Jump to content

Gordon EF

Gold Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Gordon EF

  1. Fair enough. Don't let me interrupt your mental breakdown.
  2. Watched the first couple of those Blair and Brown documentaries. Interesting stuff. It's amazing how, in hindsight, they both called everything that was going to happen with 100% accuracy.
  3. And again, I'm not saying anything about whether Clarke is better than McLeish - he obviously is, I think everyone agrees on that. I'm not talking about whether he should be held to McLeish's personal standard. I'm talking about whether Clarke's squad should be held to a significantly higher standard than McLeish's squads, based purely on the available ability. Clarke's resources are better but I don't think they're that much better.
  4. You've got to admire the "stop being so defensive you absolute b*****d" strategy.
  5. Nothing I'm saying is about McLeish's ability (or lack of) as a manager. I'm talking about the relative strength of squad available to Clarke vs previous Scotland managers and whether it's fair or reasonable to hold Clarke to a significantly higher standard or expectations because he has a significantly better squad to work with. I'm comparing to McLeish because he was the previous manager and worked with squads filled with largely the same players.
  6. It's particularly striking with a lot of Alba supporters that it seems like there's absolutely no consideration of what people in the middle of the independence question (undecideds / Soft No / Soft Yes) want. It's absolutely all about them. Which kind of fits into the majority being raging middle-aged gammons. Can't remember who posted this on the Labour thread but it's similar to the hard left being absolutely raging at Tony Blair. It barely matters. It's the people in the middle who matter, the people who could be convinced to vote Labour or could be convinced to vote Tory. Every serious person understands that and every successful campaign caters to that.
  7. I always suspected M&S managers were IRA sympathisers. Good to finally get confirmation.
  8. Patterson has started 2 competitive games (both of which we won) and Gilmour has started 6 (of which we've won 4, drawn 1 and lost 1). I don't think they're great examples of Clarke not living up to expectations with greater resources. Dykes and Adams, with all due respect to them, are probably not the players most people are thinking of when they talk about us having potentially the best squad in 20 years. We're in a better position than we have been in a while and we're also performing better. I don't think the quality has improved to such an extent from McLeish's time that our expectations should have increased by that much that we should be judging Clarke by a totally different standard. It's not about bringing back McLeish, obviously, it's about saying that what Clarke's working with isn't radically different than what McLeish was. I'd be interested to hear the list of countries you think have worse players than us that are performing significantly better right now.
  9. For those making the argument that Clarke has much more to work with than his predeccesors, it's worth noting that the only players from the most recent squad who's first call up came after Clarke was appointed are Patterson, Ferguson, Gilmour, Turnbull, Dykes, Adams, and Nisbet. Of those, Dykes and Adams are the only two who're into double figures in terms of caps. I think the squad is better now that it has been for a while and of course some of the players in it have improved individually over Clarke's tenure but let's not pretend what Clarke has at his disposal is a huge step up from what was available at the tail end of McLeish's time.
  10. Steve Irwin on one pec, Harold Bishop on the other. Rips the shirt off and bears his chest to the crowd after every goal.
  11. But you see the point though right? Games against weaker teams who we're expected to beat are a hiding to nothing in that sense. Beat Faroes 4-0, so what? Scrape a one goal win, shite.
  12. But those were only better relative to the opposition. If we'd played exactly like we did in the England game against the Faroes yesterday, people would have been spitting teeth about how shite we are. If we'd gone down to Wembley and battered England with 65% odd possession, and beaten them with a late winner, the place would have erupted.
  13. Could be worse lads. Could be Republic of Ireland.
  14. Scotland have just won their 4th game in a row and are hot favourites to finish in the top 2 of a qualifying group for the first time in 18 years. Scotland fans on P&B, how do you feel? We're pish and am no happy.
  15. Anyone know where I can get a decent stream for this because f**k Sky.
  16. Leaving old Bayview may well have made financial sense. The real disaster was replacing it with a one stand brick of a ground.
  17. There's clearly a massive amount of snobbery here. I watched Darren McGarvey's Class War on iPlayer a while ago and it did a pretty good job of examining snobbery in modern Scottish society. You'll find the class system or versions of it everywhere and get the same kinds of stereotypes cropping up but it's still probably much tougher to get rid of in all parts of the UK. I think a big part of why we sometimes feel Scotland is a bit different to England in this regard isn't necessarily that we're that much more 'equal' or don't see things through the lens of class that much but I think there's almost this kind of thing where we seem to tie Scottish identity to working class identity in a way that England still doesn't. When someone imagines a Scottish person, they probably imagine someone working class, when they imagine an English person, they probably imagine someone upper-middle class. I think it's just mostly perception shaping the way people think about these things without it baring too much in reality.
  18. I suspect it's also because you're the "right kind of foreigner".
  19. Difficult to disagree with that. Only been assaulted once as an adult when me and a pal got jumped by some guys walking home from a night out. Violence was pretty common all the way through school though. Even if it's not something you went looking for, it was pretty much impossible to avoid. I think a lot of us kind of forget how much violence is actually part of growing up because it just seems like part of the scenery. I suspect you'll be in the extreme minority here and that most folk here will have been on either / both ends of violence multiple times between say 10-18. Thankfully it's something most folk leave behind in adulthood but it's no wonder we produce a certain % of violent adults when you think back to how pervasive violence was in childhood.
  20. It's not an argument. It's just a factual response to a claim that was made. I said in my post that women were disproportionately the victims of sexual violence two sentences after you stopped reading and decided you needed to rage-reply.
  21. I always think it's a bit mental to think these kinds of things are either 100% biological or 100% societal. Men are always going to be more violent than women.
  22. Fair point. Just didn't see that as being particularly likely. I've never seen anything like that happen.
  23. Men are more likely to be the victims of violence than women but obviously men are far more likely to carry out serious violence than women are. This isn't an attempt at "but men get attacked too you know" whataboutery, just an attemtp to put this stuff into context. There are some forms of violence that do disproportionately happen to women - sexual violence, domestic abuse, partner or ex-partner violence. And I don't think it's too hard to work out why that is. Generally, most violence isn't some noble form of fisticuffs, it's people attacking other people when they think or know they have the advantage. Whether that's through physical size or strength, having a weapon, outnumbering someone or just the situation like sucker-punching someone or attacking them when they're drunk. There's no doubt that far too many people in society have a problem with violence and most of those people are men. But it's surely not too hard to figure out why more men attack women than women attack men?
  24. Obviously you'll never miss an opportunity to be indignant about something but it seems pretty clear from the story that the girl wasn't in any kind of continuing danger after the incident happened. Anyone involving themselves wouldn't be defending her or protecting her from harm, they'd basically be putting themselves in harms way to rebuke someone for their behaviour. I don't know if you genuinely think the world is that simple but the likely outcome is, at best, you're told to f**k off and what you say has no effect on these guys whatsoever and, at worst, you get assaulted for it. I'm sure it makes you feel good to insinuate what you would do in that situation in an internet post though. It'd be interesting to hear about all the times you've faced a similar situation and what you did.
  • Create New...