RicoS321

Decent result, but not the best of games. Very one dimensional at times and struggled to break them down. We dominated as expected, but if they hadn't taken off Gogic and tried to pull a goal back we'd have been looking at an unimpressive 1-0. I struggle to see how that team scores against Spain, but it'll be an entirely different performance I expect. Jack was okay in midfield, but I expect McTominay to replace him against Spain. The defence were fine. McGinn can't be dropped deep in midfield as a three, he needs to stay further up where he can effect games more and not get caught in possession. Dykes did okay when he came on. Lovely header to McTominay, and a great finish. Not a bad start. Think we're missing one or two players to really make a great side. Someone better than Christie at doing Christie stuff and a fast winger.

I don't. I'll probably do the seven day free trial for these two games.

Aye, the Netherlands should tank them What's the deal with today's game, as I can't make Hampden, is it available anywhere to watch? I'm assuming you have to sign up to an 8 year subscription to some weird TV channel that shows nothing but shite? Or stream it and hope for the best.

Yes, it doesn't happen under every manager, but for those who experience an uptick in results, it usually fades away after 15 matches, apparently. I can't find the study. I think it was particular to English football too, but probably applicable everywhere. I suspect it is largely based on the level of incompetence that comes before and whether there's been a run down of the playing staff too (which McGhee, Glass and Goodwin all experienced). You wouldn't expect the manager after Robson to have a bounce either, as Robson won't be leaving under a cloud. I agree, Robson is not abiding by the strategy and that is working. It was blatantly obvious it would. What the club is aiming for cannot be achieved overnight and cannot be achieved with the existing playing staff. That has always been the absurdity of it. The notion that Ramadani, McRorie or Shinnie are going to be playing free flowing football because a new manager tells them to is a little bit silly. Hopefully our recruitment team have proven without doubt that they are incapable of getting eleven players capable of playing free flowing football and we can move on and base our strategy on good, but pragmatic, fitba that plays to our strengths in order to get results with the odd dazzling display in between.

It's fairly normal for a manager who isn't the previous manager to get a bounce, and I believe it's been recorded as waning at 15 games (correlative, not causative). Whilst any other manager would have benefited similarly, it's probably not sound to draw too much judgement from Robson's performances to date. I get the impression that Robson will be getting kept up to date with what's happening, but also not in a position to divulge anything in order to keep the morale up, so it's just one of those awkward situations for now. The players will likely have been told that they're taking their time to make sure that they make the best decision and that it could take a few more weeks, and then they'll just keep updating that position to drag it out for another while. I'd be happy with Robson. I don't think he ticks any of the boxes when it comes to strategy, unless we're getting a new director of football above him.

Scum game moved to the Sunday 23rd at 16:30. Asking for trouble.

Thanks. I'm always up to date with the news.

Judas ditched fae the peterhuns.

Sold out, should have charged £120.

That's what I heard too. Let's just say he was on a three day bender and he turned up at pittodrie at 14:47 with Tuesday's training kit still on.

The case for it not being Robson is the club strategy. We saw with Neilson today, a manager like Goodwin who is trying the "we're a passing team, we pass out from the back" pish that appears to be being forced on managers because of its apparent entertainment value. This has been rightly canned by Robson, but it was the reason we got rid of McInnes and we're back to where we started in that regard. If entertainment has to come in some form of weird passing mantra that doesn't just include winning games, then we need someone with experience of doing that. I'd happily give it to Robson, and fuck the strategy.

Crucially, Robson has them playing ahead of Clarkson. They both do a power of work in there, but not having Ramadani in the number six role is like having a new player. Clarkson will be a massive loss for us next season unless Barron can step up. Coupled with Clarkson, that back three is a game changer for us, it mitigates so many issues, allowing the midfield to make mistakes and also cope with the brain farts of McRorie, Coulson and Duk. Well played Robson, although the subs are again quite latchy. Duk and Miovski not quite getting the partnership going, they were too far apart most of the time. Miovski's movement is fantastic on the shoulder of the defender, but we're not getting it to him quick enough, but I've no doubt he'll adapt and pick up goals following things in. Watkins deserving of his minutes at the moment though. Pollock and MacDonald are probably the best six months partnership I've seen!

Don't do it. Never sit with the proles. That's my motto.

I saw Suede this week. Decent bands play the music hall and other venues all the time. Screw going to some shite heap at the airport to watch Rod the Tim or some other dickwad.

Departing shortly to our biggest rivals in the area, teca. Disgusting.

Surely we want someone who succeeds in playing football?

The reasoning is of he is good enough to get third then he's good enough for a longer stint. If he's not then we need to get our arse in gear for a rebuild including about ten players leaving (and that's assuming dross like Richardson, Morris, Roberts (probably) and Myslovič (probably) aren't also punted). If he's allowed to put in a good challenge to make third and gets close then the new guy will be on a hiding to nothing, with constant chat about us should have having kept Robson (we're maybe already too late in that regard, but I don't think so). Now is the ideal time to join the Dons, with a handful of decent players and two recent departures that suggest both chairman and fans will exercise a bit of patience. A massive summer rebuild with no opportunity to see the team in competitive action prior to that doesn't have nearly the same appeal in my opinion. Qualifying for Europe would likely only make things worse.

Jesus, that's a limited squad like. Lewis Morgan not good enough to come on for a run about? A serious lack of options in the wide areas. We generally play with wing backs, but it's always nice to have options with ten minutes to go and a goal down to Cyprus.

We could have actually made it to the final given the way that the draw worked. Probably won it. But we didn't, all because of Jim Goodwin, or whoever.

If we didn't get beaten by Darvel, Goodwin would still be in a job and we'd have been beaten by Falkirk.

Hearts are very clinical, with some good individual players and a manager that knows how to get points at any cost. Our midfield was weak until we changed things against utd, so I wouldn't be starting with the same team. I'd go a back three with either Scales or McKenzie (or both if Pollock injured). Coulson in on the left wing back role and McRorie on the right. Three in the midfield with Clarkson pushed forward rather than backwards and a front two to keep Duk away from defensive duties, which will be absolutely critical against a side which scores every second chance they get. I think that if we start the way we did against utd we'll be two goals down in the first 30 minutes.

You're right, but yet I think we know what he meant? Golf is viewed in majors and football management how a manager succeeds in England, basically. If Mourinho turned up at Everton, they'd see it as a shite appointment and call him a dinosaur. I think what WIASW was suggesting was that managers don't become bad overnight, yet they are often portrayed as such. The example of Hartley is a good one, because there is probably enough to suggest that he is a decent manager (possibly as much evidence as Goodwin, or even Gerrard to be slightly more controversial!), yet his successes are quickly forgotten as he fails at Hartlepool. Hartley is probably a good enough manager for the SPFL, I'd say, but he's not likely to get anything close to that now and yet he's a manager with more experience and more understanding of the game. He's simply failed as much as any other manager. It's a weird system.

But managers aren't players, so it's not a valid comparison. They're not responsible for other people's mindset. You're right though, it's nonsenical. If Mourinho came to the Dons it'd be viewed as the potential second coming (Ferguson being the first). Any claims to dinosaurism would be rubbished and they'd switch back to his past successes and experiences. If he went to Everton, it'd be as you suggest. Similarly when there's talk of managing "big clubs" as a useful factor in guaging a manager too, as if the traits of being a good manager are diluted or augmented based on club size. It must have some impact on the way players respond to a manager too though. The term "dinosaur" is largely a nebulous concept (would McInnes now be regarded such?), but it wouldn't surprise me to find that players buy into it and have a pre-defined view of a manager before he even steps in the door. None of us really know what a manager is like before he's at our club if we're honest, and I suspect that via the coaching badges and such, the overwhelming majority are a fairly homogenous bunch who have little to no impact on the team they're managing at any given time (player recruitment and timing likely have far more weight). There will be the 1% of gems that can consisitently have a side punch way beyond its budget (Martindale the only one up here), but they would be very difficult to pick out once all the other factors have been removed. I remember reading an article about Paul Sturrock not being given due credit as a manager when he was one of only two (I think it was two, Wenger was another) managers who consistently had his teams placed above budget. Every other manager was as expected or worse when averaged out over a few seasons. If we can find a guy that's done above average in a couple of roles within our budget, perhaps in a league that has players that could fit in the SPFL but relatively untapped resource, then that might work for us. I think it'll be about luck though, as it was when Milne was at the helm.

I think that instead of the English match of the day pish that they insist on showing in Scotland, they should just show a montage of Lineker's face after every England tournament exit. Some decent techno to accompany.

Absolutely. Although to say that Strachan's view of McGhee wasn't massively, massively skewed due to their friendship would be lacking in credibility. To the point of blindness (McGhee wasn't even on the merry-go-round by that point, he'd been kicked off well before). However, Strachan as Scotland manager came across as a guy that would do what he wanted with no real care for the consequences - like he was incapable of self reflection. The type of guy who might think: "well Dundee are going down anyway, might as well take the opportunity to help out a mate", rather than: "I am going to do everything possible to stop Dundee getting relegated". Which is how a lot of us approach life, so it's not a major criticism of Strachan. I guess we're maybe just not used to seeing that laid back approach in football, where it's normal in other business as you point out. Glass is a great comparison though. I think the difference is that Glass was up and coming, McGhee was down and dying.