weeyin

"Tried" is a bit generous. Unless that includes the talk about trying it rather than actually broadcasting anything to test.

He obviously had some talent, as he was signed on a 4 year contract by Leicester when he graduated from their academy as top goal scorer. Seems like many before him, his attitude got in the way of any talent he might have developed.

Maybe they should just simplify it, so that once the penalty taker kicks it, it's a goal if he scores and goal kick to the defending team if he misses (including saves from the keeper). That way, encroaching is pointless.

I think you'll find that most do. This moronic sectarianism should have no place in a 21st century society, never mind a football match. It's an embarrassment to the game and the country. Just ask anyone overseas what is known about the Scottish game and top of their list is the OF and their sectarianism.

He won't get a game with Boro's first team until Darren Randolph leaves.

And that's a good argument. Rose definitely has more experience and played a lot of first team games last season. Campbell is definitely a prospect and I'd definitely like to see him get more game time. I'm sure Craigan will be making the case if he thinks he's ready for more.

Superb piece.

Robinson has said he wants to keep a Scottish identity to the team. The problem he, and every Premiership manager faces, is that means a reliance on U20s. The development fees involved in signing Scottish prospects - even from the lower divisions - generally price us out the market.

If Rangers can tell us not to play someone, every other team can too and it makes the signing pointless and, frankly, bizarre. Not to mention making a mockery of the SFA rules.

Yesterday was Dunne's first game against top level opposition for months. Typical of a section of our support to write him off after that. I should be used to it by now, but it still amazes me that some people don't understand about the development of new players in a team.

Instead of taking alternate penalities, Team A takes the first, Team B the second and third, Team A the 4th etc. The idea is to reduce the advantage/disadvantage of winning the coin toss and taking them first. Every time a team scores they play Dancing Queen over the tannoy. (One of those may not be 100% true).

The modern trend is to employ "opinionated" presenters to "get the fans talking".

Be interesting to see how Robinson sets the team up away from home against a Premiership team. Hoping we don't go too defensive. I liked the ABBA shootout they had in the Charity Shield today. That would be a good addition to this competition given the sudden death nature of the ties.

What I meant was Ashely forced Rangers to take 4 or 5 players on loan that they never wanted. He could do that because, at the time, Sevco was beholden to his cash injection. The fitness of them to play was questioned at the time. None of that, however, is relevant to whether or not a team you don't play for, can somehow stop you from playing against them.

To miss it, I'd need some notion of what it actually is.

Maybe Rangers have a clause that says we're allowed to field McHugh against them, but he's not allowed to play well.

What Ashley did to wind up Rangers with forced loan deals was dodgy, but he had the power and the privilege to do that (and it wasn't illegal). That has nothing to do with Bigi's contract with Motherwell. We'd be just was well invoking our right to play Ross County's U20s in midweek.

I wasn't aiming my scorn at you. It just makes zero sense even for a conspiracy theory. The premise it that: A player was signed to Coventry City, then Newcastle Utd and then Coventry City. His deal with Coventry City came to an end. He was signed by Motherwell. The contract he signed states that a team he was loaned to (and never played for) while he was under contract to Newcastle, managed to implement a clause that states for the rest of his professional career, he cannot playa against Rangers. The club he currently plays for, not only fails to mention that clause, they lie about the reason he didn't play. The player is quite happy to adhere to a clause inserted by a team he was never contracted to, and is almost certainly an illegal restriction of trade under UK and EU law. It would be certainly be explosive. Bigger than Bosman.

I never believe any secret squirrel stories I read on here unless there are direct quotes. Everything else is just internet conspiracy BS.

What I was trying to say, but you were much more succinct!

Crazy talk.

Standard Rangers fare. They could field their U16s, and we'd find a way to lose.

Not completely surprised by the performance so far. For all the new guys, this is a big step up in quality of opposition. Hopefully, will settle down a bit in the second half.

Glad to see we're sticking to the old script. Give up soft early goal? Check.

Glad he's found a team he actually wants to play for. Hopefully he keeps it up and gets us a nice sell on fee. Although "final ball let him down" has been his weak point for a few years.