RicoS321

Looks like a 442. Or 451. Weird. Should beat them.

Much as I hate Johnson, I think the real reason we're ramming this through is just another form of English exceptionalist behaviour. We'll only be a few days before other countries, so I doubt we'll be guinea pigs as such. It's all about being able to say we were first. Childish, populist shite that you'd expect fae the yanks. I don't like the idea of a mandatory vaccine, but I understand it. Thing is, if I've already had covid (I haven't) do I still need to get it? If I were given the chance of getting the vaccine, or being infected with covid and two weeks isolation I'd take the latter given my age and health. I have no doubt that the vaccine will be safe, but I'd rather have my body work past it itself. I understand the logic in not doing that of course.

I like the 3-4-3. I'd be tempted to throw McLennan into the Wright role to see if he can do it. Give him a half to see if it works, then maybe switch with Kennedy. I could even see us playing a 3-5-2 with Hedges alongside Ferguson and Campbell and maybe Cosgrove and Edmondson. I think McInnes will go 4-4-2 with Main and Main up front. He's such a pacey dynamic player, it's like having two up front.

Nah, McInnes is holding out for the Celtic job. Just waiting to see if McGhee gets it first.

What constitutes clear and obvious? Why is it clear and obvious when Celtic got a penalty, but not when Rangers got a penalty? What is the actual point of VAR full stop? Are there enough clear and obvious errors to merit it? How many clear and obvious errors have referees made for or against us this season? Was Ojo's "contact" against the hun enough to be a penalty, or just part of normal play? Was Considine's arm on the shoulder something that could have been proven to have occurred at every single corner in the game? It's a ridiculously flawed product (and it is a product, let's be clear). It simply moves the point at which the decision becomes contentious from referee to video. For the number of decisions it "solves" it really isn't worth it. The entire concept is, and always has been, flawed. In my opinion, the only decisions that VAR should be making are those that are offside and thus can be proven with absolute certainty. If the techonology can't do that quick enough, as is currently the case, then it shouldn't be used. See goalline technology for a working example. It's simply impossible to change VAR for offside to what is clear and obvious, because again you are simply moving the point at which the decision becomes contentious. Anyone suggesting that offside - on its own - needs to be changed to being clear and obvious simply hasn't thought through how that process would occurr, and the point at which offside comes into play. Any through ball where the player is playing the line falls into the category of "requiring investigation". At the point of investigation, you can only say "yes, it was offside" or "no, it wasn't offside" - there is simply no grey area with offside. You can't say, "well, it's only his arm that is offside", or "only his leg" or whatever, without introducing some sort of consistent measure - e.g. "if there's daylight" or some pish - at which point that will become the new target for complaint. I don't understand why people don't get it with VAR. It will never work, and the decisions for which it does work are so infrequent as to make little difference in the overall scheme of things that it can never be worthwhile. All it does is move the point of contention from the ref to the video panel. That's all it would ever do. Why did you choose to highlight point X, but not point Y? You've highlighted point X, but in slow motion it is always going to look worse. You've highlighted point Y, but you've still got it wrong because you don't understand the game. Who are these people? And so on. Spend the money on getting better support and training to refs as well as building a bit of respect for them alongside transparency over their decisions. Or just accept that bad reffing is part of the entertainment of our sport, as it always has been, and that a fake set of refs behind a telly completely devalues that. Fuck VAR, in short.

Aye, that was the highlights reel that was doing the rounds when he signed. Mostly from a single u21 game, so probably not indicative of much. I agree about wing back as a suitable position. I think it's difficult, as Logan hasn't done that much wrong, McLennan has played well at right wing back and Kennedy has worked hard whilst not being that great. To be honest, as soon as it turned out he was average he was always on a hiding to nothing. The price was so far out of our normal range, he was going to have to be good to get the squad behind him. In any workplace, if some overpaid superstar turns up to do the job that you already do, but worse it gets frustrating. He's the fitba equivalent of Serco coming in to fuck up the test and trace for the NHS.

I disagree, his opening game for us was one of the worst performances I've seen. It was horrendous. I don't know if you were at the game, you had to be there to appreciate it as a lot of it probably didn't make the cameras. It was like watching a child, he'd wonder away from his position, stand a metre away from his teammate for no apparent reason, treat the ball like a hot tattie firing it at McGeouch to get rid of it etc. It was head in hands stuff. The only saving grace was that it wasn't possible to get any worse. And it didn't. He wasn't completely shite against the Huns in the opening game of this season. However, he also wasn't better than Logan and that is the benchmark. With Logan getting poorer there was a great opportunity there for Hernandez. Unfortunately, other players being shite doesn't make Hernandez any better. With moving to a back three and playing some excellent football this season, keeping out of the team was completely justified. McLennan had some good performances in the right wing back role and merited his place, and Kennedy had a couple of good performances before injury too. that said, I think the right wing back role is a less riskier position to try him out for a few 30 minute stretches here and there if we're comfortable in games, so hopefully we'll see him get some game time soon. He certainly wasn't the person to risk bringing on against St Mirren, and Hoban was the right call, who did fine at right back.

The only reason we've got a large squad is because the signings were so shite, we had to go out and buy more. You can accept the odd error, like Ojo, but guys like Main just make you lose all faith. I've said before that recruitment should be removed from McInnes and I'd still go with that (despite Hernandez). That said, with guys like McRorie, Watkins and Hayes we've filled in some of the gaps making summer a bit easier. With Devlin, Taylor, Logan, McGinn, Main and Ojo all likely moving on in the summer, that gives us a bit of breathing space. We've got about 3 or 4 windows worth of damage to repair so it'll be a slow one. No more Main, Wilson, tansey, storey types is key. An Ojo or a Forrester is to be expected in each window and that's fine.

I think that's a little disrespectful to St Mirren though. Despite their poor league position, they actually looked a fairly competent side when we played them up here earlier in the season and we were still finding our feet a little. They didn't look crap last night either. If anything we brought them down to our level. I mentioned it last night, but I'm not sure how you would have adapted tactics to suit last night? We changed to a four at half time, but with that midfield and Main up front we were always going to be in a battle. I can't think of a single formation that would have got anything out of that. In terms of our depth of squad, I think it is still fairly reasonable. But in any team you're going to have big players who you struggle to replace. Ferguson, McRorie and Wright fall into that category for me, and with an unfit Cosgrove so does Watkins. We've got a good first 16, which I think is acceptable. We can afford one of Ferguson or McRorie missing, with McGeouch stepping in, but not both. Campbell would be fine learning the game in a three too. Wright, under normal circumstances, should be coverable by McGinn or Watkins and so on. The question is, do we want to build a squad that has the depth for these unusual situations? I'd argue that we shouldn't. As we've seen, by building that squad depth, it inevitably means that players are not match sharp when required. We just don't need Ojo for example, or Hernandez, or Main, or Edmondson (his signing was fine as we started the season with two out) as they are always going to be lacking in fitness when called upon. We often talk about square pegs in round holes, but look at the second half last night, we had everyone playing in a position they should be comfortable in (Hoban at right back, but he's actually good at fitba so it's fine). I'd far rather see a tighter squad and actually playing square pegs in round holes and sometimes accepting that we just have too many injuries. For example, we could have had Hoban in midfield last night and Ojo could have been in space. If we get to the stage where we think that Main is the answer then (in normal circumstances) move Ferguson, or McLennan, or a lamppost up there instead. Obviously the youngsters have a part to play here, but I think the loan system probably allows them a better experience than sitting on our bench, so that should take priority even if it leaves us short on occasion. I sort of agree about Joe, but a captain just shouldn't make that much difference. Guys like Hayes, Hoban, Considine etc don't need a captain to inspire them or shout at them and of any of them are good enough to be a captain then they'll have assumed that role anyway through talking and shouting throughout the game. I think captain is largely ceremonial these days. A source of pride.

It's getting bad when your keeper throws one in rather than watch another 30 minutes. Pass marks, maybe, to Hayes. Being very generous though. It was ninety minutes of absolute shite. I'd probably give shittest man of the match to Ojo. I remember in one of the European games against the shitter teams seeing Ojo step forward beyond the player he was marking when the opposition had possession more than once in the game and it was such an amateur piece of football I assumed he was just totally unfit as it was effectively pre season. He did it several times after. It's such a basic thing, putting your body the right side to defend your goal, but again for their second tonight he drifts forward leaving the simple path to goal for their player. It's weird, just like he doesn't want to be there. Thing is, he looks like he can play football, I can see why he was signed, but he's just so reactive, late to every single ball and late to make the obvious pass. Thankfully we were able to take on seasoned professionals like Curtis Main. Edmondson has to go home in January, because if he's behind Main in even the dinner queue at the canteen then he's too shit to play professional football. We just looked really unfit tonight and with so many missing or just returning from injury, maybe it was the case. Kennedy, Campbell, Cosgrove, McGinn, Leigh so far off the pace of the game they could have still been at Cormack park.

What style would you recommend for these guys like? None of those players should be struggling in this formation. Unless we move to a 6-0-4 I think the problem will persist. It's been by far the worst performance of the season. How we're in level I don't know. Even the goal was shit. I'd consider just taking Ojo off. No replacement.

Pish sports more like.

Fit media is it on anyway?

I think the positions themselves have been the main issue, rather than just the number. It's fairly unusual to have your four best midfielders missing like we did against the Hun. Plus Wright who could have played there too. In fact Hayes would have also been in midfield ahead of Leigh against the Hun. There's a fine line to be drawn between squad unity and cover, and I'd rather we didn't go down the road of having a massive squad for these infrequent times. Throughout McInnes' tenure, we've had at least 3 players too many in our squads. That's usually been because of poor recruitment, and we end up saddled with players on long term bench warming contracts. I'd far rather see us struggle when we have this many out for a couple of games, than load our squad with Main, Hernandez types. I've got zero expectations for this one. Good luck to them. There was no shortage of work against Hamilton, we'll just have to hope someone flukes ability for the day.

But DM has taken us forward this season so far. We're a much, much better team to watch and the points return reflects that. I don't think it's time to throw out all the good performances this season and judge us based on the last two games with 8 players missing. Even last night, we didn't revert to game management or a cautious approach after going a goal up, we were just simply shite because our fringe of the fringe players are shite. I think even if we had Wright or Hayes playing last night alone would have made the difference between winning and drawing.

Surely that's understandable? With Main, Ojo, Leigh and Kennedy and Cosgrove looking unfit it is largely the team from last season. We became uncreative basically. Campbell and Ojo didn't take the game to Hamilton in the same way as Ferguson and McRorie (or McGeouch) would have, Main or Edmondson aren't a patch on what Wright offers in the advanced area, an unfit Kennedy isn't as good as McLennan and an unfit Cosgrove not as good as Watkins (both Kennedy and Cosgrove could have been subbed around 60 minutes if we'd had replacements), Leigh not even close to Hayes. Where you see our performances as gutless, I see a lack of ability. Kennedy unable to beat a man, Campbell still a bit away from being able to dominate the midfield and move the ball forward quickly, Ojo not being aggressive enough, or being aggressive at stupid moments because he's lost any sharpness he might have had, Main having the touch of an elephant that's really, really shite at fitba etc. All that before losing a soft goal due to poor marking (I suggested it was offside at the time, but having watched it on the BBC, I think I was wrong or certainly it's too marginal to worry about - although still never a free kick) at their first attempt at getting anywhere near our box. I've said it 100 times before, the youngsters should be filling the spots in our squad that we're down to: Ethan Ross where Leigh is, Anderson where Main is, Virtanen where Ojo is etc. However, maybe that does them a disservice by depriving them of a vital loan experience with lots of game time just to give us a fall back on the odd occasion. I don't know. Realistically though, how often are we going to have 8 players out? I don't think we should dwell too much on guys like Ojo and Main. We all know they're pish, but they're not going to feature much once we get a couple of players back.

Hernandez is pish. Equally as pish as either Main or Ojo. It's a difficult one, these guys are here until summer and as we've seen will be required at various points of the season. Games like these we should really be able to throw them in. With Campbell in centre midfield, you probably wouldn't risk another youngster alongside. Campbell was okay tonight, I think he'll be a great player, but really needs to work on moving it forward more incisively. Always takes the easy side to side option. Anyway, it is eight players out though, that's fairly disruptive and we struggled to create much. Their goal came from nothing too (never a free kick, terrible decision), and looked suspiciously offside, but terrible defending. The one goal should easily have been enough. A player like McGinn needs longer than 10-15 minutes, McInnes is very guilty of taking an age to make a sub. Edmondson isn't good enough either, anyone on the bench behind Main needs to be let go.

This, hedges moved further forward, which is ideal. Main might be alright in this type of game too.

I think it would be under normal circumstances, but that midfield isn't getting better overnight. I'd love to have seen us go full belt at them with our strongest 11, but I think a turgid single goal might be the order of the day.

Should, in theory. A midfield of Ojo and Leigh is weak though and it wouldn't surprise me if we dropped points. Ideally we wouldn't be in a league where one team can lose 9 players and still be expected to beat the opposition, whether it be Aberdeen, the scum, or anyone else.

Most important thing is that Rice keeps job, at least until Thursday.

Yep, absolutely, I agree entirely. Lack of transparency. To be honest, I've no real issue with the SFA making mistakes, they're in a far harder position than most clubs given the travel arrangements, but it is the lack of transparency that is the problem. Just a clear outline of events, what went wrong etc and how they're going to change things. When you said "who investigates them?" earlier, I had it in my head that you meant from a punitive perspective, but you're completely right and investigation of the facts that can be presented to the public is what's required. AD, I just read the transcript of the interview, you're right he doesn't quite nail it down. This is where the club have to be more incisive and more forensic (a good effort by McInnes to be fair, it's not really his job). We really need a solicitor type, not to sue, just to transcribe the series of events and lay out what went wrong. The SFA aren't going to do it, and we're really, massively, let down by the journalism in this country in that regard (especially the BBC who seem to just report rather than question). Force the SFA to come out and take ownership of what could be simple little mistakes, or things that are proven to be unavoidable.

Definitely watch the whole thing if you can, you get a much better view of it, it's fantastically bad. You can skip the first 5-6minutes if you don't care about the other pens. It is probably the best thing I've seen all season. Edit: it just shows though, Scotland are fairly lucky to have got through against Serbia, as Marshall was definitely off his line. Thank christ VAR wasn't on the go.

Nah, watch the whole thing pens

Have they investigated clubs for potential failings? I don't think they have. They've issued punishment for rule breaking, but that's an entirely different thing. I hadn't heard about the timing of testing problem, I'd be interested to hear more. The biggest problem with communication for me is the fact that people like us have to speculate about the circumstances on the internet - it's a lack of transparency, we're left guessing and accusing. Motherwell experienced a bizarre lack of communication, but obviously that had no bearing on Campbell being allowed to play or not. I don't think its incompetent to insist that players from the same team are placed beside one another whilst travelling, it's just a policy that has to occur at international level due to location. I'm guessing that's the single difference between a dons game and a Scotland game. There were 3 dons players in a squad of 25, where 11 had to isolate. Even those placed apart would have faced a strong chance of being infected. Given Aberdeen's infection rate compared to Glasgow and surrounding area, I'd have been more comfortable with dons players sitting together than next to another team's player, and if I'm an Aberdeen manager I'd be telling my players to stick together and avoid others because I'd be more comfortable with our procedures at AFC being robust compared to other teams (I'm not saying that they are more robust, just that McInnes would be more aware and trusting of them). What I suspect happened, is that the hun called Robbie McRorie back to Ibrox for a meeting at which he was deliberately infected with the vid in the knowledge that he'd likely be close to his brother with the u21 squad, and he in turn would infect Ferguson and Mclennan. Because they're sleekit huns.