Colognejag

I had to pay 46 euro to watch Monchengladbach vs Mainz recently... The cheap tickets are for the terracing, they are not all this price - effectively subsidised by higher seating prices I guess...

The Weirs and Partick Thistle: Better together...

I went in the adult and child gate and was told me and the kid needed to go in together through one click of the turnstile. Bit of a crush, but that might explain some additional fans counted as one entry...

Well done Jaggernaut, I am glad to see you are beginning to talk about the issues. What do you not agree upon in terms of justice and the environment? Do we not have our own legal system at the moment? There may well be something to do with justice that I am looking over here, so forgive me if I am being too simplistic. In terms of polls, I have yet to see a poll on independence where the majority has not been No. As you well know the last Scottish elections were not a referendum on independence. If it was, it would still have resulted in a majority No. The last UK elections were even worse for the SNP. Please, tell us how the BBC has been instructed to do anything. You are sounding more and more paranoid. WW1 was undoubtedly horrific for all sides. Surely a war a century ago is not forming your opinion on the current situation? I respect your wish for Scotland to become independent. I do question the reasoning why you think that way, but that is your choice. Suffice to say we agree to disagree on this! I respect you more on your choice of football team..!

Jaggernaut - that is your understanding of the issue. If it were that bad as you put it and we are getting such a bad deal, why does the majority of Scots want to be part of the Union?! Are we No-voters too stupid? Being part of a Union, UK/EU (or international organisation, eg. NATO) is about give and take. In some things you do well, in some others you do not. Unfortunately, that is international politics in the modern world. Please do not call our dead armed forces canon fodder. I am sure their families and current service personnel would not take kindly to such remarks. The second Iraq war was not supported but Iraq 1 and Afganistan were both wars in which even a Scottish army would have participated in a joint NATO operation. Is there anything in the White Paper that you question?

OK - thanks for the link, GI. A bit tenuous, but I'll offer that one to you I guess this and some of the more alarmist opinions from the No side sum up their problem. In theory, they are together, but they seem a rather disparate, rudderless group where anyone is free to make any sort of statement. The Yes campaign does seem well-drilled, hence the same bland responses and soundbites when questioned. My previous point stands - the longer they trot out the same lines, the less people will value the contributions. I, maybe not you, hope the No campaign starts showing a bit more thought. Question the issues, but in a more thoughtful manner and have a proper team directing it all. I suspect the No majority would increase a lot more...

The way you put it Jaggernaut the current situation sounds cataclysmic... I repeat that the No campaign has said that Scotland COULD go independent, but thinks Scotland is better off as part of the UK. I have not heard anyone say we are too small or stupid. I do not think that the UK or EU are perfect, but I do believe we are better off being part of these unions in the global perspective. I am happy to question opinions from the No campaign. Is there anything in the White Paper you question?

Norge - I know no Scot in my circles in Germany that are for independence either. Since Norway is a country often praised by the Yes campaign, it is interesting to hear from you that Scots living there appear not to want Scotland to follow the example. On the issue of passports, following a Yes vote, I understand we can keep a UK passport until it expires. We would then have to get a Scottish one. The White Paper states that the RUK government should allow dual nationality to allow us to have both a UK and Scottish passport, but admits this would be up to the RUK to decide... No guarantee this will happen. The only firm fact I have is that I would eventually get a Scottish passport. The only other option would be for me to become a German citizen. I guess Scots living in England could become RUK citizens based on residency as well. Salmond may talk down the break up of the UK and say we will still be a family of friends. On the passport/nationality issue, this is far from clear. The worst part is that the majority of exiles cannot even vote on an issue that could determine their own nationality.

GI - I would be very surprised if the No campaign described themselves as Project Fear. If you are correct and have proof then I take that one back. However, my point is that the more they trot out the same response the more dangerous it is for them. It all sounds like PR "experts" have told them to say these soundbites, if you say things again and again, people might start to believe you... To be fair to the No campaign they have said that Scotland could go independent in theory, but state that they believe Scotland is better off within the Union. I do not see that as hysterical. Robertson's comments were bizarre in my opinion. Maybe that's where you and I differ. I am open to questioning all sides of the argument, even if it is coming from a fellow Unionist. I hear too many on the Yes side accepting everything Salmond says. Jaggernaut - since Salmond wants all exiles to assume Scottish nationality, it is not such a ludicrous statement to imply that they will be foreigners in RUK - how could non-nationals then be in Parliament! This may seem like a flippant comment on a TV show to you. You call it racist, I see it as another example where some people do not understand the real implications and magnitude of a break-up of the UK. As an exile myself, this is an area I take very seriously.

To be honest, I am getting fed up of the times I hear the Yes campaign trot out the likes of "Project Fear" "bluff and bluster" "scaremongering" every time they respond to an argument that goes against their viewpoint. I think they may well be taking people for fools. Most people have made up their minds on the issue. The ones undecided need convincing and want to have reasoned debate. I would give more credit to the Yes campaign if they said things might not be better on every issue, but the goal of independence is worth it. If people who do not know who to vote for heard more honesty, they may well be more inclined to vote for who they can trust most. Childish responses to serious debate does not wash with those who clearly need convincing.

Crap for me too - I am back for two and a half weeks, anticipating I would see a fair bit of the business end of the season - now I only get to see the games on the 5th and 19th...

PT - why is the first round on the 19th? We play Hertz on the 5th, then a 2 week wait for post-split games. My Jags calendar also has this gap. Is it for the Scottish Cup semis?

The White Paper clearly is all about the SNP. You called me britnat some time ago on here. Given the mostly interesting and reflective posts on here from the vast majority of people on both sides of the debate, the content and tone of your posts suggests that quite clearly, you are the one brainwashed and with blind loyalty...

Kni - I have wondered if it is possible to have dual nationality between two EU member states? I think you can have both an Irish and UK passport if you are from N. Ireland (?), although that situation is unique on many levels. If Scotland were to be independent and in the EU, could you theoretically have a Scottish and, say, German passport, assuming you would qualify for both?

The white paper is only what the SNP would like to happen. It is not what would happen. So many issues within it are not in the SNP's hands - currency, EU, citizenship and so on. Many others have to be negotiated first. There is a lot of presumption. Who knows what government would be formed post-independence. Labour? SNP? A coalition? The white paper assumes it will be another majority SNP government.Who knows what policies any other governmant would want and negotiate with the rUK? That is what worries me about this being a blind vote. The SNP may cry foul play on key issues. Of course, Scotland should automatically become an EU member state. I actiually agree that it would be "an affront to demoncracy." However, we are talking about international politics. It is not always nice and cuddly, self-interest rules... For some people, independence is the only thing that matters. I respect that. Others will not be moved from the status quo. Fair enough. There have been many searching posts here recently. A lot of the content of which sums up the wider public - we still need more information to make a balanced, informed decision on this.

"Britnat"? - what are you 12 years old or something? You assume much. I said I believe in unions. I believe in the EU (despite it's many failings). It is only the Conservative party that is propsoing a referendum, not the UK as a whole. For your information, it is not just people in the UK that are fed up of issues within the EU. Here in Germany, there are many who have had enough of social tourism. They want EU reform on this too. I do think that an independent Scotland, ouside the EU, would be lonely in the world, with very few friends and allies. That's why so many countries are keen to be in unions/alliances. You look after your own. Stuff the rest. I pick Ireland as an example, since we do not have the oil fund of Norway, the riches of Switzerland, or the banking and EU presence of Luxemburg. Nobody really knows how long our oil will last. It is fine saying we will be ok with the oil. What will we be like the day it is gone? When Ireland's money dried out it had to be bailed out by the EU. Who would bail us out?

Which is why I called it a blind vote... Well, my view is that if the world is that uncertain, it is best not to risk the unions that we are members of at present. Some decisions made within we will like, some we will not like. In an increasingly global world, the more allies you have the better for you. Isolationism is certainly not the way ahead in my book. I think it plain wrong for you to imply that we give Westminster all our gold and get peanuts in return. Decreasing pocket money? Do you honestly think that if we had been independent before the present global recession, we would not be making cutbacks ourselves? Fact would be that we would be as bad, if not worse, than Ireland, at the moment..! Hence the value of being in a Union, even though it may be unpleasant at times...

Exactly - no idea. The consequences of not keeping the pound or being in the EU are huge. If we do not know the answer to these two fundemental questions then, no, we have absolutely no idea what sort of Scotland we are voting for or against... I am surprised you cannot see how this is exceptionally important to know before we vote on the matter.

You may be right about Baroso, but he sums up the problem. The EU as an organisation may very well not have a problem with Scotland joining, but it is not up to the EU . It is up to the individual EU member states to decide. As we know, there are many reasons why some EU individual states might not want Scotland to become independent out of self-interests... Scotland/the UK/the EU cannot control this...

Sounds like you are the one brainwashed here... "of course, of course, of course..." There seems to be absolutely nothing that is a matter of course!!! At present, no-one knows what is going to happen. This is the real problem of the vote. We have no idea what we will be voting for or against... I would much rather the negotiations started a long time ago so we actually knew what we would be voting for. Better together says no to pound, Salmond says yes to pound - ok that seems clear enough EU commissioner say EU will be difficult (not due to EU per se, but due to individual country's self interests), Salmond says EU no problem - ok that seems clear enough The crux of the matter is that it is not up to an independent Scotland to decide upon these matters, whether we would like to or not. This is the price of becoming independent. A independent country has to accept the conditions of entry into new trade areas/institutuions. I would much rather know definitievely the answers to these questions, otherwise it is a blind vote.

To be fair, not just Rangers. Imagine the coincidence that Aberdeen, St. Johnstone and Dundee Utd were also kept apart...

I think the set-up in many Eurpean countries is very different. Many stadia are council-owned and leased to the clubs. Many clubs are are membership-based clubs. They vote in the committe that runs the club. Therefore the committee has to be fan-friendly if they are to keep their jobs. It is also plain wrong to say that all Bundesliga tickets are cheap - the terracing ones may be cheaper (but since we don't have this, there is no debate). The seating is not cheap by any means - last game I went to was two years ago 1. FC Köln vs Mainz 05 a steal at 45 euro...

This is what I don't get. The question is "should Scotland be independent", but the actual question should be "do you agree with the snp's vision of an independent scotland detailed in it's white paper." Two very different things. I suspect a "yes" vote would be higher for the first question than the second... Anyway, it is all theoretical for me - despite being Scottish I don't even get to vote living over here. Thanks for that Alex.

Calm down dears. I think we are fixed upon this issue. It is not uncommon to have both sets of fans in the same areas. Here is Germany, they even wear away colours in the home end. It is only in the "ultras" area, where it actually says on the ticket that away fans are not welcome. Bleed them for as much money as we can... if they behave like twats, kick them out.