Kmcalpin

A positive meeting last night, with good open discussion. A recurring theme throughout the evening was that the Society Board want members to be involved, in different ways. There were many issues raised and we were left in no doubt that if we don't like aspects of the rules we can, within reason, change them. Members shouldn't sit back and wait to be spoon fed and then complain when matters don't go their way. The Board will be open to comments and suggestions so make them. Communication is a two way process. Someone also made the important point from the body of the kirk about communication with members living away from Fir Park. They have to be involved. A lot of good points made and I'm hopeful the Board will listen and communicate with everyone. We have some clued up folk on the Board and thats half the battle. What came across to me was how complex a process the setting up of the organisation has been and how much time has been taken up with that, through necessity. No doubt the Society will evolve and rules and / regulations will change but thats up to the rank and file to identify issues constructively.

Keith is now 32/33 would a week or two out of the team make any difference - is he ever going to regain his form of previous seasons? A few mutterings in the stands that he's now losing his legs. I must admit I saw his role this season as being more of a supporting role, nursing a younger lad and supporting a Steve Jennings replacement. I never for a moment thought of him as being the mainstay of our engine room. Its grossly unfair of us to expect this of him. In the pre season furore over us offering him a new perhaps improved deal, these issues were lost on many fans. I agree that despite our limited options there area few simple changes we could make.

All things considered a very good result for us today. Probably the result was better than the performance but I'm not complaining. Before the game I'd have bitten your hand off for a draw. When I heard the team I feared a real beating. Neither side did enough to win and a draw was fair. For their part the Dons worked like trojans and bossed midfield for 70% of the game. They had the bulk of the pressure but didn't seem to have a cutting edge with the exception of the first 10 minutes and last 5. We have played far better and lost this season. Too many misplaced passes, unforced errors and safety first manouevres. Central midfield was posted missing and failed to protect our defence. Credit though to our young stand in centre backs - they only let us down once. I thought that they along with Humphrey and Ojamaa and perhaps Murphy deserved pass marks. Both full backs had poor games and I was disappointed that ZFA was not given another run. Keith Lasley had a game to forget and Michael Higdon had a poor one also. If Aberdeen had to score they could not have picked a better time for us. Had they scored much earlier I've no doubt they'd have gone on to win the tie. We need to show much more character and aggression especially in midfield and not resort to sitting so deep, especially late in games. Still a good day out if a cold one and a very acceptable result. A great goal by Jamie Murphy - it was always going to take something like that to beat Langfield, who had one of his best ever displays against us .

Very true indeed. Even within the same game he'll pick on one incident and miss others equally as bad if not worse. A lot seems to depend on whether the commentators seem to want to highlight an incident or not.

You're missing the point. Most folk don't object to the use of TV evidence. The issue is how it is used. Why does the Compliance Officer focus on some incidents and ignore others in the same game? Steve Jennings' red card against St Mirren is a case in point. I and several other fans have contacted the Compliance Officer at various times with details of incidents which were televised. No action was taken - why? The process has to be consistent. TV coverage of an incident is not sufficient to arrive at a decision. Sometimes it is necessary to take further evidence. According to Stuart McCall's comments it seems that the referee may have changed his mind/interpretation post match. Now, if he has done that and weight is placed on his report, why did he not highlight other incidents, which were incorrectly handled at the time? If referees are going to change their mind about incidents post match why does that not include legitimate goals being chalked off? Officials can't pick and choose which major incidents to amend post match. Another point worth considering - assuming the referee was right to change his mind post match, his error could cost Darren Randolph a game's suspension. Had Randolph been sent off at the time he would receive a one match ban. Post match the "offer" is two matches. Why? Why should a player pay for a referee's error? As I said before the process is not transparent and is fundamentally flawed and unsafe.

This is a ridiculous decision and I sincerely hope the club contests it. It may have been a bad foul, it may have been an accident, or Darren Randolph may have been trying to avoid Paterson (unsuccessfully). We simply don't know and neither does the Compliance Officer. Only Darren Randolph knows the truth. As we now know the CO only accepts evidence from TV pundits not ordinary fans. TV pundits and commentators can now act as judge and jury. They choose what to edit out, highlight and make a fuss about. If we are going to rely on their evidence alone we have to be100% sure they are completely objective. Why are their opinions worth more than those of fans? The whole system is unfair, not transparent and open to abuse. The CO has made a decision on the a basis of his interpretation and an incomplete assessment. He has not interviewed the parties involved for example. What does his decision say about the referee who was on the spot and arrived at a different conclusion?

Just back home. A great 3 points so well done Stuart and the lads. Two good goals with Humph's being a scorcher and candidate for goal of the season. What a goal!! United came back into it in the second half and it was nail biting stuff. Very poor ref who let a niggly United side off with murder. Great 3 points. Depressing to hear the Arabs moan and whinge at everything from start to finish. Humph's goal will go down as a real jewel.

A great win and performance. Didn't see that coming at all. Hopefully that'll boost the lads' confidence. Well done to Stuart McCall.

Good point. I suppose you could email Alison Wallace with any questions/ views prior to the meeting . Failing that I'd be happy to raise them on your behalf.

Not unduly concerned at this stage for the reasons the Brazilian has set out. Its important though that as many of us as possible attend these meetings to influence decisions.

I would not have thought so. We entered the ground using our season tickets legally which we'd paid for (including giving £70 to the Treasury in the form of VAT). If we make a donation then surely thats up to us. It was not handed over in return for any purchase or service.

In general you're right but it could be argued, from a Hearts perspective, that the system in this country is working given that they won 4-2.

You have to ask whether Carswell, McHugh, Hetherington and other fringe players are doing enough to push for first team places.

Yes, I've been taken aback by both the lack of reaction from fans and just as importantly the club itself. At the end of this year we could be looking at a £300k loss. Joe Wark the Legend and I just walked into the ticket office and handed over our donations and asked for them to be treated as such to ensure no VAT was paid. They were gratefully received, we were thanked and then we left for the Cooper.

The same view has been rife in the Cooper Club and POD Stand for weeks now. Thats the worrying thing isn't it that many fans agree on our weaknesses (we all know what they are). If many fans are alert to them then you can be sure opposition managers also are and are devising ways to exploit them. Like Jim Gannon's latter days in charge, we are so predictable.

Eh? He's surely made a mistake FC? If so it should be rectified asap.

I'd drop it into the office.

Thanks for clearing matters up Flow.

Give the club a donation - don't pay at the gate.

I'll be using my season ticket but giving the club my gate money as a donation. A word of warning to all ST holders who are going to pay in tomorrow - don't pay at the gate. If you do 20% of your cash will be siphoned off by the Government in the form of VAT. Instead give it to MFC as a donation - that way the club gets all the benefit.

If you have concerns you're quite within your rights to contact Alison Wallace at the club and ask her to confirm whether or not the Chairman is employed by MFC in any capacity or works for it in a voluntary capacity. That should clear matters up. Lines of communication have already been established. For what its worth I too agree that Society Board members should be separate from the club.

Well its your Society and if you're not pleased make your feelings known to the Board. Its a democratic body.

The penalty was given because Craigan was facing his opponent and not the ball.

I wrote this after the St Mirren game back in August. "I'm all for giving youth a chance but Steve Hetherington had a mare really should have been replaced after 30 minutes. For most of the match we were totally exposed down both wings with Nicky Law not really knowing where he was meant to be playing. Jamie Murphy again flattered to deceive and his roving role from a deep position caused our lads more trouble than it caused St Mirren. Keith Lasley is struggling badly just now and may be missing Jennings' presence to protect him. At 32 are his best years behind him?" The midfield (and other areas of the team) has been a problem since the start of the season with players out of position in roles for which they are not suited.

Not at all. I did not say that a decent cup run comes down to luck. Certainly luck is an element, in terms of the draw and perhaps in some individual games but its only a factor, in most cases a minor one. Even if we were to be very fortunate 3 games on the trot in drawing lower league opposition at home there's no guarantee whatsoever that we'd win all 3 games. I'm long enough in the tooth to remember many games in which we played lower league opposition and have been knocked out. Ayr United, Dundee, Clyde, Queen of the South, Queens Park, East Stirling, Stirling Albion, and East Fife have all knocked us out at some point. Then theres been a good number of defeats at home by so called weak SPL sides. I would think it very unlikely that a team could reach the semi finals simply on the basis of good luck. Even if the draw is kind you still have to beat the opposition.