Uilleam

Wouldn't be Scottish, if we were. All the best to you and your bride. Hope you have a great day.

Imagine what gear they would be in post "Independence".....

Agreed. A man among men.

My very best wishes to you both, as you enter that Vale of Tears. (I assume that you are old enough to know what you are doing.)

Some always fell on stony ground (or stoney): the old story (not storey).

A guest on the next edition of "Off the Ball", perhaps?

Goldson. For some reason, this ever so solid, ever present, player seems to have been overlooked by every other poll.

Who is the "Man of the Season", based on the match by match polls?

2 goals, so Roofe.

Do you think that Sturgeon will demand a new vote?

An easy mistake to make. Actually, although this is little known, Kant was a keen savouries man; no lover of the Bourbon Cream, he. In fact he devoted a whole volume to savoury cuisine: A Critique of Practical Seasoning (1788). You're welcome.

In idle moments, with tea, or coffee, I have often reflected on the biscuit, and on which is the better: The Caramel Log, or The Kit Kat Chunky? Despite assiduous research, I have yet to come to a conclusion.

I've been looking at the League Table: a thing of beauty, like nothing I have seen since......well, let's not go into that today. Anyway, here's a thing: Today's opponents, the Sheep, finished in 4th place, a staggering 46 points behind the Champions; this is actually 1 point more than 5th placed St Johnstone totalled for their entire campaign. Furthermore, thanks to our lads' efforts today, the Sheep finished with a goal difference of -2; in 4th place.... But, here is the, em, kicker (and it's a brammer): For every goal our lads conceded, they scored 7. F: 92 A: 13 which is kind of impressive for a professional League.

25 points ahead 30 goals better in goal difference I don 't think that they can see us now.

Girly swots

That would get you his tattoos.

Time for a change!

Haggerty really takes the biscuit.

No Willie Waddell? No Scot Symon? And, given the sentiment expressed, no Steven Gerrard? Good effort; but must try harder.

I' m not a critic of that approach. If I am a critic of anything, I'm a critic of differential application of the law.

An "illegal gathering" is an illegal gathering, whether it is 'spontaneous', or 'organised'. Both represent breaches of the law, and must be treated thus. One may be seen as a more serious infraction than the other, but that does not free the lesser action from illegality. The reasons for assembly are irrelevant, although they may figure in any assessment of the public interest in undertaking prosecution, the nature and extent of charges, and the sanctions imposed following establishment of guilt.

A gathering is a gathering, irrespective of its reason, or purpose. The motives for a gathering would come into play only in matters of punishment.

Provided it is not Lord Mulholland presiding, we should get away with it.