weeyin

Likewise. Thought they were at it on Saturday, taking advantage of the fact the SPFL didn't have time to investigate 2 hrs before kick-off, and knowing the SPFL would do nothing afterwards. Still think they were at it. Still think they will get away with it.

I have vivid memories of him causing us problems when he played for Arbroath.

It's not nonsense. The clubs were told that if they want a full season there is only one free weekend in the schedule (and no winter break). It's almost guaranteed there will be games postponed for weather during the winter, and even more likely there will be a spike in Coronavirus cases during that time too. So if there are zero additional cancellations between now and the end of the season we can just about fit them in. We all know that isn't going to be the case. And if there are no consequences, any team that wants to wait until they get key players back from injury can just decide to pull out 2 hours before kick-off.

That's also true. Celtic sometimes seem to buy Scottish youngsters just to stop rivals signing them. Lewis Morgan is another recent example

Turnbull's spent his entire footballing career at Fir Park and his senior career consists of playing in Motherwell systems. Arsene Wenger used to reckon it took a minimum of 6 months for a player to adapt to a new club in the same league, and longer if you switched leagues. One thing he's definitely missing is game time. He hasn't had many competitive minutes since his long lay-off and unlike us, Celtic aren't going to rush him into starting. I still think he'd have been better off switching leagues, but I'm sure he'll do just fine at Celtic.

It's always interesting to see players we bring through that can't quite make the step up to Premiership standard, but do well in the Championship. If someone could figure out exactly what it is that differentiates those players, they'd make a fortunate as a coach or scout.

It's the lateness that prevents any real assessment of the validity of the claims. Coupled with the fact that Goodwin has been moaning about losing 2 big players for the game, you can see why it's pretty convenient to have a game called off with the only consequence being you get to play it when your best players are available. There was no talk of any other issues on Friday, so while it can certainly be the case that somebody reports symptoms on a Saturday morning it all seems a bit off. Anyway, even if it is a legitimate situation (and it may well be) none of this would an issue if the forfeit rule was in place. I said we needed one before the season started and I said we needed one after the Aberdeen and Celtic had their issues. It's the only way we'll get through a season without ending up in the same situation as last season. Either that or we need to reduce the number of games played - but that ship has sailed. Something needs to be put in place soon - maybe setting a maximum number of games a club can postpone before a forfeit - or we could end up in a situation in May where clubs have half a dozen games to fit in over and above the regular fixture list.

I don't think they have the same level of testing protocols in those leagues do they? That's why Danny Johnson missed the cup tie against Spurs. It was Spurs that paid for Orient to be tested and discovered 19 positive results.

Not really. If they say they can't field a team, what do you think the SPFL will do? They haven't awarded any cancelled league games to opponents so far, so there is no reason for St Mirren to think that would happen here without a rule change (that couldn't be applied retrospectively).

Agreed. The loophole right now is "players that need to self-isolate" because that's almost impossible to disprove. And with no crowds, there's no financial penalty for pulling out at the last minute. Without forfeiting the game, St Mirren gain an advantage here. Meanwhile we have to potentially squeeze two rescheduled games into an already packed fixture list through no fault of our own.

According to Doncaster - and I have no reason to doubt him on this point - the SPFL is currently not allowed to award forfeited games to opponents. That power lies with the SFA and there is a process to follow on a case by case basis. When the SPFL Board asked their members to give them emergency powers this season to make decisions without needing a vote every time, one of the powers they would have been granted is the ability to award 3 - 0 walkovers in situations like this. The clubs voted against that option (probably with good reason), but that means we're stuck with this problem for now. It does feel very convenient that yesterday Goodwin was talking about how he had lost "2 big players" and today they need to send just enough players into self-isolation to cause a postponement. It's easy for the authorities to confirm players that test positive. It's a lot more difficult for them to confirm who needs to self-isolate, so this is a get-out-of-jail-free card for teams that don't want to field an under-strength team. Of course, it could all be legit - but then we're back to forfeiting games. The sooner that rule is applied the better.

Unless there is a forfeit rule I can see teams taking advantage of late postponements when they lose a few key players. It's impossible to prove you didn't need to put 4 or 5 additional players into self-isolation.

All we need to do over the next few weeks is say we don't have enough players two hours before every game until we have our left backs fit again.

While I have sympathy for Covid 19 related issues, it seems a bit strange to call off so close to kick-off. The cynic in me thinks they don't want to play with a weakened team and calling off at this stage prevents the SPFL or SFA from having sufficient time to investigate and make them turn out. Regardless, as I said after the Killie game, there needs to be a rule in place otherwise we are going to be back in the same position of having to call the season. Except it will be worse as teams could end up having played 4 or 5 games less than others.

If Robinson plans to use a back 3 I don't think he will get a start.

I can see him going with a McGinley, Gallagher, Lamie back 3 with O'Donnell wingback in front of Lamie on the right,

Official team news so far is Mugabi definitely out (obviously), Gallagher definitely starting, O'Donnell "will be assessed after playing three times in six days for Scotland" - although, to be fair, he did have to cover a lot more ground than Dec. My guess is we'll line up with a back 3, but my guesses are usually wrong.

The rule at Fir Park is that we must injure at least one player per international break.

What does that mean? Aren't the protocols supposed to keep players segregated at their workplace with everything happening in small groups from dining and training to traveling to the match and changing?

This is how the protocols should work. When a player tests positive there should be a relatively small number impacted. Which makes the Killie situation all the more interesting - I wonder when that report will be available.

I hate playing full backs/wing backs on their wrong side. Much easier to defend against (just show them the outside) and players on the wrong side naturally drift into the wrong position. One reason Gallagher and O'Donnell have played well the last few games is because they are playing in their regular positions. The main reason McTominay struggled is that he wasn't. I understand the desire to get Tierney and Robertson into the same team - it's just unfortunate they both excel in the same position. Clarke will know what we are up against, though, and he's certainly earned the right to pick whatever teams he thinks will do the business.

Just listening to the "experts"on the Sportsound podcast last night, they all wanted O'Donnell to start against Serbia. Levein fancied Gallagher in the middle with McKenna on the left of the back 3 (as he reckons we'll need some big defenders to take on their strikers). Miller fancied McKenna central and Tierney on the left. It would be tough on Dec if he was dropped (5 games, 4 clean sheets, 1 goal conceded, unbeaten), but there's a lot of competition in the back 3 when everyone's fit. He's certainly staked his claim in the best way possible.

For last week's game, Clarke said he was unlikely to be a starter. What he does now is anyone's guess.

He was a bit unlucky with his scoring streak. After the team being let out of isolation not long before the Cheltenham game last week he had the ball in the back of the net there too, but it was ruled offside. He always seemed to be more of a confidence striker than a grinder. Good to see it working out for him.

And Killie lose 0 - 3. Been as well not playing it