Boydy 0 goals against Celtic 20 against the rest

[Blue Stars Bearette 1]

I am happy with that where would we be without the 20 goals against the rest of the SPL?

One day he will score against Celtic. The whole team disappointed in the last OF game not just Boyd.

[Frankie 505]

He has scored against Celtic before though...? Just not this season yet.

[Bluenose_Pete 4]

I am happy with that where would we be without the 20 goals against the rest of the SPL?

One day he will score against Celtic. The whole team disappointed in the last OF game not just Boyd.

Hope you know youre about to be told that Boyd is a fat lazy bastard and should be sold as he is useless by a few members of the board.

I agree with you though.

[brissybear 50]

I am happy with that where would we be without the 20 goals against the rest of the SPL?

One day he will score against Celtic. The whole team disappointed in the last OF game not just Boyd.

He has scored once in a meaningless match.

For 500K Boydie has been a revelation BUT he must improve his game gainst better defences.

He needs a couple of chances before he scores..normally.

Better than average defences have him in thier back pocket.

I would still have him as a sub against the better teams in the SPL.

Ive said it before he can end up scoring 35 goals for us and we would still be runners up because he never hurt the teams that matter.

Anyone who has a go at Boydie is forgetting how much we paid for him and should take a reality check.

Plenty of average strikers can score a barrowload in the SPL, it is thta bad. Luckily for us we have the deadliest against the dross.

[bluepeter 5,627]

This couldn't just have gone in / be merged with the countless other Boyd threads?

[Blue Stars Bearette 1]

This couldn't just have gone in / be merged with the countless other Boyd threads?

no Boyd gets the most goals and the most threads....the two go together

[bluepeter 5,627]

This couldn't just have gone in / be merged with the countless other Boyd threads?

no Boyd gets the most goals and the most threads....the two go together

[FlippinEck 3,708]

tbh, I dont think he fluffed that chance against celtic this season just because it was celtic and nobody else, everything he had worked for had come down to one shot and it just never fell for him, and it wasnt as if he had an atrocious game against celtic, he will score and the fact he continues to do so against everyone else is vital to us winning the league this season

[dazzapat 83]

I am happy with that where would we be without the 20 goals against the rest of the SPL?

One day he will score against Celtic. The whole team disappointed in the last OF game not just Boyd.

He has scored once in a meaningless match.

For 500K Boydie has been a revelation BUT he must improve his game gainst better defences.

He needs a couple of chances before he scores..normally.

Better than average defences have him in thier back pocket.

I would still have him as a sub against the better teams in the SPL.

Ive said it before he can end up scoring 35 goals for us and we would still be runners up because he never hurt the teams that matter.

Anyone who has a go at Boydie is forgetting how much we paid for him and should take a reality check.

Plenty of average strikers can score a barrowload in the SPL, it is thta bad. Luckily for us we have the deadliest against the dross.

I'm not a fan of Boyd a lot of the time but he does his talking on the pitch the majority of the time.

No match against Celtic is meaningless, regardless of who has the league imo, we should be trying to win them at all costs and I know the majority of Bears will agree.

Stating Boyds goal against them was in a meaningless game just suits your argument.

Boyd is prolific against the majority of teams in the SPL, look at his record against the 3rd best team in the SPL at the moment, they have a relatvley sturdy defence but he always finds a way to score against them.

We will end up runners up because our team selection and average squad/pre-madonnas have no consistency, not because we have a striker who cant score against them.

[WVB 2,560]

He has scored once in a meaningless match.

Meaningless?

[Blue Stars Bearette 1]

I am happy with that where would we be without the 20 goals against the rest of the SPL?

One day he will score against Celtic. The whole team disappointed in the last OF game not just Boyd.

He has scored once in a meaningless match.

For 500K Boydie has been a revelation BUT he must improve his game gainst better defences.

He needs a couple of chances before he scores..normally.

Better than average defences have him in thier back pocket.

I would still have him as a sub against the better teams in the SPL.

Ive said it before he can end up scoring 35 goals for us and we would still be runners up because he never hurt the teams that matter.

Anyone who has a go at Boydie is forgetting how much we paid for him and should take a reality check.

Plenty of average strikers can score a barrowload in the SPL, it is thta bad. Luckily for us we have the deadliest against the dross.

I'm not a fan of Boyd a lot of the time but he does his talking on the pitch the majority of the time.

No match against Celtic is meaningless, regardless of who has the league imo, we should be trying to win them at all costs and I know the majority of Bears will agree.

Stating Boyds goal against them was in a meaningless game just suits your argument.

Boyd is prolific against the majority of teams in the SPL, look at his record against the 3rd best team in the SPL at the moment, they have a relatvley sturdy defence but he always finds a way to score against them.

We will end up runners up because our team selection and average squad/pre-madonnas have no consistency, not because we have a striker who cant score against them.

lets not settle for being runners up just yet Brissy ....at the moment its one game at a time. Celtic don't look brilliant either so lets hope we manage to keep winning and they drop some more points. Its hard to feel confident as you just don't know how we will play each week but this weekends results gave us a bit more hope

[Chambo 197]

He does need to score more often in important games but to be fair to him he hasn't had a run in the team against Celtic and he didn't have a chance in the last game.

Other than Boyd we have no one that scores consisently against the rest of the league.

Although i'm not his biggest fan i think we need to let him keep doing what he's doing and let the next Old Firm game take care of itself!

[ScotBear 144]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

[Chambo 197]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

Am i missing the math here??

[ScotBear 144]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

Am i missing the math here??

The 80% includes the 12 goals (60%) against Hamilton/ICT.

[Chambo 197]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

Am i missing the math here??

The 80% includes the 12 goals (60%) against Hamilton/ICT.

Right!

So if Boyd is still getting stick for scoring against everyone bar the one game against Celtic, who should we have in there scoring every week instead of him??

[outlaw69uk 123]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

I dont understand that. Why does the SAME team, that has been successful suddenly not function against Celtic? And, if that IS the case, why is that down to Boyd?

I think there must be more too it than that

[simplythebest 11,453]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

So you're saying would we have won if boyd hadn't been playing? I thought the team as a whole were just far too poor.

[ScotBear 144]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

I dont understand that. Why does the SAME team, that has been successful suddenly not function against Celtic? And, if that IS the case, why is that down to Boyd?

I think there must be more too it than that

It was the same midfield that started the game at Ibrox as the one at Parkhead, besides Ferguson in for Thomson (which isn't a change that really disrupts the service to the strikers). We still had a lack of genuine width with Adam and Davis wide.

Instead we had Cousin up front, who was much more effective on the deck and in the air. He held the ball up much more effectively, he pushed the Celtic backline back, and he's capable of taking the ball for a run. His hold up play allowed the midfield to push higher up the park, whereas at Ibrox the midfield were forced to try 40 yard passes over the top again and again. We also had two strikers that are much easier to find. Boyd is easy to mark against stronger defences, getting service goes both ways. It's not just about the midfield not finding you, it's about you making the runs to be found.

I've also pointed out in the past that for me, since Walter has returned, if I was to rhyme off our most impressive performances, games where you came away thinking, yeah, we really hit close to peak form today........I'd throw out 3-0 Old Firm win at Ibrox, 4-2 at Parkhead, 3-0 in Lyon, 2-0 Bremen, 2-0 in Lisbon, 4-0 at Tynecastle, 2-1 Easter Road last season and 3-0 this season........and all those games were played without Boyd. There has barely been a game, if any, where the team functions to that level with Boyd in it. Without him, we have shown the ability to get impressive results in tough games and take our performances to a higher level.

[Blue Stars Bearette 1]

Celtic don't have a striker who scores so consistently

[outlaw69uk 123]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

I dont understand that. Why does the SAME team, that has been successful suddenly not function against Celtic? And, if that IS the case, why is that down to Boyd?

I think there must be more too it than that

It was the same midfield that started the game at Ibrox as the one at Parkhead, besides Ferguson in for Thomson (which isn't a change that really disrupts the service to the strikers). We still had a lack of genuine width with Adam and Davis wide.

Instead we had Cousin up front, who was much more effective on the deck and in the air. He held the ball up much more effectively, he pushed the Celtic backline back, and he's capable of taking the ball for a run. His hold up play allowed the midfield to push higher up the park, whereas at Ibrox the midfield were forced to try 40 yard passes over the top again and again. We also had two strikers that are much easier to find. Boyd is easy to mark against stronger defences, getting service goes both ways. It's not just about the midfield not finding you, it's about you making the runs to be found.

I've also pointed out in the past that for me, since Walter has returned, if I was to rhyme off our most impressive performances, games where you came away thinking, yeah, we really hit close to peak form today........I'd throw out 3-0 Old Firm win at Ibrox, 4-2 at Parkhead, 3-0 in Lyon, 2-0 Bremen, 2-0 in Lisbon, 4-0 at Tynecastle, 2-1 Easter Road last season and 3-0 this season........and all those games were played without Boyd. There has barely been a game, if any, where the team functions to that level with Boyd in it. Without him, we have shown the ability to get impressive results in tough games and take our performances to a higher level.

Thats all fair enough, but, ignoring those games, the team was fairly settled, including the front 2, both before and after, so, it shouldnt have fallen apart in one game, and, if it did, its not purely down to Boyd. The team created virtually nothing while having most of the ball, which was a difference.

As a side, I think the Thomson bit is wrong, since he has been out, the entire midfield seem to be having to track back and not play as far up the field. He sits, breaks up play, and allows the likes of Mendes to play, which creates more. I think personally he is a bigger miss than a left winger at the moment, seems to have become about the most important player in the side to me

[simplythebest 11,453]

20 goals for Boyd this season.

60% (12) of them against two teams in the bottom 3 (Hamilton/ICT) plus one against lower division opposition.

80% (16) against teams in the bottom 6.

There is a clamour for Boyd to start the Old Firm game. He does. We as a team fail to score for the first time in our last 9 Old Firm matches. If we'd won that game, we'd be top of the table right now. His contribution against the cannon fodder of the SPL isn't worth the way he disrupts the way the team functions in 'big' games.

I dont understand that. Why does the SAME team, that has been successful suddenly not function against Celtic? And, if that IS the case, why is that down to Boyd?

I think there must be more too it than that

It was the same midfield that started the game at Ibrox as the one at Parkhead, besides Ferguson in for Thomson (which isn't a change that really disrupts the service to the strikers). We still had a lack of genuine width with Adam and Davis wide.

Instead we had Cousin up front, who was much more effective on the deck and in the air. He held the ball up much more effectively, he pushed the Celtic backline back, and he's capable of taking the ball for a run. His hold up play allowed the midfield to push higher up the park, whereas at Ibrox the midfield were forced to try 40 yard passes over the top again and again. We also had two strikers that are much easier to find. Boyd is easy to mark against stronger defences, getting service goes both ways. It's not just about the midfield not finding you, it's about you making the runs to be found.

I've also pointed out in the past that for me, since Walter has returned, if I was to rhyme off our most impressive performances, games where you came away thinking, yeah, we really hit close to peak form today........I'd throw out 3-0 Old Firm win at Ibrox, 4-2 at Parkhead, 3-0 in Lyon, 2-0 Bremen, 2-0 in Lisbon, 4-0 at Tynecastle, 2-1 Easter Road last season and 3-0 this season........and all those games were played without Boyd. There has barely been a game, if any, where the team functions to that level with Boyd in it. Without him, we have shown the ability to get impressive results in tough games and take our performances to a higher level.

Ferguson instead of Thomson was a huge difference, we didn't have a midfielder willing to just get stuck in and that made a huge difference to the game.

What you're saying makes some sense but i just cannot agree with it, very good individual peformers at Parkhead that day like Mendes, Davis and Miller even didn't peform at Ibrox in the way that their passing and runs just weren't as effective as before, Boyd seemed to try to be effective outside the box but like most of our players that day was ineffective. Obviously its all about opinions but i say with confidence the way the team as a whole played that day we'd have lost whether it was Boyd or Cousin in the team.

All of those games were impressive displays i agree (bar Lyon away where i felt we just fluked our way to a win) but in a number of big games last season Boyd being out of the team didn't help us, we lost two games at Parkhead and we lost the UEFA Cup final just to pick out 3 examples. I can't claim Boyd would have made any difference but i'd have liked to have had a player like him playing in Manchester that would stand a good chance of getting a goal out of somewhere, we were so ineffective going forward although that was probably due to Smith playing for penalties. <_<

[ScotBear 144]

Just to make a point about Thomson, I agree he was a huge miss in the Old Firm game. I've always been a big fan and I think he's a crucial player for us. Particularly second half, where Celtic seemed to always be first in the 50/50's and loose balls in midfield........that wouldn't have been the case if Thomson had been in there.

But when we're actually in possession, I don't believe that his contribution makes a sizeable difference in terms of the service to our strikers. In the games I mentioned in terms of us performing to a high level, it's the attributes of our striker(s) that has made the biggest difference in terms of how the team functions for me. For the midfield to perform to their best, they need players on their wavelength up top.

[BlueSuedeSambas 53,959]

Another Boyd thread..........

[Chambo 197]

Another Boyd thread..........

No!