Tannadeechee

That'll be another name on the list!

Fantastic 3pts! Defintely improved from 25 minutes or so. Should have been 2, cracking shot from Powers. Very happy with that, 4 pts from first two games. Robson, Harkes played well. Appere did very well in a thankless task with not too much support, although he wasn't as isolated in the 2nd half. Defensively we didn't look too bad today. Bolton showed promise, an assist, a chance he should have scored and a couple of decent runs.

And relax...

Get in, Reynolds!!

Forgot about Robson. A few dodgy moments going forward, but defensively seems to have been fairly solid, a few good tackles.

First half over. Thoughts so far, Harkes again seems to be standing out, seems to be everywhere. Bolton looks promising, had a couple of decent runs and that good chance that really should have put away. Appere is running about and harrying but is really isolated. Needs help, Harkes seems to be trying but others need to help. One thing I've noticed again, other than the punts, is the number of "difficult" balls being played rather than then far, far easier passes that are on. Has the pitch been heavily watered? Seen a number of passes skipping on to far & later on players looking like they have been under hitting balls to avoid this. We seem to improve as the game went on. Hopefully keeps going in the second half. Certainly wouldn't be disappointed with an away point here

I'm the opposite, absolutely no sound on the away streams. Not too fussed about commentary, but pitched side sound would be nice.

FFS! how long are we going to continue giving the ball to a centre half to punt it up the park and see it instantly returned via an attack by the opposition!. Its almost every time! Got fed up with this last season.

Same for me on "Away team" stream

We don't need to. Nothing wrong was carried out by having discussions. Please read Companies Act (Scotland). Please look into how shareholder etc votes are carried out. The type of thing any member of a club board that has any experience in the corporate world know. Or vote taken, 28 days to give vote. Vote "yes" can't be changed. Vote "no" discussions are allowed to see if any objections can be overcome.

Good to know you admit your team was so shite last season you didn't have any proper defenders. He did after all score against Hearts in League Cup & Hibs in the Scottish Cup last season.

When it was first rumoured to be purple I was definitely in the "no, no and thrice no" camp. Having seen it, although it still has that shit neck, I like it. It's a football strip, it's not something to wear as normal clothes. As a strip I think it's good, might even fork out for it. Now if had been a purple '94 style strip...

I think it's been shown, not sure if 100% though that Murray's Rangers spend was pretty much financed by the banks and he never actually had to spend a penny himself. Plus all the Ibrox metalwork came from his company too. Nice way of doing it if you can get away with it.

Yup, account set up and pass bought. Interesting it has a "away team video" and "home team video" option. Would this mean United's commentary team on away feed?

Far,far longer than that. The last specific deal I can remember though was Chris Erskine. He had that out there days before anyone else. It's not just a "pal of Asghar thing".

Fixed that for you

OK, so what you want is Failure in the league still being able to beat a team that finished ,say for argument, 10 points clear in a one off game and get promotion. To me that's just meaningful for the sake of making things meaningful. That team weren't good.enough, otherwise what's the point of the league? And an team that's done enough under normal circumstances being safe having to go down due to having to have a "double jeopardy" type arrangement etc. Not in favour of play offs like that and not in favour of convoluted forced "meaningful". If ever some absolute crap like Belgium is ever seriously considered than I'm done! Meaningful games do matter as it has been shown that games with nothing to play for mean less hospitality, less pay at the gate, it was one of the reasons along with less money from league for teams saying no to 14 during the Hearts laugh in. While its still a game & with no pressure allows experimentation and youth to play, it can have downsides too. I don't think every game needs to be meaningful, but we do have to be Mindful of the Scottish fans who do not turn out for non games. The point is relevant as the original poster I replied to made sod all reference to league format and asked a simple "why does bigger league mean more meaningless games". Simply answered. If they had given an example of an over.complicated, convoluted league format because we're so 2020, then I could have answered differently.

2008 they wanted a 5% cut of away ticket sales as they were upset that they didn't make any money from the admin and sales of those tickets. I remember Eddie Thomson felt he had no choice but to agree due to the short notice Celtic gave the club after Celtic said they would refuse any tickets. Should have called their bluff in my opinion. Not like they are short of a bob or two.

If this is in reference to me,.it WAS entirely relevant as a poster had asked how could more teams mean more meaningless games. After all the poster was probably younger than me (I was born the year the 10 team league came in) and has.no clue of that. If you go back again will.ypu just repeat the same issues again. I for one would like a 16 minimum league playing home and away, no poxy split, and the only playoffs would be 3rd bottom v 3rd top type deals. If 3 go up or down and you finish outside of top 3 then tough your shite and not good enough to go up there were plenty of games to prove other wise & you didn't make it! Playing only twice stops the big two being able to stretch away in my view. It will never happen though, and we all know why, so to avoid saying again and upsetting you I'll not bother.

See Scottish football before 1975. There were many, many meaningless games. Much like the English Premiership with teams playing out their games just for pride. It was for this reason the 75-76 season moved to a 10 team league. This was due to crowds falling due to the number of meaningless games. It was felt that 10 teams with 2 being relegated kept the excitement going as teams would always be within European contention or fighting relegation if not going for the title. It did that until the shared gates were stopped and the rest is history.

And a lot of traditional Scottish rugby teams are on their knees because of it, grass roots is not a very "happy place". For me any move to this would be the death knell of Scottish football. Not a fan of cross border leagues, as to be fair it's nothing to do with football, but driven by a desire for TV money and armchair viewers for the TV companies. Due to Scotland having, to be fair, such a strong league in terms of the number of folk that go to see it, would that actually help or would playing teams that are part-time drop the Scottish "quality" and therefore fans and viewers once the novelty wore off and the reality hit. The Scottish leagues left behind would drop in comparison and in my view this would be detrimental to Scottish football and would confirm to the world we'd given up.

How does bringing more teams in and dropping the money teams get going to help? In your idea the premiership, if top 6 is exactly the same as now. So how does that help? The 14 team premiership was voted down by clubs as they feared in bottom 8 there would be too many meaningless games and £350000 minimum drop in budget? We have teams in our top league that get paid almost less than a referee does! The top 2 can bring in a decent player of similar standing if they get an injury. Many others can't and it's youth or obviously a reserve player. That isn't going to change. Commercially they can bring in so much more money. We know that money doesn't equal talent, but the minute another team challenges out come the "chequebooks" . Even if the clubs do have ambition, the prospect of a more secure footing will win out.

Past teams weren't all up against a team with 17 and, is it,10-15 times the budget of the best of the rest. They weren't competing with an English based TV company punting over a £ billion a year into 20 clubs. We didn't have the European competitions being deliberately changed to try and keep the same (boring) teams every year to make then richer and to (wrongly) give the public what they want big names on TV every other week. There are far more leagues now that eastern Europe has splintered. More teams less space. We also seem to be frightened of playing our normal game in Europe and many times teams change tactics to play "European" , unfamiliar to the players, but very familiar to the opposition. Had my head in my hands a few times at teams doing that. The money coming in is small, it doesn't help. I've, over a number of years, lost all interest in European competitions, they have been ruined and "rigged". The national team have been punching below the talent for a few years for me. Too much obsession with Scottish grandparents of diddies playing in England. We're not going to win any tournament, but again like European competitions there are more teams chasing places so it is more difficult to qualify. I just wish we'd get rid of the split personality of, we are shit and a joke & taking to the field in a defeatist manner and the other side of we should be beating <insert country name> by 3 or 4.

So can you tell me how having the same teams with less budget will make a difference to that? And on your initial plans, am I out of touch? I have always hated the English playoff system and don't like ours. To me if you weren't good enough over 36 games to go up then you aren't good enough. If you finish 4,5 or 6 then feck off,.should have been better over the games in the season. One more thing, can the next twat that comes on here get an instant ban for using the pish "laughing stock" to describe Scottish football. I'm fucking sick of it. Don't like it, then bugger off and don't watch it. I take it that those that call it that have absolutely no knowledge of world football. Far worse laughing stocks out there. We do have problems yes but a laughing stock it isn't. Would be improved if we played the best players on form in National team though. If you only talk about a blinkered view of how shit everything is then don't be surprised if eventually everyone thinks that way too.

If that article is true then good grief, Hearts and Thistle really are at it. I particularly like the part that said if they hadn't forced it to arbitration, then it would all have been in the public domain in court. Sorry, we really are STILL going down the route of having a go at SPFL for going by the rules all clubs signed up to?? This smacks purely of trying to keep the narrative going of them being put upon.