weeyin

McHugh was a makeweight for Anier's wages, but seems like the Directors stuck hands in pockets again. Also see in the Scotsman that the Murphy to Hibs rumour had some substance.

That's a classic case of Confirmation Bias. We have a 100% record against teams in the bottom 6. That means every one of those teams who was on a bad run (which some of them were to be in the bottom 6), lost to us. The reason the 6 - 5 Aberdeen game springs to mind is because it was, in its very nature, exceptional. Of course, every team that is on a bad run eventually wins. And every team that is on a good run eventually loses. But if you actually look at the statistics, we don't really fare any better or worse in that regard than any other team. You certainly don't finish 3rd and 2nd in the league by always losing to teams on a bad run.

Was watching the Forest Green Rovers game tonight. They play in the Conference Premier and were my local team when I lived in Stroud. Just for kicks, took a look at their season ticket prices: 280 quid if you want to stand 325 quid to sit Doesn't make Scottish prices good, but they stack up quite well in comparison.

From their betting thread

We need to crush the hope out of them in the first 20 minutes. If we do that, we should win.

You are not incorrect in not presuming that would not be the case. I think.

Hopfeully, Cummins is getting some games in so he can replace Hutch (or McManus) next season.

Can we get players on loan for half a season from Scottish clubs? I have lost track of the rules. I know for a while it was easier to get them from England because we could take them on 6 month deals.

So you are accusing our board of filing false accounts every year? And the Inland Revenue being stupid enough to fall for it every year?

I don't disagree with that, but the question then becomes if we lower the quality - which would be inevitable if we lowered our annual income as a club - would that attract any more fans? Or would our reduced competitiveness and almost certainly shorter cup runs end up lowering attendances even more? The Board does a great job trying to balance the books, and a significant portion of our income is gate money. Drop our prices to 15 quid a head and that means we need to pull in about 1500 extra fans every week to make up the shortfall. The obvious way to reduce prices would be an improved sponsorship/TV deal, but the eejits in charge of our game continue to undersell it on a regular basis.

It's all a bit Secret Squirrel. Earlier, the story I read was the Viking wanted Anier off the wage bill, but because he still had a fair chunk of his contract left they didn't want to let him go for free. But you never know what is posturing/bargaining and what is actual intent.

I wonder what his wage bump was from his 300 quid a week.

Like Sutton and Hammell and Lasley. I'd still prefer Cummins (or even Ramsden with Kerr filling RB - or vice versa) though.

Clancy seemed to leave the club with no hard feelings on our part, so if he was an option, I don't think the gaffer or the Board would object to bringing him back. If Hutch does leave though, I'd prefer to see Cummins step in.

I see it's time to ignore this thread until the transfer window closes. I'm giving the Casagolda etc. hilarity a miss this time around.

The estimates being bandied around are something like: 1: £2,405,514 (13.39%, -£314,487) 2: £1,717,454 (9.56%, -£682,546) 3: £1,460,555 (8.13%, -£59,446) 4: £1,288,629 (7.17%, -£71,371) 5: £1,202,757 (6.7%, -£77,243) 6: £1,116,884 (6.22%, -£83,116) 7: £1,056,701 (5.88%, -£63,299) 8: £1,005,142 (5.6%, -£34,858) 9: £987,895 (5.5%, +£27,895) 10: £902,023 (5.02%, +£22,023) 11: £816,150 (4.54%, +£16,150) 12: £730,277 (4.07%, +£10,277) So, the difference between places can be as much as 83k. If the above is accurate, the difference between 2nd and 5th is over half a million, so it's certainly something to think about. But, like you say, we also need cash at this stage of a season, so short-termism sometimes needs to be applied.

In the case of Goodwillie, selling to an EPL team with a clueless owner helped.

"Anyone who knows anything about football". I see what you did there. You should start a blog.

Hopefully been replaced permanently by Gary McAllister! Craigan, unfortunately, comes across like an OF employee sometimes. I much prefer McAllister's contributions these days.

They get a better deal simply because they are a Glasgow team in the middle of a Glasgow-centric emdia.

I heard he was going to trade school over there and hopes to qualify as a plumber.

Last time we had any decent coverage on the radio was when Richard Park and Jimmy Sanderson were presenting Super Scoreboard on Radio Clyde. Even when we were in the 1st Division we had a fair shout.

The problem we face is that journalists exist for 2 reasons these days: 1) To sell papers/attract audience 2) Inform the public 1) is the main focus, and because we don't have as big as fan base as an Aberdeen or a Hearts or whatever, we don't buy as many papers or contribute as much to viewing figures. Result? Coverage is less. EDIT: Forgot to add, the one place we seem to get good coverage is the Evening Times. Seems like there is at least one MFC article a day in there.

Do you think he was responsible for Faddy's performance against Thistle and Vigur's & Ainsworth performance against St. Johnstone too? I think Dan did a good job for us when he came in, but he benefited from a turnaround in our form more than we benefited from him. Once or midfield finally decided to turn up that made a huge difference and took pressure of both our strikers and our defence. Depending on the extent of his injury, I'm in the "keep Hollis" camp to see how this season plays out for him. He was far from the weakest link when we were patchy earlier in the season.

In one of his interviews, McCall said that's exactly the calculation the Board will be looking at when it comes to Hutch if they can't extend him.