THERE are some things that split opinion right down the middle at the Fraser Eagle Stadium; the drum for a start.

To some it is a call to arms and a valuable part of the matchday atmosphere, while others would rather it stayed at home.

Then there are the players. Some are loved by all from the moment they arrive, while others can never seem to do the right thing for anyone.

Lee McEvilly is the latest in a long line of players to split the fans in half, the pro-Evil brigade remember his bullish runs and tenacious tackles, not to mention his quota of goals. Then, and here is the problem, the other half remember that he left us for Wrexham, and while playing for the Welshmen gave the visiting Stanley fans a sign that was first seen displayed by the English Archers to their French counterparts in days of old.

The fact that he has come back to us and that John Coleman can see the potential of a fully fit (he does look a yard slower than the Lee of old) Evil has to count for something doesn't it?

And herein lies the dilemma, because as Gordon Strachan pointed out last week, a lot of football fans think that they have paid their money and as such they have a right to voice any opinion they like, but should a player retaliate in any way then he is wrong and indeed guilty of disturbing the peace to a state likely to cause a riot.

I have never pulled any punches when it comes to trying to put a player off with bravado and banter. The victory for me has always been when a player responds as he is not concentrating 100 per cent on the game.

There have been some quality exceptions over the years, mainly, it has to be said, from keepers with little to do except join in with the banter.

So where do I stand? Well if he scores a hat-trick against Wrexham on October 6 (by then I hope he will be fully fit) and then runs to the opposition fans to let them know where his heart now lies, then I will shout his name from the rooftops.

Until then, it's time to get back on the fence.