Raith Against The Machine

At least they corrected these errors before putting the article on the back page of the print edition. Oh...

I'm not sure playing in front of fans is a huge factor for the Pars board at the moment... There haven't really been any noises from Stark's either way on this, they've really kept their counsel. It would seem to be a no-brainer from a financial point of view. The difference between fans and no fans would easily cover the cost of a January signing. But I can only assume McGlynn wanted it played for footballing reasons, on the assumptions that the Pars will improve after the window, and that they were supposed to be playing tonight. Either that or the Rovers have already approached the Pars informally and been given the KB, so they've not bothered pressing the issue.

Hey, give Ethian Viariarian a chance.

I won't bother providing a link, but I see "FFP Paul" was last to the trough on sticking up a re-hashed article for this one, and still managed to completely misread the room and describe it as a "cracking signing".

The Venn diagram of Rovers supporters who sing about opposition players being sex offenders, and who want us to sign an actual sex offender, is a circle.

Good. Even if we were, that should be the line. "No idea where this has come from, Scott Burns is a haver". Sorry Scott.

I'd so much rather finish 5th (or below) without Goodwillie than win the league with him.

He's (annoyingly, in this case) at the top end of the reliability scale when it comes to breaking transfer news. It's worth noting he's only reporting an interest at this stage, rather than it being a done deal, but I'd take from that that the question has at least been asked. That said, I hope the Rovers come out and vehemently deny it! They won't, of course, but a quiet disappearing of the topic would be perfectly acceptable to me. I think I was quite scathing about people pulling money from the Supporters Fund over the Dylan Tait transfer, but this is a totally different story. If this goes through, at the very minimum I'll be re-routing some SF contributions towards somewhere like Rape Crisis Scotland.

If anyone is leaning towards the "he was acquitted in a criminal court!" argument to justify this move, I'd grimly encourage them to read the final judgement from the civil case, which is readily Googleable. I'm no expert on the machinations of Scots Law, but I can recognise the actions of a truly despicable man when they're laid out in front of me.

Just so I'm clear on the lines of argument that are being drawn here... A prominent LGBT rights charity: 'woke', bigoted, bad news bears An actual rapist: totally fine

You know, if you'd asked me "Which Rovers supporter on Pie and Bovril will launch a totally out of context and wildly ill-informed GB News style rant about Stonewall?", I'd be going home with a brand new set of golf clubs.

Maybe he'll be cheaper now, but putting two and two together it sounds like Kai Kennedy might come with a loan fee that's over and above the wages Rangers actually pay him. On that basis alone I wouldn't be keen, and I can't imagine McGlynn would be either. All things being equal though, he'd "do a job" for us because we have precisely zero alternative options out wide at the moment. He's nowhere near ready to be starting every week at this level, but he's obviously got a lot of ability. In the similar vein, I'd take any one of the Pars misfiring strikers. Despite the team being down the bottom end of the league and Todorov/Wighton/O'Hara not really being able to hold onto a starting jersey, they'd all bring something to the Rovers squad that we just don't have.

The Varian/Zanatta (/Connolly/Ross) issues aren't separate problems, they're one and the same. Zanatta was getting space (and Varian was getting assists) when defenders were worrying about the big striker. They know now that they don't have to, not to anywhere near the same extent. It's not a lack of endeavour or talent within the individuals, it's the limitations in a system with so little variety.

It comes up all the time with various loan deals at various clubs, and I'd be amazed if it were true. There's absolutely no way McGlynn would let his hands be tied like that. I believe some loan deals have differing fees depending on how much a player is used, but again, I'd be staggered if it was ever enough to meaningfully influence selection.

Have you no joy in your hearts, gentlemen?

I'd take Panayiotou back in a heartbeat. Patter and narrative > technique and ability. Every time.

Then I apologise for my argumentative tone.

...then you've no issue with the Fife derby being postponed then, presumably?

I don't know that "let clubs pick and choose which fixtures to play now and which to play later" would've carried, but that's where we are now, and it's only fair if everyone's allowed to join in. The most realistic situation to prevent it now would be Dunfermline refusing the request, which I'd be fine with. I don't love that we've been left with our rivals being able to decide whether or not we bring in an extra £50k revenue, but these are strange times we live in. If anything, I'm surprised Ayr were so keen to help their Ayrshire brethren.

Not really. The choice on the table was playing all or playing none. Nobody offered up the option of playing some games but not the ones that will make you a fortune. I've not seen it confirmed anywhere how the Rovers voted, although I suspect it was to continue. That must've been a very difficult decision, given it involved forgoing our biggest payday of the season. If it's now clear that certain games can be moved (and it is), it's only right that the Rovers explore that option.

The Ayrshire Derby on the 2nd has been moved to February. Presumably we'll be looking for the same. I imagine the Pars would need to agree, but you'd think they'd be happy enough with that given the amount of surgery their squad will undergo in January.

In purely footballing terms, he'd be absolutely perfect. I want to make that clear first of all, so there can be no ambiguity in exactly why I'm categorically opposed to the move. It would be a massive, massive backwards step for the club when they've done so much to foster a close relationship with the support, and a burgeoning reputation within the wider Scottish footballing community. I've no idea how much, if any, substance there is to the rumour, this is the first I've heard of it, but it's a move that should not and cannot happen.

The Courier slightly more assertive on the prospect of the deal. I'd expect that to happen now. Good to see two midfielders coming in. While Spencer is obviously missing for now, he's still on the wage bill and will be back at some stage, so that's an extra body into a fairly small squad. Looking at it just in terms of what they can offer in the second half of this season, you'd have to say that Stanton and Williamson would look to be an upgrade on Tait. Young loanees are always a risk, but Ben Williamson is actually slightly older than Dylan and has experience at this level, so you'd hope he carries less risk than some.

It's not a direct criticism of Varian, but his lack of a goalscoring threat makes us much easier to play against than would normally be the case. Teams know by now that he's essentially a decoy, a build up man who's the furthest forward but isn't the real danger. At his best, Varian has dragged defences around and created huge gaps for others to exploit, but it's our only real attacking strategy and it's easily blunted by holding a defensive shape and keeping the closest tabs on the attacking three, not the striker. That we also don't have any real viable options to rotate any of those three compounds the issue.

Gaston's the last goalkeeper in this league I'd take, but that's primarily because he wears short sleeves.