jaybee

plus Hamilton and St Johnstone I believe also

what is a shroud signing please? is it shrewd

Tch tch thought that was you!

wouldn't expect anything different from you Shull

I didn't have a vote. They did. But, like you, I have an opinion. My view is that they felt that they were being "played" and said stuff you. Or words to that effect. Possibly the very Scottish reaction of cutting of your nose to spite your face. Yes absolutely spot on, done it myself, a trait that can be self defeating unfortunately.

What you seem to be suggesting was that emotion took over from logic. Since when have the Scots been any different? especially when it comes tae Fitba! Had Budge and Co approached the situation in a more conciliatory manner perhaps things might have been different, but once she got their dander up with Hearts are far to big to be relegated , wave money about that'll sort it and attempted a strategy of alternating between coercion and bullying it was never going to work. And come to think of it while you may think your preferences are reasonable may I point out the majority of chairmen DO NOT

I get the bit about bottom of the league. I do. But why did any club vote against reconstruction. Leaves deep pocket Budge to adopt an I will not Budge approach. Clubs voted the way they did because nobody likes a bully and Hearts / Budge / etc have attempted to bully other teams / the league / the media / etc into keeping them in the premier league, then when that didn't look to promising the next wave of justification was 'no team should suffer' because of the virus,.mmmmmmmmmm still no good, ah yes what els can we try? What about; we have money would you like some? and of course the final retort (not sure what happened to no team shall suffer) if you relegate us we will sue the league, stop all football and get millions from you all..assuming there is anyone left to sue, play or give a damn. I really do have empathy with the vast majority of normal Hearts supporters and I also have no problem with Hearts looking at options that might save them the embarrassment of relegation (even though they do deserve it), but when that clearly was not going to fly they should have accepted their fate and not become the laughing stock that they have.

We require a route out. A confirmation that an agreed number of new cases over a specified time scale equates to an ability to return to what was normal before C19. We need this specification laid our by the SG to tie in with their road map which is far too vague . The road map was viable weeks ago when the numbers in Scotland were higher but we now need an absolute specification i.e. a specific number of new cases for X number of days means a return to what is perceived by the public to be an acceptable norm. I was a full believer in the lock down but the numbers now simply do not compute. The public need to be given their head, we need to get society back to normal, the measures worked and need to be relaxed. Don't think many would disagree with your aim, but it's all about the speed at which it happens and given that we are speaking of life and death matters here a lot of people favour a sower opening up of society and hgiven that if things do go tits up it will be the governments fault so one can't blame them for their lack of speed.

FM can speak for himself. Somewhat of an understatement

That's a cop out and certainly NOT what I was saying and not what you were insinuating. The forum is mostly about opinions, although @TPAFKATS is incapable without using Google. As I indicated people using hindsight to beat the government are simply losing any credibility they think they have. Yes it is a cop out; but it does make my point and to be honest I was (within my argument) speaking of Engerlund which is where I currently live yes opinions are the fuel of discussion we are in agreement here re hindsight it would appear

Well. I have made no claim to be part of an intellectual elite. What I said, I stick by. NS has done what she can within the strictures and structures of the UK. My opinion is that had she had more freedom of action and funding then the decisions made by her government might more closely have reflected those of countries which have waged a more successful battle. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing. But.. Read what I wrote. The Scottish Government has aspirations towards a NZ wellbeing approach to GDP. This is not the case with the the Westminster government. Closing the airports etc right away and track and tracing in those early days was always likely to result in a lesser spread and sm Ok Faraway how about we put Shull in charge instead of NS in Edinburgh or even of the SFA, my point being ........................anyway I am sure you get my point re who discusses what and It is simply my opinion. Ricky: regarding Scotland and NOT the UK, there are some valid points in the way New Zealand dealt with the virus, just was never going to happen that way in England and again as I said to Faraway I am of the opinion that the UK government did OK, not great but OK and it does seem to become a circular discussion, if this if that and so forth. Not a fan of NS but she seems to have met the challenge and did a reasonable job...........so what do I know?

I repeat; easily said with the benefit of hindsight, the one thing whoever is in charge had to be was consistent, you pick a course / strategy and you stick with it and yes some things work and others don't. Did they get everything right?; Clearly not , but hey look at elsewhere Ie; America. It just irritates me to see all the experts arising now with that hindsight benefit............. saying if only this or that etc etc. it is not clever or even useful particularly, when we are not speaking in the abstract, we are discussing peoples lives / deaths, a discussion I think deserves a better platform than a football forum and the intellectual elite who reside therein.

Long way from a reliable vaccine on the volume required. I would like to here a target / aim from the SG eg X days of zero new infections or under 5 (a defined number) means we can have schools and sports crowds back. We are in danger of meandering on like we are for months / years. It needs a bit of structure and a bit of an aim the public might actually be more inclined to engage with to achieve. The "wee hints" and moving goalposts approach just frustrates. Implied a lot and said F.... all, you do seem quite good at that.

And the solution is?

I think both of you are speaking with benefit of hindsight, unfortunately the government did NOT have that luxury. I regard this type of criticism as cowardly in the extreme.