Raith Against The Machine

Please don't.

I don't know what you expect him to say at that point. "Yeah, we want to sack him, but we can't afford to." or "It'd only cost us buttons to bin him, but we're giving him some more time." The right line for that is definitely "It's not about finances - next question". For what it's worth, I agree entirely with the second part of your post. It's a little concerning if the manager genuinely doesn't have an initial target against which he's assessed, but I could understand if it's also just a case of not making it public.

I couldn't tell you if it's ever literally been the first minute, but there are players who've been booed/heckled when they've made their first mistake of a game over the past few weeks.

Of course it can.

If you're dissatisfied (and I can understand why I a lot of people are) then I'd strongly encourage you not to go. It's a much bigger statement than booing the team/board, which only has a negative affect on the team on the park.

Should we not wait to see what the board are saying first, no?

I have to apologise, I put that stuff in brackets almost entirely just to goad you. I'm afraid your (entirely rational) dislike of Davidson makes you very predictable! To say one thing in Davidson's favour, I think he won the Player's Player of the Year two or three years in a row, and he wasn't exactly playing out of his skin. I've always thought that said a lot about his influence in the dressing room.

It's pretty much impossible, from the stand, to judge who's best suited to be captain. And while I'm a big fan of Iain Davidson (one of the few, by the time he left (for a team in a higher division (which nobody seemed to acknowledge at the time))) you'll remember that he was our captain for a significant amount of time, before being stripped of that particular honour after going fucking mental during a Reserve game.

We're certainly short of a "character" or two, which doesn't help matters. We've basically got a squad full of what John Hughes would call "guid hoanest laddies", but we're missing a badge kisser, someone who enjoys playing up to the crowd and gets people excited and involved. It's a shame, because guys like that, even when they're not the most technically gifted players, are a big part of what makes football fun.

John McGlynn is a man for a club in the doldrums. He turned our football club around (almost single-handedly?), but I don't think he's the sort of manager that we need now. Tactically I don't think he's superior to Murray.

It's their Christmas night out. Alright, our recent performances have been poor, and they probably could've kept it away from Twitter (Instagram? I haven't actually seen anything myself) but it's not like we're bottom of the league.

Yeah, once he gives the foul it has to be a red card.

I can't see what a protest would achieve. The board can see the same football we can, and I'm sure they can hear the fans at full time. Either they don't think it's worth spending the money on ending his contract (which I could understand) or they've seen and heard enough from him to think he can turn it around (which looks increasingly unlikely, but I could still understand) and a protest would do nothing to change either of those, but would only contribute to an even more negative atmosphere at the club, which would only demotivate the players further. If anything, rather than a protest, there should be a concentrated effort to vocally back the players during the 90 minutes that they're on the park. Yesterday the atmosphere soured a little after the fourth (obviously) but until that point, the South Stand was really quite encouraging. I'd rather see energy put towards that than towards a protest which is unlikely to achieve anything.

I don't think there's any doubt that the club still needs all the money it can get, even with the profits that have been posted, but I think if you'd gone to Turnbull Hutton (or whoever you like from the new board) and asked them to handpick who they wanted in the draw, I'm confident that they would've picked a home tie against a weaker side. Ten years ago that wouldn't have been the case, they'd have been knocking chairs over trying to get a trip to Glasgow.

If the only teams left in the Cup were all higher ranked sides than us, I'd be hoping for the biggest payday possible. After all, a shock is a shock is a shock. But when you look at the teams left in the Cup this year, and the way the draw had been made, surely you can't help but be disappointed that we've been handed one of the toughest ties possible, instead of (for example) a non-league side at home. It's a ridiculous thing to get into an in depth discussion about, in reality. A random drawing of balls. Such is our curse as football supporters.

The one big positive that I'm looking at is that it gives me an opportunity to go to Ibrox without having to hand over £22 (or whatever it is) straight to Rangers. At least some of the gate money from this one will make it back to the Rovers.

It would be Sod's Law for the TV companies to grow a pair now and show some intriguing games instead, but I can't see it. Maybe if we were up against Celtic, but they're desperate to get Rangers on the telly as much as they can whilst they're not part of the Premiership. If it's not on the telly then it really is the worst possible draw we could've had. Going back to a place where we just lost 6-1, to a team we've got to play four times anyway, in an empty stadium, with little to no chance of progression. Normally at this stage of the competition I'd be hoping for a big team away, to cash-in rather than be eliminated by a low-ranking top flight side, but with so many Premiership sides already knocked out, I was really hoping for an easy tie. It looks like there's every chance that at least one lower league side will make the semi-finals (certainly four will make the quarters) and we'll need a massive (Ramsden-esque) performance if we're to stand any chance of it being us.

Aye, but you can't spend 90 minutes with it shoved up your arse, which is how he usually passes a Saturday afternoon.

Somebody with Rangers for a big team? Really can't begin to understand the logic there.

Hunner grand. Not bad.

A game against a team from League One is definitely much easier than a team from the Juniors. Absolutely. Yup. Nope.

We have more strength in depth than we did last season. That is a fact.

Yeah, I'd agree with this. I'll be looking for a much more expensive brand of football next week at the Rose. Only having one fit striker brings some serious issues, but we still need to be getting our wide players closer to that striker. I wouldn't be starting Moon next week either. Recently he's been doing the same job as Fox, only not as effectively. If he isn't providing something going forward, and he hasn't been, then I'd leave him on the bench. Let Scott take his place and play Vaughan further forward. I'm not convinced that Vaughan is 'all that' but in games like today, and next week, we need to be getting more attack-minded players on the ball. I've got no issue with the subbing of McKay today. He probably had his best game in a Rovers shirt, but he drifts in and out of games and Conroy is a more than decent alternative. Don't understand the Anderson sub at all, though. Unless he'd picked up a knock, that was baffling.

Every manager who's ever tried to sign a player?