Caledonian Craig

For Acknowledgements tip a nod to any lyricists lyrics you have quoted where possible. Also acknowledge those to have helped along the way and leave an apology open to anyone you have forgot to mention. That way it covers you.

No. The time has come for him to really test himself beyond the confines of the SPL.

Point is if he is to be a future Scotland player and star he needs regular first team football to develop. I'd sooner he did that at a club where he wasn't keeping fellow Scotland internationals out of the side stinting their development.

Well lets hope for Scotland's sake he is. Me speaking purely from a Scotland supporter's point of view Turnbull going to Celtic would mean one Scotland international midfielder not getting regular first team football. Celtic have Ryan Christie, Callum McGregor, James Forrest and Oliver Burke already there battling for starting spots which they are missing out on. Turnbull moving there would be detriment to at least one potential Scotland international.

End of the day we shall see what he is worth by how his career pans out. Football is a gamble for clubs but evidently Celtic do not want to gamble here and they will miss out just like they did in different circumstances on Andy Robertson.

Or Celtic have the money and say he is not worth it? In that case Turnbull is right. No point going to a club where he is not valued.

Wage bill is not the same as transfer fees either though. Point stands though: How much do Celtic really want him as a lynchpin in their team? If their interest is real and they rate him highly enough they'll pay the wage. Perhaps the fact they won't demonstrates they don't or that they don't see him being a first team regular enough to pay that wage.

Spot on. The rise of stuff such as Facebook, Twitter etc really has been a death knell to forums. I ran a forum from around 2006 and by 2011 it had gone from a thriving community to a ghost town as many had deserted the humble forum for the new in-thing Facebook.

Or you could ask how much do Celtic really, really want him and rate him. If they do really want him then they'll pay what he wants. This is why Celtic cannot compete in Europe. They are unwilling to splash cash which they evidently have but refuse to spend.

No my point is that starting Fraser last night did not guarantee solidity at the back. That is what Clarke was evidently striving for with his team changes.

I agree. Fraser started (as did Robertson) when we played Belgium at home and we lost 4-0.

Well he played the first 45 minutes last night in a team and set-up that almost shut-out Belgium so he couldn't have done that shabby.

Look Clarke is smart enough to know what side to start with. Forrest and Fraser are fine if you want to play an open type game but Clarke had other plans in mind. A much tighter set up keeping it tight in defence and midfield and Forrest and Fraser are not of that ilk. His set up almost got us through to half-time at 0-0. He was evidently hoping that to be the case and then try to be a bit more attacking the more we were still in the game bringing Forrest and Fraser's pace on to attack tiring players.

Both were utterly knackered after Saturday. Plus Forrest is certainly not the type of player to do pressing and keeping possession whilst covering back as Clarke wanted us to keep it tight and press players in possession.

I must be the only one that noticed Forrest and Fraser were totally spent on Saturday. Fresh legs were needed and Clarke intended on a team thst could keep it tight and keep possession as much as possible and certainly Forrest and McGinn don't fit that bill. Given that we very nearly got to half-time at 0-0 I would say the gameplan worked aside from players switching off. I think Clarke wanted to keep Fraser and Forrest back and introduce them later as an attacking option to have pace to attack tiring opponents.

Under Eck we were beaten 4-0 at home to Belgium. Last night we lost 3-0 away to Belgium in a competitive match and with our best player missing. Seems like improvement to me.

Taylor did very well indeed. For an international debut against a way better side than us then he can be very proud. I'd have no issues about calling on him again if need be.

Yes a nod to Burke. It is not his natural role but I thought he did well with the crumbs he got.

I was watching Fraser on Saturday and he was flexing his leg like you do when you get cramp. I just think he was totally knackered - too knackered to start tonight. That aside I agree with your points.

That same Wales side lost 1-0 in Hungary tonight.

I think Darren Fletcher's assessment on Sky was spot on. If we could have got to half-time level then who knows? However, we looked more organised and competitive, tougher to break down. We lost 4-0 against Belgium at home less than a year ago and here we are away to Belgium and lost 3-0. Rember as well we were dealt a blow losing our best player Andrew Robertson just before the match.

If you want further evidence that Cyprus are no mugs they only lost 1-0 away to Russia.

Bad goal to concede that. Sure the match was well lost but 3-0 looks a lot worse than 2-0 and changes the complexion of things. Quality side are Belgium. We battled hard and with better composure in front of goal we could have got a goal for ourselves.

The annoying thing is that both goals were preventable in ways. Switched off for the first goal and the second goal if only Marshall could have parried it elsewhere.

Yes I would agree. Sore one to take. It will be tough from here on in but we must guard against capitulation.