superward

Again, in theory, of course it is. Some will sink and some will swim. Its again that sweet spot of exposing them too early or too late. Would Hastie, for example, have been better sitting on our bench the first half of the season or getting full games every week at Alloa? Would he have developed as much as he did by getting cameos? Maybe he would have...maybe not It's not an easy task to manage youth The club can definitely improve and they've said as much with the review of the youth system and pathway to the first team.

For me, we lose a bit from Tait in an attacking sense on the left. He's also much easier turned on the left than he is on the right, by the better players he comes up against. That said, he does do a sterling job left or right, and there isn't much in it.

What I've found very interesting in the youth contract debate here is that the theory many have put across is absolutely sound and I completely agree. In short, where we have a promising youth player, do not let them enter the last year of their contract without at least an offer on the table early doors that they will accept, and certainly before they hit the ground running in the first team, unless we have no intention of keeping them anyway. It's the application of the theory that I've yet to see any realistic suggestions as to how it can be applied to 100% success each time at a club with our budget. If we had the money of a bigger team, youth players would be renewed well ahead of time to protect the chance of losing them and the fee that goes along with them. We'd accept the risk that we will pay out an extra season or two in wages perhaps to the majority of the youth squads ongoing to ensure we don't lose on the value of that special 1 or 2 where we could sell on for big profit. But, in reality we don't, and it's a balancing act with a small overall football budget. The football staff in the club need to find that sweet spot where they pretty much know a youth player is going to make it and an early, and extended contract offer is a worthwhile investment. That's hard and they won't get it right every time. It's easy to talk about the players currently in the headlines and how the club should have, shouldn't have, or were lucky or not lucky. What about the current youth players...views? * Adam Livingstone - due up in May 2019 - going by the argument, he's a promising youth player kept back from loan to push for the first team like Turnbull so should already be on a renewal. *Peter Morrison -due up in May 2019 - on loan to Albion for games. SPFL team of the week last week. Renew to 2021? Other goalies now pushing up though. Do we safeguard our investment and give him a 2 year deal? Or gamble that he wont actually make it and invest elswhere. *Shaun Bowers, Liam Brown, Jamie Semple - all up in May 2019. All looked great in the reserves. Couple more years? *Broque Watson - up in May 2019 - looked good in the reserves. Not really kicked on out on loan at East Fife. Also not a long term youth so not much compo due. Do we renew him? Or is ti purely about protecting our youth investment? ...and that's just a handful. Not an easy task.

Excellent shout. For all the posters on here who have it all figured out lets get the names noted down and revisit in a few years time...

Alan Burrows has been asked that on Twitter recently and is happy to discuss the general strategy over email/directly. So it's no big secret.

Cadds perhaps in the match day squad today....cameo from the bench for a tiring Hastie......

Happy with Liam signing on. Been great since coming into the team at right back and so often he sets the tempo.

For me, same team as before, regardless of any deal , or not, for Hastie. Regardless of all the chat about Jake he's still not a 90 min player for me. But, we don't have a better option to slot in at the moment so he plays. Strongest team for the tilt at the top 6.

Erwin we got about 400k. Murphy was sold for 100k, not compo at the end of his contract A couple of similar examples in Scottish football but at the same time both not exactly comparable to the same situation as Jake would be. Lewis Ferguson to Aberdeen has been brought up recently (c200k) but he was only trained by Hamilton for 4 years and played 13 times before moving. Charlie Telfer to Dundee Utd (£170k) is a bit more similar from a training perspective (full youth career at Rangers) but he only appeared once for Rangers. For more than the obvious reason....we want Hastie, if he chooses to go, to go down south to the likes a Crystal Palace.

Bit of a misleading headline. Sent back for an injury assessment in his calf.

I've noticed this a couple of times now. Why is Gordon suddenly in the dud bracket beside Newell etc? Last time I checked he was loaned out with the same view as Hastie but got a very bad injury and has been out 7 months. Prior to that had already contributed a couple of goals at Patrick....

Hearing the potential to be the same. The amount of seriously interested clubs shot up so a proper decision to make now for Jake. Also we are quite restricted in what we can offer.

It's the principle more than anything and a great gesture from our club to reimburse. However, Im hoping most folk don't go and claim that fiver back from Motherwell to be honest. As for the game, expecting the same starting 11. Be a great one to win. Interesting few games coming up for a few reasons including seeing how Hastie and Bolt deal with being doubled up on - not so much a surprise factor anymore.

That's not a rule and been addressed in Twitter by Alan Burrows.

Hartley is carrying a knock I think or just over one - he was on the bikes with the other injured/just on the way back from injury. Begs tbe question why he wws even on the bench though. As for thr game, most of thr goals avoidable but 4-1 flattered them. Enough positives in there for me though.