DoofersDad

No. It's people who don't like short contracts saying they don't like short contracts when short contracts are offered and people who don't like longer contracts saying they don't like longer contracts when longer contracts are offered. My take is that longer contracts should be offered for the better players. It provides consistency and offers potential for income should decent offers come in. A longer contract is a real risk with fringe players (unless they are not being paid much) but the carrot of a longer contract should be there if they can prove themselves.

Can't accuse the new manager of lacking passion. Had to have treatment at half time for a cut on his head caused by cutting it on the duggout when he jumped up to celebrate Billy's goal! Said on his post match interview that he may need to wear a helment like Peter Cech. Quality!

This was my first chance to go to a game since Yogi took over and I fellt it was a pretty good game on the whole. For a while after they equalised I feared we could get over-run but we tightened up and gave their more creative players very little space when on the ball. As the game wore on we got better and created some decent chances. With Foran, Draper and Vincent all out this was the sort of match which could have been difficult and I think credit must go to Shinnie in particular for us managing to have the majority of the possession. Shinnie was my MOTM but apart from that I think IHE has it about right. The disappointment for me was again Nick Ross. He can be a neat and tidy player and it was he who put Shinnie through for the penalty incident, but apart from that he huffed and puffed to little effect. We suddenly looked far more threatening when he came off and surely his days in the starting line up must be numbered. Williams was OK, but having moved wide I was hoping for a bit more from him and Greenhalgh offered more guile and threat we he came on near the end. Good calls from Yogi to substitute the 2 of them although doing so earlier might have reaped rewards. Brill rode his luck and hopefully he'll learn from today. However, just one observation about his distribution. Sometimes it is very poor and I wonder why he doesn't quickly throw or bowl the ball out more. It was an open game and often he had Doran, Williams or Tremarco in clear space but just hoofed the ball up the park. In contrast, Cierzniak threw the ball out on two or three occasions and set up promising moves. More positives than negatives today though. It looks to me that we could consolidate our position as a mid table / top six side under Hughes - and do that by playing good attacking football. We just need that little bit more confidence in front of goal and we could go on a run again.

I for one would be pleased if he returned. I felt he was under-rated when he was here because he started slowly and I think had already been written off by many as just an average player at best before he began to develop some decent form. He has good vision and IMHO is a better player than Nick Ross and would provide more incisive linkage with Doran and Mckay. He also scores more than Nick and is probably better at free kicks than anybody we have at the moment.

The fact of the matter is that the policies of the SNP are more popular than the concept of Independence. The dilemma for Salmond and the SNP is that they are more likely to win "yes" votes if they can give voters the impression that a vote for independence is a vote for SNP policy. But by linking the two they are open to charges from the Unionists that they are turning the referendum into an election. Of course the Unionists are going to bang on about it. They know that a focus on the deeper longer term constitutional issues, regardless of the merit of the argument, is not going to enthuse an apathetic electorate in the way that short term political policy can. Salmond will be forced to adopt a strategy linking independence and SNP policy whilst strenuously denying he is doing any such thing. It's a risky strategy but he will certainly lose if he does what he demands of others - i.e.sticks to the real issues.

I think he will be a good signing for them. It is a very strong attacking line up United have and I would not be surprised to see them end the season as runners up.

...and 5 points ahead of them. Had Dundee United not got a late equaliser we would still be 4th but only 3 points ahead of the team in 6th.

I'll not be buying it but it borought a smile to my face and fair play to the guy for the effort - I wish I had the talent to do something like that. It's not going to be a club anthem but it's the sort of song that if sung to a group of fans in the pub or the coach would earn a big round of applause.

Can't agree with that. It is after all only a handful of players from the 50s and 60s who are talked about as "greats". The 3 exceptional players Dougal mentions undoubtedly bear comparison to the likes of Ronaldo and Messi in the modern game but bear in mind we are not comparing like with like as the nature of the game and the level of media exposure is so different now. Eusebio, Puskas and Pele played in a much harder era. Pitches were much more uneven and referees did not afford the kind of protection flair players receive these days. Flair players were targets for the defensive hard men who not only tackled hard but who routinely kicked and dead-legged opponents off the ball. They got away with that because there were few games being televised and even when they were, there might only be one or two cameras following the ball. It was only exceptional players with a mental and/or physical toughness to go with exceptional ball skills that came through these handicaps to shine. Remember also that the limited TV coverage of matches means that only a fraction of what these players did on the park is recorded and therefore it sometimes gives the impression that their fame is based on just 2 or 3 outstanding performances. Make no mistake, the 3 players Dougal identifies were exceptional players in their day and would have been exceptional players in any era.

You seem to forget that prior to Butcher leaving, Foran, when asked about his future, had stated that it depended on what the manager was going to do. Butcher goes and Foran signs. It's interesting but it doesn't stink. Any candidates coming to the club knew that Foran had signed and if they didn't like it then they had a choice as to whether to apply or not. I reckon the signing of Foran will have been seen as a positive thing as far most managerial candidates were concerned.

Far too early to make judgements on Hughes' performance although perfectly reasonable to comment on specifics such as Raven's omission from the starting XI. All teams have good and bad spells. Dundee United looked invincible recently with a run of 6 wins on the trot, scoring 4 or more in 5 of those games. They have now lost 3 in a row including losses by 3 clear goals to St J and St M. It happens.

Having been away for a few weeks I have yet to see ICT play under JH. Whilst not my first choice, I was not unhappy with his appointment but from what I am reading there are some worrying signs. To be fair to Hughes, it is always difficult taking over a team that is doing well. If you go into a winning dressing room and immediately change things then you set yourself up for criticism if the level of performance dips at all. I think Hughes has taken the view that he wants to observe the set up he has inherited. That's fair enough but the dip in form which had been apparent before Butcher left has accelerated. Before Butcher left we had lost the fluidity of early season but still managed to win ugly from time to time. With the uncertainty of what the new manager wants and now with Foran's injury the form has slumped further and points are hard to come by. Hughes has now had plenty of time to observe the team and it is time to take some decisive action to stop the slide. We do have to be patient though. In my view, the success of early season was built on the midfield strength of Vincent, Foran and Draper. They were effective at breaking up the play and providing defensive support to allow Raven and Shinnie to press forward on the flanks. This in turn created space and opportunity for the forward players to create scoring opportunities. The loss of Vincent has been a significant factor in a gradual loss of form and we can't expect the same level of performance with Foran out, let alone Draper as well now. We are going to struggle in the next few games whatever Hughes does and this must be seen as an opportunity to give other players a chance and see how they perform on the big stage. Coaches may learn a lot from the training ground but you never know how players will perform in a match until they have a genuine opportunity on match days. Hughes will not be unaware of how we played earlier in the season and he will have studied all the videos. What worries me, therefore is why on earth Raven is not starting at right back if he is fit. Surely Hughes knows how effective he was pressing forward and how much better Doran plays when Raven is offering support? The experiment of playing Shinnie on the right must end. Raven is better at RB and in the absence of both Vincent and Foran (and now Draper as well) I feel we really need Shinnie playing in a ball winning midfield role. The limited use of subs is also perplexing - there would be a lot to learn by using subs earlier when certain players in the starting XI are having an off day. We also have to play to our strengths. Up front we have an instinctive but very small striker in McKay supported by Ross and Doran who are also small. The long high ball is clearly not the way to go. We need to stretch the play wide and play the ball to feet and into the spaces. It really isn't rocket science. In that context, one final point about the importance of Raven playing down the right is that most teams in the league are better defensively on the right than the left. IMHO Raven and Doran should be encouraged to expose these weaknesses, get behind the defense and drill low balls into the centre for Billy. Not only is this likely to be our most productive route to goal, it is also great to watch.

Hartley was not impressed with the boards dilly dallying I hear . That may be true but that would not be a reason for turning down an offer. It would suggest that Hartley was not convinced that the job was for him and was looking for an excuse to turn us down. Our Board may not do things quickly but I am sure they do things correctly and Hartley would know that he would get good support from this Board. But if he doesn't want the job then so be it. It's a shame because I think he would've been good for ICT and ICT would have been good for him.

BBC news reporting that both Hartley and Shiels have been ruled out. Hughes has also been interviewed and is now expected to be offerred the job

I have no issue with Celtic going to Marbella - it's the fact that they plan to return that I object to.

I think folk are being a bit harsh on Hughes. He has a real passion for the game and with the right club with a supportive Board he could do very well. My gut feeling favours Hartley but I would be happy with Hughes. The main thing though is that whoever the Board appoints and whatever folk may have said about certain candidates on this forum, we give them our full support.

Funny that someone who only registered on the site on Friday should suddenly be the person to come on here with this.

Clearly the stand out tie of the round. Mind you, I'm a bit concerned about a 12.15 kick off on the Sunday to suit the TV companies as getting down to Stranraer in the middle of February will not be easy.

Don't you mean subscription - or was this something you could watch on your tablet device?

Celtic v The Rangers, Aberdeen v Dundee Utd and us against anybody else would do nicely for me.

Maybe a bit of credit to Celtic would be in order. They are out of Europe and the league cup and will be wanting to ensure they win the league and cup double. Sounds like they produced a thoroughly professional performance and any other team in Scotland would have taken a beating against them today. It just happened to be Hearts.

No. It just means that as Hibs manager, he'll be looking forward to us knocking Hearts out of the competition.

True. But great work then from Doran to set up McKay for the finish. It is a shame Nick couldn't have shown the same vision when the game was a bit tighter.

Very poor first half. Morton defended deep and we lacked penetration and support for the front players. Polworth was particularly poor and many managers would have hooked him at half time. The late goal in the first half made a big difference - it probably settled our players whilst forcing Morton to be more postive themselves which in turn created more space for us. Most of our penetration came yet again from Doran who is a real example to others in the way he is always looking for the ball and looking to go forward. If his percentage of good final balls and his shooting could improve a bit he would be tremendous. MacKay was quality and Shinnie was the other player who had a cutting edge coming forward. Very much the 3 stand out players for me. Polworth settled in the 2nd half and had a couple of decent efforts. His delivery from corners was good but he needs to hassle for the ball more and to be far more effective in his distribution. I also don't get the Nick Ross adulation - he was tidy enough for the most part and there were one or two more telling passes but mostly it is the safe option from him and the creativity and penetration come from elsewhere. He is bullied off the ball too much and seems reluctant to shoot. It was hard work and the score flattered us. However the one high spot was the 3rd goal which was a thing of real beauty. A real top quality counter attacking team move which was worth the entrance money on its own. More of that please and less of the side to side and passing it backwards stuff we saw for too much of yesterday.

Well, you presumably care enough to still be reading this thread,