Jump to content

scot-gcar709

Gold Members
  • Posts

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by scot-gcar709

  1. I don't think anyone would suggest that Goodwillie was in top goal scoring form towards the end of the season but to calling him a liability is just mental. Even when he wasn't scoring the amount of work he put in and space he created for others to score just highlights the importance of having him in the team. 

  2. The problem is that they know quite well they can get away with it. For all that the Scottish Government continue to press for it, they have no need to accept it. Additionally, given the numbers they don't really expect to get a significant number of MPs from Scotland so to their thinking it really doesn't matter if we keep electing the SNP. The only votes that really matter to them are the English votes which such rhetoric will they will hope will bring back all the Brexit voters. 

  3. Some day. I will admit to having major doubts leading in today and tbh the first half didn't do much to change that. Annan came down with a plan to frustrate as much as possible and it worked perfectly. It should also be noted that they were very organised. However it was very frustrating watching them waste time at every opportunity and I feel the ref should have done something about it.  Ultimately we had much of the possession but lacked any real end product to it. The second half started in much the same vein until the breakthrough. At that point Annan, had to change their tactics and looked dangerous on occasion. When Goodie went off I feared the worst but Banks made the Annan keeper pull out an outstanding save. In terms of the penalty, i'll be perfectly honest, I have no idea why it was given but I am not going to complain. Great feeling to finally get out of league 2

  4. Honestly, we will need to play alot better than saturday if we hope to get through the playoffs. I do think that part of the problem on saturday were that the players were a bit too keen to get an early goal which was leading them to make poor decisions. Hopefully  since this is a two-legged affair this won't be as much of an issue and they will be able to settle into the game. 

  5. 1 hour ago, Muzza81 said:

    What another absurd shout. How on earth would deducting you points from next season make any sort of sense when the offence happened this season?  If you had said simply deducting you points this season it wouldn’t have been so ridiculous but to suggest next season is wild.

    Why? the only reason this punishment is seen as being in any way meaningful is down to the fact we were challenging for the league. If this had happened if we were mid table towards the end of the season it could have meant nothing. At least by applying a consistent point deduction at the start of the following season the team that broke the rule is faced with some kind of disadvantage. At the end of the day if the SFA either uphold the current decision or just deduct the points from us then fine but i still believe there needs to be a penalty that will punish any team that makes these mistakes in the future in a consistent way.

  6. Being perfectly honest, i  don't see there is any chance of the SFA overturning this decision although i do think it was the worst punishment in terms of what happened in the league. I also don't see them replaying the games as that could cause us to end up with more points than we got in the first place. IMO the fairest punishment would have been a points deduction from the start of next season but as i said at this point i don't see the SFA changing it.

  7. 10 minutes ago, dee_62 said:

    Twitter whispers that Labour won't be supporting it today - but may do next week!  Think they want their own front bench amendment to pass today and if the second referendum amendment passes, their amendment would automatically fall.

    I know its very unlikely that this amendment will pass but i would honestly love to see May's face if it did pass although i suspect she would just ignore the result and still declare its her deal or no deal.

  8. The two of them are as bad as each other and its clear to see why this country is fucked. May is so entrenched in her own plan thats its laughable, whilst Corbyn refuses to come up with anything so that he can try and appeal to everyone in a GE if he somehow managed to get one called. Neither of them seem to give a damn at this point about actually fixing the rampant problems that exist. 

  9. As a Red Sox fan i am delighted to be one win away from being in the World Series however after seeing the interference call that took away a 2 run HR from the Astros all i can say if it had been the other way i would have been raging.

  10. I thought this weeks episode was an improvement on last weeks. The only real complaint I have at the moment is that there seems to have been a shift to more character based narrative which is leading to the monsters of the week feeling very underwhelming.

  11. To be perfectly honest i found the entire hour dull and lacking in energy. I didn't feel any real threat from the enemy, the new score was bland and Jodie's performance didn't really wow me at the parts they should have like when she confronted said enemy. I am hoping that as everyone involved finds their feet that it will improve as there is always a period like this when a new doctor is introduced.

  12. I think Duffy should do a decent job for Queens Park. He might not be the most spectacular manager going but i would say he's good at keeping things steady which for a team losing their manager to another club is not a bad thing.Its not like he needs to come in and make sweeping changes. The biggest problem i would say is his ability to changes things in games when they aren't going well which could be an issue if you were to make the playoffs. 

  13. 17 hours ago, The Spider said:

     agree with all of this, but it's the classic lower league club dilemma isn't it?  I reckon the determining factors if a less than six figure sum came in would be how sound your current financial base was, combined with how loudly Lennon and the support would voice their protestations. Another way of looking at it might be, if you were guaranteed promotion this season but then were to lose him for nothing in a couple of years and were to plummet quickly to the bottom half of League 2 v the option that the money would provide secure foundations for the club to build a stronger base for a sustained stay in League 1, would you choose the "well, we always had Paris" option or look at the longer term picture?

    Largely i would say it would need to depend on the circumstances. Can we get replacements in the time left in the transfer window and without wasting the funds we received for selling him. If we sell him, how are our chances of getting promoted diminished. What are the financial implications of promotion in terms of increased crowds etc and what is the difference between the amount we would get for selling him and funding replacements. Clearly, this would be up to the board to look at and decide but for me personally i think the chances of promotion take a serious hit without him and i'm not convinced we could get the replacements needed. If we were then to lose Lennon then our chances of promotion any time soon might well end too so i would say, keep him and hope things go well.

  14. 27 minutes ago, The Spider said:

    For once I'm not on the wind-up, and if you value the player more than the potential income, then I'd be more concerned by this " St Mirren manager Alan Stubbs admits signing a striker is "paramount" after they drew a blank in their League Cup meeting with Queen's Park. "

    Watching last night's game, I don't think I've ever seen a more inept front line from a Premier League club, and now that Clyde have absorbed the worst of the heat as far as the associated baggage is concerned, I can't think of many other strikers up here that would be within St. Mirren's price range. Were it to happen with them (or Hamilton), I guess the question would be "how much of the fee would go to Lennon, and would he able to source a suitable replacement?"

    I think the point about finding a suitable replacement is the key issue here. It is clear that we are still looking to get someone to play up front with him so effectively we would then be looking for two strikers, neither of which are likely to be anywhere near as good as Goodwillie. Given this might be our best chance of pushing for promotion with our management team, squad and backing from various sources I personally think it wouldn't be worth it. Obviously the counter argument is that the funds would give us a better chance of getting some more players but i doubt most teams are going to be willing to part with their best strikers before the season even starts.

×
×
  • Create New...