Fearchar

Admit it! Who shouted "I love you!" to Balatoni after he scored.

There is a pattern to our play that is becoming a worry - dominance of games, but silly goals given away by a defence caught flat-footed, and plenty of opportunities to score, but very few being put away. My explanation is a bit different: where the team played the ball on the deck through the centre early on in the season and so ran opposition teams ragged, scoring freely while doing it, what is happening now? Almost every ball is played out to the wings in the hope of a cross that will catch the opposition unawares. Maybe someone can tell us what kind of attacking the likes of Cowdenbeath or Dumbarton is really used to - is it fluid passing movements through the centre or is it high balls lumped into the penalty box? If we really want to succeed at this dull kind of head tennis, then it shouldn't be Craig that is leading the line, but Balatoni, who seems capable of getting on the end of most high balls. In my opinion, if the team stuck to what it's good at - playing a more direct passing game through the centre - more goals would be scored (and if some of them come from conceded penalty kicks and free kicks, does that cancel the goals out?) and the play would look better to spectators. There would also be less likelihood of losing possession so often. This typically British play from the wings is not just dated but also ineffective against inferior teams. The likes of Bayern München or Barcelona don't use it, and they seem to be doing alright. Although Craig is relatively effective, his presence seems to encourage the team to try dropping high balls into the box, which is taking away from more effective attacking means. I''d like to see Doolan, who is a more cunning, less predictable and more alert striker, in his place. (It's also worth thinking about how many goals each has scored in relation to the time they've been on the pitch this season.) There were several occasions today when Craig was looking about, trying to spot the loose ball in the box. In such situations, Doolan is usually much sharper.

(Context: my statement was "Again, that isn't some kind of unfortunate accidental clash: force has to be applied intentionally to cause that kind of damage.") An injury like that has to be caused by a concentrated impact, which is either a smash with an arm or a fist. From the replay, it looks as if McGovern turned away from the challenge, raising both his right leg and his right arm. The swing of his arm as he turned away from the ball caught Lawless in the face. Possibly McGovern was trying to protect himself from the impact, but it's my view (admittedly easier to come to from a replay) that it should have been a straight red for dangerous play.

I think the replay shows clearly that it there couldn't have been many questions if Falkirk's number 10 had had an early bath - a shocking assault from behind. As has been pointed out, Falkirk's players have resorted to this maltreatment of Erskine in the past, which suggests that there is a pattern emerging. Again, that isn't some kind of unfortunate accidental clash: force has to be applied intentionally to cause that kind of damage. The real wonder is how Falkirk managed to keep 11 players on the park for the 90 minutes. It wouldn't have happened in most other European footballing countries.

That game was lost in the dugout: if your team dominate midfield for half the game and keep putting one cross after another into the box, only for it to be defended, then it's time to try another approach. What the team did was presumably what they were told to do - more of the same, in the hope there would be a different result. Craig did not contribute (and it doesn't matter what the reason was), whereas Doolan was near to scoring a couple of times: so why substitute Doolan rather than Craig, if you want to freshen things up? That was poor decison-making from Jackie. The Dumbarton manager, on the other hand, had it sussed: keep pressing Thistle players to play the long-ball game, and they'll lose possession while they're piling forward, making a sucker punch all the more likely. The result? 2 goals up, and packing the box will wrap up the game. A lesson for our rookie manager, I hope. (Don't forget that Falkirk did the same and Cowdenbeath has come close to it too.)

"The top two divisions would split after two rounds of fixtures in which teams had met home and away. "The top eight clubs would then meet a further twice home and away, while the bottom four clubs would play against the top four from the Championship. "These eight clubs would have their points re-set to zero then meet twice, home and away, with the bottom four clubs being relegated at the end of the season. "The bottom eight clubs in the lower division would also play-off against one another." That's just a dog's breakfast. Oh, for an SFA that had the cojones to tell them they'll have proper-sized divisions as the customers want, and any clubs that don't like it can go and join the Northern Irish League. After all, we've all seen how Armageddon has failed to arrive: so the boot really is firmly on the other foot, and as the national body the SFA should be representing the interests of the paying customer that keeps the whole thing going. In any case, why can't the SPL get to grips with the fact that they're in the entertainment business - not that of providing cheap TV? (And TV will become much, much cheaper: that's not a business that can afford to throw money around, especially after the cutbacks hit the BBC.)

Was that Balatoni that lost his footing in the box just before the final goal? He seems to slip more often than anyone else in the team: is he wearing the wrong kind of studs?

Am I the only one whose eyes glaze over amid talk of splits? If it's a proper, grown-up league, then it has a good number of teams competing against each other. If, on the other hand, it's a knockout competition, then it's a cup competition, in which the lowlier teams are almost always knocked out early on - and with plenty of extra games for the more able teams. If you're trying to crossbreed these, then all you end up with is a chimera, and they can't survive.

That's how I see it, too: the game should have been wrapped up by halftime, but one chance after another was squandered. Craig just wasn't fast enough to beat the Livingston defence or even to put their goalkeeper under serious pressure after a passback, while Doolan, who would have been quick enough, was forced to play deeper to accommodate Craig.

My family's four season-ticket places (2 for each st) will not be needed, since all four of us are going for hospitality. Christmas has had to be postponed, of course, till late 2013.

Presumably there have to be calculations about how long the heating has to be on for the pitch to thaw out, without leaving patches frozen.

Yes.

What a pity to see this discredited (and renamed) "charity" pushing its views here! It has argued vigorously for years that all men should be screened for prostate cancer, despite overwhelming (peer-reviewed, statistically relevant, medical) evidence that this would harm many, many men - rendering them impotent, incontinent and/or depressed to the point of taking their own lives. More and more men are dying with prostate cancer - but they're not dying of it: they're dying of old age, as expected lifespans increase. Prostate cancer is a disease of age - a natural phenomenon. Here's a free explanation of what prostate cancer is and what (not) to do about it: http://www.cancerwa.asn.au/articles/news-2010-media-releases/new-book-challenges-prostate-cancer-testing The biggest study on testing for prostate cancer ever carried out (on thousands of men in eight countries) came to the conclusion that it resulted in too many men dying and being mutilated, due to false results. "To prevent one prostate-cancer death, 1410 men (or 1068 men who actually underwent screening) would have to be screened, and an additional 48 men would have to be treated." Also, "Overdiagnosis and overtreatment are probably the most important adverse effects of prostate-cancer screening and are vastly more common than in screening for breast, colorectal, or cervical cancer." (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0810084#t=articleDiscussion)

Perhaps it's relevant to point out that after that game Jefferies was talking about a pull and Dargo said he'd been clipped on the ankle. To most of us watching, it was a push - if a light one. Dargo's version looks like an excuse for going down, but at any rate it's obvious that someone somewhere was making excuses on the basis of something that didn't happen.

Perhaps it could be played midweek at the end of January.

Is there really any point in sending a manager to the stand nowadays? They can stay in touch with the dugout using a phone or walkie-talkie, and get a better view of the game too.

If you're going to write for radio, remember to include background effects. Perhaps you can get some from the club or the SFL - sounds from the crowd (especially recently). Another source might be several songs that feature Partick Thistle. Ask on here, and I'm sure you'll get some good advice. So much for the media; now for your questions. What's it like supporting Partick Thistle? What's in the psyche of a Jags fan? It has been longsuffering, in part down to recent ups and downs (particularly downs), but also due to the patronising attitude of many in Glasgow, particularly those that do not actually pay any attention to football but somehow see themselves as entitled to sneer on the basis that they belong to a tribe of hangers-on of one or other of the Old Firm clubs. The astonishing violence and paranoia among Old Firm supporters is, by and large, notable for its absence among Jags supporters. What is your most treasured memory of being a Thistle supporter? Not a public incident, but more of a process: introducing my sons to supporting Glasgow's only senior professional club that rejects any form of bigotry. That is not a small achievement in the hothouse of fervent tribalism that permeates this city. What are your feelings towards the Old Firm? Especially the Rangers debacle. To answer the latter first: Hell mend 'em! They are the unacceptable face of football, to steal Edward Heath's comment. Comparing them with any major European football club is a waste of time, since there is no equivalent. If these allegiances were not so entrenched in the media and the Scottish establishment, any reasonable authorities would have had them closed down long ago. In footballing terms, they are the maggot that is eating the apple of Scottish football from the inside - sucking all the goodness out of it (in terms of money) while giving nothing back, and even threatening to fly off at the first opportunity. Thistle are top of the league and in a cup final. How do you feel about how the season is progressing? What's changed this year? Will there be success at the end of it? I can't predict the future, but two things spring to mind: the football management team of Jackie McNamara and Simon Donnelly has been very successful despite their managerial inexperience, but also in large part due to having sound off-field support in the form of Ian Maxwell, who has moved smoothly from playing football to managing the club's off-field activities - a masterstroke by the new board. There may or may not be success this season, but there are certainly the signs of an attractive, forward-thinking approach to playing football not just in the first team but also throughout the club's teams. This is indicated by increasing crowds and also by the players that could earn more elsewhere being so keen to stay and benefit from the atmosphere and training at Partick Thistle. This even goes for apparently temporary employees, such as Graeme Smith, who was quickly drafted in to fill an unexpected gap. Finally, what are your thoughts after the game against Dunfermline at the weekend? It's not reasonable to expect to win every match. If German officials had been in charge of that game, the opposition would have been reduce to 8 or 9 players by the end of the match, but a First Division football club cannot expect any special indulgence from officials such as recognition of how football is developing everywhere else in Europe. Since the current management team is set on playing the right way without recourse to the kind of crude tactics that have tended to win the First Division in previous years, then there will be setbacks as attitudes among fans, officials and opponents will only change slowly. However, the current policies are making the Partick Thistle team into the most enjoyable team to watch in Scottish football: long may it continue!

On watching it again (a few times), I'm amazed that Barrowman didn't get a straight red for the first foul he was carded for, while the second could arguably have been a straight red too: he went straight for the ankles both times. (In some other countries, with notably more success in football, there would have been no question about it.) Interesting to see the TV highlights including these fouls: I think someone doing the editing decided to showcase a few fouls, which is rarely the case. Perhaps it was an attempt to embarrass Jefferies in the studio. Dargo, of course, was looking for a penalty by going down as soon as there was physical contact; to Jefferies, that was a "pull". Wrong direction, Jim! It's embarrassing to watch matches in which players foul time and again, and see that managers are encouraging their players to do these things (albeit without much sign of any finesse about it). Will someone in Scottish football please waken up and get officials to train in Germany or the Netherlands? The day of blood-and-snotters football is long gone everywhere else: why should we have to watch the dinosaurs walking out of the museum on to our pitches?

The criticism of Muirhead is unfair, as can be seen from the BBC commentary: "The busy Dargo looked to be in the clear chasing down a long ball, but Muirhead pushed the former Thistle forward who used all his experience to go down and force referee Steven McLean into a decision." That's diplomatic language, since experience doesn't really weigh very heavily on the slightly-built Dargo.

That's quite a good idea - offering a stand name as incentive for future attainments. If there are none, then it gets whipped away to be offered to someone else.

Dare I suggest that John Lambie wouldn't be first in the queue to be honoured in that way? http://ptfc.co.uk/media/video/interviews/2008-2009/david_mcparland

However, the team on Saturday was picked assuming that Dunfermline Athletic would try to attack, but Hamilton Accies are more likely to adopt the Falkirk approach. That may justify a different approach, perhaps with three up front.

Surely the obvious way to do it is just a slight alteration from the current system: promotion from the SPL into the SFL 3rd Division, and then on up through the divisions. You know it makes sense!

Row numbers have been repainted, following a mention of this a short time ago. Well done! Could Thistle perhaps advise Deutsche Bahn how to run a business so that it serves its customers?

That confidence and willingness both to bounce back and to kill off another team are commendable changes that have come since the Ian Maxwell/Jackie McNamara rule started. (I think that IM's responsibility for the organisation often goes unacknowledged: his efforts leave JM and Simon Donnelly free to concentrate on the pure footballing side of what is, after all, a business.) Despite some reservations about defensive cover (and there were some signs of that in the first half, especially - not just in the goal conceded), the flexibility of several utility players does give respite when facing enforced team changes. We are seeing players dropping out for one reason or another, but with others ready to step in and take their place. (E.g. Rowson, Archibald, Murray, Sinclair, Welsh, Bannigan.) Fox is just the latest in a series of these.