Kmcalpin

Its a tricky one. I think he was given a year's deal last summer? We've been down this route before and handed out 2/3 year deals to the likes of Luke Watt and Dom Thomas. Young players might have all the talent in the world but have they the temperament and attuitude to make it in the first team? Thats a tough call to make with an untried youngster. I'm glad that fans, including those who post online, are taking a more realistic view of young Turnbull's contract negotiations. I think thats a direct result of more becoming shareholders in our club; attending AGMs; and listening to the club's point of view which wasn't always widely known or publicised in the past. In years gone by an agent would stir it in one of the redtops and claim that the club was being insulting and disrespectful to players in negotiations and that would be enough to fire up some fans who would simply swallow that and have a real go at the club. Now they are realising that there's two sides to the negotiations.

So we are letting him go at a time of his choosing and not asking for a fee from his new club (ok its in his contract) and I presume paying his wages for his last month. If that is indeed the case then I don't think its unreasonable to ask him to play if selected by the manager. If however his new club is paying him this month then fair enough they are entitled to call the shots.

Very much my thinking. We're going to have 3 big games coming up within a week, and they're all ones which we're capable of taking something from. So, use squad rotation and substitutions (injuries permitting) to rest some players. The only question in my mind is will Rose be allowed to play, if fit; I sincerely hope he is. Hartley, Gorrin, Bigi, Rose, Maguire, Sammon, Bowman, ATS and Frear could all potentially come in, if only for a few minutes in some cases. Allan Campbell would be first on my list for rest.

Taken in isolation I would just about agree. 4 subs plus a goal gives us 2 minutes 30 seconds. Some time wasting and injuries (mostly simulation). However frequently in the past we've seen similar games with say 1 minute added on. I can recall one game against Accies with really blatant and excessive time wasting, way way worse than yesterday, and it appeared that no time was added for it. The SFA should issue clear guidelines for fans and clubs. One qualified referee told me that he normally added on 10 seconds per sub and 30 seconds for a goal.

Its interesting that Robbo is saying that Andy's Rose January departure has been known for some time and has been factored into our budget ie there's no cash being freed up. He wasn't even on the bench yesterday. Its likely that Jake Hastie will be returning from Alloa. Significantly though he acknowledges our lack of pace and width and has identified some targets, subject to cash being available..

First things first an unexpected but thoroughly deserved win in baltic conditions for both players and fans. In our current situation the 3 points are what matters as they help to propel us a little bit away from the relegation dogfight. It was a strange game in many ways and a mixture of the good and poor. Overall our performance was improved compared to early season form but weaknesses were still evident. We tried to play a bit more football and that was encouraging in itself. We got off to a dream start scoring 2 fairly easy goals in the first 17 minutes. Gillespie's penalty save was also crucial and despite what many are saying he saved and Saints didn't miss it. Lucky? Certainly but also good goalkeeping. It was a clear penalty. Not surprisingly these events influenced the whole course of the game and gave us a vital cushion. I thought we defended reasonably well for most of the remaining first 45. Most unlike us, we sat fairly high and the midfield chased and harried well off the ball. Very very encouraging! However a bit before half time we lapsed into long standing bad habits and sat off Saints and showed them a glass jaw. I felt a bit sorry for Grimshaw (for the entire 94 minutes) as he had no protection in front of him and at times had to fend off 2 or 3 attackers. In the second half we resorted mainly to a narrow deep 5-3-2 formation as we decided to see the game out and Saints began to bulldozer our midfield. Worryingly they began to rain in cross after cross and we conceded avoidable corners. Fortunately Gillespie proved his worth in goals and stood up well to aerial threats. It wasn't all Saints in the second 45 though and we did create a good few chances but our final ball and poor decision making nullifed that. We should have had a penalty when Johnson was pulled in the box but the referee did not give it. Fortunately, for all their endeavours Saints were pretty toothless up front, despite being given generous freedom in and around our box. It was only a matter of time before they scored though albeit it was very late on and the last few minutes were a bit uncomfortable for us freezing souls. Alan Muir was the model of inconsistentcy and brought out his card a good number of times although it wasn't a dirty game. Despite that, I don't know why the Saints defender wasn't carded for hauling down Main or Johnson (not sure which) on the halfway line when he was beaten all ends up and they had a clear route to goal. Danny Swanson also resorted to type and was fortunate not be carded for blatant simulation. In conclusion, a decent performance albeit still with weaknesses. A platform on which to build though. Happy days.

Only one candidate for me and thats Gillespie. He didn't get the protection to which he was entitled but still looked comfortable and saved the penalty.

Time wasting is very rarely taken into account. All I look for is consistency. Still, more important issues to focus on today.

Where did the 4 added on minutes come from? Mr Wright's watch?

Was that a Monday evening 2-0 defeat during Craig Brown's reign? If so, I remember it well. The game should have been called off by the Police because the car park was a death trap. A foot of ice/freezing water to wade through to get to the turnstiles. Compare that to the effoprt we go through at Fir Park these days. As if a long journey back down the A9 after a defeat wasn't bad enough, the road was icy and there was freezing fog. My worst ever car journey.

You're saying that Scottish football is garbage or rubbish (in UK english? If so, what are you comparing it with? For some years now fans' general expectations have become more and more unrealistic. When I say that I'm not referring to one teams ups and downs.

Thats my question too.

Irrespective of who we would prefer for our selections will Peter Hartley be fit? Apparently he has/had a dead leg.

Andy Rose has had limited impact this season, in part due to injury and maybe others like Bigi, Turnbull and Gorrin coming through. Perhaps too it was part of the masterplan to gradually phase him out, in the knowledge that he would only be with us until Hogmanay - who knows. At any rate the midfield dynamic is already changing and there's no-one amongst the current senior players who can replicate that role. Rose reminds me very much of a young Keith Lasley but with more athleticism, but less grit. Not in any way showy, but hovers around to cover up for other more gung ho colleagues' errors. My overall view of his time with us is that whilst he never set the heather on fire he did a passable job, most of it off the ball. Not our worst signing by any means but far from our best. Still, it gives Robbo some time and money (he must have known about Rose's move months ago) to plan for a new player in the upcoming window.

I don't know but if he is rested it would be a nice gesture by Vancouver to pay his wages intil 1 January.

Apologies Andy, my comment was partly tongue in cheek and before the news about Andy Rose was confirmed. At every turn we broadcast the message that we're totally skint (unlike our close rivals). I accept that might be deliberate to dampen dreams of healthy warchests from other clubs. My thinking was that if we were totally skint and no-one was shipped out next month ie the worst case scenario, then if Jake Hastie were to return we couldn't even afford his wages (currently being paid by Alloa presumably). That won't now happen as Andy Rose is leaving next month, although its unclear if any fee, however nominal, will be involved. At the very least a wage will be freed up. I'm ambivalent about him going, although I'd rather we lost a few others first. We are reasonably well off for central midfielders and need to strengthen in other areas first. Centre Back; left sided wide midfielder; creative midfielder and striker. Still now that we know for certain Rose is departing it will free up some cash - maybe to allow us to bring Hastie back .

Steady on Weeyin. Pittodrie and Tannadice really take some beating. Tannadice is the only stadium you need to wear long johns in July.

So, as things stand, Andy Rose may move on next month and Falkirk have made it widely known that they're keen on taking Ross MacLean. If our budget permits, Jake Hastie may return.

Yes of course, but not all will. There are a whole range of factors which might influence an individual's decision on when to move or if indeed to move at all. As Fizoxy says, "Many young players know that it makes more footballing sense to get regular playing time, build a reputation, and reap the rewards of a bigger move a few years later, and actually playing games is why most got into the profession in the first place." Most young players will want to move up in the game and I get that, but timing is also crucial. Some do want to establish themselves first, earn a good reputation and then move on and up.

There are agents and agents as the powers that be at Fir Park will tell you. Some are honourable and conduct themselves as you say. Others are ruthless and don't care about their clients; they simply want their dosh. As far as careers go not everyone is money oriented and desperate to become the next CEO by the time they're 23. In some cases a move for more money might be premature or simply not be right. I've seen colleagues turn down far better paid positions because they didn't like the company, their methods or their personnel. Money is important yes, but its certainly not the end all and be all.

Our fans wouldn't like his brand of football or his reluctance to use bring young players on . He has done very well at St Johnstone and built solid teams. Not great to watch, not exciting but they're competitive, consistent, physical, streetwise, experienced and don't make many mistakes. He likes players with a combative and abrasive attitude like your Murray Davidsons, Liam Craigs and Paul Patons. Not making mistakes is his trademark. In our league that will guarantee you a mid table slot. He's not great at bringing young players on. For some years now St Johnstone have paid higher wages than us (not by a huge amount) despite having smaller crowds. I'd like to know how they balance the books.

Just watched the TV highlights and the time and space the Hearts player was given to cross the ball into our box for their goal was criminal. He was allowed to pick his spot. That put our defence under unnecessary pressure. We're not good at closing teams down outside our penalty area.

It means leaving his post but continuing to be paid and continuing to carry out parts of his job.

As Shaka says above we are in our wee group of 4 teams at the bottom until the end of the season. That doesn't mean that we won't improve when injured players return or we have a good January window. I'm confident though we have enough to finish in 9th or 10th place. If we can beat those teams below us anything we take from sides above us will be a bonus. However we should go out to win every game.

Don't get me wrong Iain, the team should go all out to win these games and they have to believe but its just that I have low expectations this week and next. Just now I have little confidence that the team won't make a crucial error against better sides whilst the oppostion makes none. There's little in these games but just enough to deny us a point, as we've seen often this campaign so far.