KingRocketman II

I'm fine with having him in the squad. My point was that Gallagher was excellent in every Scotland game he played up to Nov 2020. I am glad that Hanley has improved but that wouldn't justify him walking in to replace Gallagher (it was a choice between the both of them) based on a) Gallagher's recent Scotland form and b) Hanley's previous Scotland form. If Gallagher gets injured, is not playing at club level and/or loses form then we look to other centre halves in the squad.

A gentle hint; why don't you spend more time reading and informing yourself, and less time on here posting. I'd call that a win/win. I know about the Republican Tea Party. Had never hear of Quilliam or Nawaz. Ouvre - that French for an open egg? 2/3 out for me - got more reading to do myself.....

by simply looking at their performances for Scotland. Gallagher has been assured and confident across his 7 games whereas Hanley for many of his 29 odd games has been shakey and error prone. so in answer to your question - the world of international football.

I don't disagree with your point per se but would be less weird and creepy to read if you would call her Sturgeon, NS or even FM.....

assuming Gallagher was sitting out cause of injury and not some contract issue as some have suggested. Hopefully he will be back playing soon - I would ay he is a definite starter and a far better option than Hanley.

Rangers silence prior to the weekend allowed fans to interpret how they wished to approach Saturday and Sunday and allowed fans to consider that in gathering, the club did not seemingly condemn this. Players and management celebrating out of windows with gathered fans would seem to confirm this, thereby resulting in Sunday's gathering. The fact that Rangers subsequently lashed out at the SG over.a lack of consultation as to how they ensure their fans understood clear restrictions illustrated how they failed in their duty. The pressure from the SG on both sets of fans to observe whatever restrictions are in place in the run up to the Old Firm game means that the game going ahead is entirely in the hands of the fans. If the clubs and particularly Rangers want it to go head, then they simply need to reinforce the restrictions via social media and suggest that any fans planning to gather will "hurt the club/are not true fans". Those types of phrases seem to cut to your more basic thinking supporters.

his ongoing dislike for Maradona became seemed a rather bizarre obsession.

aye - offering assurance to the public that a police officer in uniform represents safety/law and order. More generally I am always slightly surprised how prominent the coverage is devoted to an attack/abduction of an individual . There is always a sensationalist element to it and such stories seems to engage the public and media a like. A man getting murdered/knifed/attacked in a housing estate barely gets coverage; a woman getting attacked perhaps murdered (hopefully not in this case) gets prominent endless coverage. This is not to diminish from the seriousness of this crime or to trivialise concern over the missing women. Am merely pointing out the inconsistency in the media's approach (and public appetite) to something like this. Is it because it could happen to anyone (ie this could happen to my wife/daughter/me) whereas a knifing in a scheme or by a teenager in London is more likely to affect the more marginalised?

aye Craig; prey tell who in your view would make an effective replacement if she were to resign. Maybe a certain line running politician?

I posted this on the OTB thread which shares the same view of "Biscuits" and his performance appraisal: And Tam and Stuart, who are continually having a go at journalists/media for waltzing into games for free with an aggravated sense of entitlement - and not even making a token gesture to help clubs with even a donation towards the gate - let him [Biscuits] off very quickly when he questioned why he should "have to pay to get into my work?". aye, Biscuits, if you had a line manager like any other employee you appear to be comparing yourself to, you would have been on a performance improvement plan years ago and would very likely have gotten your jotters shortly afterwards......

and once more boom

snarky . Thats me been dismantled

I don't think "dismantle" is any way a red flag - the reaction is no doubt to your use of the word not being in any way applicable to the events which actually took place. Maybe you remembered the exchange as you wished it had played out. Whether you have "spoken" to me or not, it doesn't mean that I can't read various exchanges on this forum. Or are you suggesting that you are some board royalty (in keeping with this thread) that needs to extend permission to anyone who wishes to comment on their posts?

"Dismantled" no doubt in the same way you probably feel you have "dismantled" many opposite opinions when you finish on P&B each day.....

be interesting to see where the X-Men come into the MCU at some point but up till now they have been well served by Fox. Would say Dark Phoenix would be more powerful than Scarlett Witch were she to reappear.....

in the words of this Royal watcher....

they chose the name of that film as the stream of words proved a very difficult title to remember, True story.

I assume they have very well paid PR and damage limitation people in their employ and the best they can come up with is throw out a bullying accusation in the run up to this interview. They probably thought that in the current climate that might stick..... I do not know Meghan Markle - I have no idea if she is a bully, she may well be. However looking at the behaviour and demeanour of many of the Royal Family including their past behaviour and outbursts, I would suggest that many of them routinely treat their staff like shit and have done for years. Can you imagine Andrew or Phillip speaking cordially or kindly to someone who his misaligned their slippers? The fact that not one claim of bullying has come out of the Palace in all these years until very recently and this is apparently down to the behaviour of Meghan Markle - Christ - a PR intern would be embarrassed trying to trot that out in that context. And then the response of Royal supports on Twitter, social media and as echoed through the BBC and such like - for example someone flagged up a Peter Shilton tweet the other day where he suggested an attack on the Queen is an attack on all of us. I know I don't share political or constitutional views with a lot of people in this (UK) country but holy f**k this really shows up how fucked up this Tory induced isolationist island actually is.

"Twitter/P&B needs this today"

quite a few twist and turns missing from that sanitised journey list - maybe We Were Down kicks things off like Chapter IV A New Hope........

"twitter do your thing" "you have just won twitter today"

nice to meet a fellow goalkeeping aficionado ......

that's the fudge they are now going for. After running with "Sturgeon has no option but to resign" and other Tory fed official statements and quotes to give them a Tuesday headline, the BBC and other outlets now see that following her performance yesterday, they can't credibly continue to run with this. Therefore to a) maintain face given all their reports/reporters predicted/hoped for a far different outcome and performance yesterday and b) to keep some sort of pressure on the SG and in the interests of continuity they have gone for the fudged "questions remain" approach. If they had led with that on Tuesday rather than act as a mouthpiece for the Tories, their take wouldn't seem so ridiculous today. Overall, I do love the spin and opinion that the BBC attach to all things SG/SNP whereas every misrepresentation, contradiction and clusterfuck that comes out of no10 is reported with a straight bat.

ah yes, the important qualifier in any prediction to allow you to post "telt you" in 2037 when she elects to stand down........