DoofersDad

HT 1-1 FT 2-2 ICT Vigurs County Boyce Time 5 mins

One positive thing was the use of the long throw. I always knew Meekings could throw it long but I hadn't seen Tremarco throw it long before. Surely this is something we should use far more often - not only to get the ball in the box but, as Lawrence suggested earlier, to get the ball down the park quickly from throw ins in our own half.

What an utterly bizarre post from Caley Stan! Things are indeed moving on but evidently not in the world of left wing political thought. I just love the phrase " The working-class has been successfully subdued by easy access to property and cheap consumer goods for the past 35 years"! What this implies is that 35 years of steadily rising living standards for much of the poorer sections of our society is not seen as a positive thing, but as a cynical subjugation of the "working class" by the ruling classes! I put "working class" in quotes because in this day and age surely the very use of the phrase is evidence of long outdated reactionary thought. This outdated left wing thinking requires a "them and us" philosophy. It requires social division in order to find a cause on which to base a culture of victimisation and grievance. This then allows the left wing leaders to satisfy their egos by leading the "people" in "demanding significant change from the political system". Using the phrase "working class" denies the significant progress that has been made over recent decades in improving the lot of the poorest in our society and in enabling people from poorer backgrounds to succeed in life on the strength of their ability rather than their background. It is no coincidence that most working people now enjoy a far better standard of living since the old style union barons had their power removed and the concept of partnership working was established. Of course there is still far too much unfairness in our society, but the way to address that is not to return to the confrontational "them and us" politics of the past, but to build on the consensual politics of the centre and the partnership approach. The electorate's failure to understand that coalition Government requires political compromise has shifted votes to both the left and right and has opened the door for an unfettered Tory party to take office. Osborne's appalling proposal to raise the threshold for the 40% tax rate at a time of austerity is clear evidence that the curse of negative "them and us" politics has returned on both sides of the political spectrum. Caley Stan is right to lump the awful Donald Trump in with the SNP, but it is not a "working class" base that unites them. Rather it is an exploitation of the "them and us" philosophy and the unremitting exploitation of the perceived fears of their supporters. Trump stokes up fears about Muslims and Mexicans, so proposes to ban Muslims from entry to the country and build a wall to keep the Mexicans out. The SNP stokes up fears about the impact of years of Tory rule on the Scottish "working class" and proposes to break up a long standing and highly successful partnership. Both, in their different ways, are examples of reactionary and divisive political ideology. At a time when we need political leaders to work together in a spirit of partnership and understanding and to demonstrate fairness and compassion, we see politicians of both left and right going back to the failed divisive and sectional politics of the past. It's all very sad.

I hope he signs. He may not have the personality of Brill but he seems a more solid keeper overall. Of all Hughes' signings, he is the one clear success.

I agree you need to treat individual polls with caution but I have quoted the latest YouGov poll as tracked on the "whatscotlandthinks.org website. A growing surge of support for independence since the referendum is, of course, an urban myth put forward by the SNP. The truth is that of 34 polls tracked since the referendum, only 8 have shown a majority in favour of independence and only one poll has shown support at more than 50%. More recently, only one of the last 10 has shown a majority in favour of independence with the latest poll at 40% showing the lowest level of support since the referendum. It is perhaps too early to say whether this is the start of a discernible shift away from a pro-independence view. What is clear is that there is absolutely no move of opinion towards a level of support for independence which would justify a second referendum. Support for independence is and always has been a view held by a minority of people in Scotland.

Elections to the Scottish Parliament take place on 5th May. That is not far away now. There is an assumption that the SNP will coast back into office with an increased overall majority and therefore attention seems to be focussing rather more on the EU referendum and the continuing independence debate. But the latest YouGov poll shows support for the SNP at below 50% for the first time since the general election. They put SNP support for the constituency seats at 49% and for Regional List seats at 43%. Is this a trend that will continue when the SNP's record in Government is examined a little closer? Whilst it seems inconceivable that the SNP will not be the largest single party, is it possible that other parties could gain enough support to prevent an overall majority? The Scottish Government Budget has increased by 10% in the last 4 years from £33.8 billion in 2012/3 to £37.2 billion in 2015/6. How well has the SNP Government spent this money? Should they have used their devolved powers to raise additional money via the Council Tax and, this year, through income tax? Both Labour and the Lib Dems have pledged to raise income tax rates to support essential services. Is this a vote winner or a vote loser? What other issues will affect the way people vote? Be assured that as the election is now just 7 weeks away, this debate will be a short one.

Interestingly, the latest opinion poll is putting support for independence at just 40%. It seems as though support for independence has peaked and this would explain the SNP's desperation to reinvigorate the debate before support for independence and the SNP falls to a level where not even the most fanatical of Nats could justify a further referendum.

I see Sturgeon has finally given up any pretence of having any respect for the democratic process. She has announced that the SNP will be campaigning for a 2nd indy referendum regardless of how the EU vote goes. It is no longer a question of making a reasoned (albeit flawed) argument that a Brexit, despite a Scottish vote to stay in the EU, is a sufficient change in circumstances to justify a 2nd referendum. They are going for a 2nd "once in a generation" referendum come what may and before they have even bothered to see how the new devolved powers work. It really is quite shameful. On the plus side, it does mean that the EU debate in Scotland can be about the EU and not about Independence. Not that anyone in the SNP will be wanting to debate the EU much. To do so would only draw attention to the absurdity of wishing to remain part of a massive bureaucracy in which an independent Scotland would have little influence but would be increasingly bound by it's very extensive legislation, yet at the same time, wanting to leave a long standing union in which it has major influence and from which it is increasingly getting devolved powers.

Yes. We might have done better last night if Liam Hughes had picked the side and John Hughes had played as striker.

Seemingly he lost a contact lens and couldn't see straight. He appeared to be indicating to the bench that he needed to come off but they weren't having it. It was a farcical episode but I think the fault for that must lie with the bench rather than Oxley. Unless they had a spare lens readily to hand then they should have substituted him. To have a keeper with blurred vision on the park puts other players at risk as well as the obvious risk of losing a goal because the keeper can't see! I've no idea whether a referee can insist on a substitution in such circumstances but I'm sure someone will know. Of course, if it was all an act by Oxley then he should have been sent off.

I don't know what to make of that. I really couldn't believe the starting line up. It seems strange that all of a sudden both Meekings and Foran are fit enough for a full 90 minutes and that Wedderburn, Horner and Hughes are preferred to Polworth, Williams, Roberts and Storey. Were the 4 of them all injured or unwell to some extent such that they were deemed only fit enough for the bench? I would love to hear what the manager says about that. Despite that, I thought we started pretty positively and took the game to Hibs. But as is so often the case, there was little quality of delivery and neither Foran nor Hughes were sharp enough to look threatening. Slowly Hibs came into the game more and were gifted a couple of soft goals for a half time scoreline they scarcely deserved. Second half we improved with the introduction of Storey and Williams with Storey often threatening down the left wing. I can't fault the effort but it was mostly huff and puff and very little quality. It was the first time I have seen Hughes play and I thought he was very poor. He never seemed to make himself available and did little with the ball on the few occasions he didn't let the defender get to the ball first. It says a lot for the imbalance in the squad that he stayed on the park for the full 97 minutes. Hibs have certainly got quality but they started nervously and ended very nervously after Vigurs' composed finish. They were there for the taking but the sad truth is that we no longer have the quality in the team to exploit these opportunities. We now have a battle to stay in the top flight and on this form I will be mightily relieved if we finish the season in 10th place.

At least we are consistent!

We weren't knocked out of the League Cup by lower league opposition - it was worse than that. We got knocked out by County

Er .... No! That's our defence of the trophy over - but at least we remain champions until another team lifts the trophy on Cup Final day.

HT 0-1 FT 0-2 ICT Roberts Hibs Cummings Ist goal 33 mins

I see you have no takers. But I agree that these are just the sort of things we should have some info about, but don't. We don't because nobody knows although I would doubt we would get better trading terms with EU countries than we do now. Michael Gove has said that officials keep telling him that EU regulations mean he can't do certain things that the Government wants to do in line with manifesto commitments. If he, as Government Minister doesn't know the extent to which the EU impacts on everyday life, how on earth are we supposed to? I guess it comes down to a gut feeling about whether you feel the general principle of cooperation and increasingly closer political and financial union with our European neighbours is a good thing or not. On balance I think it is and so if the vote was today I would vote to stay in the EU. But I'm open to arguments which might give a good case to leave!

As you wish. The merger's history. Two fine clubs with a proud history merged and we now have a bigger and far more successful club. It's called progress and is something we should celebrate.

With the SNP having just forced through their austerity budget as part of their unholy alliance with the Tories, we really should be focusing on the Holyrood elections first of all. It is not good that the EU referendum comes so soon after because attention will focus on the splits in the English Tories over Europe rather than the record of the SNP government in Scotland. Personally I am not really wanting to talk about the EU until the Holyrood elections have been and gone. But if people want to talk about the EU then for goodness sake raise a few issues of interest to you rather than complaining about others not doing so.

Enjoy Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible.

Yawn

But yet in your 3 posts you haven't raised a single thing yourself. As a number of posters have pointed out, it is the SNP who have high jacked the referendum to drum up further grievance for their independence campaign. Only Alex has tried to defend the SNP position by pointing out good reasons for Scotland to be part of the EU, but he seems to miss the point that these are also reasons why Scotland is also better being part of the UK. It would be helpful if the SNP would actually accept the will of the people as expressed in the independence referendum and respect the democratic process that follows. We voted to be part of the U.K. and therefore must accept the will of the UK as a whole. Only when the SNP can show a bit of leadership for a change and honour basic democratic principles can there be any hope of having a proper debate in Scotland on the issues which matter.

Actually, it was probably one or more too few. Two or more normal sized holes had become one big one!

HT 0-0 FT 1-2 ICT Storey Opp Ross Time 51

HT 1-0 FT 3-1 ICT Mutombo Opp Griffiths Time 14 mins

Big result. It was nice to get a bit of luck with the referee's decisions for a change, but regardless of how much Aberdeen bleat (and they will bleat a lot) we were the better side. It was a good team effort and we showed more desire to win throughout the park. We do so much better when we adopt a more "up and at em" approach and look to get forward. Too often in the past when we get in the lead we tend to sit back and defend the lead. Tonight we kept pressing forward and got a 3rd, after which Aberdeen wilted. A great night's entertainment!