So whats our thoughts on the three potential targets being spouted in the media?
Greg Stewart - Seems a done deal, surely just to bolster the squad
Jack Hastie - Not seen enough of him but seems a promising youngster, probably more potential than Jordan Jones
John Souttar - The price it seems its going to take to get him away from Hearts could be the stumbling block here but he has looked decent anytime I've seen him, although a bit injury prone
All in all seems to be good options for the squad but not exactly what we need right now in my opinion but hopefully the more marquee signings will come later
Potential Targets
posted on 17/4/19
comment by Hot Shot Hamish (U21959)
posted 50 seconds ago
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 15 seconds ago
Context is simple.
If Hamish is a Tim NNH is right, if he's not i'm right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Hamish was a Tim then you'd be right you absolute
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hamishes misses is a Tim - does that help?
But Hamish is deffo not left footed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 17/4/19
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 1 minute ago
I worry for people like you in the real world, i really do
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Be better worrying about your understanding of context
posted on 17/4/19
So no answer then?
posted on 17/4/19
I think it's quite clear you're struggling here, not me.
I'm sure the inevitable "Ah got ye there, mad wum that a am" will follow in due course.
posted on 17/4/19
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think my very simple closed question being answered would resolve this to be honest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well no it wouldn't because like NNH you are also choosing to ignore the context.
If you would frame the question fitting the context it would be did you mention it before any of the Tims?
Answer being of course, yes.
posted on 17/4/19
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 1 minute ago
I think it's quite clear you're struggling here, not me.
I'm sure the inevitable "Ah got ye there, mad wum that a am" will follow in due course.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it must be the schools.
posted on 17/4/19
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think my very simple closed question being answered would resolve this to be honest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well no it wouldn't because like NNH you are also choosing to ignore the context.
If you would frame the question fitting the context it would be did you mention it before any of the Tims?
Answer being of course, yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you’re wrong.
Hamish being a bear mentioned it before you did.
posted on 17/4/19
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 11 seconds ago
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
I think my very simple closed question being answered would resolve this to be honest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well no it wouldn't because like NNH you are also choosing to ignore the context.
If you would frame the question fitting the context it would be did you mention it before any of the Tims?
Answer being of course, yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you’re wrong.
Hamish being a bear mentioned it before you did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You got the second half right.
He mentioned it before i did but i wasn't disputing that, i mentioned it before the Tims which is what i said if you don't ignore the context.
posted on 17/4/19
should change ur name to curly wurly HB
posted on 18/4/19
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator