starchief

Now you're being ridiculous

Why not just give him to Hearts to get them out of trouble? Maybe we could get Gary Glen to replace him? Or maybe spend a bit more for a Stuart Duff return? Im quite embarassed we are hanging onto a player that should be at a bigger club like Hearts or Dunfermline. He is desperate to go, so let us get shot of him asap.

I feel sympathy for the fans of Rangers, Hearts and Dunfermline. Not quite so much Gretna as they came from nothing, went to the top and then back again. Most of the supporters dont really know about the financial world and who is telling the truth. All they want to do is support their team, whether thats John Greig and Gary Mackay or Flo and Ngoo. If the finance chiefs give the manager millions, what chance the guy who thinks a balance sheet is something Rolf Harris played to contradict them?

That assumes the No campaign are all English. Obviously not. Thats your own prejudice shining through. BetterTogether was launched and is led by Scotsmen. They simply have a different view of an independent Scotland - one worse for Scotland and the UK. It is you using underhand deception to smear whilst condeming the other side for doing the same. Stick to the facts. This anti-Englishness just puts anyone without a chip on their shoulder off. Still undecided.

Id go for Bardsley as first choice, once he moves on from the Di Canio fall out. Never been a fan of Whittaker at LB. Mulgrew too has better positions.

If Black was betting on ICT to win, that's fine by me. He's supposed to be trying to influence the game for us in that direction. For his own team to lose? Nah. As Yngwie says, clear conflict of interest. Even if he's not aware of it, there's every chance he's not giving 100%. Just that little calculation in his unconscious mind slowing him down by a second.

Cant be right. I thought Butcher never played homegrown players? Well done that man. Dont think aScotland callup would be out of the question in 2 or 3 years.

Thank goodness it's never happened with any ICT players. Quite sure no legends were getting cheered whilst being accused of exactly the same crime.

Shame it wasnt on BBC, then we could have had David Hansen and Sergei Lawrenson, with Hamish Lineker. Seriously, cracking match and gives me more confidence for the future. Even felt vaguely pleased for Lambert, although would have preferred Griffiths to have nicked one.

Which players arent too bad? There is not a single defender of any real quality and no attackers wanted by EPL clubs except the benchwarming Naismith. Midfield ok but not amazing. If Scotland were an EPL club, we would be relegated. England midtable at best. But relying on Championship players like Bridcutt and Hanley in defence is not a mark of excellence.

I'm dreading this. Can't see Scotland getting anything, especially with a new manager.

I think if you read his full post there is no sarcasm. He was asked how many players would get into this team and he answered the ones 'signed' but not eligible. That Rangers massively under-performed is neither here nor there. Little's a decent player too. Think he'd be a decent player for bottom six clubs. Maybe more in a few years.

Everytime I saw them on ESPN last season, McCulloch was outstanding.

1. Ontario, Canada 2. Johnstone, Renfrewshire mainly 3. Really when ICT formed as I was living here. Mild supporter (more quite liked really) of Clach just before it. I liked the area and the whole new team aspect made a difference. Being right there at the start (which I immediately had to decide on as my old team, St Mirren, were first opponents -thought I would get a few years to decide loyalty). 4. Nottingham (via more places than I could count) at the moment but every chance that will change soon (rarely stay in one place for long). Return to Scotland at the end of summer a strong possibility but who knows?

There's no point an on-loan player coming as back-up to three players. May as well stay where he is. The whole point is that ICT would get a player better than the current crop that they could not otherwise afford and Arsenal would get a promising player getting competitive matches.

It is probably then in the best interests of the creditors to sell a prime piece of real estate. It may also be in Hearts long-term interest to start anew. Relegation this year looks a strong possibility, so maybe take that long-term view of building up a la Rangers? Can't say I'm in favour of it but then, my version of the Scottish leagues would be completely different anyway.

Did I miss the news that Richie had been tried and found guilty of anything? Foran was dropped for the last match anyway.

This defies belief. Can you back up those assertions with evidence? England cant vote on Scottish matters. Scottish MPs can vote on English matters. Some could reasonably argue (not me though) that Scotland has more MPs than their population deserves. Personally, Im in favour of far more MPs for everyone. DoofersDad talks complete unbiased unemotive sense. Just the facts ma'am, is all that is needed.

Freedom from living under a government that the country did not vote for, that is run by and for an elite that grows richer and more powerful by the day. Freedom from sending our children to wars that mean nothing to us, from spending billions on those wars and the weaponry they require; freedom to decide what your own economic and social priorities are; and the freedom to take responsibility for those decisions. Those kinds of freedoms. That's what I meant by representative government. But under independence, power is centralised in Edinburgh. Under federalism, power is concentrated at the most local level. That's why I am a federalist - greater freedom in your words, or representation in mine . I'm undecided here how best to get there. At the same token, England has had to put up with Labour when they have been extremely unpopular there - I think they should also be ruled by the party they vote for - again, that would preferably be under federalism but I do think they have every right to complain about the last 15 years of unrepresentative government more than Scotland (80s Thatcherism in reverse). As for the Commonwealth not getting as much as the Olympics. The prize for winning the second division in the Auchtermuchty Under-15s girls' league is quite rightly less than the Champions League. It means far less, has way fewer fans and won't bring in anywhere near the amount of money. It's not comparing like-for-like. Scotland might be bringing in more money than they get out but would that money be coming in if we weren't part of the UK? I have my concerns but I genuinely don't know. Quote one economist and the other side quotes another. My predictions are: - All to play for despite the polls. I anticipate a slight 'Yes' vote. Independence is a rallying call. The status quo doesn't have that (ignoring Rockin' All Over The World natch). A trick has been missed with max-devo to keep the UK together. I'd certainly have voted for that. - I also predict the UK leaving the EU if a referendum gets taken. Again, rebelling against something gets people out. Thinking things are ok doesn't inspire someone on a rainy night to leave their house.

More scare stories and bluff. Most of the funding will come from the Scottish Government. And where do you think they get their money from? Here's a clue, it's the same pot as the Olympics Committee got their funding from.

You already live in a pretty free country. Struggling to see what more freedom there will be. Is a Scotland in closer ties with the EU than the UK is willing and with the Bank of England as the keeper of it's monetary union really independant? If England changes the interest rates, Scotland will have to jump but with less consideration paid to it's needs. And with such a large competitor next door, will Scotland become a much less desirable place to do business? It's not about blind bravehearts but about fiscal sense. It's not so simple, so I'm undecided. For me, it's mostly about a more representative government. That's why I'm much more in favour of devo-max and even more increased federalism. Power at the most local level. Below that of London or Holyrood. So, neither option especially appeals. The case isn't simple for me, so I'm still undecided.

...and the level of debate continues in the gutter....

Rubbish. The Tories would make substantial gains as they are overwhelmingly dominant in England. They are a Unionist party through ideaology, even at the expense of dominating an English parliament for decades. you may disagree with their manifesto but you are being disingenuous to suggest it is through greed or political gain. oh, and both Labour and the Lib Dems are also unionist, so how does a party with so little support like the Tories become the vanguard for anti independence. Make your case but less of the scare stories and bluff. It only turns off the undecideds like myself.

If we can just win that game, I confidently predict at least getting to the quarter-finals.