Dons_1988 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Michae Stewart’s performance usually depends on who he’s on with. He can be good listening with Tom English as they tend to bounce off each other well. When broadfoot is on Stewart turns into a seething anti establishment twat who just disagrees with absolutely everything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightswoodBear Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said: Michael Stewart is a seething twat ftfy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozam76 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 4 hours ago, Dons_1988 said: Michae Stewart’s performance usually depends on who he’s on with. He can be good listening with Tom English as they tend to bounce off each other well. When broadfoot is on Stewart turns into a seething anti establishment twat who just disagrees with absolutely everything. Again far be it for me to defend Stewart, but if said establishment that he rails against is the SFA, then he can seethe away with good reason in my book. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 1 minute ago, mozam76 said: Again far be it for me to defend Stewart, but if said establishment that he rails against is the SFA, then he can seethe away with good reason in my book. I disagree. Obviously the SFA is shite but arguing spurious points for the sake of it only weakens an argument IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjc Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: I disagree. Obviously the SFA is shite but arguing spurious points for the sake of it only weakens an argument IMO. If Michael Stewart wants to play Robespierre in clearing out the SFA then I'll happily play Louis Antoine de Saint-Just. Off with their heads! Edited January 15, 2020 by sjc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wastecoatwilly Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 25 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: I disagree. Obviously the SFA is shite but arguing spurious points for the sake of it only weakens an argument IMO. Even if broadfoot was the SFA's PR man the hear,speak and see no evil attitude of the SFA needs to change. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 (edited) A minor point but last night someone tweeted in saying Aberdeen put Robbie WInters in goals in the 2000 SC final to replace Leighton, despite having a keeper on the bench. This was quite clearly nonsense yet no one corrected it. Edited January 15, 2020 by Dons_1988 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukDukGoose Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: A minor point but last night someone tweeted in saying Aberdeen put Robbie WInters in goals in the 2000 SC final to replace Leighton, despite having a keeper on the bench. This was quite clearly nonsense yet no one corrected it. Esson wasn't great to be fair. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 26 minutes ago, Merkland Red said: Esson wasn't great to be fair. It's actually mental you were only allowed 3 subs. Who came up with that rule? I can't even think of a single good reason for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukDukGoose Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: It's actually mental you were only allowed 3 subs. Who came up with that rule? I can't even think of a single good reason for it. I remember Dons fans got a lot of hassle for the conga etc. No point being upset when you've had to stick a striker in goals about a minute in to the game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranaldo Bairn Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 26 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: It's actually mental you were only allowed 3 subs. Who came up with that rule? I can't even think of a single good reason for it. I started watching football in the early 80's when Scottish teams had 2 listed subs, but our backward southern neighbours only had 1. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 It's actually mental you were only allowed 3 subs. Who came up with that rule? I can't even think of a single good reason for it.Subs weren't allowed at all until the 1970s, then it was one per team, then two, and so on. If a goalkeeper (or any player) got injured in the past then it was just a case of chucking someone else on in their place and rejigging things.The notion of have lots of subs for every position is a modern thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 4 hours ago, Dons_1988 said: It's actually mental you were only allowed 3 subs. Who came up with that rule? I can't even think of a single good reason for it. It was two not long before that, and only one in England. I think it was far better than what we have now. Being allowed to have more subs just increases the disparity further between clubs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 It was two not long before that, and only one in England. I think it was far better than what we have now. Being allowed to have more subs just increases the disparity further between clubs.I’m sure you could pick out just about any law of the game and find a way that it increases the disparity between clubs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Rubble Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 1 hour ago, craigkillie said: Subs weren't allowed at all until the 1970s, then it was one per team, then two, and so on. If a goalkeeper (or any player) got injured in the past then it was just a case of chucking someone else on in their place and rejigging things. The notion of have lots of subs for every position is a modern thing. Subs were introduced in England in 1965-66, and in Scotland a season later. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Jean King Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Indeed Archie Gemmell replaced Jim Clunie for Saints v Clydebank in August 1966 to start the ball rolling Subs were introduced in England in 1965-66, and in Scotland a season later. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 35 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: I’m sure you could pick out just about any law of the game and find a way that it increases the disparity between clubs. Do you not think being allowed to have more subs and field more subs, exacerbates the inequality between clubs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salvo Montalbano Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 I think for a while after three subs were permitted it was the case that one had to be a goalkeeper? Clubs had lobbied for 3 subs to make sure a replacement keeper would always be available and with it being a specialised position it was so agreed. A few years later (possibly less?) clubs lobbied to be allowed to have any three players, not 2 plus a keeper. I've always thought 5 subs was more than enough at pretty much any level - GK, a central defender, full back, midfielder and forward for example would cover almost every eventuality even it meant someone playing slightly out of position due to injury while also allowing a bit of tactical flexibility. 7 subs, or 11 as it seems to be in some places (is it still 12 in internationals) seems overly excessive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Do you not think being allowed to have more subs and field more subs, exacerbates the inequality between clubs?I’m tired MT. I’m not playing this game over the number of subs on the bench. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said: I’m tired MT. I’m not playing this game over the number of subs on the bench. That's what they rely on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.