Jump to content

Skyline Drifter

Platinum Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Skyline Drifter

  1. Possibly, and we're all guilty of judging these things by our own standards, but I'm not entirely IT useless but I've never used a VPN in my life and despite having a genuine interest in football, I can't see me ever going looking for one to enable me to stream something I'm not meant to do anyway. My dad would look at me like I had horns in my head if I suggested he could stream something by using a "VPN". I think it's easy to underestimate the proportion of fans who genuinely have no idea such a thing can be done, let alone actually do it themselves.
  2. I'm aware of East Fife, who had their own reasons for doing so which probably no longer exist. Falkirk are an unusual case remaining in league 1 as they do at the moment. Neither Raith nor Partick are in League 1 now (though Dunfermline may drop in and do so of course) I'd be genuinely surprised if this time next year more than 2 or 3 other clubs are continuing with streaming for foreign viewers outside the top division. The notion you'd be able to do so every away game is I suspect pie in the sky. I think you under-estimate the degree to which people will actually put themselves out to obtain a stream. Whether it's "literally one click" (really?) or not I doubt many will do so if they are even conscious they can.
  3. Well only if the other club actually bothers to film it for streaming. And only if you can be bothered / have the expertise required to set up a VPN. Is it really the case that League 1 and 2 clubs are streaming overseas regularly? You presumably were in the Championship for long periods in which you were streaming previously where clubs like Dunfermline, Falkirk, Thistle etc would have been doing so. I think it's likely (but not certain) that our streaming at Palmerston will stop as soon as domestic streaming is banned again. We'll look at the numbers and see but I doubt we have enough potential overseas sales to make it worthwhile. The goalposts have moved from us not doing before in that the equipment and 'know how' is now there and wouldn't need an investment but I still doubt we'd sell more than 10 - 20 streams a week to non domestic. Likely to be more hassle than it's worth.
  4. Bloody hell. If you are going to be so desperate to nit pick that you have to go back almost 4 weeks to find a quote, it's probably best then not to claim it says something it doesn't (I never said they "couldn't", I said they "can't" which was correct at the time) nor to edit out the half of the post you found that actually suggest they ultimately could do exactly what they have. You're not doing very well here, I'd suggest you quit while you're behind.
  5. I thought at the time Connelly was at least a yard off and Roy was miles off. I didn't actually know what happened with the Roy one. I saw him put the ball in the net, saw the flag go up and turned to talk to someone only to look back up and see we were lining up for centre! I've just watched them both again though on ICT's excellent footage and I think the officials got them both right. Broadfoot hasn't got his line right on the first. He's far too deep when it's not his man who is the threat. I can't be 100% certain as on the footage Broadfoot is out of picture when the ball is played but when he appears a fraction later Connelly's maybe a foot ahead of him and the ball has already traveled 5 or 6 yards. Pretty sure they've crossed. And as for Roy's, whilst he's clearly "offside", what I thought at the time from my angle was a fairly minor deflection was actually Carson effectively playing the ball across his own 6 yard box from a Euan East header that's going about 6 yards wide. There's an argument to be had but it looks to me like he plays the ball deliberately and then Roy just capitalises on the error. As others have said, the defending on both ICT goals leaves a lot to be desired. First one especially. Wullie gets it wrong but it's the sort of ball a no nonsense centre half like the three at the other end would just head away. We started without any centre half who is particularly good in the air. Walsh does well with a sharp turn and run at the second but Max is a fraction late to react to it and never catches him. It was a good game, I imagine ICT will feel they should have won as Rae made some great saves, certainly more than Ridgers did, but then if Connelly makes it 2-0 as he should have we're probably not pegged back. All four goals were certainly preventable but I thought a draw was reasonably fair.
  6. I think you'll find it was your own Robbo / Finlay who said that. Though I agreed with him. It wasn't allowed but they relaxed the rules after the 500 limit came in. And yes, I'm sure.
  7. Appreciate you are probably on a deliberate wind up here but thats nonsense. Unless they were boardroom guests of one club or the other, or hospitality guests behind glass they count in the 500.
  8. Feigning injury! We finished with 9 men effectively. We have a player who finished the game and had to get someone else to drive his car down the road because he wasnt capable of driving it back himself. Dont let that stop you working yourself up into a lather about people feigning injury though you dafty. Were you one of the clowns behind the away dugout going ape about an 18 yr old lying in his own penalty area while Inverness were throwing crosses on top of him?
  9. He finished it with a tap in from 6 yards to an empty net. Anyone on stream confirm if he was onside? Looked at least a yard off for me.
  10. Meh, it shouldnt have been a penalty but its not even close to being Kilmarnock's most generous penalty award this week!
  11. It's the middle of the January transfer window, your club has struggled through the first half of the season and is on its 3rd (THIRD) manager of the season already, fans are desperate for new players, you've just announced one and your club grabs everyone's attention by releasing a Teaser to imply there will be another new signing shortly.............................................................. Only to release the news that a member of the u18 squad, who was already eligible to play for the team and in fact did play last week, has signed a pro contract. And you can't see why anyone might "get their knickers in a twist about this"?
  12. Did Ayr seriously troll their support with an "imminent" only to reveal that a member of their u18's has signed professional terms? Magnificent.
  13. Maybe....... Although Gordon is one of those obviously.
  14. Behave yourself. Your team is better than ours over the piece, the League table tells no lies. But we've knocked you out of a cup and held you in the League as well as probably being robbed of at least a point on opening day. We've more than held our own head to head.
  15. It wasn't "likely", but neither was it inconceivable so they wanted to keep their options open. It's pretty standard in loan deals. Zander Clark wasn't allowed to play in the Scottish Cup early rounds when he was here too in case St Johnstone recalled him. They didn't though and he played the later ones. It wasn't even "likely" at 3pm last Saturday but things change unfortunately. His fate was probably sealed when Scott Robinson limped off.
  16. There are costs. He's completely fixated on income (which as you say isn't that black and white anyway) but he's ignoring the fact moving games, changing ticketing, cancelling staff, etc all has a cost. Clubs who didn't play a home game will still have suffered losses. Not to the same extent of course but they aren't unaffected.
  17. It's not that simple. The restrictions themselves discouraged attendance. For instance the 1st of our two home games in the period did not sell out the 500, having a crowd of 440 or so I think off the top of my head. As poor as our crowds have been this season, we've not had a crowd lower than 980 when no restrictions existed. It didn't sell out but that's because people either chose not to faff about with advance applications, couldn't be bothered with it or didn't understand the process or just didn't realise until too late that they couldn't just rock up on the day. I doubt we were unique. Away fans were routinely banned across the divisions unless the match in question could clearly accommodate both sides. There will be games that had under 500 that would have been way over it if away fans had been welcomed. Whilst I accept that giving for instance Celtic a significant share of this will be a tad ridiculous, they will have faced costs and inconvenience from having to move games to change the shutdown inevitably.
  18. They certainly weren't completely unaffected. They had a round of fixtures on Boxing Day that was limited to 500 fans. St Johnstone, Rangers, Motherwell, Hearts, Dundee United and Aberdeen all played a home game with 500 attendance limit. I assume Rangers probably weren't massively financially impacted though. Are the majority of their fans not season ticket holders who wouldn't have been paying anyway? The biggest losers were probably St Johnstone who lost a visiting Celtic crowd. To an extent that's true. Though other than that one round of Premiership fixtures, it's not unreasonable to point out that only the Championship was significantly affected by the restriction. Falkirk presumably also. I know 9 out of 10 League 1 sides have an average attendance above 500, but most of them aren't far above it and averages are probably corrupted by the visiting Falkirk support. I fully expect there won't be any means testing this time either and whatever is given to each division will be split evenly, taking no account for instance of the fact we lost a visit from Killie (and so will Thistle) and Raith lost a derby crowd with Dunfermline whilst Kilmarnock themselves moved their moneyspinning game to not lose the cash. Getting support for doing so would be ironic to say the least.
  19. Sadly his only goal came away to Inverness, so denying us the chance to play Ebeneezer Goode over the PA to celebrate it, though we used it on social media
  20. The English non League scene is certainly a potential source for players and one we've used relatively well in the last couple of years. We picked up Ayo Obileye and Nortei Nortey last season (& indirectly Izzy Jones). This year Josh Debayo, Udoka Chima and indirectly Roberto Nditi. Chima has been injured all season and Nortey was injured for a large portion of last year but the others have done pretty well. Obileye played every game and got himself a move into the Premiership. Izzy Jones granted had already been picked up by Middlesbrough but he was an absolute star and thats showing now with him English Championship Player of the Month for December. Josh Debayo and Roberto Nditi have played every game they've been fit for since signing. With defenders in particular in short supply in the Scottish game at the moment its a good source of players. From the player's point of view it is a far higher profile place to play and if young and no ties down South they can get themselves noticed and maybe pick up a bigger side up here or down South (see Obileye or Nouble for that matter).
  21. It may be that @craigkillie is correct and it will change again but it wouldn't be the first time football has followed different guidance from the rest of the population. Until anything changes clubs will be obliged to comply with the JRG requirements though.
  22. Fundamentally none of that matter though. The clubs will have to comply with what the JRG say. At the moment that guidance is saying if you have an expectation of under 1,000 no checks are required for football matches and if you expect over 1,000 then you check 50% or 1,000 people, whichever is the higher. Events where expectation is over 1,000 fans MUST be fully vaccinated including booster or able to show a negative LFT. Furthermore, all matches clubs should recommend and encourage that fans take an LFT before attendance regardless of vaccine status.
  • Create New...