RicoS321

Just as not getting a striker in for the Apollon game a few years ago was a big issue, I think that letting McKenna go before this one is also going to prove fatal. I know that the club probably had little room for maneouvre this time, but timing is so important. I think we might have had a chance with that settled back 3 if we really went at them, but I don't see us being good enough with any of our options in defence. I think a back four, of Logan, Hoban, Considine and Hayes would be solid enough, but I just don't see us scoring a goal in a 4-5-1, so we'd be left with a glorious failure. Wright had his poor game at the weekend, so that'll be the trigger for McInnes to put McGeouch in. I expect us to see another glorious failure tonight*. A hard fought 1-0 loss. *unless Covid has truly fucked their squad.

Does anyone actually disclose fees these days? The fee will very much be made up of sell-ons and add-ons, with the amount up front being largely invisible. I'm guessing the idea behind not disclosing is so that people don't think we're flush and can afford to spank £750K on a Venezualan right back or some other ludicrous con,

Could they nae loan him back for the morn?

Have you not gone yet?

McKenna will pay it from his signing on fee.

I don't think it's a Celtic thing though. When the dons are playing poor, or a particular player has a few bad games, the fans have a tendency to start singling out our own players and as soon as a few folk start questioning a player it's almost like a competition to see who can critique their game the most harshly (Logan had a few months of poor form, which turned to permanent criticism as his game steadily improved again. Considine still classed as nae good enough by some despite nearly a decade of above average dons' player performances). I've heard plenty of dons fans suggest McKenna is a donkey and can't pass or whatever. It's almost like it's cool to be ultra critical. He had a couple of months where his form dipped, as every single fitba'r ever has. He's a very good defender, strong, good concentration, good awareness, aggressive, doesn't take chances and can kick it really hard. Being the best Scottish defender at the moment isn't much to boast about, but it's definitely the case.

Ah, switch in McGinn or McLennan then.

I expect McInnes to revert to type for this one. No attempt to play nice fitba. I think we'll see a 4-5-1 and hope to scrape a 1-0 or take it all the way to pens. Shame, as I'd really love us to work out the defence and continue with the 3 (I'd have Considine, Hoban and Logan) as it makes us a far more watchable fitba team. My team: -----------------Lewis------------------ -----Logan-----Hoban-----Considine--- Kennedy---McRorie--Ferguson---Hayes --------Hedges--------Wright---------- --------------Watkins------------------ McInnes' team: -----------------Lewis------------------ Logan----Hoban---Considine----Hayes ----------------McRorie---------------- Hedges--McGeouch-Ferguson--Kennedy ----------------Watkins-----------------

I'm with Tup on this one, I think Forest have got a good deal there. Although, it's also a good deal for us, but with a hint of poor timing. McKenna has been very good for us for most of his time here, and started the season very well. He also has the room to develop his game and he does raise it when required. I think he'll relish the greater physical battle he'll get down the road and if he can weather the championship well enough could get the move to a bigger club subsequently. We'll take an £8M cut on his next £40M transfer.

I was just joking. Although with Campbell and the boy fae county too, even our future slots are filled these days.

Get him signed, we're short in that area.

You're correct

Completely agree, a much better footballer than pawlett. I liked pawlett, but he never had the touch and skill that Wright does. Both have excellent movement off the ball, which often gets missed (often by managers too it seems). Just by being there he makes space for hedges and makes Watkins' life a little easier too. I do get the impression that he's not a McInnes type player and he's just waiting for the right minute to replace with a more solid McGeouch type. He's the difference between the very watchable performances we've had so far this season and the dull wins we racked up last. In fairness to McInnes, Wright did start a few games before injury last season. There's an opportunity to mould him into an even better player too, which is the really interesting part.

Think he'll stick with McRorie on the right if Kennedy not fit. Justifying it with the goal. Clearly we're a better team with him in the centre and I actually thought Ferguson and McGeouch didn't work particularly well as a pair, with McGeouch especially being out of position and not pushing out to his man. I think McInnes will want to keep McGeouch happy though, so I expect to see the same starting eleven.

No, they'll give it to SFA who'll pass it directly to rangers.

Aye, it'd be typical, but the prize fund is where the money is and getting there would stave off the corona debt for the season and allow us to hold out for proper money for £12M+ valued Ryan Hedges. I'd definitely have been across in Stavanger, and a fair chance I'd have been in Lisbon if I couldn't wangle the former. Two really good trips we've missed.

Are there for us? We've not been past the third round under McInnes, surely Ferguson must have managed three fixtures a season?

Are you joking? He tried it at the weekend, and Rogers saved it. If anything, their keeper should have been expecting it. Would still have struggled to save it, as it was an absolute peach.

Yep, maybe. Although we'll really miss McRorie in the centre. I'm guessing it'll actually be as we were, but with McRorie on the right and McGeouch in the centre. I always get the impression with McInnes that he like to keep players happy. McGeouch has been unfortunate not to be in the team of late and as soon as a spot comes up, he launches him in. With Logan on the bench, I'd have preferred we played the same team and just switched Logan in for Kennedy. Or even McGinn if we want to go for it.

A 3-5-2 maybe? -------------------Lewis----------------- ----Hoban----------McKenna-----Considine----- Hedges---McRorie---Fergie--McGeouch---Hayes --------------Wright---------Watkins------------ something like that.

McGeouch in for Kennedy. Mental. How does that work? A 3-1-3-3? Or McGeouch playing wing back, or McRorie? Seems like an unnecessary fuck aboot with the lineup like. Edit: think Kennedy might be injured.

Good on you if you last the two weeks like. I think I read something like 12% of folk actually stuck to the quarantine restrictions. I think I might text one of my mates and tell him I'm in quarantine and ask him to bring me some booze too. Has to be the same team. Unless there are any plastic pitch issues. Maybe give Hoban a bit more time to make sure he's 100% sorted and take Taylor in? I'm guessing that he'll be fairly quick to invoke the game management if we go a goal up. In a way I hope we go a goal down, just so that we're forced to play some fitba. I think we're more likely to come from behind and win than we are to take a one nil lead and see it out (even though our statistics would not back up my argument at all). I take it away goals aren't a thing?

We were second favourites for all three games though. Kairat had spent a fair bit of dough (Tymoshchuk etc.), certainly more than Rijeka and Groningen could dream of. Maribor had more recent success than either of those two also. They definitely were not more winnable than the Rijeka and Groningen. All five ties were winnable, it's just that we weren't favourites. The only argument I'm making here is the bland use of the word "bottle". It just seems like a meaningless catch all. If we had lack of bottle in the three games we lost, then we had lots of bottle in the games we won. It's just a bit silly. As I say, to me bottle would mean we lost to a team we shouldn't be losing to (where we weren't favourites), and in my mind it needs to be happening regularly in order to say that a team "lacks bottle" (or a manager does, given the change of players over the years). Maybe you guys have a different definition (belief, perhaps?), but I'm struggling to see how you can cherry pick a couple of games and - in the original comment - use it as a reason for us not being favourites tonight. Although I'm struggling full stop to see why we aren't favourites tonight.

Did we bottle Apollon away? I don't think so. Unless you include Milne in that, because we went into that game without a striker, when all we needed to do was spend an extra £150K on Moult. We were never going to be good enough to beat them at their place, only narrowly beating them at Pittodrie. They were a good team and we had an off-form Stockley or Maynard up front. I remember advocating starting Tansey (fuck me) and playing McLean up front rather than waste our time on those two jokers. We then signed Stevie May - too late, and too shite. In the end, I think we got lucky not to be on the end of a hiding. Kairat were a good team too, I suppose it's the definition of "bottle" that I take issue with. We didn't lack bottle (belief) via Rijeka or Groningen, just as we didn't when we beat the hun at hampden and ibrox the other year. I just don't think you can invoke "bottle" each time we don't win and ignore the times we do beat a team that is better than ourselves (or everyone would class as better than us). I think it's just a lazy term. I'd say we were unlucky against Kairat, we didn't hold back in the way we would against the Tim. Apollon we simply didn't have a good enough team and we were always going to be found out. I think the Maribor one is definitely the one that comes closest to "bottle" (or lack of belief). For me, the damage was done in the first leg by letting in that away goal in a game where we should have tanked them. We were miles better than them and had lots of chances, with their random break being one of the few they had and they scored. I think the lack of belief stemmed from that, it was like nothing was going our way, and that's up to the manager to overcome before the game. The circumstances surrounding the penalty (I think if McGinn hadn't gone on to score, Rooney would have finished it; I think he was put off by that) probably gave us even more of an "everything's conspiring against us" attitude. Of the three, it's definitely the only one where I'd say that we were the better team over two legs and should definitely have got through the tie. The other two would have just required a very, very good performance and would have been up there with some of our other good victories where we've been second favourite. To me lack of bottle would be losing to Kilmarnock in a cup semi final or something, not losing a game you're objecvtively expected to lose. There are very few of those under McInnes, we generally scrape through them in spectacularly ugly fashion.

Agreed (I probably wouldn't describe as bottling, but we should have beaten them), but what I meant was that they were favourites going into the game. I'd class them as a level above Stavanger. I'd put Stavanger in the Skonta Riga category, Vilnius, that sort of mob. Certainly not Groningen or Rijeka level.