Shadow Play
-
Posts
4,053 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Shadow Play
-
-
27 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:
We've apparently sweetened the deal a wee bit.
Now that’s what P&B is all about! A bit of humour, slagging an opposing club while poking a wee bit of fun at your own club, all at the same time. Genuinely made me laugh that.
5 -
10 hours ago, Sortmeout said:
It’s not really a surprise that a club which spends most of its time in the Championship has Championship level facilities.
Which club are you referring to?
0 -
1 minute ago, Pens_Dark said:
Putting him on ignore is a pretty good solution, I find.
What if he posts something insightful though? You could be missing the chance to increase your footballing knowledge?
0 -
10 hours ago, Florentine_Pogen said:
"Look down and check what you’re wearing on your feet. If it’s a pair of Adidas Sambas, I’m afraid you need to take them off immediately and never wear them again. Sorry. I don’t make the rules. Blame our beleaguered leader. In an Instagram video last Thursday, Rishi Sunak wore Sambas during a Downing Street interview to promote his tax policies. The doomed prime minister went for a white pair with navy stripes, teamed with skinny slacks and a tailored white shirt. Listen carefully and you could hear the death knell tolling for the trainer du jour."
Does anyone still wear Sambas other than when playing 5 a side football?
ETA - just seen the pair a Sunak was wearing. Apologies to any Samba wearers out there. I was thinking of Samba Super.
0 -
1 hour ago, Arab_R_us said:
I mean it might happen i guess
Given your obsession with all matters Dundee FC I would have thought you’d realise that there has been amended plans for the stadium submitted since this image was created.
1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:The game going ahead 3 miles away on a local park is more relevant IMO.
Is it possible that the Riverside pitches, being nearest the river, have a more sandy based composition (and thereby drain easier) than a pitch on a hill 2-3 miles away? I’m no expert on the matter, hence the reason I am asking yourself.
3 -
4 minutes ago, Junior_Arab said:
I think recent events have put an entirely different spin on those pyros though - maybe they were being used genuinely to signal for help by people stuck in the quagmire in the middle of the pitch, being slowly dragged under to their doom?
I don’t think so. The away support is at the shallow end of Dens…..
0 -
Just read their statement. I think Rangers missed an opportunity to update us all on how many of their fans they have identified and banned as a result of the pyros last time they were at Dens. After all, professionalism appears to important to Rangers.
9 -
18 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:
There’s also a lot of “there’s a perfectly good pitch across the road- just switch it to Tannadice”.
I’m sure I speak for everyone connected with United when I say we don’t want that disgusting club anywhere near our pitch.
That’s no way to speak about your future landlord.
0 -
4 minutes ago, Grangemouth Bairn said:
Just fucking cancel it and cue the outrage.
Outrage incoming no matter if the game is cancelled now, later or the match proceeds without any further issue.
2 -
14 minutes ago, AJF said:
If that were the case, then it probably would've been wise for them to stipulate that if the pitch was deemed playable at 11am then there would be a further inspection carried out later in the day due to the forecasted weather.
It just feels like kicking the can down the road, and while I totally appreciate the weather is not the fault of Dundee, I think the frustrations are simply born out of fans likely expecting a decision to have been made at 11 which hasn't happened.
If it makes you feel better just pretend an 11am pitch inspection wasn’t carried out but I take your point it doesn’t add a great deal of certainty to the game proceeding today.
Personally, I think a 11am inspection was a worthwhile effort given that if the pitch failed the 11am pitch inspection the referee may well have formed the opinion that with the anticipated rain the pitch would not improve or likely get worse. That way an informed opinion could be made if it would be simply better to call off the game for today.I don’t think the club could have announced earlier that there definitely would be a 3pm pitch inspection. What if the 11am inspection had revealed a pitch that appeared ready to handle the anticipated level of precipitation. Again personally, I had already anticipated a further pitch inspection, not least due to how events unfolded on Saturday.
This may not be a universally popular opinion but for it’s worth I genuinely do feel sympathy for the away fans this evening, or indeed any away fans in such circumstances.ETA Just seen your later post about announcing a possible 3pm inspection. You make a fair point raising the possibility of one. Perhaps the club, wrongly, assumed everyone would take it for granted.
0 -
5 minutes ago, AJF said:
There was an update on Sky Sports a wee while ago. Essentially said the pitch looks okay but there are three problem areas, being the two goalmouths and another section.
They said it was only these parts of the pitch that have been covered so I'm assuming they'll get the covers back on them again should it pass the 11am inspection so fingers crossed anyway.
The bad news it the other section is the area of the pitch between the two penalty spots.
3 -
9 minutes ago, Pens_Dark said:
In essence, the football operations at dens and the business that owns the land where the new stadium is to be built on are two separate entities, but you're right how long would it be before the Nelms & Keyes accept defeat. I think that it why there has been as much up front information as possible in this type of planning application, which isn't usually required.
These groups are fine, fundamentally, they stand up for the preservation or betterment of the area in which they live. More often than not though, those intentions are skewed as they end up just becoming a deliberate hurdle for allowing development to take place. The real issue is how much credit local authority give to community councils and trusts like these and stand strong on their determinations. Generally, if planning applications are refused, appeals don't usually take too long in the grand scheme of things.
I agree they can be useful but my main issue with certain conservation / similar type groups is with regards to the modernisation of older buildings. I’m thinking specifically when they complain about exterior cladding to increase the energy efficiency of of old tenements. Their primary concern appears to be the effect such cladding has on the aesthetics. Never mind the residents who are struggling to heat their homes. As long as the character of the area many simply drive through to get to their expensive homes doesn’t lose its history and character.
The same with listed buildings. The repairs are prohibitively expensive so they are destined to simply fall into a state of disrepair. I’m thinking of the house at the top of Roseangle.
0 -
12 minutes ago, 2426255 said:
Points deduction for Dundee I heard if it doesn't go ahead. Deserved imo
Your source is wrong.
As an aside, how many of your 4,400 posts were in a thread involving Dundee? I’ve got to say it feels like 4,300 of them.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:
Still laughing at the moment on Saturday where the ball was lumped into the Motherwell box, and everyone just kinda pretended they hadn't seen anything when it dropped almost vertically and stopped stone dead at Jonathan Tiffoney's feet as if he'd suddenly developed a Ronaldinho-esque first touch.
The pitch may have been deemed "playable", but it was an absolute pudding surface from the penalty spot in front of the Shankly out to about 10 yards beyond the edge of the box, and it's probably just as well there was precious little football played that would have exposed it.
Must admit I never noticed that. I’m certainly not aware of any other instances of the pitch holding up the ball etc but I sit a fair bit away from the Shankly.
0 -
12 hours ago, Shadow Play said:
Better still, are you wanting to go on record to say the match official was “under pressure from his employer”, ignored a “massive hazard” and placed the players in danger?
1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:Did I?
I still think the ref doesn't let the game go ahead if he's not under pressure to do so.
I will let you answer your own question. Perhaps I have misinterpreted what you said. If so I apologise but I can only go by what you type. Here is a cut and paste (which I have underlined and highlighted where appropriate).
“We have the benefit of not being forced to say it’s playable by our employers. Anyone with a brain can see that massive sandpit is a massive hazard to the players who are absolutely going over ankles on that part of the pitch”
and
“it's genuinely a disgrace that it's been allowed. That's a major hazard for players”
Finally, the ball ran true, there appeared to be no player complaining during the game of any unnatural bounce and no player got injured in a very competitive match. Other than the visual aspect of the pitch why do you still appear to be insisting the pitch wasn’t playable? Is it not more the case that in the modern game fans, perhaps quite rightly at this level of football, expect the pitch to look near perfect all year round and they are no longer used to seeing large patches of mud and sand on a pitch that is still playable?
0 -
5 hours ago, 'WellDel said:
If you're in a round of mainly couples and one or two singles, surely the right thing to do is fire up a kitty, with the singletons contributing half the amount of the couples?
Same applies if you're going to be visiting multiple hostelries/have wildly varying round prices. Kitty up at the start and replenish as required as the night goes on and no-one should really get stung. That's what us sensible and civilised folk in Lanarkshire do anyway.
Always found it was the tight folk that wanted to run the kitty. If there’s 6 people in a kitty they could easily end up with £10-£20 left over at the end of the night. Not like anyone asks for their change out a kitty.
0 -
32 minutes ago, Hendo said:
That was kind of what Stuart Kettlewell said, who obviously saw the pitch better than us. Motherwell made an official complaint, didnt they?
My point is the uncertainty for everyone because your pitch is a disgrace isnt any good, so a quick decision to move the games would have been better?
Ah ok. It think I’m beginning to see your line of reasoning. It appears you are saying uncertainty for everyone as to whether a match is taking place isn’t any good if your pitch “is a disgrace” and therefore a decision should be made to move the match days prior to any match day pitch inspection. Regardless of weather the pitch passed an inspection two days prior to the day of the game.
However, if your pitch is not a disgrace but it is anticipated it will require a match day pitch inspection that’s OK and we can just ignore any uncertainty that causes.
Does that just about cover your position on this?
0 -
17 minutes ago, Hendo said:
Thats debatable. My point is, this uncertainty for clubs, players and fans is unacceptable so a quick decision to move both games would have been much preferable, the sooner this is done the easier it is to resolve any logistical problems.
Sorry but why is it debatable? The pitch was declared playable. Are you suggesting the pitch was not playable?
Better still, are you wanting to go on record to say the match official was “under pressure from his employer”, ignored a “massive hazard” and placed the players in danger? A certain other poster claimed this at one point but appeared to back away from that when challenged about it.
0 -
Just now, Hendo said:
The SPFL have made an absolute pigs ear of this. They should have moved both the game at the weekend and tomorrow night to a neutral venue last week and been done with it.
Why would you move the game on Saturday when a playable pitch was already available?
0 -
2 hours ago, Pens_Dark said:
Do you mean that the city council would receive 1.9m rather than Birmingham FC receiving that money from the council itself?
Birmingham council were having to sell 750m worth of assets in order to balance their books. It looks like the owners bought the land off of them.
Anyway - why I raise that question is that, similar to the Brum council, Dundee is having to pull themselves out of a massive financial hole. I couldn't see grants or investment at local level but government grants happen all the time with sports developments. Spurs, Man utd looking to receive funding and of course this one that you point out.
I would think that Nelms & Keyes are actually relying on this type of grant/funding to make it financially viable at all. I think they've even conceded that previously.
The article read, to me at least, that the council would give City the £1.9m. I was a little surprised given the significant ongoing financial difficulties facing the council.
I suppose in the context of the creation of 3,000 jobs £1.9m may seem reasonable particularly if the new facilities will have community access.
I wonder if there is anyone on here with more experience of similar projects could chip in?
0 -
Just reading that Birmingham city intend to build a new stadium. They have secured a government grant of about £17m to help clean up the site through the levelling-up fund. The city council will inject a further £1.9m as a condition of receiving the money.
I assume the condition of the site and the number of new jobs that will be created has had a significant bearing on such funding being granted.
I’m not suggesting Dundee will receive any similar financial assistance. Just thought it was worthy of mention for anyone not aware / interested.
0 -
On 07/04/2024 at 17:44, Bigmouth Strikes Again said:
Has to be Sylla and Boateng v the currants. IMO. We'll see what he does, better not be another total hiding.
I’d add in Fin Robertson as well as I think that would be a decent defensively minded midfield. I wouldn’t try to get the full 90 minutes out of him though like Doc appeared to want to do at Parkhead.
Also, I’ve loved watching Dundee playing some very good and entertaining football this season but I don’t think we should even try to do that tomorrow night. Better to try and just frustrate Rangers at every opportunity and see how that works out.
3 -
44 minutes ago, Ric said:
Ok.. simple yes or no, are you hitting the top six?
btw, even if you don't I think you will, you've had an incredible season and should be well proud of your team.
...but yeah, at this very moment, what is your gut feeling?
I think if we have the same line up as today for the Rangers game we will get a hiding. Not enough strength in that line up for games against Rangers and the like. I think we will then get a draw at Aberdeen which will not be enough as I think Hibs will beat Motherwell.
0 -
Onto the game. Full credit to Motherwell they could have folded after the 2nd as I didn’t think they played that great up to that point. They didn’t fold, they kept at it and got their reward. I thought Bair in particular was excellent today. A player like that really does make a difference to just about any team in this league. You will be doing well to keep him for next season.
As for Dundee, I thought we played some good football in tight positions but we are definitely lacking a cutting edge. Another worrying collapse but I’m confident Doc can sort that out with some decent recruitment in the summer.
Mad mad scenes for Motherwell’s third goal and I hope the lad that jumped from the top of the vomitory didn’t “go over his ankles.” I know some poster on here was worried about that sort of thing happening today…..
1
Dandies v those Dastardly Dees
in Scottish Premiership General Chatter
Posted
Disgusting tackle by Shinnie. Total lack of professionalism there.