fat_tony

Sounds spot on to me, would suit me down to the ground!

Nobody there got Google? http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+to+clear+print+queue+on+a+xxxxxx-xxxxxxx+printer

Looks promising at least...

But then if the "update" is just "we're still working on the details", it's hardly worth announcing that a couple of times per day. I still think he's signing, just probably some legal snags etc. to work around if the deal's being financed externally again. Let Faddywatch Day 5 commence...

Looking at that table, ourselves and Killie have really done incredibly well since the formation of the SPL. Outperforming more than half of the city clubs (albeit with Dundee's financial problems) is an amazing feat. Not bad at all for a couple of small clubs located so close to the hordes of unwashed.

Team news to be announced just shortly, according to the club's Twitter. Hinted at a few new faces...

Oh, I totally agree. I was talking more about the suggestion of the club following a similar route to pre-admin days. However both deals are financed (assuming they're both signing), be it external funding or within our wage budget, the club's current custodians certainly won't be making the mistake of overreaching. Doesn't make it any easier waiting for news though!

Seen a lot of people raising that same point on FB and the BBC (granted the majority of people who comment on BBC articles couldn't figure out how to tie their own shoelaces). Have to say though, that I think the club's incredibly well run nowadays and they certainly wouldn't be taking a gamble with budget they don't have. If anything, it could be an externally financed deal, like we saw with Faddy last season, someone basically writing off some of their hard-earned to pay for him to return. I certainly think there's no way we could afford both players' "normal wages" within our current structure, even with all the departures.

I'm hoping the club is holding off announcing McManus so they can do a double reveal of him and Faddy at the same time...

I think that was the article that prompted the club to come out and say that nothing was final until they informed people via email.

Was a bit up and down about Kerr last season, as he put in a couple of good performances and a couple of bad. I hadn't realised he was only 20, however. Happy with the signing in that case, as he'll provide some much needed cover at the back and the potential to, with the right influences, develop his game.

That's it. Don't think I'm going to be able to sleep tonight thanks to that list!

If that was the 3-0 defeat in February on a pitch reminiscent of the Somme, you can't judge him on that performance. Not one player looked like a footballer that day.

I'd say the two aren't mutually exclusive.

Agreed. I could potentially make it, but am likely to be busy so won't get a chance to get through. I've emailed the club to ask if they can post it to me but offered to pay for the postage. I don't mind sticking a couple of quid in to save the club money on postage. They can put it into the "Faddy Fund".

Not to mention Stephen Craigan or indeed Phil O'Donnell, who was crucial to our performances under McGhee.

My point, that I think I actually forgot to make was: why can't we do both? We still have quite a few positions to fill, and as long as we can get a good mix of potential and proven, we should be looking good for both short and medium-longer term. I'd suggest that both Vigurs and Lawson are a couple of players that we may look to make something on, should they work out.

All well and good, and to some extent, I do agree. However if you look at the players we've lost in the last couple of years that we signed on that basis, we've not done all that well in moving them on for a fee. Jennings, Humphrey, Law, Randolph, all left at the end of their contracts without bringing money in for the club. I'm not sure if Higdon would fall into that bracket or not. However, the impact of those players is undeniable in terms of results, and this is something that, potentially, Sutton could offer. We'll see what happens I guess, but I don't think we should be shying away from signing someone who may be able to do a job for us just because their resale potential is slim.

Totally agree with this. Craig Brown had Sutton playing left midfield on many an occasion, to fit his long diagonal ball tactic. In fairness, it worked well, and Sutton was able to nod the ball down for the likes of Blackman, Jutkiewicz etc, but didn't get the chance to get in at goals as much. McCall got the best of him when he came in, I reckon because he tailored our approach to bring Sutton into the game. It's no coincidence that he did something similar with Higdon, it's obviously the way he works. Sutton's had a difficult couple of years at Hearts, for all the reasons outlined above. But ability doesn't just disappear, and he did very well for us when he was here, as well as putting in a power of work each and every game. If Higdon is leaving, and we can get Sutton without breaking the back, then I'd be more than happy to have him back. When he left, people were saying of Higdon "he's no John Sutton". Funny to think that now people are saying the opposite.

Please, no! Never been impressed with him.

The way I see the problem is that with a club like ours, we don't have the luxury of offering players extended deals (which undoubtedly would mean an increased wage) as we tend not to know what our playing budget will be from one season to the next. Everything is so heavily dependent on the club performing well in the league and getting to a certain stage of the cup, that the club have to plan the budget realistically. Throw in the added financial uncertainty surrounding the game in Scotland just now, and the fact that every year the available funds seem to shrink and I don't see that there's any way the club can plan their budget that far in advance. I understand the argument for planning long-term, by extending deals and trying to ensure we get a decent fee for our top players, but when the short-term is as uncertain as it still is in Scottish football, I don't think the club can afford to make those kind of deals.

No logic behind it at all, but would really fancy either a Dutch or Belgian team this time round. Would also quite enjoy a wee trip to Switzerland or Austria. Hopefully we get somewhere that's not too expensive to reach and not full of total psychos.

Can't stand the Sun, but Easy Target's link in the shoutbox (Clicky) has a lot of good quotes from McCall about the interest in Samson and Lawson, and he touches on Hollis' situation: Also, some great quotes from Humphrey there, too. Sounds like he's seriously considering staying as an option.

Every week on the radio I hear McCall praising Randolph. If the media isn't making a headline out of it, then that's something to do with them, but I don't for a second believe it's because McCall doesn't praise him to them. They'd just rather gush about anyone in a green and white/blue jersey because it sells papers to the knuckle-draggers.

Exactly. It reads to me like he was approached by The Rangers, and spoke to them, as anybody would with any job offer. He's obviously got other options to investigate but doesn't want to make any decisions until he's checked them all out. I expect we'll see him down south next season, but he'd be stupid to tell The Rangers to stick it before he's seen what else is out there. In saying that, he's far too good a player for that mob...