RicoS321

Also, as much as Stewart sold the jerseys, that tackle was beautiful. I think Chris Clarke on Hutton was the last time I saw a Hun so spectacularly booted in the air. If that had been a league game, I'd have been going home happy with the draw and a red in injury time.

Agree almost completely. I thought Duk was a liability though. Tavernier caught him on the overlap at least three times before his injury, which came in about 36 minutes. He then became even more of a liability as he hobbled around until half time, giving Tavernier a free role on the right. That continued in the second half until he was taken off, with our shape ruined by being effectively a man down in defence (strangely he was fine going forward). He was waving to the bench for about five minutes before he was actually taken off, at which point they had already scored. It's a high risk strategy playing such an unpredictable player in a role that has a defensive requirement (Kennedy did really well at getting that balance on the other side, having a great game), and bar a few bumbling runs it largely failed.

It's fine to regurgitate an article, but don't lie about it by saying that you caught up with the players and simply change the name of the cup sponsor to suit. At the very least, delete the comments from the article so that we don't read posters telling us that we've got a great chance of beating Brendan Rogers' Celtic side.

And what the Westminster government promises, is what the Westminster government delivers.

"as Aberdeen prepare to face Rangers in Sunday's Viaplay Cup semi-final, BBC Scotland has been speaking to some of the main protagonists from that day almost nine years ago." Oh aye, what day was that you spoke to them? Monday, Wednesday? Oh no, 2018. Thanks for the valuable update and unbeatable journalism. BBC's coverage of anything non old firm

We've got Scales and McKenzie for left centre back and Stewart and McRorie on the right. That's enough for one game surely? Goodwin's right though, it would be a massive distraction. Replacing your captain a couple of days before the game would be fairly massive. The alternative being that we sign a centre half that isn't good enough to displace Stewart, which would also be ludicrous. That said, the issue doesn't go away beyond Sunday.

Visa sorted. We're getting quicker and quicker with these. Hopefully good enough to go into the squad for Sunday.

Nonsense, the most bang for buck would be a 6ft7 defender who we can throw up for the last ten when things aren't going well. There's a cost of living crisis, we need to learn to be more frugal.

Yep, they should be getting ten or fifteen minutes fairly regularly or go out on loan. Harvey looked a poorer version of Bruce Anderson in my opinion and Bavidge is in that Shankland zone where application could be the only thing holding him back (I'm not suggesting he doesn't apply himself), and I suspect that will be tested the longer he doesn't get an opportunity. I'd not replace Watkins or Ramirez if they left though. I can see us playing one up fairly regularly from now on, and from now until May I'd gamble on having the two with an option of one of the above youngsters from the bench.

Bloody amateurs

Exactly that. He's a quality player who'll undoubtedly get better and better, but he's probably been fortunate to have had as many minutes for us as he has. Further up the pitch is definitely his best position at the moment, because he's always looking for that quick ball in behind that others don't spot in time. That leads to a few poor decisions, but it's better to have tried in my opinion. That's what will set him apart in future. He could be the difference between winning and losing a game some weeks, so it'd be great to see him stay until Monday. Just until we get the work permit sorted for the new Slovakian world beater who can bring us home the cup.

I was going to. I assumed I'd be getting two.

No priority tickets for superfans? Shocking. Not that I'm going, but it's still shocking. Obviously, I'd just have bought one and sold it for thousands.

It was good to see him get into a few good positions, and his lob was a good effort. However, his all round play was honking yesterday. He looked laboured and slow, and he didn't once get his body between man and ball to offer any hold up or flick on. His chances all came from Gordon for them being completely unable to judge long balls. Him starting next week could be the difference between winning and losing, and Goodwin has to drop him. We can't afford a passenger, and he'll likely be that at Hampden. I think you're right that he'll come good, but now isn't the time to be playing him into form.

Just back. Reasonable performance and a deserved win. Looked like a team that hasn't won in five, very uncertain in the final third. Once again, slow getting the ball in from the wide areas and unsurprising that it was a punt through the middle that eventually broke them. Ref was pish and var just ruining the experience once again. Good return for Shinnie, who played well, and the back two were solid, with Scales playing well again (assuming the Tims will wait until next week before discussing any potential move). Duk didn't play particularly well, but two goals going through the middle means he has to start there next week. Again, a solid shape and a more organised performance, which is what we'll need next week. Think the subs needed to come sooner and would like to have seen much more of Ramirez and Duncan.

Aye, we go from one extreme to the other! It's a difficult area of the pitch as, much like centre back, you really don't want too many fighting for places as you tend to have pairings that go together. Ideally, you have your preferred pairing (or three if that's your thing), a spare and a guy like McRorie that can be called upon when necessary (in response to jute, I'm hopeful this means no more McRorie in midfield, an astute call in my opinion). We've been at our best when we have a two in midfield with one further forward, so I'd split our midfield into holding midfielders and "in front". Thus, we're looking at Barron, Shinnie and Ramadani (the latter two probably the best pairing) as holding midfielders (4 and 8 if we're numbering them!) and Clarkson and Myslovič fechting it out for the number ten spot alongside likes of Besuijen and perhaps Kennedy dependent on who we're playing against. Clarkson can fill in further back if necessary. Today, I'd go: ------------Roos----------- McRorie---Stewart---Scales---Coulson -----------Ramadani---Shinnie---------- --Duncan------Clarkson-----Duk------ ---------------Ramirez---------------- I expect to see Kennedy and Miovski in Goodwin's lineup.

I think Coulson has found his level. He's a fantastic player, but his concentration levels and application are miles away from where they need to be. At the moment he can count himself very lucky to be keeping McKenzie out of the team, and against the Hun in a couple of weeks, I wouldn't be surprised to see a more capable defender back in, or a switch to a three. I assumed it'd be Clarkson going back, but Coulson probably makes as much sense.

Scored a few for us, including a couple of crackers, with one against apollon that springs to mind. I get what you're saying, but the above is definitely not the definition of journeyman.

At a guess.... not Ramadani?

What does that actually mean though? He captained ICT to a cup before/as we signed him. He was a fantastic player in this league and had us finishing second on numerous occasions. He's about six times better than McRorie. It's a really good signing.

I don't think Kennedy was bad, but he wouldn't go beyond the fullback, which caused us problems, especially with Duk doing the same on the other side. He managed to take his man on several times, but the defence was always in shape and ready for the cross. I don't think their crossing was particularly bad, it's just that they allowed the defence back in and completely narrowed the margins in terms of our player getting on the end of it. At one point in the second half we had two on three in the box when Duk got it out wide, and by the time he crossed it was eight on three. Duncan is far more direct and will make the run beyond the fullback to receive the ball (as Hayes did a couple of times), ready to get an early cross in. That said, we may want to leave that as an option from the bench too.

I meant credit to Goodwin for trying a 4-2-3-1, mainly for the four at the back, but having someone behind Miovski helps him. I think it was a decent shape, that he should stick with for a while and try and fit the players into it. I agree entirely about Ramirez, but for the opening period he did well enough, he tracks back too. It is almost like Goodwin wants him to fail, so he plays him in an unfamiliar position then takes him off. Duk was left of the three today, not no 10, he was okay, but took far too long to make a pass. Being one of two seems to be most suited to him, and as a no 10 is fine if we have that solid(ish) two in the centre of midfield. Against decent opponents, I don't think he can play 10 though. He switches off too often and doesn't track his man. Agree about Barron and Clarkson, but Clarkson and Barron is fine if Clarkson is pushed into number ten* (in fact, it's how I think we should be setting up against the stronger teams and away from home). As a pairing it is one or the other with Ramadani, and I think Barron should be given the opportunity personally. Clarkson wasn't that great today. Hayes has never really been a good sub in my opinion. He goes 100mph for the first couple of runs and then runs out of steam. He's more than fit enough to play ninety minutes, but he seems completely incapable of pacing himself off the bench. It's weird. Again, I agree about picking a formation. Your last sentence sums it up, he changes both formation and personnel too often (at the same time) and doesn't really seem to understand the consequences. Pick a shape and then take players in and out of that. If you're forced to change shape in a game, make it a subtle change of one less up front, or an extra defender, not going from a 3-4-1-2 to a 5-4-1 or throwing five up front. *Edit: when Barron and Clarkson have played together this season, it's almost always been as a line of three, or both ahead of Ramadani, which is why it has rarely worked

That was rank. Didn't deserve the win. Interesting setup in a 4-2-3-1, credit to Goodwin for attempting something different. McRorie played well at right back and Stewart and Scales coped fine in a four (for now!). Ramirez clearly not going to be given the opportunity to play as a number nine, and he did okay for a bit in the first half as a number ten, but it does seem like Goodwin is hanging him out to dry by playing him out of position. Kennedy did okay, but between him and Duk, the ball was just taking an age to get into the box, and we were almost always outnumbered by at least two when the ball came in. Clarkson was poor in the number eight role and I think Barron should have been on earlier for Miovski with Ramirez and Clarkson both pushing forward one (and Clarkson off for Besuijen if he continued to struggle). Duk was tired by the time he was pushed up on his own and the Duncan sub was just a waste of time given how late it was, his direct running would have resulted in the ball coming across far quicker. Overall, they played like a team short on confidence and Goodwin's ability to change things during a game has to be called out again.

Not sure, I'm not on first name terms with Celtic managers.

Joanna's? Is that a thing?