FoolPhysio

Doctor

Goal!!!!!!!!!!!!! A Shinnie

But still no highlights!!!

There are highlights for the other 3 matches on the BBC Sport site just now - where is our one????

Now looking forward to beating Celtic in the semi

Killer

Bodhrans. Would probably need a few to make enough noise, but would set us apart from just drum-bangers.

You got it bauhaus - all of them. I am (one of the few now) both willing and proud to declare my political leaning as Liberal and hence by default fall into the LibDem camp as their present incarnation, but my despair at the sheer futility of politics in general has meant that I have become extremely jaded in my view of politicians of all colours. I vehemently encourage people to go to the polling station at every given opportunity and to cast their vote, even if it is just to spoil a ballot, as they are exercising their entitlement to vote even if there is nothing to vote for. The two should never be confused. Democracy was once described as the least worst form of government, and it is probably true since even a benevolent dictatorship is reliant on the incumbent and cannot be guaranteed by their successor. In truth, a representational democracy is a fantastical notion in itself since there is no power unless people fall in behind a common banner, but that in turn may result in people being restricted from being able to make their true views known as a result of this. Hence the whip system and "free" voting in Parliament. There can never be any form of perfection in any form of government, that is simply the human condition. Idealism is all good and well but it cannot be allowed to distract from reality. Remember Robin Cook and "Ethical Foreign Policy"? Wonder what happened to that then? Remember that the new Scottish Parliament would be more mature in approach and a departure from the yah-boo politics of the Mother of Parliaments? Watched or listened to any chamber debates or question times recently? Human nature takes over every time. The proponents of Independence attack the NO campaign as being negative, because they are not offering change to make things better, while they say imagine what we could be if only we weren't being fettered by having to be a small part of such a much larger whole. But that is exactly it - imagine. Snake oil. Scotland has contributed to and benefited from the Union that has shaped the UK into what it is today. It is an intrinsic part of the success we have enjoyed as a developed nation, and we are essentially the same as our Home Nation compatriots. You would think at times that the way it being portrayed is that we nothing like our Southern neighbours but that is simply untrue. We are northern Britons, but still Britons. Independance would, if it ever actually took place, be a major disappointment to the if-onlies who are the cornerstone of this movement.

Welcome to the forum Rocky1. Yes, I asked that question a while back and I can't remember if anyone responded. I thought it was something that really marked us out as a team but I suspect that like a lot of SPL / Stadium rules that designed to detract from the enjoyment of a day out at the footie, the drum was routinely being confiscated as an "offensive weapon" and so ended up more trouble than it was worth! Just speculation on my part though.

Agreed. At first I thought it was a shameless attempt at co-opting the dewy-eyed and notoriously unrealistic uber-optimists who would still be naive enough to believe the fairy-tale presentation by the YES campaign that the only thing stopping Scotland being a world superpower was being shackled to the English oppressors, but the more I thought about it and the more I listen to youngsters the more I realise that actually the ones who are more likely to vote are the ones rejecting separation and support the practical benefits of the Union. The inclusion of 16 & 17 year olds into the suffrage will create problems post-2014 as there will be pressure on the local and national governments and by extension the European government to bring down the voting age for all government democracies. By signing off on this, Cameron must be prepared for more strident calls to extend this right to this age group for the various elections and more importantly, be ready to make it happen. It could be that this is being run as an experiement to see what will happen in what is possibly seen as a great opportunity due to this being a one-off event (not accounting for the next one in a couple of decades in the saga of the Neverendum). I would be fascinated to see the turnout for this age group, having been an initial sceptic on the idea but now starting to warm towards it. Mind you, I am also tending towards the idea that it should have nothing to do with age and more to do with understanding. Three simple questions before you are allowed to enter the polling station - weed out the uninformed and just plain stupid and we may actually get a more representative government rather than what we have now, self-serving egoists who will say just about anything to pander to the masses because they need their vote but have no real intention (or capability) to actually do these things if/when they get into power!

Of course, it is always that simple. The EU membership is not automatic and although Salmond would have you believe that he is right and the EU Commission is wrong and will at some point learn the error of their ways, promising a referendum on EU membership may be to ask if we want to join, not if we want to leave! It is a hollow promise, since they can't lose either way and they will expect most Scots to vote Yes to EU! I presume there will be another one on whether or not we want to remain a part of / join NATO? Whatever happened to the concept of representational government? When did this idea that all "big" decisions need a referendum start to exercise the chattering classes? If that is the way we are moving then I would like to vote on the National budget every year please, since that has a direct bearing on my life. Will I get that in an independant Scotland?

Journey

No problem with ALBA in englandshire. Channel 168. Agree with weddings in fitba season. Do guys not stand up for themselves when organising dates!! I had to use a perfectly good away day v Hibs a couple of weeks ago, at a wedding in Carrbridge. Have to admit, was a crackin day though. Many years ago I was at a wedding which had the traditional line up where guests going into the reception dinner congratulated the bride and groom as they went in. The line shuffled in at a reasonable pace but suddenly stopped for a few minutes as one elderly gentleman took an inordinate amount of time shaking hands with the groom and appeared to be engaged in a one-sided conversation. The remainder of the line were starting to get impatient as they wanted to get their scran down and start the real celebration and really enjoy their Saturday night. There was almost an audible sigh of relief as the gentleman let go of the groom's hand and stepped away allow the line to continue as before. It wasn't until after the honeymoon that the groom told me what had happened. His uncle had grabbed his hand, said "well done son, you've got yourself a cracker there" and, pulling him closer, started to recite the scores for all the Divisions starting with the top and working downwards!

Has anyone else noticed that they don't have their own abusive name for us and are calling us Tinks? FFS, cannot even come up with a name. Just how far does using our cast-offs have to go? Wasn't really reading OTB before but the run up to the derby game was too good an opportunity to miss. Excellent fun. But now back to concentrating on what ICT can achieve and not worry about the also-rans. Just hope the break doesn't allow the team to cool too much and that they have the same hunger and determination in the next game against the relegation fodder in 2 weeks.

FT yeeeeesssssssssssss!!!!!!! 3-1 GIRFUY

Gents, both good points and I welcome the reasoned debate. Addressing the point re: young referees - there is scope in the Laws and during the training to allow "discretion", but often the individual will think that the easiest way to approach it is as a jobsworth. The Laws themselves allow for this discretion to be applied (the quick free kick, play on etc) but only experience, maturity and dare I say it talent can make the difference between a good decision and a bad one and on such things can a game pivot and the ref suddenly find themselves struggling to retain control. The training process requires refs to progress up the grades (it certainly was in my day and I presume is the same now) so they go via Amateur / Junior, HL and lower leagues before they get anywhere near Div 1 or SPL. There is a fast-track process for those who show both enthusiasm and some basic capability as well but they still need to gain experience first, even if it is cut short in terms of timescale. However, these youngsters are getting the same if not worse abuse at these lower tiers and only the strong-willed would want to power through to the highest levels. Unfortunately, they may not have the required talent to go with that stubbornness and those that did have may have been lost by giving it up as a bad idea. Totally agree with the obvious errors, and this is where the assistant could and should be helping, but I have stated before that the amount of assistance provided is at the discretion of the referee prior to the match and can change on a game by game basis. Effectively, the ref may tailor what they want depending on who is assisting, who is playing and what the type of match it is. There is no hard and fast rule in what the assistant must do, only limits to what they can do, according to the LOTG. One important thing to note is that the referee does have the option to change their ruling, but only before play restarts. They obviously have to be careful that they do not do it often (especially in the one match!!) but we have seen it happen before and will no doubt see it again and in my mind it actually is the mark of a good referee when they can admit the mistake, change it there and then and crack on. However, remember Lennon throwing the toys out at the Hearts match a couple of seasons back? That may explain why, even when they are right to do so, referees now hesitate to be seen to change their minds as it can sometimes be easier to just power on rather than put up with the kind of abuse that King Richard the Third dished out. The irony was, the ruling had actually been in Celtic's favour at the time but Lennon used it as a means to attack the ref when it turned out the reason he gave after the match was not the whole truth and nothing but the truth and he was sensationally accused of being a liar. Not a good way to promote open dialogue but then Lennon was at war at the time and didn't care about the collateral damage he was causing.

Thanks Charles. Much what I suspected, so unless I can get the kids off to their scratcher in time I might miss a portion of the game live, but can keep updated until then. Looking forward to it . . .

I suspect one of the reasons why technology is being resisted is that the Laws of the Game are applied equally regardless of level. There is also the cost - if you choose to introduce it, are you creating a bias where teams eligible for promotion to a higher league based on results is unable to do so due to prohibitive cost? I realise that the same argument could be applied to stadium upgrades but that is just my take on it. The half-ar5ed response to this persistent call for technology to be introduced and especially for determining if a goal has actually been scored was to bring in "line judges" in the Euro 2012 competition, as it was easier to introduce another official. However, this was shown up to be a farce in the England game when a blatant goal was not recognised despite the chap looking at the goal with fierce concentration. Mind you, with the introduction of Sky Sports we have become used to the media using cameras on goal lines yet there are times when even they cannot clearly identify if a goal has been scored (or given incorrectly) so I don't know how effective it would turn out to be. Might resolve some of the more blatant ones though. With regard to fouls well . . . just look at our own discussion regarding OTJ being sent off. It ranged from "obvious red card" to "wasn't really a foul". Watching it time and again may or may not help a referee decide, and consensus of opinion should be avoided at all costs. After all, it is said that the elephant is a cheetah designed by committee!

Chevron

Had to be them - they needed to give us a change from Celtic . . .

You seriously believe that? The large number of Scots originated from the Emerald Isle, although there are a significant proportion originating from the Nordic countries with the highest concentrations in the Northern Isles due to their previous status of being an extension of Norway and populated accordingly. However, the culture of the Scots is far more akin to our Celtic brothers than our Nordic cousins, due primarily to proximity and inter-breeding. Our attitudes and behaviours are much more British than Scandinavian, due primarily to the fact that we are a part of the same geographical location and not separated by almost 400 miles of sea. Hence the reason we speak English and Gaelic and not Norwegian and Danish.

Picked this up off the OTB site (just had a quick reccy to see which way the wind was blowing) - actually a good read: http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport/football/barry-wilson-looks-forward-to-a-first-ever-highland-derby-in-the-top-flight-1-2555740

I won't get to see this - don't have ESPN or anything like that - so does anyone know if the BBC Radio will be covering it live or if it will be available online?

Scotty, your post was made while I was composing mine and you have captured some of my points eloquently. Your suggestion of meeting the managers is a valid one but experience tells me that if there was something contentious during the match then often that is NOT the time to do, while emotions can still be somewhere in the stratosphere. I see no benefit in a ref "defending" their performance, because that is what it would be for most fans. Being open and honest is not as welcome or comfortable as some people would like to think it would be, and it could easily degenerate to something resembling a blame-game contest.

Quick question for you - are any of you current or past referees, or (heaven help me for even suggesting this) personally know or be related to one? I am just curious, as no-one here (or on other boards) seems to speak much about the definitive referee oversight mechanism or how it works. And it not only applies to the highest grades, it applies to all SFA qualified referees regardless of the level they choose to officiate at. From the commentary on this and other threads where this is discussed, many seem to think there is no background activity regulating the performance of the referee and that they are the ultimate authority, which although correct in terms of the Laws of the Game and the actual match itself at the time it is played, is not the case in the wider scheme. Referees at the top level will always have an observer present, who is responsible for making a report on their performance and where there is cause for concern, this will be dealt with via internal means. They have to meet minimum performance standards on a consistent basis over an average of matches played. Those who are persistently below par will be quietly replaced. Problem with this can be two-fold - 1) there needs to be games that they are poor in before this can trigger the process and 2) who are the thrusting young up-and-comers pushing to take their place? If there is no one stepping up to be counted, you are left with what there is and if that is not good enough, then who can we really blame for that? People are put off being a ref because really, who apart from a masochist or the mentally challenged would want to do it nowadays? So the problem will never resolve itself. There also has to be an understanding here as to why the authorities are so protective of the concept of the referee as the arbiter of the game - just look at the way nearly every decision is challenged by players, often in an aggressive and confrontational manner. If the status of the referee were to be even slightly diminished, this would only get worse and it would lead to even worse performances at times as refs second-guess themselves or allow bias to creep in just in an effort to keep the aggro level down. It should not be allowed to happen and it may go some way to explain why the SFA seems to have such an entrenched position on the matter. Never underestimate the influence of FIFA in these things as well. Certainly there are times that I, as an ex-referee, will watch a game and see a poor performance that sometimes I just shake my head at. But while a player or two can be below par on the day they can hide more easily - the ref cannot. Their faults and foibles will be there in the limelight for all to see. Talk about pressure. But there are just as many times when I listen to or read comments from fans who make comments on performances that are simply unfair and at times totally unrealistic. What I find strange is that the SFA does not do more to explain about the observer process, but it could be much to do with the points I have made above. I realise this may not be a popular post, and I am not defending referees just because I used to be one, but I hope you will appreciate that I am giving an honest view from what may be seen as "the other side". Only by understanding how it works can we decide if it really is failing and from there work together as lovers of the Game to make it better. Constant dripping about how cr4p it is and how standards are falling is not fixing it, just making it worse.