RicoS321

So more of them makes it better, or more favourable? I don't get it to be honest. Team buys big team status. Repeat. It's fake. I don't get why fans of Scottish fitba, who witness first hand the ridiculous state of inequality in the game, get any enjoyment out of another twat buying stuff. It's fucking Hunnish (buying success, I mean), regardless of how many do it. I'd feel the same if the Dons (or anyone) decided to splash millions on catching the scum too. It'd make us Huns in my mind. English fitba is Huns. Edit: feel free to insert Tims in place of Huns if preferred

Oops. I read your original post as Queens park rangers! He maybe thinks he's Andy Robertson.

Still not a bad result for him. I think he'll be a great player. Doubt we'll see him at pittodrie again.

Aye, Scotland had a half decent second half. Middleton clearly a senior player like. The subs helped and unlucky not to get a draw.

I have seen English football before. For every Liverpool v man city, there's a Burnley against Newcastle. I just don't find it very enjoyable, although I'd watch a game if it was on in the pub or whatever. To be honest, outside of the dons or Scotland, I rarely watch any tele fitba, although I enjoy the Friday night first division games. I'll get my fill of premiership players on Saturday at Hampden.

Maybe a handful of match of the day highlights per season. Usually only if there's a Scotland player kicking about. Often check to see if Scotland players are getting a game or not too.

Yep, that's what fitba is all about. At least they're not trying to hide it. I don't get why people even watch that pish down South, it's pathetic. Although it won't stop Scotland trying to follow in its footsteps. I'm guessing that if nobody walked away with Ashley in charge, a Saudi dictator won't be a problem.

Good to see Gurr getting 90 minutes. Definitely one for the future.

And you couldn't even be bothered to spell his name correctly. Shocking.

Couldn't quite see it properly. Do you have any videos of it from seat D46 behind the goal?

It would be a shame to edit such a good typo.

On Woods, he invited pressure on us on a few occasions with poor touches and passes. Lewis was getting accused of being poor on the ball, but it's evident that the problem lies with the defence and the tactics. Over the years, Lewis has never struggled with the ball into feet - quite the opposite. He's always been calm and sensible in possession, clearing long when required. The problems stem - for both keepers - when our defence pass it to them onto their wrong foot, pass it to them with a defender bearing down, when the defender doesn't either drop into the space or tell the keeper to go long. The defence today regularly passed it to Woods whilst very close to him. He'd then be under pressure in a second with no defender offering the relief of an easy pass. Our defenders aren't good enough to be playing it out from the back and they make both keepers look bad.

Dirty cunts.

He is, but he's more generally a coach. We do look good from set-pieces, but that has a lot to do with Ramsay's excellent delivery. Need to get Ferguson off the freekicks. We weren't bad today and were unlucky not to win or draw. Took us a long time to get into the game, we were rank for the first 30 minutes or so. Some much better performances today, Ramirez led the line well and Hayes ran his arse off, and Brown and Ferguson did well. Ramsay another good performance, but he struggles later in games and he should have done better for the goal. McKenzie showed his limitations today, he was okay but doesn't have the pace to support the attack and still defend. Bates and McRorie were okayish. Once again we attempted to pass from the back and had the ball fired straight back at us on numerous occasions, with Woods' distribution not great, nor McRorie's or Bates' for that matter. The Tims could have done much more to exploit it to be honest. Speaking of the Tims, that's the worst team I've seen this century. They'll likely spend their way out of it in January, but at the moment they'll not finish second with that side.

Not even on the bench, so I'm guessing he picked up an injury. Interesting line up, I'm wondering if we'll see a back 3/5. That midfield isn't setup for attacking that's for sure. Indeed, if McInnes put out that side he'd have been accused of being negative and not having belief. I'd say it's a fairly sensible approach given they're nearly back to full strength. Not sure how this one will go like, a bit apprehensive. I'll go with just the 6-0 victory.

Ferguson is there because we're well covered, he'll definitely always turn up and he's an up and coming young player who's worked his way through the Scotland ranks. It's exactly the type of situation you'd like us to be in before calling up Patterson or Ramsay, safe in the knowledge that they won't be required and can be given a five minute cameo here and there without the occasion getting to them and preparing them for the future. In that regard, I think lack of form can be forgiven as often young players go through rough patches regardless of how good they are. You're right about the token Hun role though, but I don't think we'll see Patterson punted on jack's return, and Jack is deserving of a place.

Don't know like, on this season's form (of his teammates) I could see him playing just behind the striker.

It's very noticeable how poor we've been defensively since his injury. We need him back. Fantastic professional. Glass oot, Consi in.

I have no issues with Patterson being in the squad, just that he shouldn't be in the starting lineup. He's done his development in the u21s and there should be some sort of route from there to the first team squad for purposes of experience. If we were covered for right backs then I'd ditch him, but we're not, with probably Shaun Rooney as the only one who could feel a bit hard done by. What reeks though is that he'll likely start against the Faroes. In that situation, we'll be using the national team as a development ground for a player not good enough to play for his team, and not yet ready for club football. In reality, it's difficult for Clarke as there is no doubt Patterson will be a good player in time and we have few other options. I notice Gilmour wasn't playing for Norwich the other day either, so he'd be pressed on making one rule for one and so on, even though it's obvious that Gilmour is class.

I'd say that was slightly less pish than recent weeks, we almost had the shape of an actual football team at points, in the final third. Incredibly harsh two yellows and at that point we needed the McInnes cautious sub that never came. Bates was poor today like. Lewis with a poor clearance on his wrong foot, but keepers do that all the time and the most basic rule of defending is to get into your line as quickly as possible. I mean it's drilled into players, but Bates was miles behind the others. You sprint out and retain your shape as soon as the ball leaves the keeper's foot, just as a striker should never be caught offside because they didn't get back in time. Bates also at fault for their second, and threw himself into loads of needless challenges. He just looked way off the pace. Lewis makes the wrong decision for the third, but he was always going to be second to that one and the only option of going through main was probably fairly risky - they got fucking lucky that main basically missed it. Another naive performance unfortunately.

Interesting possession stats. However, possession was never really an issue under McInnes either. We had huge spells of un-scored possession last season too, which was variously described as "dominating". However, like last season we don't look like scoring. I think if we were to look back at around this time last season there'd have been talk on this board about someone "about to take a hiding" from the dons. We were playing with a lot of invention but weren't finishing, with Watkins providing great all round play without the finishing. We're not looking like giving anyone a hiding at present despite our possession as we look utterly unthreatening. Sounds like Watkins won't make it today as you say (although I don't think that would ever excuse suggesting Samuels up front though!), so it'll likely be Ramirez getting another run out. Hopefully we'll see a bit more invention with Hedges back, but I think that we're so disjointed at times that he might struggle to work out his role. I think I'd like to see us take the Steve Clarke at Killie approach for a while. Simplify everything down to a few basic instructions per player in a recognisable shape (3-5-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1) that provides good cover. For example, Hayes and Hedges hitting the byline and firing it across with Ramirez making the front post on repeat. Playing it in the channels and pressing the opposition, that sort of jazz. Get us back to some sort of form and then build back in the more elaborate stuff from a position of confidence.

Harsh like. I'm not on for players being charged for such minor incidents on the field of play. Maybe they're making up for the fact that they couldn't get him on the grooming.

Next you'll be telling me that Trump's "art of the deal" is self congratulatory pish.

It's been disjointed and largely clueless performances. We're enforcing a shape that doesn't suit the players that play in that system (in a McGhee type fashion) and signing players who don't suit the system either. We are not more entertaining under Glass, despite what the club is pushing. There's nothing entertaining about an incoherent system that doesn't produce.

On the contrary, if I was forced at knife point to choose one of the big four to perform a review, I would choose Deloitte. Maybe not knife point, I'd probably risk getting out of that alive, but gunpoint then.