RicoS321

It's a shame, he's gone downhill quicker than Joe Lewis. For me the second was unlucky, he reacted to a good swerving shot, but the first goal was completely his fault, and he had at least one other punch that went straight through the box. Coupled with the pathetic attempt at a punch against the Tims where he nearly got lobbed, it's not looking good for him. It looks like nerves to be honest. He's lost all confidence, it's horrible to watch. I'm assuming doohan is absolutely gash.

Ah well. Better team won. Bit harsh to blame Roos for the second, it was a fair strike from their midfielder, unchallenged too. Not sure he had the time to control the parry. Absolutely ludicrous that the ref was asked to check the red, who the fuck was VAR? Fair play to Robertson for sticking to his guns, completely put under pressure by the incompetent Huns on VAR, just no fucking need. I wouldn't have complained if one of ours had been sent off for that, it was reckless and at speed. Anyway, McKenzie was very good tonight, Gartenmann too, and of course Miovski. Thought Phillips did alright when he came on, the rest didn't get into it. Not embarrassing, but not much we can read into it either.

Jesus, that was a poor half from the Dons, but who gives a fuck when you've got Bojan up front. What a striker. Better than any Hun out there tonight. They've looked good, better than the Tims. Terrible goalkeeping for the goal, his hands are in fists to try and palm it out, just all wrong. We've given them far too much time and space, a bit like the first half on Saturday. Hopefully we'll have the same attitude in the second half here as we did then. It'll be interesting to see how they react and if the Dons come out more fired up.

As expected, Hayes in. Looks like a 4-2-3-1, with McGrath right and Hayes left. Unless he's going to invert the wide players, which sounds like something he might do. Should win this by a couple.

Be an interesting lineup tonight I expect. I reckon he'll start Gueye, and maybe Hayes. He won't like weak lads like Polvara and Morris.

In fairness, the last guy got the whole windae and preparations are hopefully done in advance. The biggest disappointment is that we missed the cost saving opportunity for him to get a taxi from the airport with Warnock.

I think that when anybody takes a single attribute and uses it as a barometer for anything, you know not listen. We've needed a young, hungry manager many times for instance. Equally, your assertion that managers get better as they get older is in the same line of thinking. There is nothing particular about age that makes you intrinsically better, as a long list of managers will attest. Good managers will learn from their experiences, others will double down and learn nothing, whilst blaming others (insert McGhee gif). Good young managers will draw from the experiences of those before them, others will keep doing the same thing and learn nothing. There's a long line for each category. The dinosaur thing is possibly valid though, as it points to a more tactical, technological, scientific assertion (handily wrapped up in a single soundbite, without nuance). It could be argued that ignoring sports scientists, or new training methods, could be the attitude of a dinosaur for example. Screaming at players and throwing things another example. These are probably what people think of Warnock, but if we're honest, we probably don't have a clue what happens behind the scenes, rumours aside. Given his short time here, I expect he'll let coaching do what it does and sports science do what it does. His assertion that 95% is man management is interesting. I don't think I agree, but I certainly see his point. I suspect it would be labelled a dinosaur attitude too. Obviously recruitment is a huge proportion of success that he's leaving out because he won't oversee any. Yep, definitely. "Foreign" is another attribute that gets thrown about a lot, usually a positive for a manager unless we've just had a failed foreign manager, and then it's a huge mistake not to get someone that knows the game. Ultimately, there is a long list of good foreign managers and bad ones to back up each arbitrary side. I would argue, however, that in a short term appointment like this, a good knowledge of the Scottish game would save a lot of time and effort and definitely be an advantage. By the time Warnock is up to speed, he might be leaving. He'll possibly leave a lot of the worrying about opponents to Leven.

Warnock's warriors to be 3-0 up as the game is cancelled in the 88th minute due to a dead royal.

It's entirely acceptable to compare, not acceptable to conflate, which I wasn't. This is a mistake made by politicians and, in turn, football pundits the world over, which means we can't use examples or illustrations to make a point anymore.

Professionalism in and of itself is the issue. It is not competence, and often hides incompetence. There was nothing unprofessional about Warnock in his interview, just no professionalism (with emphasis on the ism). A bit like you don't need managerialism to be a good manager. It goes back to the consultancy issue mentioned earlier, where professionalism is essentially an abstract game, filled with concepts, slogans and specific ways of talking. Taking it too far in the other direction, you get the ignorant man "telling it like it is" that, when questioned, can't go deeper than the "common sense" opinion they spouted. Warnock came across as neither. The only other manager I've seen do that recently was Steve Clarke (outside the scum, as it's utterly irrelevant what they say). As @Slim says, he mentioned setting up to player's strengths, rather than playing a fucking 3-5-2 with Clarkson deep because that's your thing. That is something Clarke did at Killie supremely well, alongside keeping the instructions very straight forward, limiting what each player had to think about (very useful for Greg fucking Stewart, because he's a fucking imbecile). Basically, he had a confidence in his own ability to the extent that he didn't have to deploy the vocabulary too much. There was a little of it, but it's difficult to avoid when the level of questioning is so fucking rancid and you're only just in the door. It remains to be seen if he can maintain the attitude.

I don't mind that, I think football should be fun. As should all employment. They're not our servants. To me, it seemed like he was suggesting that he'd make it enjoyable for the players and fans, rather than himself. However, as @OrlandoDon suggests, he came across as very genuine, which I liked. It's refreshing to see a football manager that isn't bothered by the abstract bullshittery of professionalism. Not giving a fuck is a very healthy place to be in my opinion. You can be very honest, and still work hard because you're doing something you choose to.

All of it. I find it difficult not to smile when someone else is happy. He was clearly happy. Also, it's very clear that he's not done any homework on the Dons, but he didn't pretend otherwise. Basic is fine when you have nothing to say, much better than I'd hoped.

Fuck sake, just watched his first interview, found myself involuntarily smiling. Does he not know that I'm trying my best to dislike him?

Robson got the best out of him last season, I wouldn't blame him. One player came back having developed muscle and strength, the other developed fat. The physical difference in Bojan this season is phenomenal, not just in upper body, but his sprint over 20-30 metres is twice what it was last season. Duk did nothing and arrived back overweight. That's not necessarily a criticism of Duk, there are a million different things that human beings have to cope with in life, and I'm sure being away from home can effect different people in different ways. However, the fact remains that effort seems to be the deciding factor here (although I always thought Bojan was by far the better player).

I've been involved with many of these types of things, and almost always they have failed spectacularly when large consultancies have come in. More often than not, they have a template that they follow (there needs to be, as often they employ graduates with zero practical experience), which generally means implementing expensive systems that they have experience with, regardless of fitness for purpose or existing system compatibility. They skew advice towards areas that they can embed personnel or provide continued consultancy in the longer term. It's usually a bit like weight watchers, where 80% of the customers return (because they've failed). I have no experience of football consultancies, but Dave strikes me as exactly the type of director I used to work with, who'd basically go for the most well known consultancy company (McKinsey, Cap Gemini, one of the big four auditors for comparison in the business/finance world), and they'd offer a fantastic display of professionalism before sending out the cream of the shite to blue sky the fuck out of our out of the boxing. Perhaps there isn't such a thing in fitba, but it would surprise me. There's bound to be a company out there with a list of clients that'd make Dave's legs quiver. I don't know if the Warnock appointment is better or worse than the consultancy thing, it's quite the combination. The most frustrating thing is that I've been defending the club's "strategy" for years now, thinking that they had a fairly clear approach but were just failing because they were getting the wrong people in at the wrong time, and that would be obvious to Cormack and something he'd be comfortable working on. Turns out that we really haven't had a clue these past few years and, worryingly, we don't have the people in house that are capable of understanding and correcting the issues. Aberdeen isn't a massive organisation, I find it bizarre that between our CEO (I like Burrows, and am not sure he can be held responsible for the footballing side), football director, previously successful chairman and our link with another actual football team that nobody can provide any clarity on the way forward and we have to resort to consultants. Are these guys suddenly going to get it in a few months time once the review is over? I don't think so. Are we going to get a review which says that one of these guys wasn't doing their job properly, or that they might need replaced? I wouldn't think so (biting the hand that feeds you is very much frowned upon at consultancy HQ). It reeks of cluelessness and not taking responsibility.

He's an athlete. Covered a lot of ground, and a very sensible decision to play him further forward in the 4-2-3-1. Very raw young player, who couldn't be relied on further back (in the Ramadani role), and didn't look particularly good at football. Would definitely play him tomorrow though for his coverage and work rate. Can't imagine starting him against most other sides.

I think a lot of what you say is reasonable. I just don't see him as a safe manager because he's experienced. If we signed John Hughes or Mark McGhee, none of us would be describing it as safe. That's what Warnock is - the English version. However, he doesn't have the experience of football in this country, which immediately works against him as an interim manager, because of the time constraints. He's less safe than John Hughes. Robson was a tactical fud, but he generally had players playing for him and there seemed to be a togetherness and no lack of effort. We could see on Saturday that the players were working hard and were playing for each other. I think there's a large risk that an arsehole could undermine that. Maybe Warnock has aged well and is no longer a screaming bellend, I don't know. We have guys like Miovski who are in form and need continuity, which I'm sure Leven could have provided for a bit, while we did a proper search. Warnock could really upset a fine balance, with a swearing bull in a China shop approach where it's not needed or wanted. The players could down tools (like butcher at Hibs). For me, I don't see the safety that you point to.

Cormack, you mean? He's John Hughes with less experience of the game in this country. Something which you'd absolutely want in an interim manager. The problems we have at the moment are mainly tactical. Warnock is a giant leap backwards in that regard. As you say, he's also an old firm arse licking wanker. As tlg said, this is the worst appointment since Alex Miller. Reeks.

It's because Cormack genuinely appears to think like (or take advice from) the thick cunt down the pub. The ex-fitba pundit who says absolutely nothing worth hearing. Of course the media will fawn over big name celebrity from England, in the pathetic, obsequious fashion they do. We're the ones that are stuck with England's Mark McGhee though.

Warnock to get sent off for flashing his cock at the fourth official.

It's the complete subservience to the English game that we have up here that puts Warnock anywhere near the frame. He's managed in England! Big clubs! Big name! As if management is in any way similar to playing. It is entirely possible that that a joke manager is a joke manager wherever he goes. Fulfilling this wanker's faux dream to work in Scotland (as if Scotland is one homogeneous place), because he sometimes has his holidays on the West coast. It's fucking embarrassing. I'd far, far rather have John Hughes. At least he's a joker who knows Scottish football. I'd far, far rather we kept Leven in place than any no-mark interim tosser. As for the consultants that will come in and cream us, who are they reporting to? Are they going to be telling Gunn*, for example, that he's actually the problem? Or: Cormack, you're interference in club matters creates an issue? They'll basically come in and ask the staff already there what they think would improve the club, re-word it, sanitise where necessary (in order not to criticise the people that need criticised, who also ensure ongoing consultants fees) and pass it back to Cormack. It's all a touch shambolic. *I keep picking out Gunn, when I don't really know much about the guy. I believe that something better should be coming from his role, but it could be that his role isn't really what we think it should be, so not a slight on the guy himself.

As a consultant myself, I can confirm that all consultants are charlatans looking to charge a fortune for stating the fucking obvious. The fucking obvious, to everyone apart from the guy in charge who doesn't trust his employees. It helps the consultant immensely when those employees are yes-men, too frightened to question the boss.

That was an enjoyable game today. We were very nervy in the first half, Roos especially. We were excellent in the second. It was a little kamikaze, but not too kamikaze, and we had plenty of opportunity to win it. Unsurprisingly, Shinnie and Barron as a pairing works really well, with both playing very well. I really felt for Shinnie being the one who it fell to on his wrong foot, he was really good otherwise. Overall, the setup was good and the subs very sensible. Miovski is just phenomenal, best striker at pittodrie this century, a joy to watch. Whatever was said at halftime worked, we pressed higher and they couldn't cope.

Peter Leven. Sorted.