DoofersDad

One of Butcher's grouses with Hibs is that he was not given the opportunity bring his type of player in. No doubt he will be trying to bring players in quickly to Newport and he will be ruthless in getting rid of those whose faces don't fit. But we also have a link with Newport through Garry Warren and I am sure he would be aware of decent players who become available. His success here would encourage others to come here if the manager was interested in them. On the Foran front there may well be truth in that. I don't know what goes on behind the scenes but if Richie has harboured hopes of an assistant manager role here at some point, they might have been scuppered with Yogi bringing his old mate Brian Rice in. As a player I'm not sure that a fit again Foran will ever be more than a bench warmer here so if he gets an offer from elsewhere he might jump at it. The club would be happy to give him a free transfer and free up his wages

Well, the Women's World Cup is over and we haven't had a thread for it on our football forum. That's a shame, so let me belatedly put it to rights. It is a shame that there is not a higher profile for the women's game because it can be pretty entertaining. There seems to me no reason why women should not be equally able to develop good ball skills or be able to spot a good ball and I am sure as the profile of the game increases and more young girls are inspired to take up the game, even more players with even better skills will emerge. The world cup has produced some really good moments and good goals as illustrated in the link below. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33398720 Where the game does have a significant difference to the men's game is the relative size of the keepers to the goals. A theme that comes through in the compilation is that when a shot is well placed, the keepers lack both the height and the leaping power to reach the ball. This should, in theory, increase the chances of a shot at goal being successful and therefore should encourage attempts at goal. The smaller stature of the women keepers must be equivalent to increasing the size of the goal in the men's game by about 15cm all round. Another difference has been significantly less foul play and gamesmanship (cheating) than we see in the men's game. And without getting into the England v Scotland thing, England's success in coming 3rd must be good for raising the profile of the women's game throughout the UK. The Women's World Cup has been a breath of fresh air and I look forward to seeing the game continuing to develop.

Would they be allowed to register women as players if they made the highest bid?

I believe he was playing in midfield tonight. Mind you, I have always been of the view that he's better in midfield than at full back.

Where Tansey has not been so great last season is free kicks. I agree with the point about Tansey coping well with the pressure of a penalty but Roberts looks as though he could be an option for free kicks.

Blackened timber. Charles Rennie Mackintosh. Work done in the last year. You didn't source the timber from the Glasgow School of Art by any chance?

I would have liked him to stay although I don't think he would ever have been more that a decent squad player as long as we retain top six status. I understand the desire to develop a career elsewhere but my fear for Nick at Dundee is that he will also be just a squad player there as well. He's a tidy player but rarely offers much drive going forward. He plays the safe ball rather than the risky ball that penetrates. He also seems to lose his composure in front of goal and should have scored more than he has. ICT have had a knack for getting the best out of players but somehow Nick's potential has never been properly realised here. Maybe things will click for him in Dundee - but maybe not. I am sure we will all watch his career with interest.

It's the Americans' use of the word "bathroom" that gets me. They seem to feel it is OK to bomb any oil rich or strategically important poor country whose Government they don't like, but to use the word "toilet" is seen as a bit indelicate. Or is it that at home they don't have toilets and actually use the bath? At least that way (unlike with some of their bombing) they shouldn't miss.

Accounts are employed for the reason that they are a statutory requirement for a limited company. Failure to produce accounts on time can lead to sanctions up to and including the strike off of a company from the register of limited companies. In addition, failure to produce timely accounts could lead to sanctions from the footballing authorities, and would lead to the witholding of a uefa licence. Clubs employ accountants to minimise the amount of tax they have to pay, and private limited companies tend to produce accounts containing the least information legally required. To give more than that would be commercially naive. I was originally going to say there were three reasons for employing accountants with the third being to comply with legal and statutory requirements. But then it occurred to me that many companies (not ICT, of course) employ accountants to conceal the fact that there are some legal and statutory requirements that they are not complying with. Such companies usually engage the services of expensive lawyers as well. I'd better stop now or I might need one myself.

Tripadvisor only has one entry under "things to do in Giurgiu" and that is to go to the "Bridge of Friendship" which takes you across the Danube and out of the country. It sounds like a smaller version of Hull.

I would have thought the best plan of action was to wait and see what the specialist travel agents which the club is consulting come up with.

Accounts will be published, but remember that organisations employ accounts for 2 main reasons. To ensure the company pays as little tax as possible To ensure that as little meaningful information as possible is provided to people who are not directly involved in the running of the company.

and come out the victors. boom boom! Of corsa

The fact that we don't need to wait for the outcome of a previous match and that we are at home first means there is maximum time to make arrange for getting to Romania. Astra may have given Celtic a hard time last year - but they lost. We gave Celtic a hard time and won so there is no reason to think we can't win this. What you need to beat an Astra is a Cavalier approach.

The top 4 teams in England have got to be in the Champions league. No question about that Arsenal, Chelsea, Manchester United , Manchester City, Could give any team in the world a good game. Of course there should be a question. If they don't progress as well as teams from nations who have less places, why on earth should they continue to have four places? Teams should be there on merit. The real scandal to me is the way that failure in the Champions League system get a 2nd bite of the cherry in the Europa League.

It was announced today that the Parliament buildings are in need of very major refurbishment. If they abolished the House of Lords then they could sort that end of the building and then the House of Commons could move in there whilst the other end was sorted. I agree that the House of Lords as currently constituted is totally unfit for purpose. But we do actually need some kind of second chamber to scrutinise things. The danger of an entirely elected 2nd house is that if both houses are of the same persuasion there is not enough scrutiny whilst if they are different, things get blocked. Most MPs know precious little about most of the things they are debating so maybe what is needed is greater input from people with a detailed professional knowledge of the issues under discussion. But no system is perfect - if it was, we'd all be doing it.

They are playing silly b*ggers around full fiscal autonomy as well. Now that Cameron has said it would be a bad idea they have decided that they want it again. Interviewed on Radio Scotland, Swinney was asked that if it was refused by the Tory Government, would this be seen as the kind of major change in circumstances which would lead to the SNP seeking a 2nd independence referendum. He answered by saying this was all about "respect". He said that the Government had to respect the mandate given to the SNP by 50% of the electorate for full fiscal autonomy. Without actually answering the question, the implication was crystal clear. But of, course, the SNP have no such mandate. As others have said before on here, at a parliamentary election people vote for a party whose overall manifesto most appeals for whatever reason. It is fanciful to say that all who voted SNP in the recent election are in favour of full fiscal autonomy. In other words, a 2nd referendum is threatened on the basis of the Government refusing to give to Scotland something the majority of Scots don't want in any case! And Swinney talks about respect! He might also like to have some respect for the clear majority of Scots electors who voted for Scotland to remain in the Union. And he might show some respect for the democratic process and agree that after 40 years and huge change within the EU, it is reasonable to ask the British people if they still want to stay in the EU. Swinney has also had to reveal that the Scottish Government has underspent its budget by £200 million last year. Whilst it is good they have not overspent, it does rather put into context their regular bleating about how the Tories' austerity agenda is starving the Scottish Government of money.

I agree with PerfICT. If he is with us next season then it will be Yogi's job to get the best out of him. Kink's performances will be just one of the things which will give a measure of just how good Yogi is as a manager. Boyce had a bit of an attitude at County but McIntyre seems to have been a big influence on him and that has made a huge difference to his performances. We need Yogi to do the same with Kink.

Actually they did vote against a referendum. I appreciate that they would like 16 and 17 year olds to vote as well and I agree that they should, but the Bill has a long way to go. The vote earlier this week was simply about whether in principle there should be a referendum. The Bill now passes to the Committee stage where there will be plenty of opportunity for our elected representatives to argue for the amendments they feel are appropriate. Had other opposition parties and a handful of pro-European Tories voted with the SNP then the Bill would have been dead in the water and there would have been no referendum. No doubt there is lots in the Bill as it stands that other MPs don't like, but fortunately MPs of other parties take democracy seriously and the Bill can now be refined with a final decision being taken in due course. If the final Bill does not include all of the SNP's wish list I don't think that even the SNP will be as pathetic as to vote against it again then. Make no mistake, their tabling of a completely unnecessary amendment and then voting against the Bill this week was not a principled vote against about the shortcomings of the Bill as it stands, it was simply about being disruptive.

Oh b****r!

He looks very uncomfortable wearing that kit.

I see Ciftci has decided not to renew his contract at Dundee Utd. Maybe we could sign him? At least Gary Warren would be able keep him in front of him if he was on our side.

As it is the season ends in May and starts in July so we already have summer football. In any case, don't the guys who do the business on the park deserve a summer holiday too?

​It's even worse than that. In opposing the bill, Salmond argued that no one believed Cameron wanted to take the UK out of Europe and therefore agreeing to the referendum was simply to appease Tory back benchers. He said that major constitutional referendums should be held on a proposition, honestly held. What complete and utter hypocrisy! By the same token you could argue that Cameron should never have agreed to the independence referendum because he does not want to take Scotland out of the UK. I don't recall Salmond opposing that one! Salmond is all too keen to let the people have their say when he thinks there's a chance he might get what he wants, but not when he thinks there is a chance he might get something he doesn't want. At least Cameron had the guts to allow the people of Scotland to have their say on Independence and has the guts to allow people to vote again on Europe after 40 years despite the fact he did not want change on either issue. It is called democracy. But as I have pointed out before, the SNP are not interested in democracy, they are just interested in getting their way. Like most people in Scotland I will vote for the UK to remain in the EU and I welcome the opportunity to affirm that at the ballot box. By trying to deny the people of Scotland the opportunity to exercise their democratic right to vote on this issue the SNP rabble at Westminster are clearly not speaking for the people of Scotland. I have no doubt that the people of Scotland will continue to be as poorly represented by Salmond's clones as they were today.

Well with respect to the Independence referendum, that's 3 SNP supporters talking about it for a start! Seriously though, the reason some of us keep talking about a 2nd referendum is that the one person in Scotland who matters most in Scotland in this regard refuses to rule it out. Saying a 2nd referendum is not in the current SNP plans is not good enough because it could easily be in the plans tomorrow, We really do need a clear statement that the earlier "once in a generation" sentiment will be honoured or else there is going to be ongoing uncertainty which will be bad for Scotland. I certainly accept that if there is a continued high level of support for independence there should be another referendum at some point. The once in a generation timescale seems appropriate to me. The reason for this is that major constitutional change is completely different for parliamentary elections, In parliamentary elections if you no longer like what you voted for last time, you have the opportunity to change things in another 5 years or so. If we vote for independence in a referendum then there is no going back - we're stuck with it even if a large majority change their mind. In our democratic history it is only in the last few years that there has been a significant support for independence. It is too early to say whether this support will be maintained or even grow further in the next few years, or steadily dwindle like a similar level of support for the Tories in the 50s has done. Because a vote for independence is such an irrevocable step, it really is important from a democratic perspective that we don't make that step until it is clear the people have been in favour of independence consistently for a prolonged period of time. Support for the SNP at the moment seems to me a bit like the latest social media craze and we really don't know what people's views will be in a few years time. If people still support independence in 20 years time then fine, have another referendum. But in the meantime can we please have a bit of leadership from our leader so that we can get on with the business of running the country in an environment of political stability using the new powers which are being devolved (and on which,incidentally, we have not had the opportunity to vote).