Scotch

Good to see you posting again, I have to admit, I was worried that you had given up the ghost.

Looking at that team that never got called up really drives home the kind of talent England have. I mean, outwith maybe two or three, every one of them gets in the Scotland team without a second thought.

IMO, it was the only fair punishment available to them. Southampton cheated to gain a SPORTING advantage so I believe that the punishment should be a SPORTING one and this is the only SPORTING punishment that the EFL could impose AND enforce. They didn't really have another option.

"Also... there was a f***ing dog there"

That's fair but it really just comes down to loyalty. Clarke has his favourites and that's who he picks. He even told McBurnie that when Ollie called him up to ask what he could do to be selected (which is think showed some balls.)

Picking a player who doesn't score goals NOW over a player who didnt score goals 5 years ago makes no sense what so ever. McBurnie might not be very good but he's scored almost the same as Adams, Dykes and Hirst COMBINED this season.

We don't get enough goals from our strikers because we continually play strikers who aren't natural goal scorers. Shankland will be behind Hirst, Dykes and Adams and McBurnie who scored the same amount as those 3 combined isn't even on the plane. It's no good having a squad that works hard to create chances if we don't have a striker who will take them, instead preferring a striker who also works hard to create chances.... I like Clarke but he is incredibly frustrating at times.

I'm not too sure what more Ollie McBurnie could have done to get into that Scotland squad. He's scored the same amount of goals as Adams, Hirst and Dykes combined. Clarke has done amazing things with this team but his loyalty to certain players, particularly strikers who don't score goals is holding us back. We need a goal scorer. All the other pieces are in place.

I honestly thought they were 100% finishing bottom when they won the play-offs.

Someone on hear said it's 85% in your first season down to give you time to adjust. Not sure of it is true or not.

How has that Man Utd goal stood? He basically caught the ball!

Included in what? With the new rules, they only look to ensure a certain % of what was brought in has been spent so I'm not sure how a loss can affect that. Mutual terminations are absolutely allowed. I'm not sure why the FA would step in if both the player and the club wanted the contract to end. I don't have any examples at this level but there are certainly examples of it at PL level.

We should bring him home. I think he would take it and I think he would do better than most of the names being bandied about.

That's the fear. They will get too greedy on what they bring into the club and we will be stuck with players who dont want to be here and push us over the wage bill restrictions....

The goalposts have moved on that front. Before we couldn't sell players for less than their book value as it would go down as a financial loss which would count against us in terms of PSR. Now, we can sell players for absolutely anything and although it will still be a financial loss, it won't see us fall foul of financial rulings. If players were willing, we could even terminate contracts and it not financially hurt us but rather align our wage bill with where it needs to be. Think of all the measly bids we've had over the years from Italian teams that were less than what was still on the books. We can no accept them.

I was thinking this too. Surely this means we have a better chance of clearing the decks, moving on the high earners and reseting with a squad that meets the wage bill requirements? Get rid of the over paid dead wood for buttons. Proper Italian team money.

Interesting. So in theory.... if it WAS voted through, could we sell players for massive losses or even release them to get their wages of the wage bill and not fall foul of the rules? If so, it would make it easier to meet the cost ratio and start a rebuild without being stuck with the dead wood.

Yes. As far as I know, they work off of revenue as opposed to financial losses so we can only spend 60% of what we bring in. It doesn't really make a difference though because any losses would immediately be considered if we went back up.

Predictable.

Have you got the sound on because they've mentioned it a few times?

Maybe the skeptic in me but i can see Celtic getting a few dodgy calls tonight just to set up the final day showdown.

It's not "Mini" to them. I really hope they do it purely because we know how it would feel for them.

Just had a look, it's points, goal difference THEN goals scored so you are right. In the scenario we where talking about, Celtic would only need to win by 2.

In that scenario, Celtic beating Hearts by 2 goals would put them both on +31 and Hearts have the advantage on the head to head so the need to win by 3, no?

I was looking at the table. If Celtic draw and Hearts win tonight, we are in a position where Celtic would need to beat Hearts by a certain number of goals (depending on how big a margin Hearts beat Falkirk tonight) on the final day. So let's say that tonight, Celtic draw and Hearts win by 1.... Celtic need to beat Hearts by 3 goals. Hearts win by 2... They need to beat them by 4 and so on....