TopCat
-
Posts
8,260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
45
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by TopCat
-
-
Should he be judged on how many goals Gary Teale scored as a winger? :blink
When did Gary Teale ever play as a striker?
Marwood's goalscoring record as a striker is poor! That is an indisputable fact!
Poor how? He got into double figures. He was the top scorer for a team who finished 3rd in the Conference Premier.
-
Agree with him going but we're getting in a bad habit of paying people off who subsequently sign for other clubs (sometimes a rival).
Could we not have held out for a transfer fee? Or at least not paid him off?
Agree with your first point, that's probably the main reason Danny never got a new contract. He gave too many big contracts to players who never cut the mustard and had to be terminated. Harkins is the latest, guys like Imrie and Grainger preceded him.
I don't think we were any position to get a fee for him really. Ideally someone would have taken over his contract and we wouldn't have had to pay him off. He's been available on a free for months and nobody's wanted him, I assume because of the wages he's on.
Therefore we've been forced to 'mutually consent him'. Gary walks away with - I'm guessing - at least 3 months wages and he will get a new deal somewhere, less than he was on at us, but not 3 months wages less.
He's happy and we free up some cash.
-
Called this the day he signed.
Inevitable really, has never been good enough for this level. Delighted he's gone.
-
I'm not putting him down.
I'm commenting his factual goalscoring record.
He'sa striker s I think its perfectly valid to do that.
Its shame that the usual suspects want to drown out any discussion and want to abuse fellow supporters.
Well he was a winger. How many goals has Gary Teale scored for us in his 4 seasons here? Should he be judged on that?
-
If Kenny does sign for 2 years it means he can leave in 2 years time without us being owed compensation. That should mean he would have his pick of several English clubs. If anyone wants him before then, show us the money.
Therefore he should sign a 2 year deal post haste, you know it makes sense Kenny boy!
-
He must be good usually by this time we have about 10 he's sh*te posts.Welcome to the Buddies Mark, hope everything works out fantastic for you.
Good post, but who's Mark?
-
Would be one of the signings of the summer if we signed him up
-
Happy with this signing.
Conference Premier is a good level, at least on a par with our Championship IMO. If he's got 15 goals there he's a decent player.
Much rather him than Fallon or Novo... Welcome aboard Jamesy!
-
Pre season starts in 7 days. I hope and expect we will have at least 2 new faces in by then.
-
Amazingly Super Salary is now the third longest serving SP(F)L manager!
Only 2 managers been in their post longer than 2 seasons? Remarkable..
-
I'm in Arbroath now, lovely wee place, great seaside views with your McDonalds.
-
Murray wins in the second round:
6-1, 6-1, 6-0.
Easy!
-
I say we sign up this guy:
-
Cook should resign post haste, he won't though.
He was one of the best batsman in the world, then he became captain.
Now he can't bat and he can't captain either. His brain is fried and he can't focus on either problem, so each one is getting worse.
The tactics against Herath and Matthews the other day was some of the most baffling I've ever seen in test cricket, the Sri Lankans couldn't believe their luck.
Now he's been whitewashed in Australia and he's the first English captain ever to lose a home series to Sri Lanka. India must be licking their lips at their upcoming 5 test match series against this side, I genuinely wouldn't rule out them whitewashing England in their own back yard.
Broad or Bell aren't exactly inspiring potential replacements, but they couldn't do much worse. I'd get KP back and put him straight in as captain, that would shake them up!
-
What a conclusion that was. Don't think anyone saw that comingZ
-
Another European team bites the dust!
5/6 South American teams through now, only Ecuador to go and they're currently 2nd in their group.
-
Lex, let the "England" fixation go.
Pure conjecture and excuses to back up your view.
Nice attempt, I'm out.
England are an example. Replace them with Greece, Bosnia, Croatia, Portugal.... Whoever. Point is the same.
-
You continually mention lucky or unlucky goals to suit your view.
That's a good idea, forget the goals, just let someone decide who the better team was, sorted.
You also come up with reasons to justify poor performances by teams from other federations.
Maybe you should try for a "best excuses" team to win the world cup?
As I mentioned, there have been plenty of teams from other federations who were simply poor/rotten/shite.
Point is that if CONCACAF had an extra slot Panama could be here instead of someone like Bosnia or England. Would they have done any worse?
-
Irony? All of the above are OUT or as good as!
Longer and longer list of excuses.
Results, that's what win world cups.
PS Don't FIFA run the world cup?
Well the teams you list as going out aren't going out due to strong European teams ... Duh.
Yes FIFA run the World Cup, UEFA is one of the continental associations that send teams to it, like CONCACAF and CONMEBOL. It's the UEFA teams that are getting a showing up.
-
You couldn't actually be any more wrong about watching non-European football. I'm actually going to Morocco in January for the African Nations & have been to quite a few games outside of Europe. I know that sounds wanky & a bit Stuart Dickson-y, but it's a fact.
St. Mirren beat Celtic 4-0 a few seasons ago, does that mean they were better than Celtic that season?
I've already stated European teams often fail to do as well in South America, but they're quite clearly the strongest Confederation.
The 5 African qualifiers lost a total of 5 games out of 50 when qualifying for the tournament. There's not a lot of strength in that confederation.
Well how can you say that the runners up in the African Nations Championship would be 3 easy games then? Surely you can see what an ignorant comment that is?
3 of the 5 African teams (Algeria, Nigeria and Cote D'Ivoire) look set to qualify, Ghana could sneak in. That's a far higher percentage making it through than the European teams will have.
The African qualification is ludicrously difficult. 10 group winners play off in 5 two legged sudden death playoffs for 5 spots.
Meanwhile a no hoper like England only has to finish top of a group containing such heavyweights as Montengro, Poland, San Marino, Moldova and Ukraine to go straight in.
This clear disparity isn't good for the tournament and it isn't good for the development of world football.
-
I can play this game...................
Cameroon, Australia & Honduras, all heading home with South Korea probably joining them.
Really, you must do better.
See Post above for a balanced view.
Cameroon are an outlier. They had internal issues and underperformed, kind of like France last time.
Australia have been brilliant for the tournament. Despite getting a very difficult group they were very competitive in their opening 2 games. They've probably scored the goal of the tournament and beaten finalists Holland had to come from behind to narrowly beat them.
Honduras had 10 men against France, and then lost to a South American team.
South Korea drew with Russia and then lost to an African team... Yet more case for less Europeans!
You're not doing a great job of defending UEFA here!
-
So why not just award 6 places to each federation and make the hosts qualify? That'd be the fairest way - it's the World Cup, it should be for the world.
Or maybe it's a competition and should feature the best teams. The current amount of spots awarded to each confederation usually mean the best teams qualify (Burkina Faso & Jamaica are dross & would bring nothing to the World Cup other than 3 easy wins for everyone else). There are some poor teams from every confederation, but the Europeans usually do best out of them all.
As bad as Bosnia & England (you're clearly trolling with your comment insinuating England are on the same level or worse than Burkina Faso or Jamaica - this is the first group stage they've not qualified from in ages) are, Cameroon, Honduras & Australia are just as bad (actually worse IMO).
Oh and Brazil didn't qualify for this world cup - they had 4 qualifiers and 1 from a play off.
Your first point isn't a bad idea, though the hosts have to qualify. You could perhaps reduce the host continents spot by 1.
Your point about Burkina Faso is extremely ignorant and disrespectful. They reached the final of the African Cup of Nations in 2013 and beat Ghana in the semi final.
Did Germany - an elite European team - have an easy win against Ghana last week?
Panama would have been in the playoff against New Zealand instead of Mexico had it not been been for a last minute goal. Did Croatia have an easy win against Mexico last night? No, they got a pasting.
I can tell you don't watch much non European football. Thankfully, FIFA do, and there's an appetite among these nations too open up the World Cup to other nations.
-
Lex, Scotland were unbeaten in a few world cups, proves fcuk all really.
It's a unending debate but, on the whole, the current set up seems to be working reasonably well.
There could always be an argument to include other teams but that could result in, as it has in the past, seriously diddy teams qualifying.
Serious diddy teams like Bosnia and Greece?
It's time FIFA opened up the World Cup to the world. It's ridiculously difficult to qualify from Africa and Asia and it shouldn't be.
-
4 years ago England were lucky to draw with USA and Algeria. They only got through because they beat another European no hoper - Slovenia.Beat me to it.
I was going to look into this but didn't have time.
To say England are no hopers, when this is the fist time in a million years they haven't got out of the group stages, is ludicrous.
They then got a predictable pasting in the next phase from an elite team.
They are no hopers.
Harkins Contract Terminated By Mutual Consent
in General St. Mirren Discussion
Posted
Oh come on. Not given a chance?
He started our first 7 games, in various roles. We lost 6 of them and drew 1. When he was dropped, performances and results improved immensely.
He was given far too much of a chance. He should have been dropped after 3 games.