RicoS321

I thought McLean was our best player. Only one looking for the ball, and had some great runs. I don't imagine Christie will get much more of a run out on that form. Anyway, we rode our luck a bit recently and were bound to lose soon. Straight back on it on Sunday I reckon.

Yass min. I have all those things. I might whap a few of them up the nicht.

Aye, but, the recipe?

Rather than ask who the fuck this cunt is, I decided a quick look on the internet wid tell me. Where does it tell ye who the ref is going to be? I can't find it on any of the usual websites (SPFL, AFC, AFC Heritage, BBC or BT sport). Is it McLean?

Thon looks good. Have you a recipe for such things? I'm shite at cake-baking (I do good baguettes, naan, wraps etc).

Me too, we could move the stadium there.

McGhee sacked?

Aye, I'd very much go with this. Khan's comments didn't apply to me, despite being an independence supporter, because I'm not a nationalist. Nationalism to me is about fitba, rugby and a couple of other sports - otherwise it's an arbitrary line drawn by angry cunts a few hunner years ago. The SNP are right on the border of being nationalists for the sake of nationalism and have got worse since the independence vote and Brexit. It remains to be seen whether or not that is a good tactic that will assist in winning a referendum - my opinion is that it could backfire. Independence, to me, was about understanding that Westminster is not fit for purpose, that it never will be and that people in England - and very much including London - will never break the two party suffocation of democracy. The difference between London and Scotland is that London hugely benefits from Westminster and the fact that it resides in the city, so they can (and have) never looked at it objectively. As for Sadiq Khan's comments, who gives a fuck? The notion that in the 21st century, cities need a mayor or any other single figurehead is fucking ridiculous. He's just a mannie. He's not going to make London better or worse or make Britain a better place. The sooner we realise that we don't need these people the better. It starts by not hanging on their every word. Just ignore the cunt.

I'd like Hertz to finish above der hun. They'll never catch us, so a better manager would be no bad thing. Was hoping that both them and Saints wid win at the weekend to put the pressure on the cunts. In other news, the crab moves to favourite for the hun job. Would be hilarious.

Things are getting pretty slack around here these days (Manc, I'm looking at you). Thoughts on team for tomorrow? We're starting to rely on the subs a bit too much, suggesting that perhaps some of the first teamers need a wee break. I understand the desire not to change a winning team, but I think that has to be balanced out slightly with player fitness and just avoiding going a bit stale. The signs are there that we're heading for a slip up (I dinna mean a thrashing, just losing a couple of points or something). I actually think Storey may be of some use on the quick surface tomorrow so I'd maybe gie him a shot. Although that wid be tempered by the fact that if he does play McInnes will shift Rooney into a wide role making a good case for burning our eyes out. Anyway, oot, TV etc.

That's very harsh. Considine's biggest problem when he was younger was that he was easily knocked off the ball. He's sorted that out by coming to meet the ball and giving attackers no space. He's the best footballing defender at the club, has a good touch and isn't frightened to take the ball under pressure. A much better football player than folk give him credit for. Better on the ball than a lot of midfielders we've had in recent years.

Not a great game, but a good result. Interesting McInnes mentioned the pitch, it doesn't look great. I'd have thought that a shitey pitch is exactly the reason we'd have Stockley, but I'm guessing he was injured today? Anyway, Storey played the Magennis role well when he came on. 100 mile an hour harassing the defence. Rooney got lucky with the goal, and indeed was lucky to stay on for the whole game. Jack good, Shinnie a bit off the pace, and I thought Hayes looked like he needed a rest. Logan got forward well enough today but the final ball wasn't there. Overall, they were probably unlucky not to get a draw. Ref wasn't too bad, couple of poor decisions but nothing major.

Me. Agreed. Not sure about the inclusion of Quinn, probably should have killed the character off I reckon. Also, they really screwed up with the female president. Looks like they just assumed - like the rest of us probably - that Hillary would win and only wrote one version. It prides itself on its relevance, and they jumped the gun a bit. They could have had much more fun, and a far better series if they'd waited on the election outcome.

Aye, it's nuts. It's identity politics all the way now, with very little way back. Unfortunately Corbyn loses in this regard very time because of the tabloid shite. Of course, there could be some sort of UTG type local reasoning too I suppose that we're not party too, which is fair doos. I don't believe the Labour party has a viable future. I hope the people of Scotland are paying attention. Independence is the only remaining route of opposition.

How many teams played in this game?

Surely that should be a police matter too (if it's not - as is likely - horse shite)? It could be part of a 20+ year conspiracy, featuring several other red-herring stadium proposals, where Stewarty and McIntosh have colluded to cover up asbestos dumping with the final part of the jigsaw being to cover the entire thing up (literally) with a fitba grun. It'll come to light after Johnny Hayes collapses on a training pitch as his lungs give-way after two years of belting up and down on top of a pile of ancient asbestos. Think of all the hooligans that could get poisoned on their way to the game after shiteing in a local gairden.

Unfortunately, exercise winna mitigate the effects of the sugar. Indeed, the spazzy fad diets and gym classes have just deliberately added to the confusion. Really you (edit: I dinna mean you specifically; you in general) should be establishing a baseline diet that doesn't change (I don't mean the foods don't change, I mean the amount and regularity), then just eating an additional banana or whatever to fuel you for exercise. The whole "I must go to the gym because I've eaten x,y,z" approach to lifestyle is ruining us as it doesn't tackle the underlying issue, but it seems to be regularly advocated by pseudo-experts that make money from the game. Eating a shite load of sweets isn't good for you, full-stop, the same effects still occur in your body. That you mitigate the weight gain with exercise is nae really here nor there and when that exercise inevitably tails off (as you get older, injury or whatever) then you haven't adapted yer lifestyle to suit. It's a subtle nuance perhaps, but I got injured a year ago and haven't put on any weight because I just ate a banana before playing fitba and then stopped eating that banana when I got injured (I have experienced a serious build up of bananas however). I still enjoy a sweet and so forth, but I generally find most chocolate bars a bit bland these days, mainly because I've developed a decent palate through years of cooking. They're so heavily filled with sugar its boring. I like a home-bake like, that's mair up my street. On a societal level, we need to do a lot more. We've developed a system whereby the accepted normal (and it's ridiculous to even think about this) is for a country full of fat people to be tricked into purchasing stuff that they don't need and in some cases is actively killing them. It's really, really fucked up. Nutrition and cooking should be taught in every school from a very young age and to a high level. It's ridiculous that the basic skills needed to survive (and be healthy) are lacking from the vast majority of school leavers and a whole generation of adults can't feed themselves or their kids appropriately. Supermarkets are generally to blame.

That's the interesting question in all of this. The problem is a huge lack of alternative. Arguably Sanders was an option, but he would really have struggled to break through the system and his values would have been watered down to a terrible compromise that would have resulted in failure. The right wing press would have been all over him. A quick look at Corbyn confirms this. I think we're at the stage where the system (capitalism) is failing. I think that over the next 10-15 years there will be a lot of fighting as things break down entirely and it'll be an ugly transition. What we are missing is a viable alternative that is radical, progressive and workable. I think that with Trump there, things will break down much quicker and much more obviously. Hopefully this will provide the space for new alternatives to crop up and be more widely listened to. 4 - 8 years of Clinton would have seen things be reasonably stable, with little changing. We would have slowly progressed toward increasing unemployment, continued ignorance of technological advancement, continued creep toward catastrophic environmental collapse. All the while keeping the mouths of the plebiscite slightly above water, depressed and economically precarious. We would have then looked to a Trump character to fight the establishment etc etc. I think it's good that Trump is in charge, I think we need a complete break down of the system, with the general public taking a good - but non-fatal - kicking in the process so that we can begin the huge re-building process that is required to take us forward. I think Trump is a necessary evil, if only to prove to his supporters that they are completely and utterly wrong. I don't think he'll pave the way for Hillary/Obama 2, I hope he'll make space for completely new ideas.

To be fair, he read it on AFC Chat.

Absolutely, yer right. I just think that we've left several avenues for genuine objection open that would have been easy to close off, make little difference to the overall cost and make it look even more like the club are trying to accommodate the locals. I'm probably being harsh.

He didn't say he wasn't a hun, just said he wasn't a Rangers man. There's a distinct difference.

Aye, so it was, my apologies. Do you ging to Oxford games? Is their ground part of the city? Or an out-of-town shopping precinct?

It's not whether they want to, is whether they should have to. It's a valid objection, but it shouldn't be something that affects the decision (yes or no), it should just be a caveat of the application to create a suitable alternative for cyclists on match days. I couldn't give a fuck about the cycle route myself, I just don't get the need to be snide about genuine objections. It doesn't do the pro-stadium side any favours, in the same way as citing ridiculous objections about hooliganism and so forth doesn't do the anti-stadium side any favours - both are as pathetic as each other.

Not read this, but the reviews on Amazon are fantastic https://www.amazon.co.uk/Natural-Harvest-collection-semen-based-Photenhauer/dp/B01LPECGUQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1487242898&sr=8-2&keywords=natural+harvest+a+collection+of+semen-based+recipes

When did he leave the set up?