Jump to content

Tuesday 26th November 2024 - kick-off 7.45pm

Scottish Premiership - Hibernian v Aberdeen

RicoS321

Members
  • Posts

    7,681
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    229

Everything posted by RicoS321

  1. Just got an email from the club to say that Premier sports is the only way to watch? Fuck is that shite all about?
  2. Aye, sounds about right. Interesting that our best "game management" options come in the form of bringing on a striker. That must take Deek out of his comfort zone. I don't think he'll trust Ojo on performances so far this season, but that was why he came on a couple of games ago - in case we needed that option, so it'll be interesting. It's a shame Campbell isn't fit, I'd have been happy enough taking him on for 20 minutes ago to protect our lead and perhaps grab a late fifth.
  3. I'll look out the old corpse-shovel.
  4. Aye, okay, that makes sense. As I say, I'd be concerned that we don't get the best out of Wright with Hedges out wide, but you could be on the mark with McInnes' line up. A little harsh on McLennan who's come in and done well. I'd go: -----------------Lewis--------------- ----Hoban----MyGranny(dec'd)----Consi--- McLennan---McRorie----Ferguson---Hayes ----Hedges----Cosgrove------Wright----- with Hedges and Wright dropping in to support the midfield off the ball. Switch Watkins for Cosgrove if Sam can't play 90.
  5. Christ, what a fucking shambles. The Yanks making the mistakes that the rest made before them. They must be aiming for this new Europa 2nd tier pish in the coming years, otherwise I can't see what the influx of US cash into the Scottish game is about. Cormack possibly slightly different, but the tie in with Atlanta reeks of some prior (to Covid) bigger picture. I can't believe anyone would pay Edwards £3K per week, he's a slightly above average SPFL player that could be replaced very easily. At least they should know where to target their cuts with all these high paid failures.
  6. And Hedges wide right? Or do you mean play Sam and Watkins separately (i.e. one starts the other comes on for him)? To me, it has to be one or the other, Watkins or Cosgrove. The best I've seen us play so far this season is with Hedges and Wright together high up the park. They combined really well playing close together and had the freedom to make space for others too. I think that piling in a front 2 of Wright, Cosgrove, Watkins, plus Hedges right slightly nullifies the threat, although it would be a hell of a decision to drop Watkins or Cosgrove or Edmondson. To me, I wouldn't bother with Wright from the start unless we're getting Hedges up there too.
  7. I don't believe the £5K per week figure. That'd be twice what they're paying any of their other players I'd have thought. I can't see that happening in this day in age, especially not for a player as proven mediocre as McNulty. Sounds like internet bollocks. That said, getting him in before Shankland going out sounds plausible, and a real fuck up if true. If they can cling on until January, that might save them. However, I don't think they'll get good money for Shankland. I'm really not that convinced he's good enough - or got the right attributes - to play down South. He's that sort of in between striker that would do well up here. Got obvious talent and a great finisher, but not that quick and not that strong. Reminds me of Rooney in many ways. A big hoofer in the championship would just sit on him for 90 minutes and he'd struggle. Like May when he was at St Johnstone, I also think he's at the peak of his game with few obvious areas he can improve. Hopefully he'll prove me wrong, because I think he's done really well to get back to the top of his game and deserves the opportunity.
  8. Can they not just sell one of their big names?
  9. It better fucking not.
  10. McGeouch out for eight weeks. Disappointing for him, he's not done much wrong in the games he's played. Forces McInnes' hand a little with the starting lineup for the weekend. Leaves us a bit short on game management options when we go four up too.
  11. McRorie was actually okay out wide last week, but it is a waste of his talent. I think the idea was that he'd be able to switch McRorie central and Hedges out wide during the game if we were getting overrun in midfield. When he realised that McGeouch, Ferguson and Hedges were matching their midfield he seemed happy enough to replace McGeouch (once injured) with the dedicated wide player in McLennan rather than bring on Ojo (thank fuck). McGeouch was actually playing quite well before he got injured, so it is a bit of a dilemma for McInnes if he's fit. Does the extra five metres Hampden width make a huge difference in deciding whether to play a 3-5-2 (with McGeouch) or a 3-4-3 (with Hedges/Wright)? Obviously, we can play a 3-4-3 with Hedges and Wright dropping into a 5 when they've got the ball, which would be my preferred approach. I think last week gave us a good insight into their abilities as well as our own, and we have a good chance this weekend. All the choices we have to make are good ones too, there's a number of players that we could have in our starting line up that are going to cause McInnes a headache, and he needs to make a decision on when to involve them all. I'd start with the team that finished last week, with a front three of Wright, Cosgrove and Hedges and McLennan deservedly keeping his place out wide. That leaves Watkins, Edmondson and McGeouch (and Kennedy if fit) part of an exceptionally strong bench. I don't think Cosgrove or Wright will be fit enough for a 90 minute outing at Hampden, so it's up to them to get us ahead in the first 60-70 minutes. McInnes might be inclined to bring them on instead for a bigger effect against tired players, but I think you have to go for it from the start.
  12. Very reasonable. Of course, the first thing you'd probably recognise is that unless you're at the game, your analysis is going to be fairly weak. There is simply no better way to see a player than in the flesh. Having been to many a dons game over the period that Andy's been here, I agree with some of your analysis, but I think your off in part too. The point I made about him sticking close to the attacker was in reference to his years at left back, I should have made that clear. I completely agree about standing off at centre half and especially left centre half (depending on the opponent's formation). At left back, his biggest problem was standing off and allowing the player to run at him. That was how he got caught almost every time in his early McInnes years (his early early years, alongside guys like Mulgrew, he just allowed himself to get thrown off the ball by strikers half his size). At left back, he simply couldn't afford to give the attacker a five yard run up every time so he had to learn to stick to his man and be very aggressive. Start by winning the headers against them, then sticking close and using your body so that they can't get going. Most wingers he came up against struggled with it - the overwhelming majority. Hence why, in the words of Clarke, he's a consistent 7/10 every week. Usually against Celtic, McInnes would ask him to play infield slightly and allow James Forrest to run at him full pelt all day long. He did the same against Hibs in a semi a few years back when Boyle was given the freedom of Hampden to run past him - again, tactical stupidity playing to a player's weakness. I completely agree that in the last year or so, since moving back to centre half, he's changed his game and now seems comfortable at left of a three when given a run of games there. That's not entirely surprising, given he's proven extremely adaptable over the years. In terms of penalties etc, over the last decade he probably averages two a season at most no more than you'd expect from a McKenna or Hoban. Similarly, he's fairly low on red cards in the last decade too, with 2 I think. Finally, it simply isn't true that he is heavily left sided, that's just incorrect. He's one of the most two footed defenders we've had in the last 20 years (probably not a great compliment!). He's happy to take a touch on his right and pass it short. He loses accuracy with anything long on his right, but that's fine. There's a reason McInnes trusted Considine to play on the right side and McKenna on the left recently when we had players missing (he was phenomenal there against the hun a couple of seasons back), because he can take it on his right without squaffing it. Compare him to guys like Reynolds, McKenna, Taylor and even Anderson on their wrong foot and it's night and day. For a defender, he's more than adequate - not amazing, but that's not AFC's benchmark - on his wrong foot. In terms of punting it long, he plays to what is in front of him, and it's almost never done in panic. If there's no space or runner in midfield and turning and playing back is risky, he'll chip it into the channel for the striker to chase - rarely hitting it out of play in the process. It's exactly what you want a defender to do. Again, it's never obvious on the TV, but in all my years at Pittodrie I don't remember ever thinking Considine was (with any regularity) ignoring a pass into midfield before playing it long, it was almost always the lack of movement in midfield that preceded the pass. Again, compared to Taylor, McKenna, Devlin, Anderson and Reynolds (especially Reynolds) it's night and day. Again, that's not saying his passing his perfect, but his choice of pass, like Hoban on the other side (also guilty of not finding a man when going long), is consistently correct. Having watched this entire season on TV, it's amazing how much I'm missing and basically filling in the blanks based on what I've seen in prior years with any of the guys on the pitch.
  13. You've clearly not been to an Aberdeen game in a long time. He was on the road to being our player of the season when he broke his leg midway through a game under Brown around 8-9 years ago. You could see the point in his career at which he finally learned he could use his strength to go hard up the arse of players to make up for his lack of pace. He's been solid and above average in our first team in every single year since that. McInnes has never been able to replace him - despite trying - because he's that dependable (he even came on at left back in place of Shinnie in a game against the Tims as Shinnie couldn't cope). He's never been similar to Ash (or Diamond, to take another that came through at a similar time), as he's always been able to play football and his positioning and reading of the game is ten times better. Under McInnes, any time Considine has struggled it's nearly always down to poor tactical decisions. He got hung out to dry at left of centre numerous times against the Tims for example, which took a long time for McInnes to work out. He's limited his mistakes in a season for a long time now and the only time I hear folk criticising him still are those that decided he was pish more than a decade ago and can't get over the fact he's made himself virtually indispensable to the dons for a long time through immense workrate, commitment to the club and consistency of performance.
  14. Yes, I was just being cheeky. You accidentally put final instead of semi final. Although I was drunk at the semi final.
  15. This shit needs done. Four years, take a gamble.
  16. Bit harsh on Ash to be honest, they're first goal was class, really quick feet from McGregor. Their second was down to McRorie getting drawn in to the ball unnecessarily, leaving his man in acres. Ash obviously partly at fault for both like, he doesn't get off with it, but just not wholly to blame. I have to admit when I was watching the pen I had already blamed Taylor before noticing it was Hoban that gave it away! In terms of the overall approach, I'd say they got a lot less easy ball than in previous games. We pressed them quite well from the start and didn't give them any easy passes. They still moved it around without much difficulty but not in areas that would trouble us. They might as well not have had a left side, nor us a right side as the two largely cancelled each other out. If anything, I'd say Hayes gave frimpong far too much space on their right, sitting way off him. I assume it was tactical, but it was a dangerous approach given Christie was on that side too. They got a number of - thankfully shite - crosses in from there. Cosgrove only played 30 minutes ish, and we didn't really change as Wright came on at the same time. I don't believe it's Cosgrove that makes us play long ball anyway, I think it's the lack of movement in midfield and there is plenty of that when Hedges and Wright are on the pitch. I think we'll see a much better Cosgrove with players in and around him.
  17. I assumed it would be Watkins and Edmondson/Cosgrove, but I suppose it depends on whether Wright starts or not. Watkins took a knock, so might make the decision for us.
  18. If he's fit, he should start. Not sure he will be though. Had three shots on goal when he came on, Edmondson had none and did very little. Cosgrove just a way better player. Still not convinced by Edmondson yet like, despite a good game against accies. He's far from pish though, so it wouldn't be the end of the world if Cosgrove wasn't fit. I'd probably rather Cosgrove came off the bench if he's not fully fit. Once we're three up.
  19. He was a young lad learning the game similar to Anderson in his early years. Considine has been good for about a decade. Once he learned how to use his physical presence he's been good. The entire tenure of both McInnes and Brown, and even for a while under McGhee he was good.
  20. Great game and a good performance. We didn't deserve to lose that, the equaliser very much deserved. Wright awesome when he came on. That run at the end was like watching Eoin Jess. Phenomenal. Cosgrove also offered us a lot in attack even though he looked way off the pace. Ferguson, Hedges really good. Hoban good, but unlucky for the pen. Can't complain too much about it. Felt sorry for McGeouch who was doing well before he went off. McRorie was okay, but was really poor for their second. Staring at the ball instead of his man. Finally, McGregor should be missing next week, he had several fouls after his yellow and his hack at the end was a deliberate attempt to stop McLennan that was a booking all day long.
  21. Aye, I thought that too, but it was weird he got ninety minutes. Normally if you're not good enough to get in your preferred position you're the first to come off. Or, if you're good enough, you'd then be moved into that position when the switch was being made. It just suggested that he wasn't seen as a striker by Campbell. Although Campbell likely too busy swearing at the moon to worry about positions or shite.
  22. Both looked okay. Virtanen in the unfortunate position of being a central midfielder, so as absolutely zero hope of getting in our squad. Ruth playing on the wing looked comfortable in the ball and put in a few good crosses. Was really hoping he'd be a striker, but doesn't look to be the case.
  23. I must've been very drunk to have missed that!
  24. Shame. Seemed like a gentleman. Had a great team for about ten games once. Gets a lot of credit for a fairly mediocre record. Brought in some imaginative signings (had a lot of backing), and had some of the best and worst performances of our recent history.
  25. Yep, I think your second paragraph is pertinent, they're not on a high, but they also might have a point to prove. Christie makes a big difference to them too, which is annoying. Celtic haven't dropped plenty of points to other teams. I put a thing up the season before last showing deek's record v Tims and everyone else's and there was no real difference. Killie and Hibs had an extra win from memory and everyone else had similar to us. I don't think that's changed. Hibs got a couple of glorious draws under Lennon. Clarke too. But none really went for it, they generally did the same as we do. I agree that we've been guilty of sitting back too much, but that's not what my original post suggested at all. Our strengths are being organised and not shipping goals and being fast on the break. All of which we can do. But the suggestion that we play to our strengths completely ignored the fact that we will be playing a team who are also playing to their strengths. If they're better at that than us, then we inevitably will not be playing to our strengths. It's just too simplistic. But in the end, we're likely asking for the same thing, which is that we give a performance like the cup final or the parkhead game a few years back.
×
×
  • Create New...