renton

They voted 65/35 against last time. Something like 236,000 other EU citizens in Scotland. So 153,000 No voters abd 83,000 Yes voters. Either we get all of those 153,000 this time or none of them vote leaving us better off by a net 70,000 over last time. Fairly backwards looking analysis obviously.

Or disenfranchised. Either way is a net gain for Yes.

Yeah, think their 34% never figure is reasonably accurate to be fair to them. Probably in line with the British Not Scottish Census answer. I've honestly never seen the point of splitting the referendum timing question up, other than for mischief. If you want a referendum, then even if you think the timing is wrong, you'll still bloody vote in it. Indeed, I'd go further and suggest that asking people if they want a referendum at all is pointless. Ask people if they want a GE tomorrow and they'd likely balk at it, yet they'd still vote in it. Folk in the UK are fairly disengaged from politics. They want someone, somewhere to be doing something about "it" but they don't want to be bothered at all by the process. Cynically I think that the only reason authoritarianism wouldn't or hasn't worked is that it suppresses criticism and free speech. I suspect that so long as you let people complain about the person in charge they honestly wouldn't care that it was always the same person in charge.... And yeah, standard SIU tactics regarding the polling question. Wings asked a similarly non standard question last month and produced a 53% in favour of independence.

It's not about "being in a position to select", it's about having a strategy that affords you the outcome you want, and a strategy for a 50%+1 is probably different from that of trying for a 60%+ outcome, for example.

Yeah, but who wants to try and get by with a 50% + 1 result now? There is certainly a minimum result possible but reasonably we would need a bigger margin to put it beyond challenge at the ballot box.

Yup. Albeit EU nationals voted 65/35 against last time, either that number will push 90% Yes next time or they'll be disenfranchised entirely. Either way it's a net gain for Yes of something like 150,000 votes already.

Careful what you wish for: Dunfermline fans down here with the Falkirk fans...... would make match threads between Rovers and the Fife look positively civil and intelligent.

Always have felt thats the natural boundary for asking the question anyway.

Before May 2021 apparently.

Wasn't just the mix up between the two. Chance looked gone after the Morton guy didn't immediately cut the ball back into the middle. Defender in the centre should've covered it but it seemed to pass right behind him. No matter, we'll manage to top it at some point soon.

His Mk.2 team from January onwards was very much built from the back. We'd started with a fairly lightweight midfield, but after January you'd often see us line up with Toshney and Callachan in midfield with two out of three of Davidson, Benedictus and Barr behind them. Very much a solid unit from middle to back. The probable difference lies in a rare alignment of attacking talent. Hardie came in on loan and was dynamite, Connolly played like he had something to prove, Craigen had his best ever season for scoring goals. So yeah, maybe he hasn't really ever changed, just when he was with us we produced a rare confluence of attakcing players and form to actually make us look good that had little enough to do with his tactics....

I think players in higher leagues will be stronger, faster and probably but not necessarily better technically (the lower leagues are full of can't tackle, can't run midfielders who get stuck out wide but have an absolute wand of a foot). The Full time vs. Part time fitness debate I think is not the main thing. Modern Part Timers look after themselves with access to decent facilities. McGlynn's last teams down here weren't fitter because of any full timers we had, but because McGlynn utterly beasted them in the Summer time: Even with out hybrid system we were fitter than a number of better teams once we were up. The main thing about FT vs PT should actually be in terms of organisation and drills. We do fall down on that to a degree: We play pretty enough football that you couldn't really do without a decent appreciation of where everyone is going to be on a pitch and it's a sign of well drilled tidyness, but middle to back we're a disaster. Partly that's personnel: Wedderburn can't run, Benedictus has been making mistakes all season, Crane has been getting worse as the season wore on, Davo is Davo. none of them trust the keeper. Partly it's the aforementioned injuries - not being able to play guys like Vaughan, Duggan and Hendry (let alone guys we've sold over the last two seasons like Cal and Armstrong) means more pressure on the backline as we don't hold the ball well enough further up the pitch. I do think McGlynn has made mistakes, some aren't new - a predilection for sticking with guys even though their match form alone wouldn't recommend them for a game - Benedictus above all this season, but also thinking back to him shoehorning Campbell into a defence in 2010/11 that was perfectly settled and one of the stingiest in Europe. Aye, he's conservative with youth and always has been - then again I don't think Watson is the best example as he's looked out of his depth in most games he's played. He has given game time to Jack Smith and Bowie though. As for Barjonas I'd only disagree to the extant that 'bang average' is doing the lad a favour, but we needed the body in and we don't know how the loan arrangements work: Celtic were certainly pissed that Hendry came in and sat on the bench for a couple of months under Smith. Flanagan does look like an example of rushing in without taking time to assess him properly but then again would he have done that now? Bear in mind Flanagan was on a 6 month contract, Armstong on a 3 month contract and the window was looming.... Commercially they've been trialling buying tickets on line which is a start. Starks is not well suited to getting a big bar in, really anywhere in the current facilities. Not sure what we'd do with that. The lack of even any boozer, let alone one the club owns next to the ground is a major downer for your match day experience if your out for the day. As long shot as it seems, we still get another go at promotion. So it's not all doom and gloom yet.

Injuries have played a role though. Firstly, regardless of scoring a good few goals, the simple fact is that having a guy like Vaughan fit adds more creativity to the team, gives you a willing outball which will reduce pressure on the midfield and defence and yes, will also score many more goals. Being able to take off a striker or midfielder and replace them with another fit body would also help us in cutting down on mistakes, not to mention the cohesiveness that comes with being able to pick a consistent 11. That doesn't mean it's the sole or even the chief reason for our issues. I have written before and will reiterate here: The board's big mistake was on keeping Smith in the first place and then not trusting him sufficiently to fund a decent team. We ended up with a bunch of guys from the last chance saloon and on top of that couldn't field a specialist senior full back. The team brought in over the summer was woefully unbalanced and lacking in technical ability in key areas. If you don't get the Summer recruitment right, and that goes for the board selection of coaches as much as the coache's selection of players, then your season is fucked from the get go. Coming in 8 games into the season with the window shutting on him, there was a very limited amount that McGlynn could do, and he actually did react to try and shore up our midfield and full back options. Crane has not really put in the performances he did for Alloa last year, but to claim that this is all down to who's coaching the boy is to deny Crane any agency of his own, people have good spells and bad. The board just gone should shoulder some of the blame on where we currently find ourselves. No doubt Sim has made mistakes - recruiting and then keeping Smith would be top of that list. Not sure about the zero commercial sense as they seem to have done wonders on trying to reign in costs and find new avenues of revenue. It's on the footballing side they've been naive. I don't particularly care if we're part time or not, it's not some terrible stigma, it's just a decision we'll need to make. We've been there before and did fine if that's what it eventually comes down to.