THE_Ibrox_Preacher
-
Posts
5,646 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by THE_Ibrox_Preacher
-
-
3 minutes ago, K.A.I said:
Hmm I know where you are coming from but Halliday is like a man down a lot of the times and if we are to be a man down (short term while Nico get's more games under his belt) I'd rather have the "man down" with bags more ability. Ideally Windass would be fit to give us that drive, though while Nico get's fitter.
Nico looks at the level he's been at for 6 years, if we can get him looking like a 90 minute influence then we'll be pulling a rabbit out the hat. As it stands he did dick all against Hamilton and they are shite - he scored a great finish last night but it's a wonder strike unlikely to be a weekly event and his performance was against Peterhead....I just think he'd be better off the bench against tired legs/minds unless he can look look a top player for 60 minutes.
Halliday wouldn't be in my starting 11 but I don't have Crooks, I don't have Miller or Waghorn fit/sharp, I don't have Windass (as far as I know); I figured that Halliday has looked like he could do the defensive/ball-winning/passing job and allow Rossiter (shot and good eye) to be more of a playmaker.
Forresters shooting with his right foot last night was abysmal and yet he offers so much- I prefer him middle to right, if he goes to right wing he allows O'Halloran to go through the middle and I think Forrester can cut in onto his left foot better than most.
-
37 minutes ago, K.A.I said:
Same team as last night except Wallace and Fod back in. I'd be happy with that.
Maybe a bit harsh on McKay but if Forrester or O'Halloran is having an off day then personally I'd bring him on at half-time for either one. No messing about like waiting too late that cost us the win against Hamilton. That should be a key lesson learned.
Unless Kranjcar ups it significantly or Dundee go mental (they do frequently) and let him do whatever he wants, he'll be a man down against Dundee as he's nowhere near fit/sharpness and we need to be a lot sharper going forward.
I also think that unless Miller has been injured and I'm last to hear about it, he'll be back in the side. Dodoo showed he can offer us something different and there's potential there but against higher level opposition he'd have been snuffed like a candle in the wind. There are other options but we all have wonderful ideas and yet we know from experience that the manager has his plan so we can expect the two not to tie up.
Personally, I'd go for something like the following at present and try and play quick through balls for O'Halloran to run on to as he's a whippet and can beat a man. Think Rodney Wallace but without being offside every 2nd ball.
Foderingham
Tavernier, Kiernan, Hill, Wallace,
Halliday, Barton,
Rossiter
Forrester, O'Halloran, McKay
-
There are loads of things that can be done to improve our game dramatically both in terms of producing footballing talent and in terms of marketing/financial benefits.
The problem is that these things take investment, unilateral agreements by the teams and bodies in Scotland, out the box thinking, TIME, etc. etc. Can we honestly see ourselves being willing to do that nevermind getting teams with smaller margins to work within?
Our club has changed tact with signing policy and financial approach but it's the tip of the iceberg if we're serious about long-term improvement of ourselves and the countries footballing setup.
-
16 hours ago, Jack The Flipper said:
I get the feeling MW is getting the team fit and sharp, not picking the players he would normally pick.
16 hours ago, Inigo said:If he is, I wish he hadn't against Hamilton.
The management got it wrong against Hamilton. Mr Warburton played a team in part to get the match sharpness of certain players up. The assumption was made that the occasion and inherent class difference of our players would carry us through against a poor performing side. It blew up in our face.
Evidence:
Throughout preseason Miller had the touch of a wrecking ball and failed to take a raft of chances, Kranjcar was living up to what his record suggested (played 20-odd games a season tops, since he was 25, retired from internationals just as long, playing in the US diddy league i.e. not the MLS), Hill nearly took an East Stirling player out the game (non-league) such was his timing; all 3 made the starting line up.
Conversely, we brought on Rossiter, O'Halloran, Forrester and every one of them was night and day in comparison; Rossiter was clearly not on the bench due to lack of fitness as he had been playing with England U19's, O'Halloran was raved about in preseason as he started to show he had pace and acceleration, Forrester is Forester. When they came on it was clear that we had been using the Hamilton game to get the fitness/sharpness of players up with a view to being in a better overall position in the weeks to come, these 3 players were ahead of Kranjcar/Miller in particular by weeks?!
Now the most concerning 2 things for me from the Hamilton game were as follows;
- Our manager said multiple times previously words to the effect of "It's great to get the players in early so we are ahead in terms of fitness and preparation" and yet what we've seen first hand is that Kranjcar and Miller were nowhere near ready, Hill was behind, Waghorn's out injured (could be bad luck or more indicative of the work we've put in). Against Motherwell we were out the gates slowly and could have got a hiding, the other lower-league opposition we never got out of 2nd gear, Hamilton we fell on our arse. It doesn't feel like that we've entered the season fitter and more prepared even if you can say we'd have beaten Hamilton with a few simple changes.
- After the game, McKay and Mr Warburton both gave credit to Hamilton for the result. McKay said something like "Hamilton made it difficult for us getting back and defending", Mr Warburton said something similar with regards to them playing well and I feel that both were talking out their arse frankly; We threw the points away because as usual going forward we tried to walk the ball in allowing the whole opposition to get back and defend and through underestimating our opponents to the extent we played the league opener as a preseason friendly getting squad fitness/sharpness up. When Ross County lost to Alloa the manager said the result was embarrassing and with our mistakes being there for all to see I felt it was close to being dishonest and insulting to suggest Hamilton had achieved greatness instead of owning up to making a couple of big howlers, especially when one of them has been around for a year (lack of impetus going forward). Hamilton getting their arse handed to them off lower-league opposition again this season last night to Morton at home should tell it's own story.
Obviously if some of our shots/efforts had gone in we could have got away with it and it wouldn't be viewed as a mistake to have got the fitness/sharpness of some players up however last night against Peterhead was no turning of a corner with regards to impetus going forward, directness, pace, quick decisions etc. etc. Peterhead lost 4-0 to Alloa at the weekend and 2 of our goals came from a CB not famed for scoring and who has thus far been well off the pace, Kranjcar's goal was good to the point of being unlikely to be repeated week in week out, Dodoo got a couple but he had some guilt edged opportunities where he took too long on the ball; all I'm trying to say here is that while it was nice to see some things that were different last night, I don't think we have truly adopted the mindset that we need to be a few gears up on what we were at the weekend going forward (that's not to say we won't get it in the coming weeks, just Barry McKay's interview didn't indicate that going forward has been identified as being too slow behind the scenes and Peterhead won't be a measure of turning a corner in that regard).
What we've got as a squad for the money is outstanding and as we get our shit together we should walk to 2nd but if we try to win in 2nd gear every other week we'll piss away a title challenge before it's even begun. Celtic aren't great but if for e.g. you have an unfit Amo ( a few classes above what we have) at the back you can maybe get away with it, this squad has to up it (as we all know they can) and play consistently at that upped gear if it's to get by the top tier sides weekly when those teams are playing an extra 20% against us because of who we are.
-
57 minutes ago, 6superbarry6 said:
Got it spectacularly wrong today imo there was no pace or drive whatsoever in that side Miller and Kranjcar shouldn't be staring together and the latter is already looking like a luxury player and a passenger when not on form,I'm hopeful Windass return may solve the midfield problems but a replacement for Miller is looking like an absolute must
I think the management underestimated Hamilton and played Kranjcar, Miller etc. with a view to getting them up to speed thinking that we'd have enough in us to do both that and to get the business done.
Bit us in the arse and points needlessly dropped.
There were positives today but effectively the old problems remain and several players just aren't ready/fit/match-sharp.
-
42 minutes ago, TheKingObv said:
No invention going forward. Ridiculously slow tempo at times and incredibly shaky in defence.
Not going to hit the panic button just yet, but if we don't improve on that then the league will be over in no time.
It's hard to argue with that assessment.
As you touch on, there's time and it's too early to be pessimistic but it's quite clear what our problems are and that some of them have been there a while.
The management, players, and dare I say board needs to up their game here quickly or it's all just lip service.
We are quite clearly capable and it's been promised but as things stand the season has started and we weren't ready.
-
I think it's easy to pick 3 or 4 players who just clearly weren't sharp enough, we played in the same gear as we did in preseason and the latter half of last season.
Obviously disappointing but it means that doesn't we need to get O.T.T. about what the result itself "means".
Work obviously has to be done to get us up to speed, fitness, sharpness and personnel changes going into the next game. Kranjcar and Miller both look like they are weeks behind others and while game time is a remedy to that you could say equally that the alternatives to them should get to start in the next game while they get themselves up to speed with training and subs appearances. There's every possibility that both of them and Kranjcar, in particular, may just continue with not being 100% and will have to be cameos off the bench for this season. I think it's only fair though that we remember it's early days and a lot can happen in a short space of time in football.
Terrible to see Waghorn's situation unfold, if it's as bad as it looked we'll have to turn to the other players to step up and show why they are at the club.
Hill didn't look to me as though he was as out of his depth as he looked in preseason. O'Halloran and Forester did themselves credit today. Barton looks as though he will be that huge presence in midfield we simply haven't had for years i.e there are positives in the sea of shit that we're sailing through today.
Got to up it big time but there are plenty of reasons to know that shouldn't be beyond us.
-
5 minutes ago, Moobs said:
Bears on here sayin 6 nil and shit need tae get a grip. Fuckin long season ahead
I know what you're getting at but I think a good dose of optimism driving those statements is the knowledge of knowing what we can do if we go up a few gears and with the occasion, it's easy to imagine a packed house etc. driving the team to their best.
As it stands we blew warm then went a bit cold and slipped into the issues identified last season. The free-kick was a highlight and will be interesting to see what else we have for set-pieces.
-
29 minutes ago, gogzy said:
Well our response to that goal will tell us a fair bit IMO.
One of the best comments on the thread, it's perhaps a little cliche but winners over the course have to be able to win having gone down because there'll always be a few games that go against you in a season and points won there define a seasons success, if we do it tells you a lot more about our character/team that skooshing it 5-0. Having said that you hope for the 5-0 because going 1-0 down fucking ruins you as a fan.
-
Rangers are 10/11 to win HT/FT.
Rangers to win -1, 10/11.
Rangers to win -1, 9/4.
Odds are applicable to BET365 and may differ with other bookmakers, use somethings like Oddschecker to find better odds if and when they are available http://www.oddschecker.com/football/scottish/premiership/rangers-v-hamilton/winner
-
1 minute ago, jim beam said:
"Henchmen were deployed by the board" really?when did this happen.
I've always took the view that Craig Houston was a henchman of Mr King and Paul, he seems to do everything that would be of benefit to them. I could be wrong there but that's my take on it. I also don't think that in the 'politics' of our club the big figures personally run round everyone telling them what's what, so there would have to be an individual or individuals doing that for them (call them personal assistants if you prefer, campaign team, lobbyists, whatever.)
-
Came online hoping to read that we had been linked with a CB who on paper looks like he can do the job better than what we have, instead I'm greeted by this clusterfuck.
From what I can see the current board are strongarming a new deal by apparently being willing to cut their nose off to spite their face. Buying it out or seeing it out are 'unacceptable' approaches.
Those happy with the deal have said 'Fuck that, why should I want to shag myself for no reason' and have tried to carry on regardless.
The fans have signalled an interest/intent to buy strips that have been generally been regarded as our best for years.
The board worried that the fans interest/intent, combined with the opportunity, to buy the strips means that their play for a new deal would be critically undermined.
Henchmen were deployed by the board to pressure fans away from buying the strips, 'Buy shares for us or buy our merchandise, stay away from the devil of Mike Ashley,....no you can't ask where the money goes!'
Clubs board puts it out there that we could be changing our strips in order to encourage our fans to avoid "wasting their money" and to avoid undermining the boards play for a new deal.
Have I read/followed this correctly? I try to avoid the boardroom stuff.
-
I think on the basis of what we've seen thus far we may struggle to hit the ground running and be in the right gear at times, we should win all four but I think being ropey in defense and lacking that gear or two of impetus going forward will make it a lot harder than it has to be. I can see us being a bit nervy and frustrated at times as a support particularly against Motherwell but probably Hamilton too, Kilmarnock are gobshite and Dundee aren't far off them (absolutely no excuses should we drop points to either of them because they are that bad).
It's not that we aren't a lot better than them or last season, it's that we've just basically played with the same ills for so long that having seen it continue into the League Cup, I doubt it'll be reversed in a week. Another thing is that for all we've brought in players early many of them simply aren't fit or up to pace, Crooks is obviously injured and I think he's a bigger signing than most seem to think, Kranjcar lives up to form, Hill tackled a non league players shadow against East Stirling such was his lack of match sharpness, Millers been fluffing chances galore, Barton hasn't exactly sparked into life yet, etc. etc.
I'm not saying we're going to lose any of them (that would be far worse than what I'm talking about), I just mean that our only game at this level was against Motherwell and they could have been pumping us after a hof hour - I think it's plain to see we aren't yet firing on all cylinders (kind of a good thing because it means we can be a lot better) and as such I think we'll make a harder slog of a couple of them than we really should.
We'll probably run out winners by a couple of goals in all of the games but we'll probably repeat our ills and form the conclusion that we need to sharpen the fuck up for the tims and the sheep in September.
-
Very tricky subject as while I think we can all agree there are circumstances whereby the law etc. etc. should tackle things like racism/sectarianism/xenophobia etc. etc. the trouble with this legislation is that it's been poorly thought through. The framework is inadequate, the implementation has been patchy, the public good that it's doing is arguable at best, the definition and guidance are unclear, the offending terms/songs etc. etc. are ambiguous and subjective; the whole thing is a farce.
With an open and fair mind I can see why a government would not want to have the possibility of a large crowd singing something like "Hang the n***er/Catholic/Jew/Protestant/Atheist from the tree" at a football match with legal impunity, however I also take the view that merely stopping people from saying what they mean doesn't make issues like racism etc. etc. go away. Freedom of speech is something that while many of us believe we have it as a right, we do not; I therefore, would rather we worked towards that (for all the ills that come with it) than banning words and phrases that upset the controlling powers.
I think it beggars belief that children can be segregated for schooling purposes on religious grounds yet that is seen as having nothing to do with sectarianism. Targeting of specifically 2 groups of football fans in this country is not the answer to social problems seen around the globe and I think that while legislation etc. etc. shouldn't be ruled out, any implementation of it should be made having ascertained that legislation etc. etc. is clearly defined with appropriate guidance supplementing it etc. etc. What's clear is that this particular piece of legislation is riddled with problems and that while it's achieving little, people are being criminalised by it unfairly in its erratic implementation.
-
13 minutes ago, MasterD said:
I'm not totally convinced that out midfield will have enough drive or directness without someone like Windass in there so hopefully he starts preferably in place of Halliday.
CB would probably go with Kiernan & Wilson, the sooner we can get someone else in the better.
I'm not sure the lack of directness is a personnel problem but rather one with the style in which we attempt to play. After a short burst of onslaughts, last season we seemed to slide into a tippy-tappy stalemate 30 yards from goal having allowed the whole opposition to get back and defend on the 18-yard line such was our impetus going forward. This appears to have continued despite significant changes to personnel leading me to the conclusion that it's more an issue of our style. I've said all this before though and stated that if Mr Warburton sees it as an issue as we do then he should be running drills or something to correct it i.e. in training repeatedly making attacking plays whereby 3 passes within the opposition half before the 4th pass in which the chance is created then running the drill again (only a suggestion and hardly revolutionary but Mr Warburton seemed to suggest in an interview that our lack of directness was a problem the team was struggling to address and that I found a little concerning).
When you say you'd probably go with Kiernan and Wilson you've said it in a manner where it looks like you had a free choice, as you say it's plain to see we need someone that's better all round than both of them to come in. Clint looks 'Over The Hill' as opposed to 'King Of...' at this stage and while we assume he'll get up to speed in time (we hope) he's clearly not in contention to play on what we've seen of him so far.
-
While I agree with many of the points on this issue and while I could discuss this topic in depth I won't.
What I will say is England is only going to get more and more "Fuck you" money because the powers that be want it to be #1.
What I will say is that a British league isn't going to happen because it's not in England's interest, the brand is the Premier League, not the British Premier League.
What I will say is that if you're a Scot who see's England with "Fuck you" money and complain about it yet you watch Watford V Birmingham on Sky, bet on Liverpool V Stoke on Bet365, take trips to see Chelsea, buy yourself the strips, buy your kids Man City tops etc. etc. you're making it worse. Why would England incorporate our teams when our market already spend it's money on their shit? We can back our own and ignore England making us a black zone on their market coverage within our island or we can stop complaining, do the English watch our games? Do they take trips up here to watch us? Do they buy our strips? Most of them couldn't name the teams in the top division.
If the whole of Scotland buys a ticket for a game every season, if we all watch every televised game from our country regardless of the teams, if we buy the advertised products when they start paying to advertise our teams, when we bet only on Scottish football, when we actively ignore English games and everything that surrounds them etc. etc. then money will improve up here because companies love to know they own a whole area - they don't like seeing blackout spots on the map. We used to back our own and if you can't do it why would England or a company?! Might not be what some of you want to hear but it's fantasy to think England will or Britain will improve things up here when you prop up their primary interest of England. That's just the reality of it.
England works hard to make the world feel like it should give a fuck about WBA playing Notts Country in a Monday cup clash on tv and we'd rather give them our money and rip each other to shreds up here with infighting. We're our own worst enemies and we do it in complete ignorance.
-
I felt somewhat as a minority at the time wanting Kenny to return but not Boyd but after his season under Ally I have to say I was surprised at just what he did for us last season.
I think he did more than enough to show he's not finished at the level of Scottish football we see today, the question is rather how best to use him.
Do we start with the allrounder of Waghorn in the CF/striker role with say Mckay out left and Forrester on the right? Then sub Waghorn with Miller around 60 minutes in, releasing him against tired legs? He has a habit of turning up in the big games. We have options frankly and I think the safest thing to do is to rotate the squad so that they are all playing in the system and sharing the workload over the season so that no one burns out, gets injured or goes stale on the sidelines.
CB is the one area where we don't have yet have genuine competition and therefore I'm not worried about Miller, I'm worried about Wilson and Kiernan be the best we have come the transfer window shutting ( I don't think that will happen as it would shatter optimism and a credible title challenge in the eyes of the support ).
I think with a little more directness/pace in our attack Miller would be just one of the whole group of attacking players who would benefit from the service and potentially do far more than we would be likely to expect. He's not a 90 minutes man anymore but he's still got aspects about him that we quite frankly cannot afford and he'd be a leading light elsewhere in the division let's not forget.
I don't think Kenny will take not playing laying down and with Waghorn, O'Halloran, Dodoo all vying for potentially one position along with himself and maybe another new signing, he along with everyone else will be doing their best to feature as often as possible and in this sense he'll either produce or slip down the pecking order so I'm not concerned about him 'not doing it' because as well as having that confidence that he can still do a job, I fear not him failing to do so because we have alternatives should that become the reality.
I know that from watching the team thus far Miller seemed to fluff his lines in the league cup and piss away chances he's have been on to like a whippet in the past but I think if you look at the team as a whole, there are numerous players who just aren't at the races yet, Hill is not yet on the train to put it mildly - he honestly looks like he's done at this point, Barton is yet to shine, Kranjcar looks like his career suggests (talented but of a fitness/sharpness that explains why he's made about 20 appearances for the each of the last 6 years before ending up in the America alternative league to the MLS), while being unfair Crooks injury has meant he can't possibly be up to speed, the CB's are playing at their level but clearly aren't up to the job ahead etc. etc. None of this means that they can't or won't play an important part to our betterment this season but it does mean you can say "The team as a whole aren't up to speed with fitness/match sharpness" and that in turn means that despite winning all of our competitive games thus far, we can and most likely will get better.
In the past our team was an expensive collection of highly talented individuals and losing one for a few weeks was a disaster, I think this team is about having a system and interchangeable parts that create a winning and forward moving train that is a sum of its parts. Rossiter and Dodoo are just the like the boy Thompson in respect that they may not have signed as first team players but there's a potential there for them to feature over the course of the season, develop, and contribute in a fashion that leads to our success, a future team foundation/plan and a nice sell on fee into the bargain. Competition and depth are here this season that means someone downing tools or going off the boil aren't as catastrophic as perhaps it would have been last season. It's all very encouraging for what we've spent and I've every optimism that with a much better CB being brought in and a few creases being ironed out that we'll push for the title more than Aberdeen did last year and they were comfortably ahead of Hearts in 3rd place by the end. That's not even including the suggestion of another forward coming in that would strengthen our case for a title bid (my personal view is someone of height that scores headers and who can muscle a yard of space against 6 foot 2" CB's and god knows how many zonal markers, would be ideal).
-
If I ever have weans I'll think I'll tell them that "You hud tae be somebody to see Mols play in a Rangers jersey".
-
35 minutes ago, ForeverAndEver said:
Then something needs to change, but except Wallace our defence is rotten - Hodson isn't a starter imo so not including him - and has been for the majority of Warburton's 'era'.
Hodson is the back up for Wallace and Tav because if they get injured we have no one. Hodson will likely feature instead of Tav on occasion though helping push him (in theory) into playing better week in week out.
Hill (we hope and assume) is removing one of the Chronic Combo out, the other is yet to be signed and either that'll be in a few days as a result of players contracts running out or we're looking for someone being pushed down the pecking order at another club when someone is brought it there. We obviously tried to sign Mariappa which in anyone's book is an improvement on Wilson/Kiernan. Now will we get our man? is obviously the question, we seemingly have peanuts to spend so we're alongside every other tom dick and harry trying to get a good player for fuck all. On evidence though our management have well in that regards so far so let's see.
-
5 minutes ago, sammy cox said:
The vast majority wanted a cdm as the vast opinion was Halliday was not good enough at covering that role.The manager has now strengthened the midfield with the cdm that was asked for ( Barton/Rossiter ) and now we are back at the defence not being good enough.I'm not saying that the defence is free from fault but if they sign two new ch and still lose goals what next.
To be fair I'm under the impression that Barton/Rossiter are both central midfielders that get stuck in as opposed to outright defensive mids, i'm thinking they get stuck in in the challenge offer you a bit more in central midfield like barry/thomson would as opposed to Holt/Zelalem but neither would be seen as Hemdani.
Worth bearing in mind the one true DM we've signed is Crooks and he's yet to appear, he gives us much needed height though for a start. Halliday is maybe not his understudy? With Barton and whoever being the more CM than CDM?
The defense wouldn't look as bad if the midfield tracked back at pace on the counter but we play to be left open and understrength in defense and you basically have Wallace and Tav caught out of position frequently as they attack and teams on the break play a quick punt into space for their attackers to run on to. We either tell the midfield to play more traditional i.e. help in defense tracking back OR (more likely) we upgrade the two that's been given a huge ask of defending alone (most part) being the CB's - I said elsewhere if we had Amo and Bougherra at the back they could do the job that's being asked of Wilson/Kiernan but we obviously don't and Wilson/Kiernan aren't good CB's anyway which makes it worse.
-
3 minutes ago, KeyserSoze said:
Some great points preacher. I think MW is struggling with MOH. He is a player that likes it over his shoulder but the gaffer insists on the "keep ball philosophy" and perhaps has stymied that move on the park.
I'm baffled by our defence in that the system we play should rely heavily on a pacey strong center back - the gaffer has (so far) not strengthened that position, he has went down the "protective" route with a stronger midfield - we can all see it, why not the gaffer?
Halliday was our best player today - I don't know what that says about our display.
O'H was dismissed by the support when he didn't quite click and made stop-start appearances last season, he is a fucking whippet though and if a few of his efforts had went in instead of rattling the post or whatever last season he'd be a lot more highly regarded, he's shown in pre-season that he shouldn't be written off and that the manager spent some money on him for a reason. I think he's a better Novo once you get him firing.
The manager tried to strengthen the defense with Mariappa, it never panned out and Hill was brought in (probably as a separate entity). I have my doubts about Hill because he went for the ball against an East Stirling player (non league) and tackled both of the boys legs successfully while completely missing the ball such was his timing (seems off even if he's just lacking a little game time or whatever. I have to assume though by the fact that he's been signed that Hill will come good. Who we get as an alternative to Mariappa (with that deal seemingly deader than his countryman Marley) is a mystery, however, many players contracts are up tonight and alternatively, with the money transfers happening someone is dropping down the pecking order. These are where I see our new CB coming from because if we had money I think we'd have done it already, too risky to go for a youth team prospect surely i.e. CB equivalent of Dodoo?! That's not to say we wouldn't part with a small fee for the right player but if we had the readies for picking up someone that isn't a fringe or sub-500k I think we'd have done it by now.
Halliday probably has more reason than most to bust a gut in a game that could injure him needlessly - he's unlikely to play with Crooks, Barton, Kranjcar, Holt, Rossiter. I like having someone like him there in the background, we'll have to call on him at some point most likely and you can expect that he'll produce a shift having not played in 10 games, furthermore he seems to turn up his level spinal tap style to 11 - he over the course isn't good enough but drop him into the side against Celtic after an absence and he'll probably not be the problem. I like him, maybe not at the level we need to be but he's a top notch squad man.
-
6 hours ago, KeyserSoze said:
For me:
I don't care if we don't come up against a player like Andre Gray again, our defence is not good enough. Kiernan has again been poor he should not be a regular
MOH looks dangerous but perhaps as a sub.
Kranjcar looked way short of being fit (still?)
Rossiter will be a star
and well, Andy Fucking Halliday likes his newish position.
Didn't see the game today but on your points;
- The system/style/whatever leaves our CB's exposed and neither Wilson nor Kiernan are up to it unless they are partnered with a CB that can do his job and chunks of theirs. They've been found out too often at a lower level to expect them to be a feature of a title winning side.
- MOH is pace, he could be wide right or straight through the middle on occasion - maybe he's Millers replacement legs wise or maybe he's put on the right wing to mug someone at left back for pace - he's part of the squad that'll feature but I wouldn't say he's deffo the bench boy nor will he play every week, rotation as and when required probably.
- Kranjcar has played about 20 games a season for the last 6, he's likely not going to look 100% ever unless we know something everyone else and the player himself doesn't. If we get more than 25 games out of him this season we're doing well. I think basically you try and use him against the right teams and you bring him on against tired legs (60 minute sub) to get the most out of him but on form he's unlikely to look 100% and play 3/4 of a season.
- Rossiter is part of the future, the longer term, or someone to develop a little and pick up the pay day for, like Dodoo and Thompson I'd imagine.
- Halliday isn't the best but he gives you the effort, the kind of guy you can expect to do a shift after an absence imo, even if he's not quite at the level we need to be he's your Gavin Rae (I'm trying to think of someone who wouldn't normally get a game but gives you what he has as an occasionally used squad player and who wasn't completely gash/despised for the sake of argument presented).
-
1 hour ago, Grundy said:
Ibrox Preacher - Agree with the majority of your post " Without better defenders, you need to change the style i.e. Wallace and Tav stay back, the midfield tracks back fast when we've lost possession, you play with Crooks as a defensive mid to help the CB's out (that may well be the plan as we've yet to see him)." but are Barton and , to an extent, Rossiter, not both meant to be defensive midfielders ?
Our set up from the beginning of Warburtons reign has been to attack a team to death with possession and if we lose goals it shouldn't matter as we'll score more. Not always worked in practice but none the less we leave ourselves open defensively when we go forward with this mindset of score 2 for their 1, I'm not sure that's changed yet despite personnel being signed that you'd imagine would suggest we'll change the system to one that's more defensively minded when the situation calls for it (at least).
Crooks is a DM, Barton and Rossiter should be comparatively a defensive midfielder on what we had last year but I don't think either is a DM outright - they're more central midfielders that get stuck in -, hell Krancjar is comparatively a defensive mid on what we had last year (he'll get stuck in even if it's more likely to be at the opposition end). If we're to be better in defence mode we'll either have to alter our formation/tactics/plan etc. to suit and/or we'll need to sign at least 1 better CB than what we have and he'll have to be of a certain level if he too is not going to come up short in the way we play. We can mask the problem with the CB's in some senses by changing the style of play so that we fall back and defend as a team but that would involve either telling the wingbacks to stay back or telling the central midfielders they are part of our back line (in effect), when we lose the ball teams are going to launch it to their paciest player up front and try and run straight through for a goal, alternatively they'll throw cross balls in at a central defensive partnership where neither is seen as someone who heads it clear/wins headers.
Basically, our style of play at present needs CB's well above the combo of Wilson and Kiernan if a title challenge is sincerely being attempted (we assume Hill is one of them and is yet to get up to speed, I've not been impressed by him so far, his tackle against a non-league player was woefully timed to the extent I was instantly concerned, that could just be down to where he is in his preseason though so let's assume for argument that he's David Weir but lacking a little fitness/sharpness currently). Wilson and Kiernan could individually look much better next to a capable CB i.e. Wilson looked a player with Weir doing everything he couldn't, but they just aren't near good enough as a double-act for what we're trying to play, we'd have to alter our plan to cover up "their" failings but we've yet to see if Warburton will alter 'Plan A' in that kind of fashion, so even with a few more defensively minded midfielders we're still open at the back going forward because that punt into space and the runners on the break aren't in their remit. When you watch us Wallace going forward adds to us in a big way but when we lose the ball the ball is played often into the big void where he's meant to be, the opposition player runs down that side of the pitch and plays a ball to one of the other players running towards goal - it leaves Wilson and Kiernan very exposed, this is made worse by the fact that our central midfielders don't track back fast and get into defensive mode, where in the past we'd have Barry/Hemdani etc on the edge of the area doing their bit we don't see that with our midfielders under Warburton - did you ever see Zelalem/Holt doing that last year? Halliday tries and he gets gold stars for effort from me for that but generally speaking we didn't have that type of midfielder and we certainly didn't play like that was the instruction given. The CB's are basically on their own on the break and that wouldn't be a problem if Amo and Bougherra were our CB's. They are not though and it's arguable if Wilson and Kiernan are actually CB's such is their presence for things like a header to be won in the box (they aren't all bad and I stress our style of play makes them look donkeys as much as anything but if there's one thing CB's in Scotland are known for along with everywhere else, it's the ability to win headers and Wilson and Kiernan imo are noticeably not known for it between them).
Midfield has more beef to it and yes it could be instructed by the manager to play a bigger defensive part but frankly I think the best answer all round is to bring in that CB that's everything Wilson and Kiernan are not, assuming of course that Hill is up to that task and that a new CB keeps both Wilson and Kiernan out the team. Changing our style seems unlikely so signing someone that can do the job in the current system is the best answer. The extra grit in midfield should mean we don't have to worry about the defence as much this season but only if we get that CB because Wilson and Kiernan have been shown up against poorer sides than St Johnstone & Hibs.
It should also be noted that a problem last year was creating that chance for all our possession, we have far better players in this regard and with instruction/practice at attacking with more impetus, the defence will be less of a problem as we actually will score that two or three for everyone conceded. I would like to repeat though that I'd like a target man to be signed someone who gives us an aerial threat, we have cross balls in our team now and it seems a missed opportunity to me not to have someone who can head it home or muscle a yard up front.
We're not far away, a CB and a target man known for scoring with the head would make a world of difference, attacking with a bit more desire and pace would do also. We have a couple of issues that can be ironed out with a signing or two, some instruction, a little variation of formation/tactics. We're not on our arse, just a couple of "questions" need answered if a title challenge is on.
-
Mr Warburton said himself that with respect to the teams we played in the league cup, today against Burnley we'd get a better idea of where we are.
I haven't seen the game today but I get the impression that it's brought a few down with a bump as to where we are. At this point I think it's worth reminding people that what we've signed is players from the lower leagues of England, youngsters that could be anything and with respects to the goalkeeper Gilks and the CB Hill - their best days are probably behind them; is it fair to expect that we'd be better than Burnley bearing in mind where the players we've signed have come from? Is it fair considering what we've spent?!
I've watched a few of our opponents so far and honestly, I'd say the Hibs team we played last season towards the end is of a far better standard than what most of them look like just now - maybe they'll improve but then that could be said for us as well as several players are clearly not fit and/or at the races. It's too early to say what a team will be like when we're into the season. Aberdeen have a few decent players but against NK Maribor and the team they played in the previous round they were punting the ball to nowhere like they were panic defending yet under no pressure to do so, a touch/a look/a pass/a little composure etc. and they'd play much, much better - They should have beaten NK Maribor comfortably imo but played in a fashion where they were incredibly wasteful, they had the touch and pass of table-football. At the opposite end of the spectrum, County and Kilmarnock look like relegation candidates. The two teams that has impressed me most thus far are Motherwell and Caley who look like if they are a bit more ready than most at this stage and look like they'll be top 6 and dare I say fighting it out with Aberdeen for third; yes we beat Motherwell but within the first half we could/should have been 4 down such were the opportunities they created yet failed somehow to take. Hearts look as though they have severe problems in midfield as they have a ton of strikers but create little and they appear to leave the defense wide open ( actually a complaint that's not too far from home in a sense ). Burnley is over and above what we're going to be playing weekly and while the level we're at is a shadow of what we once were it's above what the other teams have got both in personnel and in playing style, just like Burnley should have personnel over and above what we have - they are trying to compete in the top flight of England where a player could be on more per week than our first 11 is. A bitter pill to swallow personally but I concede that it's based on reality.
Now we have ultimately 2 problems;
- We are too slow and indirect in attack allowing the opposition to get back and defend for their lives with 10 men on the 18-yard line, this happened after we dished out a few hammerings last season and it'll be the same tactics to repel us again but crucially it'll be carried out by players above the level of Dumbarton and Livingston. We have to up it a couple of gears in impetus or we'll struggle to score the winning goals like we did so often in the Championship that we can forget a title challenge this season if we don't learn from it and correct it. Possession 30 yards from goal passing it sideways is not 2 goals in itself and against better teams it will come unstuck more often than it did last year.
- We play a system/style that purposefully leaves the defense open and without much backup for when the opposition attempt to counter us, basically we're asking our defenders to do more than they would at other clubs i.e. Aberdeen will lose the ball and quickly revert to a back 10 to make it difficult for us to score (for all the possession we'll likely have), their defense will have the help of the whole team if we give them the chance. Our defense conversely is expected to do the job without much backup at all i.e. the midfield under this style stay up the field or track back slowly, the theme over Warburton's reign is that when a team is on the counter it's their forwards and maybe midfielders V Wilson and Kiernan. Wallace and Tav are often up the pitch in attack and subsequently often out of position in defense of the break. Neither Wilson nor Kiernan is a commanding CB that can do everything a CB should do well, even players like Amo were prone to the occasional howler but you knew that if a header was going Amo would win that header and be able to play it to the forwards heading it clear from defense such was the power he had on it, you also that he had the ability to run down a capable striker on his own and snuff him out with a crucially timed intercepting challenge; Wilson and Kiernan are CB's that don't win headers, are lax at marking, get left falling over themselves with regularity against even mediocre teams forwards, neither is a commander etc. etc. If we're asking them to do more than a CB than one would at Aberdeen/Caley etc. etc. then it's unfair and actually obvious that they are incapable of doing it. Maybe with a fully primed Hill next to one of them you can cover up their shortcomings like Weir did with Wilson but that's asking Hill to be one hell of a player himself and it's a putting a level of dependency on him I'm not comfortable with (especially after seeing his challenge on the East Stirling player, got mugged and ended up chopping the man he was so off the pace against a player outside of the 4 divisions we actually are somewhat aware of, who can name every team in the Lowland Division?!).
Ultimately 2 solutions;
- Tell the team you want more impetus going forward, train them so that it's 4 passes and a chance created (no more than that), by all means, pass the ball but do so with enough directness that it cuts a team open and creates a chance instead of allowing the whole team to defend creating a standoff. We have the players and ability to fix this one with ease, even against a packed defense if we were a bit sharper in passing and moving we could one-two round teams in the blink of an eye. No point in buying a 5 foot 9" striker when your service is a cross ball when he's marked by two heid-the-baw types at 6 foot 3" and the whole team is zonal marking outwith that because you've went forward in a tippy-tappy fashion that's ground to a halt 30 yards from goal; these teams aren't going to open up and take a tanking weekly off us, if anything they'll be unusual with 'backs to the wall' against us and defending in numbers for their lives because they are playing "the H***"; following week they'll open up against Caley and lose 3 goals on the break after keeping us out for 90 minutes.
- We need a CB that is above the level or Wilson and Kiernan and that's assuming Hill is unfit and will get up to the pace and standard required. It's as simple as that because the Chronic Combo will piss away a title challenge before it's even begun. People think we did amazing last year but in the end, we finished the Division with fewer points than Hearts did the year before and no one was expecting them to challenge the tims for the title. In a normal title winning year you don't drop the points we did and the teams we did drop points against aren't a patch on what we're facing this year (over the course). Without better defenders, you need to change the style i.e. Wallace and Tav stay back, the midfield tracks back fast when we've lost possession, you play with Crooks as a defensive mid to help the CB's out (that may well be the plan as we've yet to see him).
****Your official Dundee v Rangers thread****
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
Foderingham
Tavernier, Kiernan, Hill, Wallace
Halliday, Barton
Rossiter,
Forrester, O'Halloran, McKay.
Subs; Probably Kranjcar on for Halliday swapping positions with Rossiter (sublime talent who hasn't looked a starting player for years on against tired legs/minds), If O'Halloran isn't working Dodoo/Miller on in his position but maybe you change his position instead of subbing him e.g. O'Halloran switches to the right and Forrester comes off for Miller. The 3rd sub I'll leave open.
The idea from me is that Kranjcar isn't at the races (yet) and therefore isn't worthy of a starting jersey, who to put in his place is the question but I've opted for Rossiter, unconventional perhaps but look the boy has a pass and clearly has a dig so with Halliday playing well in preseason and being more ready than most why not allow Rossiter to push up and offer us a fully fit/sharp threat where Kranjcar is in many minds. Dodoo did ok last night but that was Peterhead and he took too long multiple times on the ball - O'Halloran running on to quick through balls could obliterate Dundee and if it fails you have unsharp Miller or inexperienced Dodoo to bring on against tired legs/minds. Forrester should be starting on form but his finishing with his right foot was unusually poor last night and I think he's probably best on the right-hand side cutting in on to his left foot (is there anyone better at that in our team?), McKay should be on the left anyway unless you're benching him?!
Overall approach - attack with more impetus going forward, 4 passes from gaining the ball to playing the ball through the backline for O'Halloran to run on to (think Rod Wallace).