steelboy

bannan was one of the better performers, he's a proper winger who wants to run with the ball all the time it's just a shame he's so wee. he started the move that led to the goal as well. billy stark was at fir park last saturday, maybe he was unimpresses by forbes who was poor in the first half and anyonomous in the second?

that's not really fair as john fleck didn't get on either. forbes had kevin mcdonald (loads of u21 caps and club experience) and mcginn (4 goals for st mirren this season) ahead of him and would have been further down the pecking order if arfield and coutts had been fit. i'm not really sure if today was the day for forbes anyway. for the last 25 minutes scotland played with 4 out and out attackers (maguire, bannan, murphy and goodwillie) and went from back to front very quickly. mcdonald and mcginn weren't great but mcginn protected the defence well at the end and mcdonald was one of the few scotland players who could mix it with the bigger belorussians.

totally agree with andy p. i find it difficult to understand why people are so impatient with murphy. he has been on the verges of the first team for a few years but he hasn't really had a sustained run in the team or had much of a chance in his natural position. he's got excellent technique and a nose for goal, given time and encouragement he'll be a very good player for us. i just hope we don't have to go through all the shite we had with quinn and clarkson, some people must have felt very stupid when we recieved over a million pounds for the pair of them. if we're going to be a club that focusses on youth we'll have to be willing to show patience.

jamie did well when he came on and it was a great goal. bob mchugh scored the first for scotland u19 against romania in austria. we won 3-0 and meechan started and pollock came on.

just from reading this thread it seems that the trust have 12 grand in the bank but that they haven't spent any money helping the club for a long time. why would anyone want to join? the aims of a trust should be to raise funds for your club and to try and give fans a say in how the club is run. ours doesn't give the club any money and lets a guy nobody likes have a seat on the board, it's a joke.

for some reason this was my favourite one that i had i also liked this one

it's probably the same reporter who encouraged yassin to make the quotes in the first place that has phoned up the charlton manager and stuck him in.

maybe he was interviewed on friday or saturday for the story to run this week. the sports pages were full of old firm shite around the weekend. maybe yass's comments were kept to fill some space during the week as most clubs won't be training for a few days hence no interviews/stories? i've got about as low an opinion of scottish journalists as it's possible to have but i don't think they've stooped to the level of just inventing interviews that never happened.

someone who is only on loan here for six months? we can't afford the guy on a permanent deal, he's going to be looking for teams who pay more which includes the OF. i don't see anything wrong with him saying so.

it can be subtitled "lies to tell gullible fans"

i think he's very good defensively when he's actually in position.

he would need to take a massive wage cut to come and play for us permanently so why would he even consider it? as long as he keeps showing the effort he has since he arrived i'll be pleased. i'd question the wisdom of him playing so far up the park but he's obviously been instructed to do it by gannon or he'd be getting subbed/his baws booted.

i'll be up front and say no matter what i'll not be joining or attending the meeting. i am however wondering what sort of objectives the trust have these days? i can't really think of any pressing issues right now and the biggest thing the trust have tackled during the past couple of years (the phil o'donnell tribute) seems to be up in the air at the moment.

to be fair but you don't know how much ruddy, yassin and lukas are costing us. yassin was supposedly one of the top earners at charlton and even guys on the fringes at everton earn several thousand pounds a week. we won't be paying their full wages but we won't have them for free either and i doubt that they're relatively cheap. my guess is that we were well under budget and because of that gannon was able to bring in two fairly expensive loan deals before the window shut. for all the money we've spent this summer the only person we have a chance of getting a fee for is humphrey. porter was a magnificent bit of business by mcghee, even taking into account wages and signing on fee we would still have made a net profit on him never mind almost 30 goals in 18 months. looking at gannon's signings coke and jennings are probably on fairly modest contracts with the intention of putting themselves in the shop window for a better move back down south next summer for free and yassin, lukas and ruddy are most likely off in january. add in the fact that o'brien, hammell, slane, lasley and mcgarry are all out of contract next summer and reynolds will be at the quinn/clarkson time to sell stage and we could be looking at even bigger summer of rebuilding in 2010.

maybe i'm not the only one who thinks it's a bit foolhardy to have a flag made up of someone who has only put in 4 really good performances for the club?

nope same guy. as i remember coming out of love street really pleased at his performance. his link up play and ability to hold the ball up that day were excellent and i was certain we had signed a player a cut above the average spl player. he didn't set the heather alight right away but i remember thinking it was madness to drop him to play clarky, rossco and mcgarry up front against hearts on the monday. it's just a shame all the posts from pre nov 2008 have been deleted or i could back it up. there are lot of threads about mark mcghee, paul quinn, clarky and other subjects that would be interesting to look at now as well. revisionism is rife on here and mistakes are doomed to be repeated.

i'll have you know i've attempted to drink bucharest, llannelli and nancy dry during the last year and a bit and enjoyed it immensely but i didn't feel i was missing anything as well fan before i went to nancy. for me it's quite simple a couple of decent trips aren't worth 20 odd games of dross. for one you can leave scotland without having to go to a well game and even if we do bore our way to europe we could end up in kazakhstan. also if you put your mind to it you can have belting days out at domestic away games, you just need the right attitude.

lukas got his goal on saturday because he wanted to win the ball more than anyone else in the box which is always good to see. if he continues to show that same desire i think he'll do well for us although i'm not sure how impressive any striker could look playing in our team right now. and as i remember it porter had a cracking debut at love street and it was obvious from the off that he was a class act.

it's daft to say that some folk can stand up and some can't. why the back four rows and not the back five? at the same time i've no sympathy for people who get chucked out either. i like standing for good chunks of the game and as long as there are folk daft enough to attract the attentions of the stewards away from me and onto them i'm quite happy.

centenary suite paedophiles oway-oway-oh!

cheers. i don't think going out scooping was a very good idea to be honest but i was veering on the side of optimisim. on the plus side i was meant to be working today and now i'm involved in a fitba marathon.

he's second. carl finnigan is the most fouled and has commited the most fouls. 25 won and 24 conceded. a lot of the time you get the impression he's quite happy to take the kick and get his opponent booked. his injury looked quite innocuous though. i thought the stretcher was a bit ott, i broke my ankle playing fives on thursday and i went on out the razz after it anyway. jim needs to man up.

firstly i don't think we're anymore likely to qualify for europe through the league by playing it safe with a 4-5-1 than we would be if we played in a more cavalier style. we're riding our luck just now (ruddy's saves from bougherra and the triple, dillon giving away the pen, two headers from two yards from corners, arfield's shot hitting the bar), eventually our luck will change and we'll have to earn the wins. and for me, playing negatively (or at least passively) all season to qualify for europe isn't worth it. i had a great time in nancy and bucharest but the games themselves were poor fare if you were a motherwell fan. i'd much rather we tried to attack and entertain domestically even if it meant getting a few bloody noses than boring our way to a couple of games against a foriegn team and a massive piss up. i'd rather enjoy the 40 odd domestic games than grind it out for the sake of two or maybe four glamour ties.

what are we grinding our way towards, 4th or 5th place? i could see the point in keep it tight and attempting to rack up the points if we were actually in a with a shot of gaining anything signficant from it but for me finishing 4th rather than 7th isn't worth sitting through 20 odd performances like the ones yesterday and at tanndice. imo accies and falkirk are so bad this season that relegation isn't a worry for us so why not try and play a bit of football. at stockport gannon always had a target of either staying up or getting promoted, we don't have anything like that to aim for and all most fans want is to watch the team attempt to play attractive, attacking football. the way we're going we're in danger of turning into a slightly better version of st mirren.

look at the hibs game though. 20 odd passes from us followed by o'brien losing it and them scoring within ten seconds. what good chances have we created from open play in the past five league games? the way we're playing isn't working and gannon's description of us as looking like a good football team in the first 30 minutes yesterday is worrying as we're unable to put a shite falkirk team under any real pleasure.