calscot

Wish I had checked the link. I hate clicking on the DR. Quickly navigated away without reading.

I disagree, the SFA shouldn't allow it otherwise clubs could get greedy and create the situation where either or both the OF perpetually get home ties all the way to the semis, which is unfair on the other upper SPL sides. I do realise that ironically it would probably be a handicap to us this season.

Someone said the deadline for applications was the 17th. Next is shortlisting and interviews. It's the 21st so I can't see how any announcement would be imminent. I think you can have an opinion on the board for their schedule but I can't see how you can criticise them for following it.

For me, politics should be secular, as soon as you start pandering to religions, it gets quite dangerous. Just look at the US and what kind of world they have helped to deliver. Turkey are another example.

What about the Scottish Unionist Party?

Eck does have a reasonable history of short term success, so I would give him credit for that. However, he's been pretty bad at long term, and that's what we ultimately need.

I think I explained it in a very non nit picky and relevant way. I think those that equate them are ignoring a lot of the picture to put their own label on it. I think if you ask people if they are a unionist and if they want independence, there won't be as big a correlation as you think. It's not that binary.

Fair enough, but I still think the answers we have are beyond bland. For example: [h=4]Q: WHAT DID YOU CHANGE IMMEDIATELY WHEN YOU CAME IN?[/h]A: Two things really, the people, we had to bring in some people to build the team and also the environment. We have spent some time working on those two things and I think we have now got a good team in place and an elite environment where we can start to really action the vision. We set the bar pretty high, from the outset we had a clean sheet of paper for us to pretty much do it how we wanted to and go in the direction we wanted. We have worked hard on bringing the right people in and we have changed the environment. We now in a position to keep going forward, so I don’t think anything has changed we have just actioned the bits we said we would do. A lot of words to say almost nothing: "We brought in the people we wanted and changed the environment." So, in what way have they changed the environment? Imagine being in a job interview and being asked your achievements in your last job: "I improved the department." How? "I changed things". Hmm. [h=4][/h]

I would hope it's against the rules these days. I don't think it's sporting to move home advantage to the opposition for greater money. I neutral venue, reasonably local to the home team, while still not quite right, is still a more sporting compromise.

Fear of independence is different from unionism, for example you can fear losing your job but not be passionate about it or even like it. And I think if you could take all the fear from independence by guaranteeing it would be successful in all areas (impossible I know), the lack of unionism would become apparent - like offering someone a safe, permanent job they like on equal pay in the same building. A lot of staying in the UK was not the carrot but the stick and the No campaign was mostly based on exploiting that. However, I don't really get the impression of fear, more of tediousness as well as more an opposition to big changes with lots of unknowns, and I think when it comes down to putting your cross on the ballot, many more were against Brexit but are now having to deal with it without wanting to be distracted by independence too.

"Good football"? What is that really? I have to ask you, why is it that we bring players and managers from these "better footballing sides" and they still don't do so well - and sometimes look absolutely rubbish? For me one of the obvious answers to why our teams do so badly is that the opposition concentrate on a very physical game which is allowed here and not in Europe. I think that also two legged cup games are different from the league and we had no problem with them last season. If Scottish teams went out in Europe to get the odd draw or sneak a win like against us, they would achieve it but still go out very early and it wouldn't make much difference. They would probably bully their way through a few rounds with Scottish referees. Do they really? I haven't noticed this exceptionally "good football". I think that's more to do with having players who are worth ten times the wages and more. I'm pretty sure we your choice of worst manager in the world could win and somewhat entertain most of the time with their kind of money - in fact he did with a bit less with Whyte running / ruining the club. I really doubt they play Scottish style teams, especially in terms of physicality, but when you give them Scottish teams with a comparably cheaper side to what we have, who then play a quite negative style of tactics, history has shown that they don't always do so well. Playing like Barcelona in any case, is a luxury they can literally afford. Our nearest likeness for resources in Scotland is probably Aberdeen even though it's a few orders less, but I don't see them getting much of your admiration.

I have no idea what you mean. We play football against Scottish sides every time we play them. Although sometimes it does look like they are playing something like rugby or wrestling against us. IMO if you believe you can play any way you like, concentrate on style over substance to please the crowds, and just win automatically, then you're just self-defeating and probably not very successful. That's not a winner's mentality. A winner analyses the game and tries to find the best tactics possible to win against the teams he has to play against, and builds the skills the team needs. Sometimes it's not to some people's taste - like Steve Davis or George Graham for instance. Warburton tried the former and not only failed, he produced football that was not very entertaining in my eyes. However, I have suggested another way which I think could be very exciting football. I couldn't implement it myself, but I'm sure there is someone who can. Of course I could be wrong my version of the solution, but the logic is impeccable. We need to find a very good way to beat Scottish sides - whatever it is. Like Edison, we've been successful in finding a few ways to not do it. We have done it before, but of course it often affected us in Europe. To be honest, you seem to be spoiling for an argument with someone as I doubt there is anyone here who blames all the bad results on bad luck. It would be interesting to know whom you are referring to. I think like me, most people understand there is a lot of luck (or effects of randomness or whatever) to football, and you can easily lose games to it, but if it keeps happening, then there is something more deterministic from the way you play or your attitude or something, as over time the luck or randomness should start to even out. When it's a team who have far greater resources than the opponents, then the majority of the time, a lot of bad luck in a game should have a worst case of a one goal win.

I would be very surprised to find a large number of people who would really call themselves "unionists" in Scotland while away from football tribalism. I doubt it's really on many people's radar, just like in England - people know we're part of the union, but most don't feel the need to bang on about it all the time. I also think you'll find that more Rangers fans vote SNP (and previously Labour) than you want to believe. The Conservative and Unionist party certainly haven't benefited much from support from the majority of Rangers fans.

One of the most uninformative interviews I've ever read...

In my lifetime and in my experience, hitting the woodwork has always been thought of as unlucky rather than a lack of ability (except in extreme cases where it looked easier to score or in a penalty, especially the bar). The team might not have been good enough as it's Hamilton at home and they should have been enough in reserve to overcome any bad luck, but I don't think we need to get into nit picking.

While there are degrees of it, I think being highly stylish is almost impossible in Scottish football these days, as the better the team we have, the more we'll face the parked bus. Even Barca are not stylish when faced with a well organised, very defensive side - as Walter proved, and even they had the advantage that the referee would not allow our team to kick, stamp, wrestle and elbow them off the park. What we need is a team that can quickly and easily change pace, tactics and formations that provide a high number of incisive attacks against a deep sitting 9 man defence, while being able to adeptly defend the counter attack. The entertainment would come from the incessant attempts at goal, and the number of conversions.

Walter can only damage his own reputation and legacy. He's too long in the tooth to want to risk that.

Right now I think we need to get someone in who doesn't require compensation, and have a mutual contract where they agree to leave if certain performance criteria aren't met, in return for them going for free if they are doing well and another club comes in for them and they want to leave. They would leave anyway and so it's all about the compensation. By our recent record we'd save more than we'd gain, and this makes any appointment far less risky. I think there would be two types of takers, those who are out of a job but want back in the game, have self belief and don't want to go down the ladder too much, and those that have ambition, have been successful in the past , but recently had a blip and want to use us as a stepping stone back to a job in a richer league.

I would say some people do, some don't. Obviously enough do to build separate toilets and frequenting the wrong one can probably get you on the sex offenders list.

But it doesn't need to be officially acceptable in the slightest, it's what a lot of people call it. I doubt it's officially acceptable to call Hibernian FC, "HIVs" or Aberdeen FC, "the Sheep Shaggers" but it doesn't mean we can't use it on this forum and need to be pedantically corrected if we do.

Also because it was very easy to make - you simply sewed the three coloured panels together. Improvements in printing has made any kind of flag easy to manufacture cheaply.

In England, very few people know the second verse. And some of the majority who don't, hilariously say that if you don't learn the anthem you should be deported... (BTW I know it as well as an infamous, unofficial sixth verse)

Wales are technically a principality of England...

I can't imagine it would be much different with Rangers fans if the Scottish flag were green. Many fans would even love a blue grass pitch (that's actually blue in colour if you know what I mean). How many Rangers fans often choose not to buy some things if they are green? Maybe I'm pathetic as I'm one of them.