weeyin

The journos are going to ask the same old boring questions regardless of anything Halliday says - it adds zero to the narrative they are already pushing i.e. any player having a good season is a transfer target for Celtic and Rangers. And the club is going to give the same answer - also regardless of anything Halliday says.

If the club was worried about it they would ask him to stop. While he sometimes crosses the line, I think he's a net benefit for all the positive stories he tells.

If agents had their way, all their players would move every window.

We need to be charging what the player is worth.

That's right. It's the same with selling players. Do we cash in on Watt, JT and Just in January for guaranteed money or keep them in the hope they keep us in the top 4 and help with a good cup run? Option 1 is money in the hand, but with the risk of sliding into the bottom half of the table, losing to Aberdeen in the cup and crowds falling again. Plus not repeating a season like this in the forseeable future. Option 2 is speculative, but the rewards could be a good cup run, a European spot, maintaining higher crowds and a season to remember. Risk/reward can be a difficult calculation for players and clubs.

In the Scottish game, "lazy" often means "prefers to make a pass than chase down a hopeful punt"

Not these days. They tap up the player first to stir up some unrest and then go to the club and say "see, he wants to move - you'd better let him"

Did Stuperevic not play (and score) for us in a cup game? I seem to recall a 20 yarder against Clyde at NDP.

They also have to consider the alternative. Imagine Jake Hastie had stayed with us and taken on board the coaching turning him into a better player and was now a regular starter for Cardiff City on 7 grand a week, I get that it's a tough decision, and never criticise any player that chooses the money option. No idea what I would have done in the alternate universe where I was a player in that situation.

I wouldn't pay 400k for a cup tied Welsh. I rather look elsewhere. I'm sure there are central defenders who can pass a ball that we can pick up cheaper than that. As for Watt and JT, no need to sell in January and no indication they want to leave. If a Scottish club is interested, then the price goes up at least 50% - call it a tariff.

Another thing I learned!

Reading the announcement I also learned that Owen Coyle is working at Nottingham Forest.

I trust Jens to make the right call, but I wasn't joking about his show reel. Two and a half minutes of him scoring, and 15 minutes of him not scoring. A little strange for a striker. Also, if you watch the section on "Shooting" it's not overly impressive. If he can stick the ball in the back of the net for us, then that's all that matters.

Good guy, bad defender. Hope it works out for him back at Sligo.

Our history against teams in that sort of form is that we usually beat them. No doubt the times we don't will stick in your mind, but if you want a recent example of playing a team in that sort of form you only need to look as far back as the last time we played (and beat them). See also Livingston and St Mirren.

Biggest problem has been the weather I would imagine. I don't know if we still have UV lights, but my recollection is that we only used them on the penalty boxes. Have we had to use the undersoil heating at any point? That is normally a contributor.

Let's destroy McCann and Doddsy with a new striker and then have them on Sportscene in the evening to analyse our performance.

The cup tie thing is obviously nonsense, because they can just make not playing in the cup a condition of any loan. For all we know Welsh might have agreed to play tonight so Motherwell would be the only option for his next loan and the Board can't entertain any other offers now. It doesn't really matter, though. Celtic need to take care of their business and we need to take care of ours. If there is a beneficial overlap - great; If not, then we move in another direction.

Every time I've seen us win the cup we beat Aberdeen away.

I actually meant "many" but point still stands. TBH, I'd have been looking for a replacement anyway, as you can't depend on loans. But I'd be happy enough to see him back, and maybe give him the notion to sign a deal next season.

Have we lost any games when he didn't play?

What if we lose our next cup match?

It's a pretty rough business to be in. I read somewhere there were over 1000 pubs closed in the UK last year.

I think he'd have to be sold to them, though - not on loan. The FIFA rule says you have to complete your contractual obligations at your previous club before you can play for another one with "overlapping seasons" - so his current contract would need to be terminated by a transfer. Or, at least, that's how I was reading it.

It's a FIFA rule - Article 5 apparently, if you want to track it down for read. You can only play for 2 clubs in a season. (You can be registered for a maximum of 3 in a season, but you can only play for 2).