RicoS321

Actually, I think you're right. I think Campbell would be a cracking bit of business on a pre contract for those reasons. This is a make or break year for Ferguson. He has to be good enough to get a move at the end of the season. Jack staying with us as long as he did was a failure on his (and our) part and I think Ferguson should feel the same. If he doesn't get a move then Campbell comes in ahead of him and he's left to battle it out with McGeouch for the first sub spot, or McGeouch moves on. I think the issue with Campbell is just timing though. I think it would be really unsettling to get him in now as it would result in Wright being dropped or McRorie moving to centre half. Any agent worth their salt would be telling Campbell to hold on for another few months, as continued performances will get him a more lucrative move south. Unless Motherwell are keen to get some money for him now, then I think they might hold out. We could do a buy then loan back type deal I suppose? That might be the only way we can get him. There will be an element of us wanting him so Hibs don't get him, but I think that is a dangerous way to do business.

I don't think what you describe would be good competition for places, it would be overloading. One that results in shoe horning (by McInnes). The problem we have is that in the centre of the park, McInnes always has guy(s) that play the ninety minutes unless injured or at risk of red card. Jack, McLean, Shinnie, Ferguson, now McRorie are guys that aren't coming off that pitch. McGeouch is now the perennial "Wright-replacement" on or around the 70th minute (and McGeouch would walk into most teams in our league). Our Campbell now demoted to an appearance every 6-10 games, and a sprinkling of ten-minuters here and there. To his detriment. I just don't see Alan Campbell as anything other than an all or nothing signing, one in, one out, or a change to a flat three in the middle. All whilst leaving us short for cover in other areas.

I think that at some point you'd have to stop buying midfielders and accept that we can't have all the midfielders available in the league. Campbell is a fantastic player, reminds me of Shinnie, but we simply don't need him. A midfield three of Ferguson, McRorie and Campbell would mean ditching Wright or nullifying him out on the wing. It would be exactly the same as signing McGeouch in January just because he was available, overloading us in one area with little added benefit/improvement at the time. If we signed Campbell, then it'd have to be in place of Ferguson or McRorie, not as well as, but that wouldn't happen under McInnes. In reality, we'd see Ferguson shunted further up the pitch and revert back to the uninspiring, but hard-working, approach to games that we were looking like we'd finally got beyond. I'm guessing it's just agent talk to get a better offer from Motherwell or to try and stir up interest down South anyway. I think that we should be taking Ferguson to one side and having a word with him though. In my mind, Campbell is working harder and imposing himself on games more regularly than Ferguson and he needs to step up his game if he is to remain the "number one" midfield prospect in Scotland to build on his young player of the year from last year (McRorie also looks to be having more of an impact too). He's playing wthin himself at the moment in my opinion as Jack did for about 18 months around about Ferguson's age, and he needs to step out of that and start dominating games and opponents (instead of just winning "clever" free kicks). The game against Motherwell the other week should be the kick up the arse he needs and if he wants a big move down South then he needs to be better than the rest. Scoring penalties won't hide the lack of influence he's having too often in games. Like Jack, he's a very capable lad and projecting his/Jack's potential at his age, he can do better than the huns if he applies himself. I think Jack is a great footballer, but I think he should see going to the hun as a failure, as it would be for Ferguson.

Legend. 10 games to go to make the top five appearances of all time. Proper dandy.

You've got the rest correct. Well done!

I actually think that a quicker player would tear him apart in the big leagues. He's good like, and I like him, but he has a little bit missing from his game. He's nae Anderson with his positioning. Definitely get him on a contract with a sell on though, as he'll get better and better.

Agreed. I would add that it was very obvious up front in that regard. A poor signing, never good enough at the basics of fitba.

I imagine some brexity fucks in the mail will be calling them out for world war two neutrality this week in response.

Nobody is judging after the match, most would have said it during the game. I mentioned it on here as a prediction of our approach and suggested the changes at halftime. It's the manager's responsibility to act within the game too, not after. I completely agree that they could have picked us off, but that's exactly the risk that you have to take when you're one behind in an all or nothing game. That's the whole point in football. 1 or 3 for them produces exactly the same outcome. There's no could about it, a manager reading that game effectively would have had Wright on sooner, it was obvious and is an error. It significantly reduced our chances of getting a result, as we prioritised attacking for one third less time. It's quite straight forward. For me, it's a flaw in McInnes' management and one he should address as we see it repeatedly. It's the managerial equivalent of a keeper not being good with crosses and it should be identified and addressed in exactly the same fashion.

It was a weird one because he was absolutely pish at fitba

We weren't favourites, but during the game there were opportunities missed, glaring ones I'd say, to affect the result. From the 55-65th minutes they absolutely battered us and should have been two up. That was before we made any attempt to attack them. As soon as we started to wobble around 55 minutes, the changes should have begun, starting with a change in midfield to get our three away from our back five (4-1-4-1), with all attacking subs being introduced 10 minutes earlier than they were to give us the most amount of time to create opportunities. This procrastination from McInnes is evident on multiple previous occasions and rarely serves us well. Nobody is suggesting the initial setup was wrong and that we were terrible, but we had a huge amount of time being 1-0 down without creating a single opportunity, so we knew that we had to change and it took far too long to do it, which possibly cost us. We'll never know that of course, but if you don't try etc. McInnes played the second half, tactically, like it was a league game versus the tims where there's a psychological risk associated with a tanking, or an away game in Europe where we still had a home game. This was a cup semi final against a very good team. The only risk was that the game would be over after 70 minutes rather than 90. There's a fine line in these games, a really small window of opportunity and McInnes didn't recognise it or act on it. As I said earlier Panda, against Burnley (a similar fixture) we were unlucky, but last night we didn't get to the point of being unlucky. We actually played in the hope we might get lucky. Defeat is acceptable, the manner wasn't great. I'm probably classed as a "McInnes defender" on here, so certainly not one of the hysterical ones, but I don't think you've addressed what were serious mistakes in the approach given that we were 1-0 down with no fallback if we didn't score. Tup's right, we did try to win, but we made tactical mistakes that meant we significantly reduced those chances.

I just explained in fairly logical detail. Against Burnley we played with a chance of winning, which is why nobody complained after that game. Also the tims game I mentioned. I think the team played well tonight. There's no ferocious criticism, just an honest assessment. McInnes made an error, and it's one he's made on several occasions now and shouldn't be making that mistake (a player would be crucified for repeated errors). He's also done the opposite on numerous occasions such as the Burnley and tims games which I was exceptionally praising of. If you don't see the difference between Burnley and tonight's game then your missing something. Burnley we were unlucky, tonight we never gave ourselves the opportunity to be unlucky. I didn't come away from tonight's game disappointed, because at no point were my expectations raised enough to warrant that. We all know we're capable of playing better than we did tonight and that there were better ways to approach it (certainly the second half). It's a tactical approach that has a zero percent success rate for the dons under McInnes (when a goal behind), it's pretty straight forward.

Nope, it was nothing like Burnley. That game was like the cup final against the tims a few years back where we lost in the last minute. We had a game plan that involved a lot more pressing, a lot more aggression and a midfield that wasn't completely pinned to the back three (Hoban played in front of the back line, allowing Ferguson to get further forward and press). This game reminded me of watching Walter Smith's Scotland. Defend like fuck and hope to score, with zero plan B when you go behind. We deserved to lose tonight because we played not to get beaten without a hint of attacking intent. We were exceptionally fortunate not to lose a goal before we eventually made our changes, which would have put them out of sight. There was no proactive change until the 70th minute, and that's just very poor management. It's a mistake that is as bad as any that led to their goal. I'm not one to talk about belief or any of that shite, it was tactical ineptitude. Procrastination. The players performed admirably to the task they were set. Hayes, Hedges and Hoban (the three H's) especially, and of course Lewis.

Yep, don't know what hedges is fucking about at. Just shoot.

Yep, I'd say it's only partly his fault, but his slowness to react drags Considine in unnecessarily.

We've been okay, nothing more. They're a good team like, but we're going to have to step up and press them for a good 20 minutes in the second to hope to get anything. We reverted to a back five for a lot of that. Think we need to stick to a rigid 4 and perhaps have McGeouch moving left to right in front of them but getting Ferguson and McRorie further forward. Poor goal, thought we were caught out of position because of the needless losing of the ball by the midfield, but conceding that much possession means that a single mistake was always going to be the killer. Need a lot more from that midfield three second half.

Yep, I'm guessing back 4. Either a 4-5-1, or a 4-1-4-1. Hayes further forward maybe a good thing. Looking forward to it now. Taylor hattrick in a 3-3 draw. Watkins with the winning penalty, 1-0, Lewis unbeatable.

Order them some covid riddled hookers for lunch - take out the rest of their squad.

They have nine first team players out according to BBC. These cunts have a B team don't they? I'm guessing they can't just promote from that though, because they are an entirely different team, so would be subject to a transfer. Would they be allowed to loan Ryan Gauld for the game for example? Edit: no, because he doesn't play for their B team anymore it seems!

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.