ChewinGumMacaroonBaaaz

Much is being made of "the run" D.U. are on, and they will no doubt arrive at Firhill buoyed by the belief that they are capable of mounting a headline grabbing "Great Escape". They have indeed made the implausible possible, and it would be wrong to underestimate the threat their large squad of talented, experienced and determined players carry. However.... In their 8 league games since we lost to them in the cup, they have won 3. Thistle can claim the same. They can claim one more draw and one less defeat, yet that came against Hamilton away where we recently came away victorious. During their run they beat Hearts at Tyncastle while we were beaten by the Jambos. All three of the goals in their 2-1 victory came with Hearts down to 10 men, while we were only beaten 1-0 after losing Bannigan to injury before half time. They beat Ross county convincingly 3-0... yet a week later they, admittedly down to 10 men for the last half hour, managed a less convincing 3-2 win in the cup. Yesterday they won, we could only manage a draw.... They beat St.Johnstone yesterday 1-0, reportedly their goal came from a goalies blunder. The "great" achievement pushed by the media is that they held on for the last half hour after again having a man sent off. Also ..... Thistle have a 100%, 9 point return out of the saints so far this year. .... I don't underestimate the Arabs. Weeks ago I posted it might be unwise to write them off. It's just that as per usual Scottish pundits and commentators are looking to the old guard teams to provide the headlines and their shallow journalism reports little on the more than mere plucky young pretenders. Remember '96.... Partick Thistle... Finish them!!!

A good point, and the big man certainly made an impact. But, for me, it was all about the energy and movement of Edwards today. It can be hard coming on a sub and picking up the flow of the game. However, Gary looked to static. He put in a reasonable shift, tracked back and wasn't lazy. He just didn't seem to have the same attacking enthusiasm of Ryan.

100% agree.... Really disappointed with Gary when he came on. He's a good player but he was not a good replacement for Ryan today. Just hope the competition for places persists and improves and heads stay up. No one should be guaranteed their place... but after Hamilton and today, for me, Ryan's is making himself hard to leave out.

Always loved the guy .... .... who put the ball in the rangers net? super Jimmy Craigen! .... mon eh Raith Globetrotters!

Thought we were good first half but looked vulnerable in the second. Enjoyed it though. Amoo looks more confident. Still needs to improve his final ball, but at least now he's beating his man and getting them in instead of turning and laying the ball back. Not the sub I would have chosen Edwards/Fraser. Ryan's still to finesse his game, but he was buzzing about in an area where we need options, the final third. Reviews of him being a "more attack minded" Bannigan seem to me to be pretty accurate so far.... promising. Thought the game slowed and killie looked more settled when he was hooked. Lawless didn't look like he wanted to be on the left wing. Perhaps Christie would have been better coming on before Gary, or we should maybe have taken the punt on Doolan/Pogba upfront with our first change of personnel. They did it bringing Magennis on and I'm just at a bit of a loss why Archie seems reluctant to give the two of them up front more of a go. Pogba was making himself a nuisance and Amoo was getting balls in, I think Dools could find the places to be at the right time to add that finishing touch. It would have made our shape a bit lop-sided, but like I say, wee Stevie didn't seem to enjoy his shift today on the left and moved into the middle when Elliot came on. Leave the left flank to Booth alone... i dunno.... maybe asking alot.... but we gotta do something to threaten that goal and start hitting the target. I still think Archie sometimes sticks to much to his chosen formation. The players are capable but I think we could get more with a little more creativity/flexibility around our shape. Maybe it's a defender's upbringing, holding the line and keeping a good shape... alot of words to describe no plan "B"? .... aye maybe.... but .... ach..... I just think it's subtle changes required rather than sweeping ones. ....Same killie we've seen since we've come up. Big men in the box and falling like there's a sniper in the stands whenever they are within set piece range of getting the ball into them. We did well to, for the most part, hold them off. D.U. will be a different kettle of relegation bait, I think. Faster? more desperate? more creative? .... We've got what it takes to handle them.... we just need goals. Dools and Pogba ... let's go for it!

Zionks! That Great Dane doesn't have a Scooby-Doo.... I reckon oor Shaggy has more interest in chocolate covered hot-dogs.

A wean's no' a ranger, there's no debt in her bed. The wee yin's a Jagoe, Keep her far from parkhead. The stars in red and yellow, Are the team she sees play, As the little new Jags fan, Sleeps aw during the day. Happy Birthday Chloe, all the best to Mum and Dad.

Alcoholic son of Souness calls for "the rangers" to sign team mate's wife shagging ex-england captain no nonsense centre half? .... .... guess it is hard to believe the "goalie" knows how to tweet.

Steady on.... Y'cannae let your sentiments of Archie's playing career with us cloud your view on his managerial capabilities. He's got nae contacts in the game for sourcing decent players, relies on his predecessor's legacy and has nae plan B! .... Archie OOT! Jimmy Calderwood could do us a job.

Yogi Yogi Yogi.... F**K RIGHT OFF!!!!!!

... Come on Jagger, you gotta admit, that's a bit of a selective editorial on a report commissioned by the SNP executive with a brief to review the system, only up to kids of 15 years, and more specifically "Highlight key impacts of the approach taken to developing the curriculum to date" and "Analyse key aspects of education policy and practice in Scotland, and integrate insights from PISA..." ( PISA - The Programme for International Student Assessment, a triennial international survey of kids up to age 15, which last published results in 2012). The "curriculum for excellence" was only launched in 2010(?), and seems to have been in a state of flux since with a new system of national primary school testing being announced by the executive as recently as September last year. Broader opinion, and concern varies, and perhaps the picture is not as clear or factually definitive as you claim. http://www.oecd.org/...Perspective.pdf http://www.bbc.co.uk...otland-35101835 http://www.heraldsco...ish_curriculum/ http://www.thecourie...llence-1.919141 http://www.ibtimes.c...ys-oecd-1540711 While I agree substandard levels of education is a UK problem, and PISA's 2012 survey reported on Scotland that indeed its', ".... own overall performance was similar to that in 2009 for all three domains [average in maths, and above the average in reading and science]" and "Scotland's relative performance compared to other countries, including UK administrations, improved slightly since 2009 in maths...", it is also true that the separate systems in england-shire and Scotland are developing, perhaps now more than ever, with differing overall policy. I would suggest that the report you have cited claims only that the "watershed" changes in Scotland "could deliver a world class system" but have yet to achieve it and a similiar conclusion has been delivered for English reforms. It would be churlish of me to draw attention to Scottish concerns about achievement levels in Maths and refer to your numeric faux pas ".... OECD report in December 1915", ... However, as far as government actions in the matter, I'd make further comment that perhaps this commissioned report would have been more likely to give a better picture of the current state of affairs if it had been delayed till the 2015 PISA results had been published. Furthermore, a broader review and report on education after 15 years old may reveal more accurate information on how well state education is preparing Scottish kids for a highly competitive, and ever more educated world. .... anyhoo ... whatever is the case... we'd be best off out the EU! .... Hows?.... Just coz, innit? ... them's all speakz weird abroad. English, aye, but funny like... ken?

A second house should be different in nature. I'm all for reforming the Lords, but the point of it is not to be more democratic. It is there to offer scrutiny not to block, and should be independent of the electoral process in order to hold the executive to account in times of weak or divided opposition in the commons. Democracy is vital, but can be the victim of mob rule, extreme policy and minority oppression.

I was aware of the state of the thread, but do not concede that I have in anyway "ruined" it. Perhaps championing the Great British stereotypes of - speaking when one is spoken to, curbing one's enthusiasm, maintaining a dignified silence and haulding yer tongue - is one tactic to tackle the imminent referendum on how we are governed. However, the O.P. in addition to the poll, encouraged thoughts and given that opportunity I have attempted to truly engage and offer opinion on how this decision might affect one's day to day life. In many of my posts I have ended with a question, encouraging a challenge rather than imposing my beliefs. In my last post I apologise for "ranting". But in my defence I have included some pretty pictures and illustrations, perhaps for those of the twitter generation who may baulk at the effort of digesting 7 paragraphs of another's thoughts. I share your apparent dismay that others have not participated fully, and addressed this previously in a 2 line post when simply quoting the Scottish First Minister "...one of the things we learned quickly about referendums in Scotland, is that if people are encouraged to and given the opportunity to truly engage in the issues, and realise the potential impact, good or bad, on their own day to day lives, then it is possible to generate a thriving democratic debate...". At about 1000 views and counting this remains in fact one of the more popular and most visited threads in the "general chat" section of the site. ... 30 voters, 10/11 posters. Fairy nuff, I say. Perhaps some folks are still deliberating and yet to form a conclusive opinion. I do not see that as any reason to restrain one's views in the interim. The floor remains open and I won't be the one to discourage participation or flirt with censure. Solidarity comrade.

The UK pays more into the EU budget than it gets back. How much is the argument. Being in the EU costs money but does it also create trade, jobs and investment that are worth more, right? Well... We can be pretty sure about how much cash we put in, but it’s far harder to be sure about how much comes back in economic benefits. “There is no definitive study of the economic impact of the UK’s EU membership or the costs and benefits of withdrawal”,according to The House of Commons Library. So lets talk cash. The UK treasury reports in 2015 the UK government paid £13billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was £4.5. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was estimated at about £8.5billion. Without the UK rebate ( we are not alone in benefiting from rebates, Germany, Austria, The Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark have similar systems in place ) we would have been liable for £18 billion in contributions. As well as the dough the government gets to play with, the EU also "invests" or donates to the private sector, in the guise of "research grants" or other pseudo philanthropic gestures of good meaning. Guess it kind of depends on your political view if this indeed does meet with the general concept of re-distribution of wealth, however, in 2013 this amounted to an estimated further £1.4billion that made it back to Blighty. Regardless of the amounts, the money we put in or get back will be spent on things our national governments may or may not choose to fund if we left the EU. It’s fair enough to look at the net contribution in isolation and then speculate on other benefits of union membership, but, what we get back isn’t fully under our control. I guess it's a bit like buying gift vouchers or book tokens. For example, in 2014-2020, the UK will manage seventeen operational programmes under the EU Cohesion policy. Of these, six will receive funding from the European Regional Development Fund and six from the European social fund. The investment priorities for the UK are set out in the Partnership Agreement with the European Commission. In other words, as members of the EU we are committed to make the EU more "cohesive" ( I think that means "all the same really", but I think the EU means "more equal" ) and have to propose to the EU high heid yins what we're going to towards that end. They will release some of the money we have given them if they think they are good things or we agree to what they think are better things, but not enough to cover all the things that they think are worthy of cash. However, if we have to spend extra dough on projects that exceed our EU budget or complete the projects that overspent, they will endorse them as being a good thing by putting a blue flag with 12 stars on the marketing so the people won't be afraid that it's un european. They will allow us some discretion on what to spend it on but only within their guidelines of good practice and targeted worthy causes and areas http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1300&from=EN, .... sorry .... I rant..... However, the EU thinks Wales is more worthy of your cash than Scotland, and the Highlands gets more per head than the central belt. Maybe it's just the last dry wretches of the common agricultural policy hangover, but the in 1985, around 70% of the EC budget went on agriculture. Countries including Britain have argued that less money should be used to subsidise farmers and wanted a shift towards EU spending on "growth and jobs". However, farm subsidies are expected to account for around38% of the EU budget between 2014 and 2020, or around €363bn of the €960bn total.... yeah ... i get we need food .... but that's takin the piss.... remember the so called "grain mountains" and "wine lakes" of the 80s.... I thought we were ment to be working on a reduction of waste..... Anyhoo ... Gorgeous George Galloway delights in referring to Westminster as "the mother of all parliaments" .... The EU is "The Godfather" .... ba-dum cha!

t1t5!

Scotland is already seen as a kind of pseudo-member state by the EU. The Office of the European Commission in Scotland was set up in 1975, and acts as a bridge between the people, politicians, businesses and organisations of Scotland and the departments and personnel of the EU institution based in Brussels. The Scottish Government's Europe Division is responsible for advising Scottish Government Ministers, public sector officials and the people of Scotland on EU affairs and engagement. It ensures that Scotland's interests on EU matters are effectively represented in Scotland, Brussels and with the UK Government and Devolved Administrations. Europe Division also has a representation office in Brussels. The European and External Relations Committee of The Scottish Parliament, established on 1st June, 2011, has a remit to consider and report on: proposals for European Communities legislation; the implementation of European Communities legislation; any European Communities or European Union issue; the development and implementation of the Scottish Administration's links with countries and territories outside Scotland, the European Communities (and their institutions) and other international organisations; and co-ordination of the international activities of the Scottish Administration. Nicola Sturgeon, in her forward to the "Scotland in Europe" document published by the SNP executive prior to the Scottish referendum, "What really matters to Scotland is that it has an independent government directly involved in that process [EU administration and legislation] looking after Scotland's particular interests.". However, it would appear looking at these reports - http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-accounting-blunder-loses-45million-6297557#hujUiOzogQFRsrdK.97 , http://www.orcadian.co.uk/2016/03/european-commission-to-investigate-possible-fines-over-scottish-government-farming-payments-crisis/ , that Scotland is indeed not being best served under the current system. If there have been, as a SNP spokesman commented in relation to one of these reports, some public bodies "unable to adequately account for all the funding they received and spent", is the extra bureaucracy involved in EU distribution of finance is worth the bother or is in any way fairer, easier, practical or more dependable than our situation within the UK. The crux of the matter is the dilution of sovereignty and fiscal autonomy. The SNP claim to be fighting to achieve more power for Scotland yet they are actively participating in a system and promoting a future for Scotland which only moves the seat of sovereignty and makes negotiations on such matters more complex and the competition for self-determination more populous. That is not more power for Scotland. That is more power within the EU. Is it better to be a big fish in a small pond with access to the ocean of a small fish in a big pond that thinks it's a sea?

"...support for the European Union in Scotland seems to be significantly higher than in the rest of the UK." Well... perhaps... we'll see soon .... However. did you know that in the 1975 referendum on Membership of the EC ( we have never been asked before about the EU directly and treaties have been signed outwith the scope or detail of elected government manifestos) the only two constituent counties in the whole of the UK to vote "NO" were The Shetland Islands and The Western Isles. Out of the four home nations, Scotland ranked 2nd only to Northern Ireland for "No" with approximately 42% voting to stay away. England voted to join with nearly 70%. Times have changed and so have the institutions we are voting about. However, I do not like the ethereal implication that is made by some that Granny and Papa were old fashioned, xenophobic simpletons with no experience or understanding of the way of the modern world and that youthful ambition, invention, visionary hope and experimentation should lead the way. There is a difference between building on and improving what we have inherited and trading it for the shiny new and untried. When the UK joined the EU in 1973, we had 20% of the votes. Today we only have 9.5% of the votes. British MEPs voted against 576 EU proposals between 2009 and 2014, but 485 still passed and became law. Are we really getting "stronger in Europe" ?

I pity the fools who miss the next time we wallop them.

"...the idea that there’s somehow a contradiction in believing in independence for Scotland, while also supporting membership of the European Union. This of course ignores the obvious point that all 28 members of the European Union – by definition - are independent countries. 9 of them have smaller populations than Scotland. The fundamental principle of the EU – that independent nations work together for a common good..." Nicola sturgeon 29/2/16 The financial and political ideology and strategy of SYRIZA in Greece is one that can be critiqued and debated as good or bad for long term Greek prosperity. However, what is certain is that they are the legitimate government of Greece, having won the most seats at two elections in 2015 and forming a coalition government with the Independent group. The reason for the second elections was Prime Minister Tsipras' resignation, following his decision to accept a bail-out package from the ESM. It was a package that contained larger pension cuts and tax increases than the one rejected by Greek voters (61% to 39% and by majority in all regions) in the hastily arranged referendum on bailout conditions which followed his party's first election. SYRIZA's success was secured by campaigning that it would resist the existing bailout programme and negotiate better terms for Greece. Whatever argument might be put concerning what's best for Greece, the fact is that a perceivable majority of her citizens' opinions and hopes have been compromised. They have certainly lost their grip on the much cherished "levers of fiscal autonomy" Mr Swinney demands to secure our "independence". Mr Tsipras' led the "No" campaign by claiming, "On Sunday, we are not simply deciding to remain in Europe -- we are deciding to live with dignity in Europe". It would seem, sadly for Greece, that in securing a dignity within and for the "common good" of the EU and Eurozone, they have had to sacrifice control of their destiny. Perhaps the EU knows best? ETA : Greece has a registered electorate approximately twice that of Scotland.

"...one of the things we learned quickly about referendums in Scotland, is that if people are encouraged to and given the opportunity to truly engage in the issues, and realise the potential impact, good or bad, on their own day to day lives, then it is possible to generate a thriving democratic debate..." Nicola Sturgeon 29/2/16

President Obama is coming. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-barack-obama-remain-campaign-brexit-europe-a6927731.html "A No 10 source confirmed that Mr Obama will make his intervention and visit the UK as an extra leg of a trip to Germany next month.". If you wish to remain a part of the EU, at least investigate and scrutinise what it is, like this former member of the Trotskyist International Socialists, card carrying Labour Party member and foreign correspondent in both Washington and Moscow, now derided by many in the much discredited "main stream media" as an eccentric, if not extremist, right wing loony worthy of ridicule and dismissal... Mr. Salmond once said "Co-operation with our European partners in the functional areas--economic, trading, technical and social policies--offers an independent Scotland the chance to play a reforming part in creating a Europe of equal nations. The EC is by no means perfect and the idea of a centralised European super-state is anathema." ... ask yourself, do the people of Greece appear to feel they are treated as an equal by the EU?

Left and right unite and fight.

Brussels/Strasbourg. At the end 2013, MEPs voted for the two-parliament system to be scrapped by a three-to-one majority. The French government, which has a power of veto on the issue, insist on maintaining Strasbourg’s role because of the substantial amount of money the travelling circus brings to the region. Its status is set in stone under a European treaty signed in 1992, which can only be revoked should all member states agree it. The EU admits that the monthly Strasbourg sitting, which lasts just four days, costs an additional £93 million a year. Some estimates have the cost "a little" higher at £136 million. Among the costs are £250,000 a year to transport the plastic boxes containing documents, diaries and other items from Brussels to Strasbourg and back again. It is thought it costs up to £200,000 for the EU to charter two express trains to take officials, MEPs and others there on a Monday morning and back on a Thursday afternoon. Taxpayers foot the £2.5 million bill for relocating freelance translators from Brussels to Strasbourg and back again, including costs of travel, accommodation and other expenses. Catering services in Strasbourg costs an additional £1 million, while extra medical support comes to some £330,000. In In addition to this logistical extravagance, in Strasbourg extra money is needed for computers and IT support and for maintenance and security of the sleek parliament building, which was only completed in 1999. In total, the cost of looking after the French buildings and infrastructure and other charges comes to about £50 million a year. About 100 people are employed in Strasbourg full-time, even though the European Parliament only meets for 12 sessions, each lasting four days, a total of 48 days each year. The EU budget is framed in a seven year cycle. The current (2014-20) plans for administrative spending are set £62billion.

Jean Claude Junker is a shape shifting lizard and Angela Merkel is an out of control cannibal lesbian android originally built by the Stasi to lure dissident perverts who escaped the facility when the wall came down. The world is not flat, it's a computer simulation programmed by evil death aliens who keep your brain in a jar in a huge hanger on the dark side of the moon! Don't believe Sabbath... he is one of them.

Ach... dry yer eyes! ... Yer just a big smut peddlin' Scottish Arthur Daley who got caught..... Where's yer Roller now? Anyhoo... Stevie's goal was a thing of beauty. I'd welcome a few more memories like that.