forameus

I'm not sure what's sadder - chattering away about how you're going to ignore someone, like it's some kind of weapon that'll make the opposite party quake in their boots, or saying it when you clearly have no intention to do it. Little from column A, little from column B probably. Still, it's fun to watch him completely unravel like this. Ronaldinho was older than I thought he was when he really chucked it. Still the biggest shame though. Adriano was a great player, but nowhere near the league of Ronaldinho in terms of pure talent. I'd lump Robinho into that list too Not sure what any of this has got to with Messi though, and I think I'd cry if I have to go back through Pep's posts to work out where it came from.

I really want to play it again too, but for all the time I get to play now, and a baby on the way in late April, there's no way I'll have the time to really batter through it properly. Maybe one day.

A quick "aye, fair enough" would've done. Or not saying silly things, then not throwing everything out the pram - toys and all - when someone calls you on it. Think you'll manage to make that ignore stick this time, champ?

What, like Roberto Carlos (33 on his last cap), Taffarel (32) and Lucio (also 33)? Even everyone's favourite plus-sized model Ronaldo was appearing in his early thirties. Or would you prefer more recent options, like 33 year old Dani Alves? He's really tailed off, only making 12 appearances last year for Brazil, 48 for Barcelona (over the traditional season) then had the temerity to piss off to that old retirement league Serie A. Clearly done. What you probably should have said is something along the lines of some Brazilian players wasting their talent and tailing off earlier than they should have. It's hardly "typical".

Would be disappointing if they just have Ambrose keep it, then Miz wins it back at the Rumble. Smackdown doesn't need to go down the route of having that title hot potato like the women's title. I guess they could do an abeyance story, taking it away from both and having them fight for it properly with a stipulation at the Rumble. Give it to Ambrose long-term though, put Miz up to the main event scene. Given they like to do holdover feuds between the Rumble and WM, I'd like to see Miz facing whoever is champion at whatever Smackdown's PPV in February/March is.

To be fair though, if you put the teams that qualified for European competition in England last season in a league filled with Scottish teams, they'd still be a "top" league going purely by league coefficient, because (I think) it's all down to how you do in Europe. Just because Portugal is 6th doesn't mean that the quality will be uniformly high throughout. Of course I could be talking shite, as I've not really watched any games to judge the quality

You'll ignore me? Pep..pep, come on...please don't do that. I don't know what I'll do if you do that. What a sad, sad man you are.

You implied that if players played 20 games for an international side, they'll become better without question. Thistle players aren't good enough to play for Scotland, but if we're living in your wee fantasy world then I'd like them to play for Scotland so that they can improve like this. It's not really that hard to understand.

Aye, nae bother. Let's just cap loads of Thistle players. Doesn't matter that they're not good enough, they're young enough, so obviously playing twenty games for Scotland will automatically make them better. Win win.

Apart from losing more games, spiralling down the pots, and ruining young players confidence because they've been thrown in before they're ready? There's always something to lose unless you're San Marino or Gibraltar. I guarantee that should we get beat by Slovenia, then decide to do what you say against England, then subsequently lose and convincingly so, those young players will join everyone else in the same boat - HMS Shithouse. They'll get absolutely castigated. Once they're ready, they'll be in the squad, got no doubt about that. Burke is further forward than the other two - as evidenced by the fact he was plucked straight from the U19s - so will be a regular fairly soon. Gauld doesn't look ready, and is hardly lighting up the U21 side, so why should we just throw them into the main side? What does it really achieve other than the hollow "fro the yoofs in" shouts? Wait til they're ready, then it benefits everyone.

This. Seriously, is there anyone here that would see that as a good thing and attend regularly?

I pulled up the live text from BBC when I got in to check the score. First thing I saw was "Azeez should have done better with that chance". Standard.

Jericho will win it I think, going up against Owens at WM. Rollins will be eliminated by HHH - because why have him do something good at the Rumble when you can have him flounder til WM - Lesnar and Goldberg will eliminate each other, don't think Balor will be quite ready. And I think it'll be a RAW winner to free up whoever beats Styles at the Rumble (Taker please) to be fed to Cena for the Flair-tie. Am I the only one really not excited by the prospect of Jericho winning and going onto WM if it happens?

I quite liked 2016 actually from memory. It was pretty obvious in the main, but they did have me going a few times in the final few minutes. Assumed Reigns would be in the final two, and there were a few near eliminations for HHH before the eventual finish. Might've been just by how bad the previous year's one was. 2014 was pretty bad, but it only really derailed when Mysterio came out. The crowd shat all over that, then ironically cheered for Reigns to beat Batista. In 2015 it was just booked dreadfully from start to finish

I watched 2015's a wee while back. Ooft...absolutely horrible. I've never seen one so horribly, spitefully booked.

I wouldn't say that's strictly true. The SFA is hardly the shining example, but the clubs don't listen because it's not in their interest to. The way the organisation is, they don't have to. They'll send in Malky Mackay to try and carry forward proposals, but they'll probably be well within their rights to say "who cares?" Does it really affect clubs massively if the national team is successful? Obviously it's going to long-term, but it's like sending him in to say that if they do X then he'll say it's very likely you'll get Y money in the future. The clubs know they can get Z money by just looking after their own interests, so why should they go along with the SFA, given they have a choice? I don't think they should have a choice though. The SFA should be the governing body dictating to the clubs. By all means the clubs have their say in how the game is run, but the main national governing body should always be above all.

This is a good point. In an ideal world, you'd think that the National governing body would be able to go to the clubs and tell them what they were going to do, but unfortunately it's the other way around. Wouldn't agree on the last part though. We're not going to spiral down the rankings. We're likely to fall slightly further, then probably rise, then fall, then rise. It's cyclical. It's also not totally relevant - at this stage at least - to Malky Mackay. If we keep the status quo, we're likely to produce players good enough to maybe push us close to qualifying sometimes. Pretty much the definition of a mid-to-low pot 3, or at worst pot 4 team. I don't think his actions would see us fall in the rankings consistently, at least in the short term (or any term, as I doubt he'll be there for long enough to be directly responsible).

I'd forgotten about that - yeah, I'd be surprised if Harper wasn't in there. If they do a tag team one, then obviously Wyatt/Orton, they'll at least have a title match I would've thought.

Makes sense from a timing perspective given that RAW had the last brand-specific one, but EC should really be for RAW. Not because they'd do it any better - Smackdown have got that covered - but just with sheer numbers. I'd imagine they'd put the main title in there, so you've pretty much got every major roster member in the chamber. Styles/Ambrose/Corbin/Cena/Ziggler/Miz? Or if Miz is still champion they'll probably have him go up against Corbin, so sub in Ellsworth (because of course they will) and one other. It's going to be a pretty bare show.

They did, but brought it back for a weird house show/PPV thing last year. Seems to be back on the calendar for now, just not sure which side it's falling on yet. Smackdown got TLC, so RAW are due a gimmick one. Which comes first, EC or Fastlane? If it's Fastlane then I'd imagine Smackdown would get that and RAW get EC.

It's like Sophie's Choice, only you hate both your kids.

That's...that's shit.

Meh, it's not that bad. Not that good either. At least it's something different to everything else, not that that's always a good thing EDIT: Actually, now that I'm seeing it bigger rather than on my phone (cheers RnY) I don't like it. I hate that sort of gradient between the yellow and red, would much rather have it as solid colour. Sides look a bit weird with their differences too. And could they not have given the shirt an iron?

This is actually quite interesting. Looking at the parts you've picked out, it reads very much like they're bringing someone in not to bring in fresh ideas and change things, but to implement whatever people tell him to. The bolded part is spot on. People will continue to be absolutely furious about it being Mackay on a personal level (he makes Trump look good, dontchaknow?) but leaving that and even the suitability for what we think the role will be, this isn't going to be him sitting in a role for a decade and bringing through a glistening plan for the ages. It's going to be him trying to sell the SFA's shit ideas to the clubs, probably failing, then being punted (or walking) in a couple of years to the sound of the media and everyone else wringing their hands and wondering where it all went wrong. I was thinking though. Why do we actually need someone high profile at all? Reading that job spec, there's not a whole lot of it that screams to me that they need an ex footballer. It even says that it isn't essential. For me, the performance director role should be about putting in a very high level plan that arches over all of Scottish football. That doesn't need to be Mackay and Regan in a room with a whiteboard firing their way through a crate of fags, it just needs to be someone switched on who has the knack for managing people and processes. Note, not managing footballers, because I don't think that should be in this guy's remit. He can put into practice a program that attracts the people that can coach and manage, it's up to the Director to coach and manage them as people. So basically, why do they need to get some high-profile (for so many reasons) guy in? A role like this should be as low-key as possible to give the guy the chance just to get in and put his plans into practice without the media - and some of the less realistic fans - analysing every single move and then greeting when we're not winning the World Cup two years later. Proper, well-thought-out plans in this sense are going to take 10-15 years to really bed in. Which brings it all right back to the problem - there is absolutely no chance that Malky Mackay will be anywhere near this role for that timeframe. He'll be gone in a few years for whatever reason.

That belt is fucking horrific.