The EU is so far removed from that its unbelievable. The fact that you don't understand that, but advocate that position, is just blatant ignorance. A United States of Europe would be absolutely fine, but if you think that's what the EU is, was or will ever be then you're massively wrong.

Really? Diminishing from 16% in 2007 to 10% of world output in 2017 would suggest that Europe's steel industry is only heading in one direction too. The majors being owned by India and the like other than yer Germans.

Yep, I'm quite familiar with the story. I just don't perceive the EU to be any different than, let's say, the Blair government. Austerity is an EU project. Their surplus requirements constitutionally promoting that - something that should be decided democractically invoked in law to avoid being subjected to democracy. I'm in complete agreement that the Tory version of brexit (i.e. the only one on the table) is horrific. The only question for me is one that I can't answer. Given that we know that the EU is essentially a globalist, neo-liberal project of slightly less greed and ugliness than the UK (look at their fire-sale of Greece) that has almost zero chance of reform, do we kick the can down the road, or do we ditch the EU and hope for either independence or that the Torys implode and leave something better behind? The choice is fairly shite. That's about the crux of it for me like. Apart from putting it to the electorate. It should just form part of a party manifesto. We don't need referendums for constitutional arrangements. The tory cunts should have had it on their 2015 manifesto: "We will be banning foreigners, and in order to do so we will be leaving the EU - vote for us ye dicks". A referendum about EU membership is just fucking bizarre.

That doesn't really make sense as an answer to the questions I asked. We've barely got a steel industry as part of the EU and it's heading in one direction. Do you believe that remaining in the EU would improve our chances of growing our steel industry? If so, why has the opposite occurred?

He was pap. Very limited. A poor man's Scott Vernon.

Skills for what? All our shite is made in China, and most of that shite we don't need. What is it that we are missing (or is needed) in this country for which there is a skill shortage? Doctors perhaps? I certainly have had zero problems in getting tradesmen or mechanicing services; almost always a British person. What are the actual requirements in terms of skilled worker these days? It's certainly massively reduced. For example, if I'm making Ikea(esque) furniture for retail, then I don't need an army of joiners, I just need labourers to move shite from one CNC machine to the next and one skilled CNC contractor/consultant. If my electric car stops working, then I plug it into a computer to tell me it's fucked. Does anyone get their washing machine repaired or do they just buy a new one? If there is a skills vacuum then it's because there isn't a requirement for the skill. Beyond the hyper-specialist type roles that you mention, or the shifting of money from one account to another in the sudo-gambling financial industry, what are we missing? The EU is a globalist, expansionist organisation by design. It operates on the retarded constitutional surplus model. It is within that model that we've been afforded the opportunity to water down our skillset. For me, it doesn't really hold water that by staying in the EU we will rely less on imported skills, which seems to be what you're arguing for (or complaining about the lack of)? In fact, the overwhelming evidence - and the EU's trade, economic and monetary policy requirement and design - suggests that we will become less and less skilled. Surely a benefit, in your terms, to leaving the EU would be that it could force the UK to learn to feed/clothe/produce themselves (I don't think it would, but that's not the point, the point is that the status quo most certainly doesn't)?

There's a lot of potential in yer wingers fae down South like, so it's an interesting signing if it happens. It's entirely different down there if yer a McGinn style winger and those types often struggle to fit in due to the more physical approach. That said, if we're looking at Main and the like then he'll struggle to fit into that more direct approach too. The biggest concern is that, at 6ft1, he's going to be nowhere near tall enough to keep an Ash Taylor pass from going out of play.

He played a few games in the early season (St Mirren in the cup springs to mind) and I think may have even scored? Anyway, he got injured and hasn't returned. I suspect that's why the 1 year has been given as he missed a huge amount of the season and we'd like to give him a chance, which seems fair. I'm not convinced he'll make it, I didn't think he had the pace to play out wide and not the strength to play centrally, but hope I'm wrong. Interesting that GMS isn't in the list of departures. Could see him back in a dons strip next season? Could do a lot worse like, fantastic player on his day.

It's going to have to be some trick of architecture to make the new stadium in Aberdeen.

I don't think DM sees Considine as a left back anymore. Lowe was deliberately signed to strengthen that area leaving Considine as backup at the start of the season as it was obvious it was an issue. He clearly recognised it was an issue, and when Lowe was rumoured not to be returning in January he was touted as being in the market for immediate replacements.

We can't really afford squad signings before we make our actual signings though (unless it is on a one-in-one-out basis - May for Main). Squad signings should only happen after the proper signings or as a renewal of existing players' contracts. Take Taylor, there are only 3 options: 1. He's being signed as our first 11 right-sided defender, with existing players (Devlin) becoming a squad player 2. He's being signed as squad filler on top of existing players 3. He's being signed as squad filler to replace existing players and also supplemented by further signings in that position - thus we are building a big squad. If it's the first, then we're probably all in agreement that he isn't really an improvement on Devlin (when fit)? If it's the second then do we think that the Devlin/Taylor standard is good enough (given Devlin's form on return)? If it's the third option then shouldn't we be looking at a better standard with less filler? Or, shouldn't our filler be guys like Ball who could potentially cover a few positions (i.e. not Taylor)? Or do we need that level (pay level) of filler in defence specifically rather than better players elsewhere? To me, Taylor only fits in a scenario where we've attempted to sign a really good centre half and realised he's not that good so we just need a guy who we're certain is decentish as a safe signing because we know a lot about him already. Or, if we've got an agreement with a risky centre half signing like Hobban, who we know is good but might spend a chunk of the season injured. What am I missing?

Could you imagine the lift we'd get if the club announced that we were letting Gleeson go? They could bury the signings of Ash and Main in that news.

I have absolutely no idea like, but those were certainly my assumptions too.

You could be right, however the bit in bold was what I based my assumptions on. That he'd be far too expensive for a squad player. Put it this way, I think that we could get far cheaper squad players (like Devlin, who I expect would be on less than Taylor).

Taylor would not be a squad player, that's the issue.

I actually thought Main looked quite useful against us last time they played up here, having previously thought he was a lot worse. He wasn't the donkey I'd thought he was. That's not a compliment, just an observation, being "not as shite as I first though" shouldn't be our signing benchmark. We can't retain May and Main though, that would be mental. Taylor was strong/tall, a good tackler and his pace got him out of several of the problems he created. However, his Ifil-level of ball-kicking is a huge issue when we need our defenders to be taking the ball out of defence in the majority of our games. His positioning and general game-intelligence was seriously lacking. I don't think he offers anything we don't already have. Shug, for example, is a significantly better footballer as is Henry at the tim and the Livi boy that Hearts have signed. I'm not sure the purpose in this type of signing other than being a known quantity and so relatively low risk. Whether we like it or not, low risk is very important in this window because of the volume of transfers required (Main fits into this bracket too).