RicoS321

I wouldn't mind Duk leaving. I'd rather that than the fans started to turn on him. I don't think we have the resources to deal with a player like Duk when we need points and performances. He'd be a fantastic asset off the bench, but a couple of good performances and he'd be back in the team where we end up having to switch tactics to accommodate him. If we had a really top class left back, we could probably afford to play him on the left, but we don't. He's better off elsewhere, making cameos for someone else unfortunately. He's been entertaining and frustrating.

Also, Jayden Richardson getting plenty of ten minute subs appearances for Stockport, so maybe we should look to bring him home. He actually came on up front for the final ten minutes a few weeks back when they beat notts county (they were drawing when he came on), and I have a feeling he could be the next Josh Magennis. Ideal replacement for Miovski in my opinion.

Anyway, not sure what is meant by defensive midfielder these days, and probably not a necessity. I wouldn't have called Ramadani a defensive midfielder, nor would I really describe Shinnie as such. I'm hoping it means someone with the ability to run about a lot and get stuck in, while giving the ball to the good guys as quickly as possible. Whilst I'm keen on another midfielder, there's a large part of me hopes we don't get one so that Robson is forced to continue the setup we had at County. I've a feeling any new midfielder will see us revert to Clarkson deep and the direct approach again. I'd like to see several out and maybe only a couple in. I'd be happy enough with McKenzie for the remainder of the season at fullback and Duncan given more minutes in a wide role. Right wing is where we should definitely be strengthening, as Morris is clearly not good enough there. I think that if we keep to a 4-2-3-1, then we're quite well served as a squad otherwise, and perhaps we concentrate on trimming the squad ready for more errors in the summer. Unless, of course, there are some long term targets that we will miss out in if we wait. A pre contract or two wouldn't go amiss either. If Barron leaves, then we either risk Polvara until the end of the season or look elsewhere (Watson at Killie would be fantastic, but he has over two years left).

Humphrey's loon?

Is Robson March?

I'm not convinced Robson is behind Barron not featuring. I'm certain that comes from above. It wouldn't make sense for Robson to not play Barron because of a contract situation, as it could directly affect it his own job (by losing a final for example). Imagine he did go to Cormack and say that he wasn't playing Barron until he signed a new contract? At that point, Cormack would still have to either okay it, or say "you're not doing it in our name". Contract talks are done above the manager's level too, that's an internal club thing, so it's not like Robson has any control other than to say he wants to keep or sign a player. Saying that, at no point does Barron really feature in a 3-5-2 with a holding midfielder with Clarkson in the team, so maybe it was just entirely tactical. I guess it could be that. Goodwin did exactly the same with Barron, regularly playing him in front (on the pitch) of Ramadani, which is why Barron went through the same doubting from the fans that Shinnie (and Clarkson) are going through this season. The thing that makes me think it's contractual rather than tactical with Barron is that Duncan barely played any minutes before signing a contract and then went through a spell of playing every week.

Yep. You can see from the first thirty seconds the difference in shape. A speculative punt that they win and Shinnie is running onto the second ball as opposed to it floating over his head. Simple stuff Robson.

I agree about the 4-2-3-1 being out best formation, I'd have that every week, but our defence was generally stretched because of the shite served up in front of them. Our back three has also had some really good games against Frankfurt twice, the Huns twice and others. Those games we performed well in always had two sitting in midfield. If we'd gone 4-1-4-1 today, as I had thought we might be when I saw the team, I think we would have really struggled. The common denominator in our poor performances seems to be playing Clarkson deep and Shinnie further up field. It's certainly worth looking out for, as I have a strong suspicion that if Barron leaves this window, we'll see Robson return to having Clarkson deep (even in a four: 4-1-4-1) and we'll start to fail again. The reason it bothers me so much, and it's nothing to do with anything you've written, is that I've seen (on forums) and heard at pittodrie people questioning our captain and saying "his legs have gone" (the world's most irritating cliché), or "he's done" (often suffixed, ridiculously, with "at this level", as if we're at the pinnacle of the game). It simply isn't the case. His best games this season have all come from playing in a two. Shinnie needs to be facing the play so that he can drive with the ball and nip at folks heels from goal side. Not having a defender clear the ball over his head and have to chase it back, or to play high up the park and receive it to feet just outside their box facing backwards. What we were witnessing was a player doing the work of two players and being run into the ground doing so. The technical side of his game is no worse than it was in his first spell, he's not quick to spot a pass and often makes a poor decision when a more lucrative pass is on. Most fans (certainly around me) don't seem to get the nuance in formation and position, they just see a guy chasing the ball and criticise. That shitey midfield setup has not only wrecked our league season, but also had a huge detrimental effect on the fans views of our captain. Hopefully the next time Robson tries his shite, more folk will side with Shinnie and not the manager, but I don't hold out much hope.

What sort of Hun misses an opportunity to watch the Dandies for a holiday in the Bahamas? Disgusting. Whilst I much prefer the back four today (because it's easier on the fullbacks), it was never really the back three that caused us issues, it was the stupid setup in midfield. He could have easily played with two sitting midfielders and a back three, rather than the holding midfielder and we'd have been fine. I think the 5-4-1 type setup might still be a better option against teams that are better than us, especially away from home, but that rarely came with a holding midfielder, which is why we generally showed up quite well in those fixtures.

Something's gone on at Ibrox. The home supporters have no idea what. An entirely unrecognisable incident.

I think that getting a dog to pish on Morris in training would be excellent motivation.

Night and day from the other day as expected. That's what happens when you play to player's strengths rather than their weaknesses Robson. Just need him to actually stick to it and not revert back at the first opportunity, which we know he will. There was only really Polvara out of position today, but he did fine, and on a narrow pitch perhaps width wasn't necessarily required. Gartenmann on his wrong foot I suppose, but he's comfortable enough on his weak foot. Overall, we played really well, with probably McGrath, Barron and Clarkson standing out, closely followed by Shinnie and MacKenzie. Obviously, the main thing was the setup, and that setup allows us to do so much. That might be Barron's last game for us, but put Polvara in there and Duncan or Morris out wide and we've still got a strong side. Duk can come in for McGrath (although only when chasing the game due to his shoddy covering), McGrath can play where Clarkson played, Clarkson can play where Barron was, Hayes can come in for McGrath, Jensen can cover for MacKenzie or Gartenmann and so on. It'll be a real shame if it wsa Barron's last game for us though.

What a finish from Bojan. Although the defender did him a favour, as did the keeper.

Clarkson. Some lad.

Good goal from McGrath. A scrappy finish but we had plenty in the box. Shinnie miles better facing the play rather than constantly playing high and chasing back. That should have been obvious to anyone watching him play football before of course.

Think a bit of width would make this infinitely better. Not really pushing their fullbacks backwards and McGrath and Polvara generally coming infield and further congesting.

Looks much better already. Shinnie and Barron deep and Clarkson right up with Miovski. Exactly what we need. Edit: a 4-2-3-1 in other words

Shinnie won't be the deepest. It'll be a 4-1-4-1. I don't think you'd ever want Shinnie deepest on his own either, you really don't want him receiving the ball from the keeper looking for the quick pass, we tried that pish with Ramadani last year and that wasn't either of their games. Shinnie sitting in a two with Barron, and Clarkson in front would be great, but it won't be that either. Unless we're playing a 4-2-3-1 with those two known wingers, Polvara and McGrath out wide. It's frustrating, because you can fit Barron and Clarkson - your perfect pairing - into a 4-2-3-1 without them getting in one another's way, but the addition of Polvara and McGrath just completely congests the area, making it even more likely that they'll step on one another's toes. I really feel for Barron who's had two successive managers playing to the weakest parts of his game. It's like they're trying to hang him out to dry (or, more likely, they've got nae idea). Anyway, we've got enough to beat County regardless of the personnel, as all it takes is a bit of magic from Miovski, Clarkson, McGrath etc. It's not really a game where we can fairly judge new systems, but nevermind, at least there is one.

Not sure what the fuck that setup is, but it does seem like a back four. Knowing Robson's inability to give up on a sitting midfielder, it'll likely be a diamond of Barron, behind McGrath, Shinnie and Polvara, with Clarkson ahead and then Miovski. A 4-1-4-1. It's fucking weird. Why not play a 4-2-3-1, with Barron sitting alongside Shinnie and Clarkson in front and then apply some width with a lamppost (or Morris, whichever is closest) and another on the left? There is a possibility that he puts MacKenzie in left centre half and McGrath in left back for a back five of course, but that'd be weird. Either way, it's something different.

Just vote to ban plastic pitches and send Killie down, prevent Raith come up, or whatever. We're the Dons, we don't relegate.

John Pilger. Very much one of the good ones.

Probably correct. Although I'm not sure that we're much different to where he is at present. I don't think the English leagues are crying out for guys with experience in Scotland, and their nets clearly cast wider than the British isles and they'll know all about Knutsen.

I wasn't really giving an opinion, I'm saying that our strategy is one that involves a strong team in the background and a manager who doesn't want his hand in every pie. In order to do that, you need someone that can hold the manager to account, and the evidence shows that we don't have that. If we continue with our strategy (and if we're getting up and coming players and selling them on, then there's no reason why that can't work with managers), then we need to get a stronger director of football. If we go for experienced manager, then we have to accept a complete rebuild every time, and hand him the keys to recruitment etc. To give an opinion, I like our strategy, I just think we should get someone better behind the scenes. I do think the manager should be required to give his reasoning and be held to account for tactical decisions, I think it would really help him take a breath and properly think about it and also provide early intervention rather than wait until the inevitable sacking stage - I also think that should apply to experienced managers, who are clearly not infallible. McInnes was in an almost unsackable position in the final years here, because we had zero succession plan in place (and I don't mean picking an individual, I mean structure). Cormack won't be happy, but if nobody is holding his young manager to account then he can expect nothing less. Having heard him speak, I think he's fairly clueless about football, but enjoys it! I think a good director of football should have a very good understanding of football and tactics and should be able to hold the manager to account in a way that doesn't ostracise or belittle him. A sounding board, or devil's advocate basically. I think all managers should have that.

Johnson scored (twice maybe?) for the Tims the other week, doubt he'll be leaving them anytime soon, he'll probably get a new contract and be available for loan in a year's time when he's been rotting for six months on their bench. Baccus was good yesterday, very efficient and covered a lot of ground. Would be a solid signing. However, Taylor was the absolute standout for them, he was very good and streets ahead of Jensen.

I agree mostly, but Robson's tactics are very clear regardless of how shite they are. Draw them out, and then fast ball in behind for Miovski to score from. If the ball falls short then Shinnie and Ramadan.... McGrath pick up the scraps and move it quickly to Duk or drive into the box or whatever. Clarkson is giving away passes because he has to use the ball very quickly in order for this tactic to work. The stupid thing is, it's got such a low success rate, for very obvious reasons (because you have to play a pinpoint sixty yard pass - that everyone's expecting - between a deep defence and goalkeeper without even glancing over your shoulder first). Yet nobody at the club is pointing this out to Robson. Just as nobody pointed out to Goodwin that Ramadani was shite playing between midfield and defence and playing Barron ahead of him (on the pitch) was playing to his weaknesses and running him into the ground (exactly the same as Shinnie). The two tactics are extremely easy to identify, extremely easy to rectify and - most importantly - extremely difficult to justify. That's why it's clear, to me, that we have nobody at the club capable of asking the manager to justify his decisions, and explain why they aren't working and how, with current personnel, they could possibly work. It's not acceptable that two managers can come in and continually, stubbornly, make the same mistake every week and not be held to account. It'll be pure luck if the next guy doesn't end up doing the same, because we've got no structure of accountability. We're needlessly blaming and then sacking managers because we're not getting the opportunity to tell them to stop, take a breather, and try something different until it's too late and the players have lost every ounce of confidence.