madball

Nahmani at the weekend was rumoured to be getting recalled, so that might be 1 extra space. Still too many though Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

Carson signed a 2 year deal in Summer 2022, so even without the extension signed in March 2023 he would have still been under contract with us in the coming season. Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

His contract will be end of June same as almost all contracts, which is why he was with us in Belfast. After it expires he would leave the club, but if he signs for another Scottish club, as his next club, at any point in the future up to age 23 we would get compensation regardless. Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

Kyle Turner left Thistle. Looked ok in playoff games, but apparently was hot and cold through the season according to some Thistle fans. Wouldn't be a starter but maybe a squad player. Sentimentality would play a part in it being Tommy's son Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

Stuart McKinstry released by Leeds. Was on loan at Motherwell last season, but was at Motherwell as a youth at the same time as Robinson was manager. Pacey which we need. No rumour, just speculating Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

Said this elsewhere, but Erhahon leaving diminished what Baccus offered to the team Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

Erhahon was unfairly booked in first half and after that the dons were trying to wind him up. He did bite a bit though and checked one of their players off the ball. Was for his own protection and in our interest keeping 11 on field Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

Currently we are trailing the sheep in the vote in the final for Away Kit of the Year. Get voting troops Sent from my 2107113SG using Tapatalk

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/john-mcginn-transfer-details-revealed-18625595

Sean Kelly released by County. Option for left back?

After much deliberating I've decided to vote no. A lot of what Kibble would bring to the table is commendable and would certainly help in aspects of the club, however concerning is the fact that this has been carved up without looking at other ways to get members more actively involved and also the structure of the deal. I've been on other committees and always found that when the consequences of non-activity were laid out then people understood and came forward. I'll hold my hands up and say that I didn't come forward last twice as my other activities elsewhere wouldn't have meant that I had spare capacity to do anything. It seems underhand to have progressed as far as they have with the proposed deal without advising members we were considering looking for alternative options to the 71% model and also not to present any case around alternatives (ie other charities / organisations approached). On the structure of the deal I'm not comfortable with what has been stated regarding number of seats and potential veto. The ability for material decisions, which may be in the financial best interests of the club, but at odds with the direction of Kibble, to be vetoed is not what I'd want from the board. The board have talked previously about putting financial sense ahead of the wishes of fans (Old Firm in Family Stand), but are now recommending a deal where shackles will be put on the ability to make directional decisions that could be profound for financial well-being.

Presumably then they choose to buy or not? That's what I recall from the video, the meals were optional but charged if taken. Was trying to find it earlier, but not sure if it was on Alba as couldn't find it elsewhere

Pretty sure it came up on a video recently, might even have been Goodwin that said it, that the meals put on for players was chargeable to the players.

Never claimed to be, but thanks for the call-out. And this was not a "SMISA bad" post, but rather let's get it right and make sure that the organisation and more importantly it's members are adequately protected

Just read the email that has arrived in connection with signing up for the new SMISA database. Thought I'd read the Privacy Policy that you are asked to accept. Point of notice on the Privacy Policy is that it doesn't address the new database within it, so this needs fixed before asking people to accept the policy if data is going to be held on systems/places that are different from prescribed

He played on the left of a back 3 group IIRC. We'd wingbacks on the outside of them for a number of games

Just watched back the goal from the game and was impressed with the late run into the box Durmus made today to score. The goal and the runs beyond Obika reminded me of what we saw regularly from Andy Dorman.

I have a season ticket in W2 and was in a comparable seat at Love Street for around 10 years before move. I'd be cheaper pay as you go as I miss games through the season but take the season ticket for the knowledge that I get a reasonable view when I'm there. If there is a move to make seats a free for all then there is no longer any benefit in a season ticket for me and would likely stop it, the club might get around the same money over the season but it wouldn't be a lump sum up front.

Pretty sure I read elsewhere he was German born so no work permit required for now (post Brexit no idea of the impacts for that). It's just the paperwork between the footballing authorities that is required.

Looks decent enough, like the first part where he has the same type of tenacity as John McGinn in constantly harrassessing opposition

I'm not reading too much into it yet, it was in the Sun after all, however an early Kearney comment regarding kids settled in school did make me think that he's not moving over

8000 is the number for Category 4 stadium, however the rules permit Category 2 as acceptable (which is 1500 seats). So it's not the seats bit, some of the other stuff looks a bit challenging (toilets bizarrely might be a problem around number of cubicles, and things like additional camera gantry - although that could be temporarily added). UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations UEFA Stadium Infrastructure Regulations

Agree, but they obviously think they can monetise him in some form with regards to the contract

Rangers clearly rate as they gave him a new 1 year deal in January. His overall return is better than Mullen considering he played only 22 games this season vs Danny at 30. He's clumsy, but does score goals and someone will look at him and think if he stays fit he'll be worth a punt. I suspect that Rangers will likely look to move him down south next season on loan or look for fees from clubs up here.

And unless Rangers decide to loan Hardie out to them again they will have lost him too. I suspect Rangers will look to move Hardie on permanently to someone, likely looking for some fee to do so.