DoofersDad

It's funny how when there is just the slightest nudge in the box, an accidental contact with an elbow or a face to face confrontation when foreheads gently touch, players collapse to the ground as though poleaxed. but when there are real fisticuffs as at Bradford and Toronto, they all some how manage to stay firmly on their feet.

It was interesting seeing the highlights on the BBC website (if you can bear). To me I can't see Tade did anything to warrant a penalty being awarded. You dont see the whole of the Tansey incident but that certainly looks more of a penalty than the one that was given. Claude's strike was great technique and unlucky not to find the target. We didn't get the rub of the green but then we didn't deserve it either.

Prices will go up if you wait because the cheap tickets will have gone. A while ago I was looking at train prices to Leominster in Herefordshire. The return price was horendous. Two singles were cheaper but what was the cheapest option I could find was to get a single from Inverness to Glasgow, then a single from Glasgow to Crewe and then another single from Crewe to Leominster. Some of the pricing is just unreal. Bus is usually a cheaper option.

He might even get a game.

Well, chum from Brum, if you've been offerred the job I guess you'll have turned it down after that performance. You will understand why we would like Adam Rooney back.

That was bad. The two things for me were the lack of quality on show and the lack of tactical nous from the manager. Tudur-Jones may do well in the future and I thought he started pretty well. Perhaps he's not match fit but he completely faded out of the game after the first 20 minutes. There was simply no invention, no cutting edge and no composure in front of goal. And whilst the team battled well to get possession, when they had the ball they seemed unable to do anything with it. The passing was absolutely dire but then there was so little movement off the ball to give options. This was summed up for me by the number of times Tuffey collected the ball looking to release it quickly but there was never anyone wide and free to collect it and he ended up with the long punt to our 5' 7" target man. And that brings me to the tactics. Why oh why does Terry continue with a tactic which doesn't work and which has never looked like working. MacKay has his good points but for me he needs a big striker alongside. Sutherland is not a winger and is far more effective up front. So as the goals are simply not coming, Terry must know it is time to try something different. St Johnstone pressed high and crowded the midfield and Terry had no answer to it. Substitutions too little too late. Nick Ross looked more likely to create chances than anyone else but didn't really have time to create an impact. The high point was clearlyTokely's inspirational performance. I can't remember seeing a game when one player has been so much better than anyone else in the team. It was therefore very disappointing that his performance did not seem to lift the others. It was almost a case of "let's give the ball away so we can admire some more of Roscoe's defending!" Despite all this gloom, the strange thing is that we actually had the better chances and with finishing of even division 2 standard we would have won the game.

True. It is possible, I guess I meant I think it unlikely we will reach 7th. And the reason for that is that after their confidence boosting league cup win, I can't see Killie dropping enough points against the other bottom 6 clubs to allow us to catch them.

I am surprised nobody has commented on remarks made this week by Perer Lawwell, the Chief Executive of Septic FC. He was speaking about a meeting of the 10 non old filth clubs which discussed proposals to change the SPL voting system which currently requires a 11 - 1 majority to make changes. Mr Lawwell said that meeting without representatives of Septic and HMRC FC was "disrespectful". Doesn't this just sum up what is wrong with scottish football? I would have thought people are at liberty to discuss what they want with whoever they want but Lawwell apparently disagrees. Instead, he seems to think it is perfectly reasonable that if every other SPL team agrees on an issue but Septic and their friends in blue disagree, the overwhelming majority viewpoint is simply ignored and the interests of the ugly sisters holds sway. Now that is disrespectful. Mr Lawwell seems to know as much about the meaning of respect as Craig Whyte knows about the ethics of running a football club.

Let's hope we don't follow up this excellent win with a record low crowd on Wednesday. Hopefully this has removed any lingering doubts from some supporters that relegation was still on the cards and we can properly focus on getting as high up the table as possible. I doubt that 7th is possible but 8th is very realistic and would be a great acheivement given the loss of Rooney and, dare I say it - Munro, together with the terrible luck with injuries.

What is the obstacle that has held this up over the last few months? Can they not get their piggy banks open?

No training. No play in next match.

With the way Dundee and Falkirk are playing at the moment, County could probably afford to lose all their remaining games and still go up.

Great night for County. Not playing but both Dundee and Falkirk lost. They are not going up because they are good, they are going up because everyone else in the division is so inconsistent or downright poor. Nobody has put any pressure on them at all.

Even if the unthinkable happened and JJ triggered a miracle at East End Park, I still fancy us to finish above Hibs and St Mirren.

Very sad, but once the initial shock and grief is passed hopefully the family can gain comfort from the fact he died a very happy and proud man.

I had thought that Lennon was learning a few lessons but he has crept straight back into the gutter with his comments today. It was a tough call for the penalty but I thought the ref got it right. The studio panellists were saying that they couldn't see contact but to be fair, I think there must have been some with the defender coming in at the angle he did although any contact would have been after the ball was played. No penalty was the correct decision but I don't know that the ref could be sure it was a dive, so I think the yellow card was harsh. Lennon had seen the replays before he made his pathetic comments and that makes them so much worse. Even had it been a stone waller, the point he misses is that Celtic should not have been in the position of needing a penalty to simply stay in with a chance of winning the match. Celtic were out thought tactically and the players were less motivated - and that comes down to the manager. Lennon. He should simply have brushed the question aside "the referee thought it wasn't a penalty so it wasn't a penalty" and then gone on to say that it was disappointing to be in the position late in the game where such a decision is important. Should also comment on the goal. Top quality. Good movement of the ball in midfield, a lovely weighted through ball behind the defence, an absolutely perfect first time cross and a crisp header. Celtic's defence was torn apart and made to look like statues. Had Barcelona scored that, the media would be purring about them being different class again. A goal worthy of winning any competition. Well done Kilmarnock!

As Fraz says there may be some minor effect but the analogy of Tesco and Asda really does not work. We all need to eat so we go to Tesco as there is so little choice. When Asda opens those who currently go to Tesco will have a choice to go to Asda instead. If ICT and County are both in the SPL this season and when they both happen to be playing at home on the same day people can choose which match they go to, but the difference is that those who watch ICT don't suddenly have a new option - the option is already there. I accept that there will be a small number of neutrals who just want to watch football and few more will go and watch County than now but I think this will be offset by other factors. The main factor is that any small number we lose when there is a clash of dates will be more than compensated for by the much bigger crowd the derby games will attract. Secondly I expect that with both clubs in the same division the timetabling of fixtures will mean there will be fewer clashes of dates than currently. I'm not convinced about the advertising either. Sponsors will opt for maximum exposure and as long as we are doing better than County and our crowds are bigger then they will choose us over them. In addition, the boost to Highland football that having 2 teams in the SPL and the interest that will generate will help to encourage more sponsorship in total.

Absolutely. I remember him well. I used to go out with his mother.

Listening on the radio. Can't help but fear the worst from what they are saying.

Sensible move. Jim Leishman will take over again initially and it won't cost them anything more. They may also have a senior player lined up for a developing management role. They're doomed with McIntyre at the helm so no point keeping him. Whatever the longer term plan is, sacking McIntyre gives his replacement more time to assess what's needed for next season and there is always the possibilty that the management change could give the team a lift and get them away from the relegation spot. Very good move if the outcome of the Rangers saga is that Rangers are not in the SPL next season and the bottom club will not get relegated in any case.

I have to say I have some sympathy with him. I think this says a lot more about the SFA's abilities than it does Conroy's. Conroy may not be up to refereeing top class matches but by not giving him the top matches the SFA are saying he is even worse than the rest of them. I don't think that is the case. Good luck to him in his role as a doctor. It's a pretty similar job really - trying to suss out who is geniunely injured and who is just trying it on in the hope of getting some award for which they are not entitled.

Ah, but what if during construction they uncover an ancient gypsy burial site? Just stick a few more in and quickly pour the concrete.

I think this is a really difficult question. I don't like cheats and we've had discussions on this forum about cheating in the sense of footballers diving etc. A gut reaction is that drugs cheats in athletics should get banned for life but I don't think a more objective analysis supports that view. I fully understand Charles' anger at an honest and hardworking athlete missing out on glory because someone else cheated but I don't think it follows that someone who cheated on one occasion (and yes, perhaps over a period of time) should be banned for life. There are a number of reasons for this. Firstly, can we really define what cheating is? There are athletes and other sportsmen and women who have been found guilty of "doping" but who have either taken something like a cold remedy unaware that it contained a banned substance or who were given something in a nutrition drink etc by a coach (not Charles, obviously!) and who were unaware they were taking anything wrong. These folk will test positive but are they cheats? Foolish and naive perhaps, but surely not cheats. Some substances are banned because they allow athletes to perform better than they could without them. But it is all quite arbitrary really. For instance, athletes are allowed certain pain killing injections - and what do they do? They allow athletes to perform better than they could without them. So, it's OK to use a pharmaceutical substance to allow you to perform better after you have overdone your training in an attempt to get one over on your rivals, but it is cheating to take a decongestant to relieve symptoms of a cold that you caught through no fault of your own. And drugs are only one way in which the body can be modified to enhance performance. Athletes get a boost from altitude training, blood doping or by benefiting from the latest research in nutrition and physiology. Why should it be cheating to enhance your physical performance as a result of advances in pharmaceutical science but fine to induce the same enhancements as a result of physiological science? It is also true that many significant improvements in performance are not the result of drug taking but as a result of technological advances. Cycling has already been mentioned but developments in swimwear and running shoes, for example, have also been a factor over the years where some athletes have gained an advantage over others for a brief period. These developments give an artificial advantage but have been allowed and it is not considered officially as cheating simply because the technology is ahead of the rules. But the ethical issue is the same regardless, and is that whether it is the taking of a performance enhancing drug or the application of a technological advance, the object of doing it is to gain an advantage over your competitors which may overcome the fact that your competitors may naturally be more talented than you. So it appears that "cheating" is only "cheating" when some official body decides it to be cheating. But even if you do "cheat" (and we should use the word here to mean that you deliberately do something which you know not to be allowed in the rules) then should you be banned, and if so, should it be for life or just a short period? In this context, it is interesting to compare athletics with football. Footballers cheat all the time and they don't get banned. They may get banned for drug offences but in truth, a dive or holding in the box is likely to have far more influence on the outcome of a game than any amount of intake of pharmaceutical substances by an individual. In life in general there is an acceptance that if you do wrong you take your punishment and then society supports your integration back into society. We don't lock folk up for stealing possessions from others and then simply throw away the key, and nor should we in sport. As long as the former cheat is no longer cheating and no longer gaining any advantage from their earlier cheating, then they should be allowed back into the sport. In my view, this is important not just because it seems like natural justice in line with legislation in other aspects of society, but also for the sake of other competitors. This may sound strange to some, but if I were an elite athlete, just as I would not want to be denied success by a cheat, I would also not want to be denied the opportunity to prove I was the best because a former cheat was not allowed to compete. Consider the position if Chambers was not allowed to compete in the Olympics but was running 100 metres regularly under 10 seconds and sometimes at around 9.8. If he was getting tested very regularly and was shown to be clean, could Usain Bolt claim to be the best in the world if he won the Olympic title with Chambers absent? I don't think so. Whatever Bolt might say, I am sure Bolt would want Chambers and any other "clean" former cheats to be allowed to compete. The Olympics is about being the best and you can only prove you are the best if everyone else is allowed to compete against you. It is not a straightforward issue. Unfortunately for me and many others, athletics, swimming, cycling and some other individual sports have been seriously devalued by those pushing the rules to the limits and beyond and we are cynical whenever someone does something extraordinary. Someone once said that the definition of an Olympic champion was a cheat that hasn't been caught yet. I certainly am not as cynical as that but the element of suspicion takes away the enjoyment of these sports for me. So whilst there is cheating in football (and it annoys the hell out of me), any articicial enhancement of an individual's physical performance makes barely the slightest difference to the outcome of a game. Football is about the skill of a player, the cohesion of the team work and the tactics of the game. It's not perfect but all these elements combine to provide a quality of richness which will always mean that the cream rises to the top despite the best efforts of the cheats. To me, it is and always will be, the beautiful game.

It is really difficult for the youngsters to advance without a reserve league. In the current set up either the kids get drafted straight into the first team (and probably only because first choice players are not available) or they go out on loan to SFL teams and away from the set up that is nurturing them. Both options can be difficult. A reserve league is a step up from the youth leagues and allows them to play alongside hardened pros in the twighlight of their careers. This teaches the youngsters so much about the game and prepares them much better for 1st team football. In England even teams in the 5th and 6th tier of the non-league game have reserve and youth teams. I can't comment on the attitude that our youngsters have but not having a reserve team to aspire to can't help. The better youngsters may get into the first team squad but then never get a game whilst the next level simply have to look for a lower league club when they are too old for the youth team. With a reserve team the better players get the benefit of regular games at a good level whilst the "also rans " have something to aim for and it allows the late developers to come through. This is just another reason why Scottish football is going down the pan.

When I first saw the name of this thread I thought it was going to contain conjecture regarding Terry's sexual preferences - but fortunately it's been far more interesting than that.