KingRocketman II

desperately looking for a "PolandBad" article is one thing but then adding a sweeping accusation of the nation being traditionally cowardly is quite another

the quality or acting range of the dubbers (what is the common term for them) is generally awful and it often detracts from the quality of the show/movie. Its actually a wider discussion point. As I understand , certain dubbers in Italy and France are famous in their own right for providing a voice to say a Stallone. They become synonymous with the actor they are providing a distinctive voice to. They are generally actors in their own right but not that big but have acting ability. It is a completely different approach and audiences presumably react/interpret dubbing differently in other countries than the English speaking countries do.

who ahead of Gauld should have been called up but hasn't?

which begs the question what McBurnie has done to merit inclusion

same here. I have varying degrees of allegiance to Rangers, Hearts, Linfield and Millwall. Nothing wrong with that and says nothing about me!

am not so sure the vast majority; maybe channels such as the DM, Express, Telegraph etc as well as Tory voters on social media - which I concede is a significant number in England. If someone on here was to continually refer to Johnson as Boris whilst defending him in a politics discussion forum, I would find it equally weird (particularly the defending/supporting part).

I think we are getting into quite surreal realms when we largely agree that a player is extremely comfortable defending against the likes of Serbia, Czech Republic and Slovakia but at the same time wouldn't hack it at the "top level of the English Championship" or "he is decent but he ain't no Grant Hanley". On that I will bow out of this little debate.

1. indeed, he would 2. simply because you don't rate him. 3. simple in your mind. There seems to be a trend that some folks need to see a player sign for a team they consider a "top" team before conceding he is good enough. Without that yardstick some folks can't seem to spot a decent player.

re Souttar, I think having him back (post Euros realistically) would give us the option of having someone who is able to carry the ball out of defence and hit a good pass to initiate an attack. That is the reason that I believe Clarke perseveres with McTominay in the back three despite everyone agreeing he would be a great addition to the midfield. Souttar shares similar attributes to McTominay as a defender - not the greatest or strongest of our centre halves but very comfortable on the ball which gives a great option if playing out from the back. Hope he can get over his injury spate.

I wouldn't and think Clarke would stick with Gallagher given his selection coincided with much better defensive performances - unless he doesn't play much club football for the rest of this season. As said - that is if it is a clear choice between them both.

I'm fine with having him in the squad. My point was that Gallagher was excellent in every Scotland game he played up to Nov 2020. I am glad that Hanley has improved but that wouldn't justify him walking in to replace Gallagher (it was a choice between the both of them) based on a) Gallagher's recent Scotland form and b) Hanley's previous Scotland form. If Gallagher gets injured, is not playing at club level and/or loses form then we look to other centre halves in the squad.

A gentle hint; why don't you spend more time reading and informing yourself, and less time on here posting. I'd call that a win/win. I know about the Republican Tea Party. Had never hear of Quilliam or Nawaz. Ouvre - that French for an open egg? 2/3 out for me - got more reading to do myself.....

by simply looking at their performances for Scotland. Gallagher has been assured and confident across his 7 games whereas Hanley for many of his 29 odd games has been shakey and error prone. so in answer to your question - the world of international football.

I don't disagree with your point per se but would be less weird and creepy to read if you would call her Sturgeon, NS or even FM.....

assuming Gallagher was sitting out cause of injury and not some contract issue as some have suggested. Hopefully he will be back playing soon - I would ay he is a definite starter and a far better option than Hanley.

Rangers silence prior to the weekend allowed fans to interpret how they wished to approach Saturday and Sunday and allowed fans to consider that in gathering, the club did not seemingly condemn this. Players and management celebrating out of windows with gathered fans would seem to confirm this, thereby resulting in Sunday's gathering. The fact that Rangers subsequently lashed out at the SG over.a lack of consultation as to how they ensure their fans understood clear restrictions illustrated how they failed in their duty. The pressure from the SG on both sets of fans to observe whatever restrictions are in place in the run up to the Old Firm game means that the game going ahead is entirely in the hands of the fans. If the clubs and particularly Rangers want it to go head, then they simply need to reinforce the restrictions via social media and suggest that any fans planning to gather will "hurt the club/are not true fans". Those types of phrases seem to cut to your more basic thinking supporters.

his ongoing dislike for Maradona became seemed a rather bizarre obsession.

aye - offering assurance to the public that a police officer in uniform represents safety/law and order. More generally I am always slightly surprised how prominent the coverage is devoted to an attack/abduction of an individual . There is always a sensationalist element to it and such stories seems to engage the public and media a like. A man getting murdered/knifed/attacked in a housing estate barely gets coverage; a woman getting attacked perhaps murdered (hopefully not in this case) gets prominent endless coverage. This is not to diminish from the seriousness of this crime or to trivialise concern over the missing women. Am merely pointing out the inconsistency in the media's approach (and public appetite) to something like this. Is it because it could happen to anyone (ie this could happen to my wife/daughter/me) whereas a knifing in a scheme or by a teenager in London is more likely to affect the more marginalised?

aye Craig; prey tell who in your view would make an effective replacement if she were to resign. Maybe a certain line running politician?

I posted this on the OTB thread which shares the same view of "Biscuits" and his performance appraisal: And Tam and Stuart, who are continually having a go at journalists/media for waltzing into games for free with an aggravated sense of entitlement - and not even making a token gesture to help clubs with even a donation towards the gate - let him [Biscuits] off very quickly when he questioned why he should "have to pay to get into my work?". aye, Biscuits, if you had a line manager like any other employee you appear to be comparing yourself to, you would have been on a performance improvement plan years ago and would very likely have gotten your jotters shortly afterwards......

and once more boom

snarky . Thats me been dismantled

I don't think "dismantle" is any way a red flag - the reaction is no doubt to your use of the word not being in any way applicable to the events which actually took place. Maybe you remembered the exchange as you wished it had played out. Whether you have "spoken" to me or not, it doesn't mean that I can't read various exchanges on this forum. Or are you suggesting that you are some board royalty (in keeping with this thread) that needs to extend permission to anyone who wishes to comment on their posts?

"Dismantled" no doubt in the same way you probably feel you have "dismantled" many opposite opinions when you finish on P&B each day.....