UCF2008

Thanks, but no thanks. Too old and too expensive.

But they can afford to 'lose' Rangers? What's being proposed with a 12 - 12 - 18 format will see more clubs getting a 'slice of the pie'. Whatever size of league the money can be divided accordingly. A 20 - 22 or 18 - 24 format would see more promotion, relegation and playoff spots which would likely increase competition throughout both leagues. The only status quo I see in Scottish football is the inability of the other clubs to challenge Rangers and Celtic for the title.

It should be 2 divisions. Personally I'd go for a 20 team top tier and 22 team 2nd division. 18 & 24 would also work. A decent number of playoff and promotion spots and NO F***ING SPLITS. They argue that the revenue would be reduced, but the spoils could be shared to counter that. They're all still giving themselves a big pat on the back for listening to the fans with regards to our situation, but what fan would vote for this? When the supporters were polled a couple of seasons back the vast majority were wanting a bigger league. I don't see why their opinion would be any different now ...apart from possibly continuing to stick the boot in us.

Same reason they put us in the 3rd division - Greed. They're no different from the SPL clubs in that respect. No interest in the good of the game. It's all about the money.

Ally's been stood down on that touchline barking orders for the majority of the past six years wearing whatever he felt like wearing. Some traditions we can afford to let go without it being to the detriment of the club. If our CEO see's fit to break with tradition himself and wear what he likes then so can our manager as far as I'm concerned.

It's a lose / lose situation for him. It would be the same for any manager in his spot. If Ally does manage to win a cup or two beyond league trophies on the way up, he'll receive some modest praise, but it won't be until we're winning at the top that he'll get the credit he deserves. Even then, I suspect he'll still have his critics.

I think he was clearly making the point that McCoist deserves credit but won't get it because he finds himself in a position where we're expected to storm back to the top and anything less would be regarded as a disaster.

Because it appears to be an attitude shared by many on this board. It was tagged on the end of my post and wasn't specifically directed at GS - The first part of my post was. Satisfied???

I don't think we need to be letting any players go. Certainly not if it requires a golden handshake. Hegarty did impress me while filling in at centre half - So much so that I thought he should keep his place in the team. He might prove me wrong but I don't think he's a good option for right back. I'd like to see Cole given more of a chance.

Apart from the bit about us not being Rangers which could be easily misconstrued

I agree with you. I don't have a problem with us signing SPL players. Funnily enough though it does bring us back to my earlier point about Sandaza, who might still manage to find his scoring boots again. That still wouldn't change my opinion of him. He might be SPL class but he isn't Rangers class. I actually think he's one of McCoist's worst signings so far.

I hope that was a typo GS I wan't accusing anyone of anything and I think you're over reacting SA.

They might well be two different issues, but I don't see how I'm putting words in anyone's mouth.

Wouldn't have served the agenda though would it?

To stay on topic, out of that lot I'd go for Shinnie. Beyond that I think we need to add a left back and keeper to the squad so McGowan and Bell or even Randolph maybe.

I think you're being a bit harsh there GS. Cribari had a shaky start but he's been steadily improving. Argyriou was the opposite, looking like a real find at first before a hefty dip in form. Faure hasn't been involved enough - certainly not in his best position - to form an opinion. Shiels has done well overall. Sandaza's probably been the worst of the bunch and we only signed him because he'd proven himself at the top level of our game. I can't believe we gers fans can still have this "foreign mercenary" attitude after watching so many of our so called bluenoses and youth products jump ship in the summer while the majority of the foreigners TUPE'd over.

I agree that we could have done our U19's a favour by taking part in the U19 league. 13 competitive league games are better than relying on a cup run afterall. Not to mention that if we were involved the other clubs might have been more up for it. It could maybe be argued that we took the best of our U19's into the 1st team squad this season and we didn't have as strong an U19's squad as we would have liked, but then we don't have a registration embargo on U18's do we? Apart from laying blame at our club's door though, I think the whole youth structure in Scottish football is needing looked at. Surely these players need more than a 13 game league. Haven't head anything about the Elite Development games. What are they?

I see what you mean Do our youths have any competitive fixtures left to play at all this season? Having looked at the SFL website I see that the U19's league is now completed ...if you can call it that since half the teams didn't play their full quota of 13 games. I also notice that the U17's league appears to have been scrapped altogether this season. You always hear the same nonsense about having to tackle the game at 'grass roots level' when pundits discuss what's wrong with our game. How can our young players develop without a proper competitive youth structure?

Despite our current shortage at CB, we've got 3 out injured plus 2 internationals out on loan. If we were minus 5 players in any other area of the field we'd be in serious trouble. If this lad's been performing well at left back then that's a position that we definitely could do with some cover / competition.

It's more than a little ironic given that the action they've taken is over the club alegedly failing to properly consult with the players

I think their [secondary] agenda was always to diminish the SPL to engineer a route out of Scottish football. I don't think they anticipated their own decline in attendances though. It does look as though the plan has backfired either way, at least in the short term.

Evidence gathered from certain individuals in relation to the Stevens Inquiry are the root of where things started to really go downhill imo.