lady-isobel-barnett

Well that nearly had me reaching for the report button. Personally I think the use of that word should have no place on a Jags forum. Perhaps you think it's above board to associate bears with stupidity, eagles as ultra nationalistic right of centre bores and worse of all pigs as sexually frustrated deviants with a carnal penchant for amphibians. In short I find the use of that word degrading to the animals in question and in itself a form of mental cruelty

The deal's not in the hands of Jeffries tho'. Looks like the Madman may have a say or he'll delegate to one of his disciples.

Probably right sided at that. Even then we could still be a bit of a liability over on the left. Lindsay is raw and, just going on the 75 mins I've seen of him, Sinclair may be more of an attacking full back than a last line defender. If Archie misses out on Wednesday night due to his knock or only plays a wee while I'd imagine we'll have a clearer idea about the level Lindsay and Sinclair are at just now. It would tho' throw up a bit of an imbalance if we had to get another left sided defender in.

I did think from what I saw that he looked confident on the ball but again it was more of a get fit type friendly and maybe the lad wouldn't be so relaxed given his position in a real game. Even if he does look the part I'm not sure Jackie wouldn't still prefer Balatoni on loan. btw excellent use of the plural

I think we should still bear in mind the poll is likely to be weighted towards relatively more recent Jags legends. Danny Lennon will certainly get one of my votes but even if he was to come out on top here and not get in this time round I'll understand why.

You should've had a Firhill scotch pie instead. Not much fear of finding any meat in one.

I guess most of us know that. I think you'll find Andy came on in the Raith game

Not sure Donnie McKinnon is in it yet. He'd be my nomination by a country mile.

I always appreciate the different wording football can throw up instead of stating the obvious, by mutual agreement being a favourite. I must say I regard highly "decided to find a solution for the player to leave the club". Excellent

Agree. Don't know what the protocol is with copyright (assume need to get the snapper's permission) but in any case I'd have thought our shirt sponsors would be interested.

Don't think THIS has been posted.

Surprised that Gaston didn't feature today given the publicity. Also Boyle nowhere either. Can only surmise that the Sinclair transfer (and perhaps extra money needed for Balatoni ) has left us skint. Can't imagine that Jack Boyle could be assessed on his performance solely on that Blyth pitch.

It wasn't Kyle Lochhead. I maybe approaching senility (in truth already kicked in) but I know what KL looks like and it most certainly wasn't him. I'd hope the trialist was under 19 as he looked promising but not probably 1st team ready.

Took in the last half hour or so of the game and from what I saw we were much improved from last week. I think the state of the pitch played a big part at Blyth and today's was many times better. The trialist was a very young right sided centreback. Evidently had a good game and certainly played the last part of the game well.

As expected not been offered a deal.

Thank The Lord that my season ticket book only turned up today. I was intending buying the new top and offsetting the 10% off by getting CAREY emblazoned on the back. That was indeed a close one

You must have some size of heid!

Might look better if the sponsor's logo was in black . Strip looks OK to me. Considering it's neither hoops nor wide stripes it still comes across as reasonably conventional.

The way I read it Jackie was saying that we can't afford to sign a player who can't play first team football because he's "one for the future". I didn't take it to mean that Lindsay, basically untried at first team level, would be first choice at either a left back or centre back. Similarly I don't expect Sean Fraser will be a first choice striker but he is expected to be able to put in a productive 90 mins if called upon. I assume Lindsay will be on equal footing with the likes of Sean, Ryan MacBeth & Burns. I suspect minds were more or less made up about Sinclair before the Blyth game as I doubted we'd publicise the fact that terms were already agreed and not sign the guy. Perhaps the immediate cash involved is nominal with "sell ons" and/or other stipulations like number of first team appearances that sort of thing?

Looks like you're all missing the point. If Jeehon says someone is signing I'd say the chances of this happening will be very strong. It's hardly as if he's been inaccurate before.

Respect your opinion but not sure I agree. I think it's more likely that Willie K will start ahead of Balatoni but I'd anticipate a bit of coming and going re the back four. If McCall was still manager we probably wouldn't even be discussing this (three central defenders being played together as often as not) but signing an additional defender (even on loan) should cover adequately all bases across the back. It's kinda strange these days to have an emergent defender not able to play in at least two different positions. I hope Conrad isn't an exception and could either play right back or central midfield.

You mean to say you didn't get a packet? Btw, thanks uber

Checked both the SFA and FA rulebooks and found this, which should clear up the matter. "A player once substituted cannot re-enter the field of play unless facilities are arranged as such to allow free distribution of scampi fries"

Now evidently being played "behind closed doors"