absent friend

Do bench-warmers get the same win bonus as the team out on the park?? If not - is it not possible that Brew was rewarding his more experienced players by sending them on for more reward, even if it was only for a short time!

I can not believe the poor commentry on this game. ''Black gets a free kick outside the box'' ...''Gretna attacking....'' Sorry but what happened between times, apart from the gritter on the bridge!!

If the other players in ICT shirts, especially Niculae, had put as much into the game as Rossco I doubt if we would be lamenting the loss but crowing over our first win over the Dons!!

Well, I suppose this thread just proves we all have opinions - so here is mine. Bayne I felt was as good as could be expected trying to head flick high balls, in a gale, to non existent team mates! Niculae, someone I feel is often the butt of political criticism, was anything but an international player, leaving Bayne so far up the park with no back up from him, to assist. On the subject of running, he(Niculae) was like a cart horse at times and seemed to offer his wonderful flicks to non-existent team mates and then standing glowering at this non-mind reading teammate, as if it was his fault! He also fed the opposition on occasions as well. Our defence was well in control until that stupid challenge. My son, a Dons supporter( I know, it hurts) was in the Merkland stand and thought we had a 'stone wall' penalty with Langfield in deep dooda BUT it was away at the far end from us so maybe we will see it on the box and find out if we were robbed. Our manager although very involved in the game, seemed to be at odds with the supporters in his vision of the match and again showed reluctance to make the substitutions that we expected. All in all the wind was the winner but well done to the travelling and local, ICT support!!

I, for one, hope he is right as well and we win by a bucketfull. Please be careful on the drive down here today, we need all the noise we can get inside Pittodrie, so take extra care! HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU ALL!!

I think it was the great Gary Player who remarked - ''It is strange, the more I practise the luckier I become'' Maybe we have found the reason for our new 'good-luck' - Brews work ethic!!

BUT - C1C3 - the diddy men have done it before as your name shows. Have faith, I am all excited and can't wait till Sunday - just in case!! I think you have a typical ICT supporters reserve, we are wee, we don't deserve to be in with the big boys, what if we are humiliated - I share then all but over 90 mins we can do it!!

Well the Falkirk match is over, Celtic did not 'scrape' though but appeared to win at a canter- however - they will experience the fall from a loftier height when the stuff hits the fan on Saturday! I believe... on Saturday, ICT will indeed have another headline highlighting their win over Celtic and the only downside will be that Rangers will, no doubt, surge forward in the league. Brewster will be put forward, by the Record, as the man for the Scotland job. ICT fans will still have doubts regarding his managerial ability and call for CC to be returned as we have difficulty in this 'four in a row' nonsense!

Could it not also be a case of Malky being an excellent trainer/asst manager BUT maybe a wee bit short on the PR side of things. We all get excited over some changes, for the better, in our working lives and maybe Malky displayed that by going to press early!

Damned if they do and damned if they don't!! If the club had put out a statement prior to the issue being cut and dried, as it would appear journalists and Malky did, and things went wrong so that Malky was not then employed, by them, wouldn't the posters have had a field day!! HOWEVER If they do it correctly - they are still criticised!! You can please some people some of the time......................!!

I must admit that I was in the Mee camp re Brewsters return - could not imagine a worse managerial selection for the club and the morale of the supporters! I have in the past two games shifted my view somewhat and now feel that given a supportive assistant manager, we may be OK this season after all. However, I find that should we now surge ahead and people do not support the club as they are then having to eat a bit of humble pie, so disappointing. Humble pie does taste rather nice if one is proved wrong in a positive way!

Is this not all a matter of degrees or perhaps, more realistically, spur of the moment reaction? Scenerio one - Bayne misses an open goal in the first few minutes of a game. Scenerio two - Bayne misses an open goal against Rangers in the 90th minute, for us to win the game. In the first scenario I accept that Scotty will remain silent, perhaps. In the second scenario I do NOT accept Scotty will remain silent as he will be all charged up, as will we all be and Graham will get pelters AND expect it!! The McAllister situation is totally different - the type of 'supporter' (not) that behaves in this way to our own player, before he even takes the field of play, has been identified and this part of the old thread should be put to bed.

Simply win two games on the trot and the atmosphere will be changed!! Success breeds happiness and happiness is infectious and soon the supporters will infect the non - supporters, the takings will rise - we will sign one of the top players queuing at the door for a game and this new signing, smiling Mr Ronaldo, will make a difference to the results!! MAGIC!!

Fraser is a shot stopper - instinctively superb - but can not handle the pressure! Give him time to think and the lad seems to be caught out each time. His defence, last night, rarely passed back and I believe that they are aware of his uncertainty and therefore this puts them under non required pressure. This pressure can then lead to goals! Against Aberdeen, at home, the keeper was an integral part of the defence and was involved in moving the ball across the field as his defence passed back to him( no doubt some smart ar.e will come on and refer to his dead ball kicking) If they, the defence, had the same opinion of Zibi that the posters on here do, I submit that the pass backs would not have occurred!

From Johnboy ''.... Surely it should be borne in mind that one is earning 3 times as much as the other'' Are you now suggesting that the players run around the park, on a Saturday, with their incomes's showing and we can then compare them ? for ??? Or is it that a player on a higher income must run faster than a player on a lower one? Or maybe he should score more goals? Or by your ??'s for players performance, his goals should be more spectacular!! I accept that I am only an 'armchair/terracing manager' but even I realise that there is more to a player than just scoring goals - if a player assists in 10 goals and does not score himself is he then deemed to be a failure, in your opinion? And, believe it or not, the opposition are aware of a good players ability and will set out to nullify this threat to them but this then leaves the other attackers more free to be shining stars and score the goals!

ET & P!! At 3-1 to ICT it will be - R U T! Right Up Them!!

Well I am going to be boring and not aggressive, by stating that not many teams would have stayed with us on Sunday, if we had a Bayne type player on the park to knock down some of the superb balls that were coming in and being met by a taller defence. I accept that during the first 30 mins it looked as if the Dons had two extra players on the park and someone, I assume Brew, sorted that out. Like you, I fail to understand why Brew subs players so late in a game, unless we were winning and this was then used as a time wasting tactic. How Bayne can come on with little time left and expect to get the service he needs, in that short time, beat me! I see subbing as a graph, as players slow down in a game, ours and theirs, you bring on players to take advantage of the situation or if it is ours, bring a higher degree of life back into that area of the field. Doing it with mins to go does not address either of the the above scenarios and other than giving the new players a run out, I wonder why he bothers.

Perhaps you may be unaware of the strict 'no member - no entry' now prevailing at the golf clubs at Pittodrie, irrespective of past loyalties. I have therefore approached the committee of the Bon Accord(the one nearest the stadium) where I am a member and asked if I could have dispensation to block sign in the ICT supporters, on the night. The answer was YES!! The door person may challenge you and if he does, mention Bill MacDonald and the above agreement and it will be OK. I, of course, have a vested interest in this! To travel all the way from home and be refused entry for a drink, with perhaps no time for any alternative venue, due to stricter controls, is not going to provide the correct attitude before the game AND speaking of game, we need all the lubrication we can get to work the tonsils for 90 mins of Heaven! After Sunday they cannot be so lucky again...1-3, ...1-3,....1-3,....1-3

If Mike has been replaced by a blunderful keeper, even for one game, it raises doubts over his ability(a blunderful keeper is better than you Mike) and of course the ability of the management team, who assess the players on an ongoing basis and not on a media hyped description of the respective players! Who is to say if Mike would have made a difference to the score, if he was in goals? Mike will return, better for the experience, but don't see what was not evident at yesterday's game, the keeper may or may not have made a mistake but did not appear to do anything other than give help to his defence and they required it - and they appeared to have confidence in the 'clown'!!

If Fraser had lost that same goal for us on Sunday would the same cries be on here? As far as the kicks are concerned, I ask anyone on here to defend Fraser's kicking, we all know it leaves a lot to be desired! When we come down to the goal, should Young have been allowed to get into the shooting position, how hard was the shot, how early did the keeper see it, was there spin on the ball. I am pleased that the posters, in the main, are able to answer the above points when confirming that he is a 'clown of a keeper'. I was possibly one the nearest spectators to him and I don't know the answer to the above points! He got down, albeit too late, but he did not stand against the post smoking his Hamlet as the postings seem to suggest. Colours to the mast - I am a MF admirer as a keeper BUT I am not blinkered! Anyone watching our situation with MF knows that Brew should have sent out the sub keeper to warm up behind MF's goal in the past but then the pundits on here would see that as unfair on our young keeper but not when it happens to the 'clown'. MF will be a better keeper by being shown he has to fight to be top dog! Just look at the Dons keeper - kept out of the team for a close season 'discussion' with his manager, until his team was lying 3rd bottom of the league before the manager takes him back AND NOW HE IS IN THE SCOTLAND SQUAD! Who can say that viewing the park from the subs bench warrents a transfer request from a keeper? MF will come back more determined to keep his place and he also may be destined for higher awards in the future but I do not feel that yesterdays keeper's overall performance a) cost us the game or b) he should be dropped because of it. Our defeat was down to defensive lapses - staying off the attacking player for too long and heading into your own net - NOW THAT IS A BLUNDER!!

Well, for what it is worth, my thoughts are that we should have easily won this game! It was a tactical error to have small(ish) players up front and play high balls into them - Aberdeen's defence, as has been confirmed above, were mopping up all of them and there were some superb balls played in from wide. We should have had Bayne on to knock the ball down to an incoming forword OR play on the deck with the team we had. From the half hour mark up to the final whistle I felt we were the better team. The goal was poor defending and poor goalkeeping - the keeper did look very nervous at the start with his initial non-pressured kicks so embarrassing he must have wished he was still on the bench. Under pressure he was no problem and as the game went on he handled the kicking part of his game as well. The defence must have a lot of confidence in him considering the amount of pass backs, under pressure, they gave him.

''He did not slander the club or anyone in it, he did not steal or rob the club of anything.And his standard of football does not show any significant reduction does it in which case surely he is giving the club value for his wages?'' You're having a laugh, I think! He robbed the club of the clean cut image we enjoyed and he was a role model. (Wait until he plays and listen to the opposition support, when he is on the ball and tell me this is what you want to hear directed at ICT players) He robbed the club of his value as a player (whatever his transfer value was has now been reduced - clubs waiting to sign him, don't be daft!) He robbed the club of the innocence of the young(boys and girls at a very young age may be subjected to references to drugs whenever he plays and a football game does not need that) I also feel that the club will be subject to drugs testing in a less random way, to establish if there is a drugs scene within the squad. To sum up - give the boy a chance, give him support BUT don't underestimate the harm he has done to the club, by his actions!!

The dropping of Langfield at Aberdeen from No1 to the bench for a period of time appears to have made him a better keeper! My memory of him last season was not the shot stopper currently on display. Maybe rest Mike for a wee while and try a change - maybe a winner all round!

Heavy day or maybe the Bombay Sapphire kicking in! Of course, I meant Mike and not Mark! I don't know if Mark is now getting a chance to make a tit of himself. It is however kind of you to bring my mistake to my attention. Thank you.

Whilst I accept Brews point that a keepers mistake is always spotted and indeed can be fatal, they should be given a chance, having viewed the goals over and over again, in my opinion, they are all the keepers fault and blatant faults at that! Where was the defence? Who cares! It is the job of the keeper to save the goals when the ball comes into his domain and he did not do this! End of! Should he be replaced? Of course. He can expect no more. He must accept that his lack of goal-keeping skill lost the team two points. If he was a forward who has lost his way and was 'rested' who would complain? He is human and may need his confidence restored and that will not come under the spotlight in the first team- the reserves for a couple of games could produce a more confident player with his mind on the job! It would also allow us and Brew, to see what we have in reserve and that is no bad thing as all we seem to hear is what happened to him in the old days. A run out will allow us to pass judgement on his keeping ability NOW and he may, with his experience, give the defence more confidence than a keeper under stress. Just look back my previous postings and you will see I am a Mark fan and I feel the above will give us a better keeper in time.