DoofersDad

Two times Terry call. I go Inverness now.

In an article in the P&J today, TB was calling for more of the killer instinct in front of goal. We'll certainly need that if Bully is leaving because if he has gone I fear we will start leaking goals at the back again.

Maybe it is Eden Court they are thinking of. It used to be a an attractive building outside but is now an eyesore. The design of the extension is totally at odds with the original building from which it has stripped away all character. In fact, it is so bad I believe it has even won an architectural design prize. Inside, the bar and restaurant area used to be attractive and welcoming but the revampred bar is unbelievably ugly and austere whilst the restaurant is like a canteen.

It seems a conference south side didn't want him so maybe he was just sh*te.

As a Villa fan myself I would be delighted if Villa signed him. Villa have a lot of pace up front and in Carew and Heskey they have players who can hold the ball up well. What they don't have is an instinctive striker and they don't come much better than Boyd. I think Boyd could do really well for Villa. As for Barrowman, I think he's just what Birmingham City are looking for.

I don't really think it's a case of choice, more something that they are genetically born with. And anyway, blond Swedish lesbians - how can anyone not approve of that! I think (hope) you mean blonde otherwise it just gets too complicated for the likes of me.

Farcical. Will the SFA now publish a list of those rules clubs need to adhere to and those they don't?

Just as well I read the link. I thought perhaps one of our youngsters was up before the courts.

:huh:

I've been critical of Butcher's tactics in the past but couldn't fault him last night. First he tells Dougie to warm up in front of section G where he knows a handful of morons will shout abuse at him and wind him up. Then he introduces him to replace Jonny who was the best attacking player on the park by a country mile. The removal of Jonny from the park causes relief in the Motherwell ranks and they suddenly lose focus. The heavy mob are dispatched up the pitch for a set peice and there is Narius to tuck the ball away. Come the 2nd half Dougie is so fired up that inevitably he is there to silence his critics. 2 - 0 and any spirit Motherwell had disappears into the cold night air. Seriously though, a good all round performance with Narius my MOTM. Only Sanchez disappointed and he was rightly subbed fairly early. What was pleasing was the spirit. There was real commitment and a desire to be first to the ball and get the tackles in. But whilst this is all very pleasing it needs to be seen in the context that Motherwell were a poorer side than most sides we have played in the 1st division this season. It will have been a long journey back to Lanarkshire for some.

I agree with Bridge Ender. He did well enough but was never really tested. One of his strengths is the surging runs up the park often with good balls into the centre. If he did go forward at all last night he needed to check back to use his right foot and was less effective. With Hayes on the right there is less need for Tokely to surge forward so maybe the tactic was to give some solidity in the back four. If so, I'd say it worked - this time.

A similar pharmaceutical product for the golfers amongst you.

Where do we draw the line on this though? If the football is called off then maybe they go walking somewhere and the kiddie falls through some thin ice. A child could trip and fall when there was no ice around with the same tragic result. I just think society has moved too far in pandering to H&S issues. You can never eliminate risk so lets try and educate people about hazardous situations so that people can take appropriate actions to minimise risk and let people decide what is reasonable for them. There has to be something wrong in society when you buy a cup of coffee and there is a warning that the container may contain hot liquid. If the attitudes of today had been around in 1990 then there would be nobody reminiscing about the Airdree match today.

Kilmarnock is not a big place and they have been punching above their weight for some time now. I think Jeffries has done a great job for them and I wouldn't be surprised to see them struggle for survival in the SPL.

Does anybody know what the legal position is regarding snow on the roof? Not only can the snow slide off and land on someone else, it can also slide off the front when braking obscuring the view of the driver just at a time when there is a real reason to slow down. Presumably you could consider that the car is not in a roadworthy condition or that you are driving in a manner that poses a risk to fellow road users and pedestrians. I have never seen a car pulled over by the police for this. I think they should be stopped and compelled to clear the roof. They should be told to take their snow back home with them and deposit it in their driveway where it belongs. If that happened, they sure as hell wouldn't do it again. A large proportion of the culprits seem to be drivers of big 4 x 4s who seem to regard the depth of snow on the roof as a status symbol and a reflection of their ability to drive their wonderful vehicles through such deep snow. The reality is that it is not just the snow that is thick. Whilst on the subject of 4 x 4 drivers, is it really necessary for them to fly past at 80mph throwing up clouds of sandy spray and larger peices of grit which damage everybody else's cars. Mind you, I mustn't generalise - I have seen a lot of 4 x 4 drivers driving in a very responsible manner recently when they could easily have gone faster - as usual it is the small minority which give the genre a bad name.

Police will probably call it off again for safety reasons. The snow will have melted, the roads will be ice free so people will be driving faster and that could be dangerous.

Too much baggage, sorry. I think Pele said it himself that any Chairmen would have to be mad to employ him at present. Should be a good bet then. :P

It's maybe not the draw I would choose but I bet Killie and Falkirk like it even less.

If the complications of the English language were not enough on their own, things are made even worse by the huge variety of accents throughout the country. The joke: Q. What's the difference between a bison and a buffalo? A. You can't wash your hands in a buffalo! only becomes funny when said in a brummie accent. Even people in other parts of the UK can really struggle to understand what is being said in a broad Aberdonian or Glaswegian accent, for instance. It never ceases to amaze me just how well people cope with English as their non native tongue

When we had a very poor start to the season everyone seemed to be saying things would be better when Imrie was fit again. Now it seems he can do little right in some people's eyes. His work rate is usually brilliant and if he could only improve in his distribution of the ball he would be one of the most effective players in the league. I hope he stays.

Have you noticed how alcohol can get words mixed up and change their meaning? After a few beers a woman can seem awfully pretty but in the morning appear pretty awful (or so I'm told)

I can't see why there should be any debate; Boyd is far and away the best striker Scotland have got or have had for many years. His record speaks for itself and is even more impressive when you consider the number of times he has only appeared as a substitute. He should be first on the team sheet with a side picked to compliment his strengths. If there was a UK team he would be the only Scot in the squad on present form. Its a bit like saying Don Bradman should not have been in the Australian Cricket team. "yes, he scored a few runs but what else did he contribute to the team?"

A good discussion. I couldn't have got to the game as I only finally managed to dig myself out an hour ago, nevertheless, I think the game should have gone ahead unless there were good reasons why the club was unable to stage it. I agree with the argument that if the police can advise or direct the postponement of a football match, them why not other activities? Are the pubs being closed? I think not! Somebody else mentioned the ski slopes - how on earth can it be unsafe to stage a football match in the town but be fine to allow folk to drive 2,500ft up a windswept mountain? Advice not to travel unless your journey is absolutely necessary is the police just covering their backs. The fact is that any journey you ever take has risk associated with it and as long as we have some accurate information about weather condidtions then we can decide whether that information changes our minds to travel or not. I think it is wrong that when some folk have made some real effort to get up for the game, it is called off because the police won't allow us to make our own decisions. I don't know what the statistics are but because people generally drive more cautiously in the snow so that whilst there may be more accidents, they tens to be pretty minor. There are probably more people killed or seriously injured on the roads when there is no snow. People are much more at risk when the roads are wet and it then freezes - this happens a lot but would a game be called off because a weather forcast predicted that there may be a shower or two and the temperature may fall to freezing? Again, I think not! This is the increasing influence of the nanny state gone mad. Let us make our own decisions, please!

So what's the answer? If they had done tests and found him to be ill, what would they have done? Returned him to the UK? Just because you are ill does not excuse you from being responsible for your actions otherwise being mentally ill would be a licence to be above the law. Whilst society should treat and care for the mentally ill, society cannot allow the mentally ill to be above the law. Either they have to accept the consequences of their actions or they need to be detained if they are not capable of being responsible for their actions. I agree with you that they should have done tests but I also agree with Smee that it is unlikely that any level of mental illness would have been considered to be so severe to think it reasonable that he was not responsible for his actions. If he had been diagnosed as severely ill then negotiations around repatriation might have been appropriate. The lesson is that whether or not you like another country's laws and customs, if you choose to go there, you respect them or face the consequences.

But it doesn't. Double the size of the population of the Western Sahara and there is still very little environmental impact. A small proportion increase in the US or Western Europe leads to a huge change in resource use. It's not the poor that created the problem, nor is limiting their population the solution. That lies with changing from a consumer economy to a green economy. We don't all consume anything like the same resources person for person, country for country. Consumerism, with it's many add-ons (cash crops for wheat, imported vegetables, higher reliance on meat products, power-hungry but unnecessary machines etc etc etc) is the main problem. The rich are the cause and only a sea change in attitude can solve it. A simple population divided by resource model is crude, simplistic and unfair. In fact, some figures. From 1980 to 2005 sub-Saharan Africa grew by around 20%. That contributed to under 2.5% in CO2 increase. North America grew by around 4% but produced an extra 15% CO2. So, if we reduced sub-Saharan Africa's population by one-fifth, there would still be no significant impact upon climate change. Population does not necessarily equate to amount of environmental damage. Consumerism is the key factor. But what you gonna give up for it? But the point is that we need to aspire for the world's poor to live better lives than they currently do. Whilst we should consume less, many of the world's population need to consume more. If there is only so much to go round, if there are twice as many of us, we all get half as much on average.