Livingston - all the threads merged

[LiviLion]

4 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

If he wasn't getting game time then it makes sense for all involved that he returns to Sellic (so he can likely be loaned out elsewhere).

He was getting game time though, in the 4 games he was here for (assuming he left before Sunday), there was only 1 he didn't play in. He only joined a day before the Brechin game, and had 2 starts and a sub appearance after that, so not sure if game time is the real reason or there's been a bit of a falling out somewhere.

[Ayia Napa Daz]

Freddie, if he was sent back to Celtic on Thursday how could he possibly have been in the starting line-up for a game 3 days later?

Gotta say I've been reading this site for about 8 years now, and I've no idea why I bother. This thread in particular does, and always has attracted complete throbbers from other teams.

[orco]

It would have been good to keep him for rotation and cover but he wasn't our player and I'd prefer our own guys to be playing if possible.

Edited September 5, 2017 by orco

[Skyline Drifter]

1 hour ago, Ayia Napa Daz said:

Freddie, if he was sent back to Celtic on Thursday how could he possibly have been in the starting line-up for a game 3 days later?

Gotta say I've been reading this site for about 8 years now, and I've no idea why I bother. This thread in particular does, and always has attracted complete throbbers from other teams.

Dont let the door hit you on the arse on tbe way out then. 

If indeed he did leave before the weekend then the line about not enough game time simply doesnt stand up to scrutiny. He played in the three games immediately before. There is more to this.

[Durnford]

8 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Dont let the door hit you on the arse on tbe way out then. 

If indeed he did leave before the weekend then the line about not enough game time simply doesnt stand up to scrutiny. He played in the three games immediately before. There is more to this.

However Keaghan Jacobs was returning from injury; in the first game back (one nil win at Morton) Thomson was on the subs bench but came on for the last twenty minutes.It certainly did feel, rightly or wrongly, that Thomson turned up with an over inflated opinion of himself and that certainly showed in the St Mirren game with his attempts at show-boating and running straight at three defenders only to lose out at the first tackle. Maybe, as others had implied, he would have settled but in the meantime we patently had better on our books already.

If Hopkins had been totally honest with him and told him that Keaghan was going to get preference for a starting position then I can see that he wouldn't have appreciated that.

As Orco says, he wasn't our player so why would we give him preference against some of our players who are contracted to us?

I originally thought the same of Toderov but the young man has a "play-me-anywhere-so-long-as-you-play-me" attitude and accepts when he's left on the bench when the potentially less skillful Mackin is given game time. Always has time for the fans and turns up with a smile on his face.

 

[The Moonster]

13 hours ago, andylivi1 said:

Seriously are you Joe Thomson ? 

I have no reason not to believe that the reason he has been sent back to Celtic was because he expected to be playing every week and was told he wouldn't be. 

Does it make much of a difference what our opinion is anyway ? He's gone. 

I trust Hoppys judgment over a player that has been in the door 4 weeks, he's never had an issue with any other players since joining the club as coach and manager, so why now ? Perhaps the player has an issue ? Perhaps Celtic wanted him to play every minute of every game ? Either way that wasn't going to happen so he's fucked off back to Celtic. 

Given that he's played for 2 clubs in this division and had an exemplary attitude at both I highly doubt he's spat the dummy. If anything it'll be Celtic pulling him back and it's entirely understandable if he wasn't getting game time and were told he wouldn't be guaranteed it, they sent him out to gain experience not sit on a bench.

[andylivi1]

1 hour ago, The Moonster said:

Given that he's played for 2 clubs in this division and had an exemplary attitude at both I highly doubt he's spat the dummy. If anything it'll be Celtic pulling him back and it's entirely understandable if he wasn't getting game time and were told he wouldn't be guaranteed it, they sent him out to gain experience not sit on a bench.

The fact is though he did get game time, he would've got more game time, and he would've started a fair few games, there is no doubt about that.

The problem was he expected to walk into the side from the minute he arrived, was never going to happen, just like any other team a loan player won't walk straight into the side, they've got to work for it. 

Edited September 6, 2017 by andylivi1

[The Moonster]

4 minutes ago, andylivi1 said:

The fact is though he did get game time, he would've got more game time, and he would've started a fair few games, there is no doubt about that.

The problem was he expected to walk into the side from the minute he arrived, was never going to happen, just like any other team a loan player won't walk straight into the side, they've got to work for it. 

Did he expect that or did Celtic expect that?

[Durnford]

6 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Did he expect that or did Celtic expect that?

I don't know that it really matters in the grand scheme of things although, assuming that Celtic were paying his wages, they would probably want to see something for it. However, as previously stated he did play in three of the four games he was with us and started in two of those so I'm not sure what more they could have expected.

Remembering that my view of him was fairly limited and QoS or Dumbarton fans are probably in a better position to comment; but I thought he was a long way off premier standard, other than maybe relegation dog-fight, which is probably why he's been loaned out rather than finding himself on the first-team bench - hence I'm not sure why Celtic would have pulled him back after him being on the bench for one game?

[The Moonster]

Just now, Durnford said:

I don't know that it really matters in the grand scheme of things although, assuming that Celtic were paying his wages, they would probably want to see something for it. However, as previously stated he did play in three of the four games he was with us and started in two of those so I'm not sure what more they could have expected.

Remembering that my view of him was fairly limited and QoS or Dumbarton fans are probably in a better position to comment; but I thought he was a long way off premier standard, other than maybe relegation dog-fight, which is probably why he's been loaned out rather than finding himself on the first-team bench - hence I'm not sure why Celtic would have pulled him back after him being on the bench for one game?

I'm only asking the question because some seem set on the opinion that Joe Thomson is a "billy big time" and he's "spat the dummy" which I think is an unfair assumption given the lad has absolutely no history of ever showing this attitude in the past.  He played with us last year when we were at our absolute worst, we played terrible football, but Joe loved his time here and wanted to stay and by all accounts enjoyed his time at Queens just as much, I find it hard to believe he personally has given up because he didn't start a game. You're right though, it probably doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

[JessieField]

Maybe Livvy were supposed to be paying some of his wages and they didn't pay.... haven't they got "form" for reneging on bills?

Edited September 6, 2017 by JessieField
mispelt

[Durnford]

5 minutes ago, JessieField said:

Maybe Livvy were supposed to be paying some of his wages and they didn't pay.... haven't they got "form" for renaging on bills?

If you want to be taken seriously maybe you should buy a dictionary, or use one on line, first.

I personally have no idea on whether Celtic had agreed to pay his wages, or whether there was a reciprocal arrangement, but I doubt we would have taken anyone on board for a position, which we had already suitably covered, if there was a cost involved. If he had been a right back then there may be some justification for it.

[Durnford]

31 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I'm only asking the question because some seem set on the opinion that Joe Thomson is a "billy big time" and he's "spat the dummy" which I think is an unfair assumption given the lad has absolutely no history of ever showing this attitude in the past.  He played with us last year when we were at our absolute worst, we played terrible football, but Joe loved his time here and wanted to stay and by all accounts enjoyed his time at Queens just as much, I find it hard to believe he personally has given up because he didn't start a game. You're right though, it probably doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Fair enough; as I say I have no insider information so am only going by what I've seen; read and what others have said.  It is evident he was well liked at Dumbarton and if he enjoyed his time there it was probably then he was probably able to perform better. He was okay with us but nothing more in the approximately 200 minutes of playing time that he actually got.

As an aside I notice from the announcement on 11th August: 

Quote

“Our midfield 3 have been fantastic to date, but it’s a long hard season and Joe will give us a bit of cover in there. He can also play off the striker or in a wide position.

“Joe will be an excellent addition to our already strong squad, and will be involved in the matchday squad for our trip to Brechin on Saturday. 

My reading of that was that he was promised a position in the squad; not necessarily a starting berth. Not sure how that could have been misunderstood either by the player or by Celtic.

Whatever the reasons it appears the plug was pulled after just twenty days.

[Skyline Drifter]

3 hours ago, Durnford said:

As Orco says, he wasn't our player so why would we give him preference against some of our players who are contracted to us?

Because he's better? Granted that's a matter of opinion but if he's not better (and he was a starter without doubt at two clubs at this level last season) why bring him in at all if you don't expect to play him?

38 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

I'm only asking the question because some seem set on the opinion that Joe Thomson is a "billy big time" and he's "spat the dummy" which I think is an unfair assumption given the lad has absolutely no history of ever showing this attitude in the past.  He played with us last year when we were at our absolute worst, we played terrible football, but Joe loved his time here and wanted to stay and by all accounts enjoyed his time at Queens just as much, I find it hard to believe he personally has given up because he didn't start a game. You're right though, it probably doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

This. Joe Thomson's attitude at us last season was absolutely faultless. He's a quiet big lad who gave no problems whatsoever and displayed not the remotest "billy big time" attitude. Of course he also came straight into our first team and stayed there all season (I think he was maybe a sub once) so wouldn't have had any need to be upset about the team selection anyway.

7 minutes ago, Durnford said:

I personally have no idea on whether Celtic had agreed to pay his wages, or whether there was a reciprocal arrangement, but I doubt we would have taken anyone on board for a position, which we had already suitably covered, if there was a cost involved. If he had been a right back then there may be some justification for it.

Joe Thomson has a pedigree for this division and a number of clubs who would have been delighted to have him. I imagine Celtic wanted him at a full time club which probably rules out Dumbarton but there were still at least 2 or 3 clubs would have taken him. There's no chance they sent him out on loan for nothing. None whatsoever. They don't need to do that. They didn't do it last year when he was less known.

[Durnford]

13 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Because he's better? Granted that's a matter of opinion but if he's not better (and he was a starter without doubt at two clubs at this level last season) why bring him in at all if you don't expect to play him?

This. Joe Thomson's attitude at us last season was absolutely faultless. He's a quiet big lad who gave no problems whatsoever and displayed not the remotest "billy big time" attitude. Of course he also came straight into our first team and stayed there all season (I think he was maybe a sub once) so wouldn't have had any need to be upset about the team selection anyway.

Joe Thomson has a pedigree for this division and a number of clubs who would have been delighted to have him. I imagine Celtic wanted him at a full time club which probably rules out Dumbarton but there were still at least 2 or 3 clubs would have taken him. There's no chance they sent him out on loan for nothing. None whatsoever. They don't need to do that. They didn't do it last year when he was less known.

Fair enough; I had heard that Falkirk were after him so maybe we'll see him again in this division. Its possibly less likely that he'd return to the same club for a second season but then again who knows.

 

[JessieField]

1 hour ago, Durnford said:

If you want to be taken seriously maybe you should buy a dictionary, or use one on line, first.

I personally have no idea on whether Celtic had agreed to pay his wages, or whether there was a reciprocal arrangement, but I doubt we would have taken anyone on board for a position, which we had already suitably covered, if there was a cost involved. If he had been a right back then there may be some justification for it.

I've altered the spelling mistake, can you take it seriously now?

[LIVIFOREVER]

13 minutes ago, JessieField said:

I've altered the spelling mistake, can you take it seriously now?

No, was it meant as a serious post?

 

[Durnford]

1 hour ago, JessieField said:

I've altered the spelling mistake, can you take it seriously now?

Not really but then at my age I take very little seriously

 

 

 

[LIVIFOREVER]

He didn't show up as better than what we have, but maybe with time he would've, wont find out now. Penrice is in the same boat just now, looks a bit tentative in his play so still needs time to settle and hopefully he'll link up better once he does.

 

Big Toddy is a fine example of getting stuck in and giving his all in every game, and has never complained about not getting regular starts, great attitude on him for a loan player.

[Durnford]

3 minutes ago, LIVIFOREVER said:

No, was it meant as a serious post?

 

If you want serious then you're on the wrong felchin' thread