McCulloch, another weakpoint today of the team as usual recently

[Boab 73]

I was wondering in the toilet, when I got back from Ibrox, how he got MOTM.

My only solution to this strange decision was that cause that he scored 2 goals. Or did he? Well, the 2nd was the Goalie being Santa to Rangers so it would be generous to give it to anybody never mind McCulloch in that situation.

Also, that nobody else stood out! So whoever was choosing it gave it to the goalscorer.

Lee did do well in the first half of the 1st half, he worked very hard and his goal was very well taken.

But, during the game, it seemed to me that at times his work-rate was detrimental to the cause/team in that he wasn't out on the left and Barry was looking for him and he wasn't there.

Not only that, but he seemed to either 'just' be winning headers at times as the game wore on or doing very little in terms of attacking or being creative.

He is limited in what he can do, after all.

Burke coming on may be a potential replacement, nevertheless, McCulloch was poor again.

Agree or disagree?

[dummiesoot 16,049]

McCulloch never gives our full back any support, all he offers is a good leap and the very occasional shot at goal.

[KWIII 0]

I was wondering in the toilet, when I got back from Ibrox, how he got MOTM.

My only solution to this strange decision was that cause that he scored 2 goals. Or did he? Well, the 2nd was the Goalie being Santa to Rangers so it would be generous to give it to anybody never mind McCulloch in that situation.

Also, that nobody else stood out! So whoever was choosing it gave it to the goalscorer.

Lee did do well in the first half of the 1st half, he worked very hard and his goal was very well taken.

But, during the game, it seemed to me that at times his work-rate was detrimental to the cause/team in that he wasn't out on the left and Barry was looking for him and he wasn't there.

Not only that, but he seemed to either 'just' be winning headers at times as the game wore on or doing very little in terms of attacking or being creative.

He is limited in what he can do, after all.

Burke coming on may be a potential replacement, nevertheless, McCulloch was poor again.

Agree or disagree?

He probably got credit for the 2nd goal thats why but he was his usual average self and that includes the 1st goal

[Scott-RFC 308]

1) We dont have to know you were in the toilet

2) I disagree, he either scored our only 2 goals, or scored 1 and set up 1, you can choose. The amount of effort he had to put in along the frontline was massive as he was repeatedly expected to win headers. I also thought his general passing and technique was good today. I agree with MOTM award

[Del 667]

Agree, Totally agree!

He took the goal well after some decent play from Boyd making a nuisance of himself but after that he done nothing!!

The ball was lumped upto him countless times and he might have got his head to most of them but his heading was shit! He got to the ball and the went everywhere most of them back to a Hearts player!

If we had taken McCulloch off instead of Boyd we would have been forced to play the ball long less as he wasnt on the park and i think that is what we should have done.

Boyd and Naismith linked up well today on the odd occasion the ball wasnt played long and IMO they should be our 2strikers in a 4-4-2 with JCD coming on when fit.

[nvager 498]

I agree Boab, LM is far too static. He just heads a ball and hopes. Did well for the first goal, but I feel he really is a detriment to our overall style of play. We could be much more fluid and better off with him as a sub.