buster.

Bottomline, you are a Football Socialist Maybe one day, you'll see why we need such changes/corrections in wider society (in The Lounge).

I'd have thought it wise for any fledgling politician in Scotland not to publicly declare an allegiance to either Rangers or Celtic. I think it less likely for one to declare himself a fan of Rangers given that todays Scottish football enviroment has developed into a bit of a Rangers v the rest........Hence a politican who will be campaigning for votes won't be keen on making his task more difficult. The 'Celtic Minded Activists' have for a number of years been actively trying to push this angle (marginalisation) as much as they can.

No surprise to see Jackson being the one to get the first nod. Miller will be giving him his story soon.

No problem TSBear ! Best way to get a handle on it is to read the UEFA EL rules rather than have my faulty grammar as a go-between. It's not that much really,... page 38 and the section starting at 42.01 https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefaorg/Regulations/02/55/82/82/2558282_DOWNLOAD.pdf

Livingston F.C. seemed to effectively have Kenny Miller on an X week trial period where they weren't contractually obliged to pay him off if they decided to give him the boot before 'trial period' finished. You wonder if, given the number of managers wanting a job, some are now obliged to sign up to a 'trial period'?...Stubbs ?

As a minimum, eight places are reserved exclusively for "locally trained players" and no club may have more than four "association-trained players" listed in these eight places on List A We have four association-trained players (ATP) and one club-trained player (CTP). 4 + 1 = 5 Minimum of locally trained players (ATP + CTP) = 8 less 5 (number we actually have) = 3 empty slots = 22 man squad

As a follow-on from the squad post........It seems as though Lee Wallace hasn't been included because we are limited in available slots. Football wise that suggests SG sees Left Back pecking order as: 1. Barisic 2. Flanagan (if not covering for Tav or suspended) 3. Halliday (if not covering for midfield) Wallace doesn't provide the versatility that the others do. ------------ Regards Rossiter/Dorrans The later is I think an 'association trained player' (ATP) which may be why he was able to be included.

We have 22 players in List 'A' (max of 25) We haven't 25 because we won't be able to fit the necessary quota regards 'club trained players' and/or 'association trained players'. Squad List https://www.uefa.com/uefaeuropaleague/season=2019/clubs/club=50121/squad/ Rather than try and explain the ins and outs, here is a link that does it better......Go to page 38 and the section starting at 42.01 https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/uefaorg/Regulations/02/55/82/82/2558282_DOWNLOAD.pdf ps. Note that our current squad list is what has to do us all the way to the Final.....with a maximum of 3 changes allowed after the group stage and before Feb 1st, always respecting the quotas (club trained players' and 'association trained players').

This should be about helping the game as a whole and not just about having the young players develop with snazzy facilities and large pay packets. FWIW I'd look to limit/regulate the loan system more rather than eliminate it. In it's current form, it's another tool for the large clubs to distance themselves from the pack.

Sadiq had better come good because he'll be needed at some stage. He may start against Ayr in the League Cup.

Can't make much sense of the Lee Wallace situation.....he's oot, he's in, he's oot................. Anything we get from Jordan Rossiter is a bonus. Doesn't look good. Guy himself will be gutted

Big clubs wouldn't hoover up so much of the talent at such a young age. ie. they'd spend more time with the 'original' club.....As used to happen.

Yes, there would be too much pressure from interested parties against such an absolute change.

Major changes like the elimination of the loan system wouldn't stand a chance of happening or be the only change in football economc if such radical moves where afoot. For that to happen I think you'd require a major precursor regards long ovedue soco-economic corrections. In the forseeable, the best you could realistically do would be to lobby for further regulation and limits to be set on the loan system.

You'd need a lot of football fans to stop spending their money on the game and related companies (sponsers) to help convince PLC's (more than what they are known for, ie. football clubs) that it might be in their interests to even listen. I think you'd probably need a general socio-economic change as a precursor to have a chance of meaningful change.

Much less competitive. Football finances at the top end are IMO obscene and it completely skews what used to be at least partly, a sport. Power resides with those 'superclubs' and it ain't changing in a meaningful way anytime soon.

I'd estimate we'll see the CL in 2020/21 and post Brexit inflation will mean the three match package comes in at 240 Sterling plus booking fee. call it 2020 vision

If it were a one off I'd tend to let it go but generally we need to get our discipline sorted out. It is happening too much and has already cost us this season, not to mention only a heroic display by the 9 men preventing huge damage.

Michael Stewart tends to be independent (pun not intended), very careful and deliberate with his words. He also harbours personal grudges that come through loud and clear of occasion (eg. Craig Levein). IMO his choice of precedent has more to do with the team involved and the subliminal point he wants to make is that Rangers players can kick and 'get away with it'. On the same programme, Darryl Broadfoot pointed out that this season has seen a different interpretation of / rule wrt kicks / force / colour of card. From what I have seen, the various decisions have reflected that and the general media hoo-haa is uninformed Colin Nish (this hasn't changed).

Quick word on the Monday night Sportsound podcast. When talking about whether Allan McGregor should be cited by the C.O., Michael Stewart said that he couldn't because of a precedent set earlier in the season. For him, the Morelos red to yellow for a 'kick out' was the precedent. Now, more recently than that there was an incident involving Steven Naismith and a kick-out that was almost identical to what McGregor did at the weekend, both that he was on the ground and the negligible force used. Why did Michael Stewart choose the Morelos incident over a much better and more recent incident in a game that he watched ?

As I said before, after the Naismith decision, there was no way they could take action against McGregor without the process being laid bare as not fit for purpose.

I think the 'pay for not playing' clause should help concentrate the mind of the club who are taking the player on loan when it comes to due dilligence and suitability for starting XI. Wrt to Liverpool loanees, we have the advantage of Gerrard's first hand knowledge of them as players and their character.

Very much so on both counts (add yourself to Ross and Stevie).

You were and are right, we are much better and effective with LC playing. I let loose my rant post during and not after you'd finished. You actually went on to better justify your position I think the International break comes at a goodtime for mgmt., players and the support.

European Group stage football wasn't going to be cheap. What you are looking at, are games that provide quality opposition and a European level of anticipation and atmosphere. A level of football that we haven't seen at Ibrox for 7 years.