GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 If we weren't trying to play for a 1-0 why did we sit back in the first half and try to hit on the counter? Please explain GLC. No we weren't...how can you sit back against a team that were basically camped in there own half..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westenclosuregal 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Stars Bearette 1 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 the second half was one way traffic towards the Hibs goal but we should have started that way and used Novo or Lafferty from the beginning with Boyd Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 The thing is walter smith is defensive minded as a coach, no one is denying it but I need to presume you haven’t bothered watching the last eight games if you are claiming we have a defensive line up…either that or you are incredibly poor at reading a game of football….. You really need to go to specsavers if you dont think we play negative football. so you keep saying but you have doen nothign to convince me on this thread you know what you are talking about...... What about 2 stikers with not a bit of pace between them, but you cant convince people who only see what the want to see. I must speak to different fans from you, i have yet to speak to one who does not think Walters sets out negative teams. Two strikjers that had been scoring a goal a game of late....that is defensive ? As i said Walter is a defensively minded coach (you must have missed that bit) but you can't call his tactics that have won the last eight games, including one at hibs, as defensive. It's a lazy and stupid criticisim....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 What I was meaning is that the negative tactics that we ended up employing were perhaps not from Walter Smith. I get what you meant...... We were just terrible in the first half, not one player performed to an acceptable level. This team have a horrible habit of doing the hard work (like the celtic game) and thinkign the work is done and the next win will just happen...it's happened far too many times over the last four years sadly...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnstoneBear 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? Knowing full well that ra sellik were top again and with us having a game in hand, we should have started with a team capable of going straight for Hibs Jugular. We should not have been in a position where substitutions are being pondered by fans and management alike after 5 minutes! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westenclosuregal 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I think he would have used Miller instead of Velicka had he been fit which would have produced a different result last night Well the next best striker for pace is Novo, should have started before Boyd or Velicka. These games are made for the wee man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
minstral 5,375 Posted May 14, 2009 Author Share Posted May 14, 2009 The thing is walter smith is defensive minded as a coach, no one is denying it but I need to presume you haven’t bothered watching the last eight games if you are claiming we have a defensive line up…either that or you are incredibly poor at reading a game of football….. You really need to go to specsavers if you dont think we play negative football. so you keep saying but you have doen nothign to convince me on this thread you know what you are talking about...... What about 2 stikers with not a bit of pace between them, but you cant convince people who only see what the want to see. I must speak to different fans from you, i have yet to speak to one who does not think Walters sets out negative teams. Two strikjers that had been scoring a goal a game of late....that is defensive ? As i said Walter is a defensively minded coach (you must have missed that bit) but you can't call his tactics that have won the last eight games, including one at hibs, as defensive. It's a lazy and stupid criticisim....... I really dont care what you think, i watch with my own eyes, and i know an attacking team when i see one. And if you think we are an attacking team then you are deluded, and tell me what was the first half all about, oh wait a minute i must have missed it, free flowing attacking football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westenclosuregal 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? I wouldn't have started that team in all fairness. Why no word with them? No "get ur fucking arse in gear!"? Same dross for 45 mins, didnt even look like they wanted to be there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? Knowing full well that ra sellik were top again and with us having a game in hand, we should have started with a team capable of going straight for Hibs Jugular. We should not have been in a position where substitutions are being pondered by fans and management alike after 5 minutes! so the team that won the last eight games wasn't good enough for this game (even though the same team had beaten hibs a few weeks ago) ....the joys of being a monday morning quarterback....you are never wrong...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnstoneBear 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? Knowing full well that ra sellik were top again and with us having a game in hand, we should have started with a team capable of going straight for Hibs Jugular. We should not have been in a position where substitutions are being pondered by fans and management alike after 5 minutes! so the team that won the last eight games wasn't good enough for this game (even though the same team had beaten hibs a few weeks ago) ....the joys of being a monday morning quarterback....you are never wrong...... Quarterback?...are you sure you're watching the right sport? And you do know this is Thursday, don't you? It's clear for all and any to see that we rely heavily on the counter attack, my point is that we have far more attack minded players sitting on the bench who could go out and do some serious damage to other SPL teams, not just scrape by with a goal here and a goal there. Maybe I expect too much, either that or you accept the negative pish that is placed before you because we're still in for a shout of the Championship. FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westenclosuregal 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Quarterback?...are you sure you're watching the right sport? And you do know this is Thursday, don't you? It's clear for all and any to see that we rely heavily on the counter attack, my point is that we have far more attack minded players sitting on the bench who could go out and do some serious damage to other SPL teams, not just scrape by with a goal here and a goal there. Maybe I expect too much, either that or you accept the negative pish that is placed before you because we're still in for a shout of the Championship. FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? cos walter knows best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnstoneBear 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Quarterback?...are you sure you're watching the right sport? And you do know this is Thursday, don't you? It's clear for all and any to see that we rely heavily on the counter attack, my point is that we have far more attack minded players sitting on the bench who could go out and do some serious damage to other SPL teams, not just scrape by with a goal here and a goal there. Maybe I expect too much, either that or you accept the negative pish that is placed before you because we're still in for a shout of the Championship. FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? cos walter knows best That's why we're sitting on second spot with 2 games to go, yes? I won't go into a huge tirade against Walter, but last night, he got it drastically wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Manticore* 1,893 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? Well Novo is inconsistent and it seems to me he has done best for us as sub. But I can't understand why Lafferty doesn't start? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
westenclosuregal 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Quarterback?...are you sure you're watching the right sport? And you do know this is Thursday, don't you? It's clear for all and any to see that we rely heavily on the counter attack, my point is that we have far more attack minded players sitting on the bench who could go out and do some serious damage to other SPL teams, not just scrape by with a goal here and a goal there. Maybe I expect too much, either that or you accept the negative pish that is placed before you because we're still in for a shout of the Championship. FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? cos walter knows best That's why we're sitting on second spot with 2 games to go, yes? I won't go into a huge tirade against Walter, but last night, he got it drastically wrong. i agree with you. i give up with Smith. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? Knowing full well that ra sellik were top again and with us having a game in hand, we should have started with a team capable of going straight for Hibs Jugular. We should not have been in a position where substitutions are being pondered by fans and management alike after 5 minutes! so the team that won the last eight games wasn't good enough for this game (even though the same team had beaten hibs a few weeks ago) ....the joys of being a monday morning quarterback....you are never wrong...... Quarterback?...are you sure you're watching the right sport? And you do know this is Thursday, don't you? It's clear for all and any to see that we rely heavily on the counter attack, my point is that we have far more attack minded players sitting on the bench who could go out and do some serious damage to other SPL teams, not just scrape by with a goal here and a goal there. Maybe I expect too much, either that or you accept the negative pish that is placed before you because we're still in for a shout of the Championship. FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? Sorry it was simple cultural reference that 99% of the population would get...sorry for you that you are in that bottom 1%..... It's also clear to all that this same team has been winning consistently and scoring goals for about a month now, something we have been unable to do for much of the season but for some reason this had to be changed last night. As I alluded to earlier, but sadly it sailed over your head, it's easy to be wise after the event but I saw no reason last night to change a winning team considering the games we had won in recent weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingbarry 2 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 what happened between the 9iar rangers walter and the walter of now, thats what i want to know. Where did his managerial skills go? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 what happened between the 9iar rangers walter and the walter of now, thats what i want to know. Where did his managerial skills go? amazing he can lose them bewteen saturday and now....pretty sure he was a genius on saturday......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 9 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 what happened between the 9iar rangers walter and the walter of now, thats what i want to know. Where did his managerial skills go? The 9IAR Rangers Walter and the one we have now is the same guy. I honestly think the two main differences are we don't have the same millions to spend all the time that we did, and Celtic are much, much better than they used to be. Walter also returned to a trainwreck in 2007, in 1991 he took over a juggernaut. If he was a terrible manager he'd not have achieved anything with Scotland. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strayk9 3 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I see both sides of the argument here, and I think it's about degrees of interpretation: Yes the team has been winning with these players & formation, so of course it can be seen as attacking, by the same token, perhaps they could have won by greater margins if set out in a more attacking manner. The question for me is where does it (Selection & formation) come on the scale from 1)-sitting in hoping not to get beaten-----------------to-----------------10)- a blistering powerhouse of attacking that would sweep the dross like that hibs team out of their path inside the first 15 minutes. As with all football I'm stuck in the land of coulda, woulda, shoulda. But the games is past and they need to take the fright onboard, learn from it, and damned well burst a gut to do the thing that they're paid to do, the thing that their pride and passion should drive and compel them to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 what happened between the 9iar rangers walter and the walter of now, thats what i want to know. Where did his managerial skills go? The 9IAR Rangers Walter and the one we have now is the same guy. I honestly think the two main differences are we don't have the same millions to spend all the time that we did, and Celtic are much, much better than they used to be. Walter also returned to a trainwreck in 2007, in 1991 he took over a juggernaut. If he was a terrible manager he'd not have achieved anything with Scotland. Or worked with ferguson at Man utd..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 9 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 what happened between the 9iar rangers walter and the walter of now, thats what i want to know. Where did his managerial skills go? amazing he can lose them bewteen saturday and now....pretty sure he was a genius on saturday......... The past two games have actually been fascinating in showing up the fickle nature of fans. The hypocritical and 2 faced natures of the posting in all that time have been engaging. Hell, even I complimented Mendes, how fickle can ye get Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnstoneBear 0 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Great arguement and reasoning you have used there...that's me convinced...... Any manager worth their salt would not play their 2 slowest forwards against Jones. Walter should have put Novo and Lafferty on from the start. If he thought the high ball would work against Jones then he's just as much of a clown than ever. What does that even mean ? We scored three goals against them with the same tacics two weeks ago...was jones playing ? Who were the forwards ? Fair enough but after 5 mins everyone apart from the dugout could see this wasn't working. Why persist with them getting nowhere? You think we should have made our subsitutions after 5 mins ? Knowing full well that ra sellik were top again and with us having a game in hand, we should have started with a team capable of going straight for Hibs Jugular. We should not have been in a position where substitutions are being pondered by fans and management alike after 5 minutes! so the team that won the last eight games wasn't good enough for this game (even though the same team had beaten hibs a few weeks ago) ....the joys of being a monday morning quarterback....you are never wrong...... Quarterback?...are you sure you're watching the right sport? And you do know this is Thursday, don't you? It's clear for all and any to see that we rely heavily on the counter attack, my point is that we have far more attack minded players sitting on the bench who could go out and do some serious damage to other SPL teams, not just scrape by with a goal here and a goal there. Maybe I expect too much, either that or you accept the negative pish that is placed before you because we're still in for a shout of the Championship. FACT: Novo and Lafferty are attack minded players. They started on the bench, funnily enough, Novo could have had himself a hat trick when he came in. Why oh WHY would you want to leave players like that on the bench? Sorry it was simple cultural reference that 99% of the population would get...sorry for you that you are in that bottom 1%..... It's also clear to all that this same team has been winning consistently and scoring goals for about a month now, something we have been unable to do for much of the season but for some reason this had to be changed last night. As I alluded to earlier, but sadly it sailed over your head, it's easy to be wise after the event but I saw no reason last night to change a winning team considering the games we had won in recent weeks. Firstly, who's to say that I'm not in the top 1%? On a more serious note, We may have been winning, but can you honestly say that you're happy with the way we've been going about it? We were lucky to beat Celtic (no doubt in my mind about that), last night was crunch time...to show that whilst top, we can STAY top! but we failed, miserably. As I've already said, had Walter put out a team to go for the jugular and kill off teams early, then we wouldn't be in this position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I would if you don't understand a simple cultural reference like "monday morning quarterback"....... Stopped reading at "we were lucky to beat celtic "...i take it back you aren't in the bottom 1% it's the bottom 0.000000000000001%....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts