RicoS321

Disgusting use of language. You should be ashamed. It has two "f"s.

I'm going to suggest the same team every week until Thelin proves me wrong by selecting it. Same goalie and back four as Saturday. Nilsen and Shinnie sitting. Karlsson, Nisbet and Keskinen, with Lazetic in front. Anything else will lose us the game.

That's what they want you to think

Whatever we think of Donald Trump, it's fantastic that him and JFK have now cured autism. Great job guys.

I was at peace with him going until I realised that both Ambrose and Yengi were staying.

I was actually going to offer to use my account for your tickets until I read the bit about it having to be the same person travelling, as I won't be going. Understandable, I guess, but a bit shite. I remember the days when you could just turn up pished on the day and put on your best foreign accent and get into the home end.

Yes, I agree with you both. There's guys back there that are pretty much doing fuck all. I'd always have one up, just to occupy a defender. Motherwell had everyone back at our corners too, and it allowed all our players to be within 35 yards of their goal. I'm guessing it's something that has been heavily researched and the consensus is that you are worse off with players upfield that are hard to hit on the break or something. I think we should break protocol and chuck three forward. They didn't cause us much bother on the corners, they were quite loopy and a couple too close to the keeper. We just look like everything causes us problems in the box. It was sort of my point though, it's fairly easy to throw a ball in, but it's whether it's meaningful or not, and if there's no pace on it, your basically working on the lottery that it might get knocked down and somebody wins the second ball. I personally think there's a lot to be said for that, but I suspect that players like Karlsson and Clarkson take a bit of pride in their corner taking abilities. When Karlsson did beat the first man, his corner had a high chance of being converted, with Devlin very unlucky, because he belted it in. If you think about what the player is actually trying to do, it's no surprise they all get it wrong so regularly. They're trying to fire a ball in, so that it goes just out of reach of the front man, but not so high that it goes above everyone and long, with enough pace that the attacker just has to direct it. Even going for the back post, you're trying to land it perfectly in a 2x2 metre spot, just out of reach of the goalie, but not too deep that it goes over everyone and out for a goal kick. All from 30+ yards, at Pittodrie, making it easily as difficult as a free kick. Hitting the man at the near post is equivalent to hitting the wall in a free kick, with over hitting the corner the equivalent of hitting it over the bar. That happens with the majority of free kicks.

If only we could have known.... We've gone from saying that refereeing decisions even themselves out over a season, to saying that VAR decisions even themselves out over the season. It's ludicrous when you look at it that way. What is ludicrous is that there are still people saying "it isn't VAR that's the issue, it's the people using it", and "it's good, but it just needs to be used for clear and obvious errors". Even after several years, with evidence worldwide, they still don't seem to understand what it is. Me and my mate were discussing the BBC article about the errors too. We couldn't work out whether it was terrible journalism, or just the BBC being too weak to challenge the status quo, but in an article discussing four errors in a weekend, they never said how many were correct, or give a proportion. Any other other news story, the headline would be "80% decisions incorrect" or whatever, but they seem wary of presenting it in a bad light, or as the failure that it has been. Not just the BBC, but absolutely nobody is going into it in any depth whatsoever either. Of the four decisions that VAR intervened in, were any of them clear-cut? Would anyone have actually given a fuck about them in the aftermath? Would anyone have cared that Devlin wasn't sent off? It's the level of interference in the most trivial of things (because once you introduce VAR, it can only be the case). Genuinely, nobody gives a fuck about 90% of the calls. The overwhelming majority are calls that you can see why they were given, or weren't, and could be described as soft or otherwise. That part doesn't get talked about though. The insipid interviews with Collum only seek to validate the technology, which is why they are actually harmful. He never gets asked about calls that were let go, versus ones that weren't (because the ones that were let go aren't classed as VAR calls, despite being the case). He never gets called up on the fact that one incident has two possible outcomes depending on how the referee calls it. For instance, if the referee had given handball against Shankland, VAR wouldn't have overturned, but they let it go because he didn't (the opposite being the non foul on the goalie in the same game). The whole question of whether to re-referee a game or not, in itself, proves that the technology isn't fit for purpose, and never can be. It's a logical fallacy in and of itself. What should have happened was that the money was spent on training and communication. We should have asked the BBC to take the lead in its highlights programmes to present refereeing in a better light, always trying to look at why a referee might have given a decision based on the angle etc. Also, make sure to weigh up a ref's call with a striker missing a chance or a defender being out of position to show that games are won and lost on a culmination of points. I'm certain that the BBC would have been open to it, especially if they got communication from the refs. Less so the paid channels, but they'd probably fall into line for something as trivial as most Scottish football games (because they only cover the scum anyway), and they'd keep their screaming hysteria for the scum game. Rule changes such as only speaking to captains should have been in place before VAR, but also campaigns, led by players, to show refs respect, and paint a wider understanding of their fallibility. Beaton didn't have a worse game than most of our players yesterday for example. Even in the Falkirk game, where the ref was honking, Aouchiche and Keskinen were worse. It's rare that the refs are the worst player on the park, and they should be treated as players in the game, because fundamentally that's what they are.

I watched the world cup final between Argentina and France a while back, and that Messi lad failed to beat the first man more than once, as did thon Modric laddy in an earlier round. It is very common. Most corners will not reach the intended target. Clarkson's was into a decent area, just a touch too close to the keeper. Karlsson's efforts suggest there was a plan to hit the defender running towards the near post, which worked once in four, which is fine. It's marginally better odds than scoring with a free kick. It's very easy to loop a ball into the box, just as it's easy to get a free kick on target, but straight at the keeper. It's not very easy to play a corner at a pace that requires the attacker just to meet it in order to guide it in (or onto the bar in Devlin's case), just as it isn't easy to get a free kick right in the top corner. I'm not a big watcher of foreign fitba, but I hear the "a professional should be able to get a corner past the first man" type shout in every league in the world (including the big English one), and at international level. I've seen it said about Gilmour for Scotland, and even John McGinn. They've done alright for themselves otherwise. An accurate corner that is at a pace that can be scored from isn't that easy. However, there is probably merit in suggesting that we just loop it in gently to the area and hope we get on the end of a knock down or ricochet. Especially when everything is handball these days. You'd probably get a far better return playing a safe lob. Karlsson set up a very good chance with one though, which I'd say is probably a decent return.

I don't think that necessarily follows. His role isn't on the footballing side, and he shouldn't have the authority to question Thelin's decision making, I think he'd be overstepping if he did. Burrows is like Duncan Fraser before him. He has inside knowledge, of course, but that doesn't give him authority. He might question spending a portion of our budget on a single player, for example, but I wouldn't expect him to be raising the sort of questions we're asking. That would be Gunn's role. However, even if they were asking, they've clearly failed in getting their point across. This is clearly Thelin's ideology throughout, you can tell by the way he speaks and what he says. In that regard, it's clear why Gunn is leaving. He isn't doing it properly.

I've a feeling he might be as injury prone...

Gyamfi doesn't look particularly fast, but he's a unit. He'll run through people to get to the line. I think we're going to like him, if he stays fit. He blasted a couple of crosses in today, it was great.

Burrows is a Motherwell fan and chief executive (not a criticism), and Gunn is just an administrator turned football director. None have actual football experience. I don't necessarily think that you need it, in order to ask the right questions. Neither would appear to have the authority to properly question JT and ultimately override him. I think that became fairly clear when he began to bring in his own guys, both on and off the pitch. It remains to be seen whether the players we have brought in are good or not (I still think Clarkson is our best player, and the rest just average), but that's not the entire problem. The problem is that he's been allowed to fill an entire squad with players who are exactly the same as one another. All our wingers are basically Keskinen, or Matty Kennedy with foreign names. All our midfielders offer the same thing. Our strikers are all the same. All so that we can learn one system, and switch players in and out of it. It's a ridiculously stupid gamble for a club on our budget. We are never going to have the quality to not have to just grind out results, and punt it long to the big lad and pick up the scraps. It's either been a deliberate plan to accommodate one system, or he's just ended up buying players with similar attributes in error. Either way, there should have been someone at the club questioning the dogma and making a clear and evidenced point as to why it wasn't pragmatic. That person isn't there, yet, and it'll cost Thelin his job. We saw this exact same scenario under Glass, and we haven't learned since.

Nisbet doesn't really work as a number 9, he's always been better as a number 10. Nothing sticks to him. He was so much better when Lazetic came on, as he occupied the back line, and Nisbet dropped, controlled, and released. It's really simple stuff. Aouchiche is a waste of a jersey there, as he takes a touch, turns, then another touch, before trying a difficult pass. He rarely gets beyond the striker too, when he should be doing that every attack. Jensen is a victim of our setup. He's getting dogs abuse for taking ages to get the ball in, but every time he got the ball with the space to cross today, he did so. Every time he got the ball with a defender between him and goal, he cut back. There's probably only once or twice in a game where I've thought Jensen has cutback when he shouldn't have, he's very rarely favourite. I was in the mainer today for a change, and it was even more clear than normal that he's not actually doing a whole lot wrong. It must have been 95% of the time today that when Jensen got it, the fullback was not just in position, but in position, faced up, with time to spare and ready to block the cross or show him down the line knowing he had five yards on Jensen. The fans were giving abuse to the wrong guy. Gyamfi got two good crosses in from the byline today. Both where when he got it early. They're wingbacks clearly changed tact at half time and they utilised the space really well.

It depends who you are playing against and what you're doing up front. I can see the merit in just bringing him on in games, especially away from home. If we'd had a front two today, with Nisbet dropping deep in space, I'm convinced that we'd be fine with Shinnie and Nilsen, even. When Nisbet gets it with space, he immediately plays in the wide player. That means that they have space to play the early cross, or they already have the yard on their man. We got several crosses in from Jensen in the second half after the subs precisely because of that. Every time it went back to Palaversa it took eight days to reach Jensen, who isn't going past anyone, and he looks bad because of it. I'm not convinced that we do. I think they are mediocre and easy to play against for the most part. It's a team of identikit passive guys, who are nice on the ball. A team of Rob Milsons. We are also significantly worse than last season. Inevitably, too. The signs have been there for a year, after we allowed the manager to have more and more control. The squad building in the summer was an abject failure, and reeks of not having a person at director level capable of asking the correct questions. The last day gambling hasn't paid off.

Good find. We need to get someone in above him to really put the pressure on him. He could be a good manager I think, but he needs anyone to really be questioning his judgement. I would say that the whole "5 wins in 32" needs to do one though. Two entirely different squads and seasons, and need to be judged separately. There is no such thing as "calendar year" in fitba either, it's just pundit bollocks. Each season is a reset. JT has had his, and we judge him on his failures this season. I'd force him to stay and own his mess.

Sokler and Nisbet should have been an option for us this season. Ambrose and Yengi shouldn't be.

Clarkson takes risks, and I think that's what Aouchiche is supposed to do too, if it wasn't for the fact that he isn't very good. But otherwise, you're right. Take Morris out and your just left with the tippy tappy pish.

Aye, that was gash again today. Turgid stuff to watch. Again, we weren't terrible in the first half, but not great either. Lots of endeavour, especially from Keskinen who put in a power of work, but the overlapping fullbacks who not only don't overlap, but aren't really given the opportunity to do so either. They got the boot up the arse that we didn't at half time and that was all that was required. They dominated the opening period and waited for our mistake, with Devlin obliging on his wrong foot, and Knoester (who was poor again) following up at snail's pace. Clarkson the only one trying to move it quickly, with Palaversa like being a man down. Polvara's touch when he has his back to goal is shocking too. Special mention for Karlsson being utter dogshite too, just a very easy player to play against. Nisbet sprang into life when Lazetic came on, unsurprisingly to anyone who watched him play last season, but it was too late to be of use. Overall, we're just not very good. We have a lot of very average players. They all look like they're either on the verge of being good, or past the point of being good. There isn't a single player - bar Clarkson, and probably Mitov - who is playing at their best and improving. The subs were again testament to the atrocious squad building at a club who has only now managed to get a director of football in. If even the layperson, such as the people on this board, can see that it's an extremely stupid decision to go into a season with only one system and only players that fit that system, then it's criminal that there isn't a person raising that point within the club. Jensen was getting the ball deep, crying out for someone to slide it down the line to, and nobody was allowed to make that run. Karlsson, especially, narrowed in every single time on that side. I felt sorry for him. Thelin clearly watching a different game.

Will be good to see Armstrong starting, see what he can offer. Should help the inexperienced Shinnie through the game. That front four can count itself very lucky to be being given another shot after last week, but hopefully the extra week of training has got them on a better wavelength. In fairness to them, I suspect that if they actually got a goal we'd see a huge lift in their performance. European football really is a pain in the arse. We're carrying a huge squad. Tobers, Molloy, Yengi, Ambrose, the Finish lad, Bilalovic all not even in the side, and no young players. That's a lot of waste.

Or that we missed a trick in his development. A strong, tall lad who isnt terrible at football should have been something we could have made something out of. His overwhelming issue was complete and utter fear on the ball. He was jittery as hell, but also young enough that a few good loan moves could have ironed that out. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a completely different player at Pittodrie. Not a world beater, but someone who could be a better option than Jensen. I'd also say that we're seeing exactly the same in Yengi, and he desperately needs loaned out. He's no world beater either, but his nerves are making him ten times worse. Gueye was the same.

@Panda's suggested system was actually how he setup after the subs against Livi. Palaversa was in front of the defence, with Armstrong and Clarkson in front, and Polvara wide left. It became very congested, and disjointed, but if they have a week to practice it could be good. I'd say that we would be better without the inverted wingers in such a system though. The only reason I wouldn't go for it, from the start anyway, is that we're finally up against a team which our normal system would suit. In which case, we'll probably change.

2-2. St Mirren through on pens

Dons' legends, Anderson and Richardson banging them in for Killie and St Mirren tonight. I still think Richardson might turn out to be good.