Bloomsbury Bud

Barraso told us by voting 'No' in the referendum we were maintaining EU status, the 'fruitcake' is asking for that guarantee of EU membership to be honoured. Given all the nonsense talked about the EU in UK politics it seems odd to select Sturgeon for the 'fruitcake' title on this subject

I sincerely take comfort from not conforming to your 'a right laugh' standard.

I try not to say anything on here I wouldn't say to someone in person, that's all I expect in turn. My season ticket is Main Stand H49, introduce yourself to me and face to face call me 'flower'.

If you weren't referring to me, I hope you can understand the confusion as you'd use my quote in the 'lunacy' post - so I'd deduced you were replying to me. If you weren't that's fine. I don't want to put you on the ignore list I think many of your points (about the team itself) have relevance and present good reason. There's no need to call me flower, thats clearly attempting to annoy me, its not necessary, I don't seek to misrepresent you or annoy you, I ask for respect and conduct myself with it, I'd rather you did the same.

Thanks. Please note my 'guess' is 20 and not 30. I don't believe my statement was lunacy, it was a guess. Please be a little more mannerly it isn't difficult, we all have St Mirren in common using intemperate phrases like 'lunacy' isn't good forum etiquette.

I'd also doubt the SNP taking 30 seats, 20 strikes me as much more likely. The Labour majorities in most Scottish seats will need some big reverses to move to the SNP, folk need to bear in mind that Scotland didn't vote in favour of independence, despite all Labour's issues the parts of Scotland most inclined to independence face a challenge to overturn the majorities being talked about.

Labour's commitment to 'the vow' was their public concession that Scotland should be governing more of its own affairs. Since publishing this commitments they've submitted the weakest proposals for further autonomy and then summoned the general secretary of the Scottish party to London to be sacked, without consultation with the Scottish party. As things stand its difficult not to conclude that Labour only want Scotland in the Union for the continued block of MPs to sit at Westminster, the opinion (democratic structure) of the Scottish party is an academic concern, at best. Voting Labour in a Scottish seat will encourage them to continue to use the Scottish party as a 'branch office'. If Milliband hasn't got distance from the general secretary being sacked, he could be out before the general election. While Lamont was completely out of her depth, the skulduggery to force her resignation is a tawdry episode. Without any radical instincts, and with centralisation and Unionism at their heart they've lost my vote.

I was expecting a Johnny Doyle joke

Get this shift pishted

Getting back to the original point... I watched a fair amount of coverage of voters in Clacton the other night. What struck me was the general disillusionment these people had with the Westminster system and that UKIP seemed to represent some sort of alternative option which for some represents a legitimate way to register protest at the failures of successive governments. My point is losing people to that point of view isn't entirely unreasonable. I do wonder about the MP who has resigned, and forced the by-election - while the indications are UKIP will win and he'll be returned to the Commons I'd be surprised if the protest continues into the General Election next year. I don't think its just the C&U that are 'so bad' that is allowing UKIP to gather some popularity, I think the credibility of the LibDems and the disconnection of Labour from its core vote is also playing its part. As the C&U is closer on the political spectrum they've experienced the UKIP impact more directly. In my opinion UKIP's relative popularity isn't simply a question of C&U's inadequacies.

The May part of this strikes me as odd, is there any more to this, for all the clubs faults its not normally so insensitive.

I'll accept that in good faith, thanks for the consolation. Most of my family voted 'no' and I'm not so narrow in view that I'd only enter into discussion with those who share the same views as me. I don't intend to fall out with anyone over the referendum, and I'll freely admit my 'action man fantasies' remark was pretty immature and inflammatory. So in the spirit of your consolation, I offer my apologies about that to you, too. The combination of disappointment on my vision on nationhood, coupled to attending 4 St Mirren games so far this season and we've lost them all and not scored has brought some me some sadness. I have however got much more going on in my life to be content with, and I trust you do, too.

A bit disappointed, thanks for asking.

I voted yes. I maintain that your earlier post 'I fear that there's going to be trouble in the streets over the next week or two' is tripe. However, to your credit its the sort of smart tripe that no one will bother to check in 'a week or 2', despite your churlish action man fantasies nobody is taking to the streets.

I'm sure you're correct, but I doubt this really impacted such a comprehensive margin in the result However, the good people of Aberdeenshire, the Orkneys, the Shetlands and Borders etc - I doubt they conform to this OF subsetting of how we vote. We must accept the popularity of the 'no' vote is not characterised by the Old Firm divide and instead concentrate on the real reasons why Scotland prefers the Union.

Do you mean violent civil disorder on some sort of mass participation level? If so, I think you're talking tripe.

Simple emotional blackmail, your proposition is clear; if anyone disagrees with you, then that's its a 'traitor' label can be attached. Do you expect to persuade anyone with that tone of debate? I'm voting 'yes' this week and that's my choice, I know people whom I love and trust who are voting 'no' and I'll not be in the habit of considering them traitors, its a difference of opinion and is not to be confused with the inflammatory terms you've used. Your post is risible, at very best, While we're about this, the Natsi term is thoroughly pathetic, too. Being on one side of yes/no debate is logically inevitable, in my opinion there's an enormous range of opinions which can not be measured by such a blunt binary device as the one we'll use on Thursday.

Its an alarming record, as a comparison, Davie Hay made a better start than this when he was Saints manager. That said, my opinion is that 5 league fixtures is not a reasonable length of time to make judgment. I'll concede I haven't worked out how long a period as manager is reasonable, and the question goes away if we pick up points. I do know that reasonable should be before January which is fair to any new manager to allow anticipation for a new transfer window.

I agree. The chance to offer Devo Max was Cameron's to offer or decline, my hunch was Devo Max would've allowed a more temperate debate, but Conservative divide and conquer is too strong a notion for some.

Hey Sevco!

I take no pleasure in saying this, but even Davie Hay's terrible season had got a point by the same stage. I think we played the 2 promoted teams (Airdrie and Falkirk) at home, in the first 4 games that season, too. I've not written off TC as yet, but I'm uncomfortable on the evidence of the games I've seen.

That's true, I can only really recall the save from Naismith in the first half. and the Thompson header he smothered second time in second half However, there was good chances the 2 that fell to Drury,Naismith's cut back that evaded a couple of swipes, McLeans off balance swing, Ball had a stooping header and put a fairly routine clearance from a corner over the bar. Any 2 of those going in wouldn't have flattered us - 4 or 5 is inflating the case, though.

Drury did get around the Dundee left back a couple of times, and as said before he did fluff his lines when presented with 2 very decent chances. I did feel Drury got the benefit of a lot of great support especially from Jason Naismith playing behind him. Again Plummer had a good match, he looked furious to have lost the match; which I'm inclined to interpret as a good attitude, too.

Not intentional on my part, but funny all the same.

Paul Hartley, Kevin Thomson, Gay Harkins - I predict either a very unhappy or gloating home support.