LA-Don

Just woke up and reading about the game. Two points dropped? What did big ash do? As a bunch of us said, sounds like DM fucked up and Wright should have started? Hedges play well? Ferguson added a few more pounds to his value? And did big Sam look fit and how did he play?

Off to bed. Usually set the alarm for 4am and get up to watch, and by 5:30 furious I gave up sleep and got up to watch such a shitty defensive lame ass performance and loss. So, no alarm and unlikely I’ll see it. Hope to wake to a superb result and read about an outstandingly brave attacking performance. Brian a Rice bravery/stupidity approach and it’s 3-2 us!

I struggle to call Andy a legend, sorry. Yes, he’s played over 500 games for us but we were shite for a good number. Does that matter? And he wasn’t exactly our star player. Definitely a die hard don and a fans favorite but what’s a legend? I see Andy as a modern day Brian Irvine, is he a legend? What about McKimmie? I assume Leighton? Was Rougvie more of a cult hero than legend, not sure how accurate Wikipedia is, says he only played 180 games for us, bunch of players played more that could be more deserving, eg Jess, Anderson, McMaster, Bett? Are all Gothenburg greats considered legends? And Darren Mackie played nearly 400 games for us, another diehard don. Legend? Interesting topic for discussion.

Interesting to see the Tic game as the first post on Ebbe's thread. If we can attack and beat Celtic with Sutton, Larson,. Petrov, Hartson etc., when we had Dadi, the Young bros, and Derek Whyte, why can't we attack and beat them on Sunday?

I don't think any team can go all out attack for 90 minutes, unless the opponent sits back and lets you do that. But we've been guilty of the latter or opposite, sitting back so much that we barely attack and when we do it tends to be an isolated 1 v 4 or long ball, and little support or success. Dare I suggest a normal approach, not all out attack, but not sit back and absorb, but just go play to our strengths. Let the players play rather than over complicate against a normal opponent. I often think DM overthinks these games and makes it harder than it needs to be. Celtic have dropped plenty of points against other Scottish teams in recent years who just go and play, they don't overly defend like we do. I'm not watching Celtic right now, but 0-2 at HT. Curious to see if tonight makes you think any differently. Obviously Celtic can come back in the second half or they could get a 3 or 4 goal pumping. In my eyes, Celtic are vulnerable at the moment, and I hope DM takes advantage of that.

Feel free to abuse me. Rangers second goal is an absolute cracker. Ooft!

I don't agree with you Rico, and I don't think Aberdeen v Celtic can be compared to us v Hamilton. In my opinion we've got tactics wrong twice this year, both in games equivalent to Celtic.......huns and sporting......and got nothing from either game. We are not an overly strong defensive team, both Gash and Andy are liable to provide the odd fuck up and cost goals, and the more we sit back, the more pressure on them. Plus we don't have the squad depth at present if defenders pick up injuries. Defend higher up the park with 5/6 in midfield and the forward(s) and it's less pressure on our defense/weakness. On the rare occasion we had a go (the cup final with the tic in 2017) fatigue kicked in and we ran out of steam and lost at the death......we have FIVE subs to use on Sunday, let's use them! It's also hard to sit back and give a team the ball for any length of time. That usually gives the opponent, often been Celtic, confidence and comfort on the ball, and we inevitably give up a goal. We give them momentum. Very hard to come back against Celtic (huns, sporting) once we've gone behind. It's also tough turning a 5-3-2 into a 3-5-2 in the middle of a game when the opponent has increased in confidence and our wing backs have gotten used to sitting back and the opponent is pressing us. At that point it's hard to attack with numbers and we end up going long ball and chase with an isolated forward, and the team doesn't get forward in support. Rarely has our old firm tactics worked. We go at them and win or lose 3-2 or the likes. Celtic are vulnerable, confidence has rocked a little, why give them time to settle and get comfortable? Of all games this is the one to get stuck in and have a go. If you're boxing against a quality fighter and you know they have been rocked, do you sit back and let them recover for the fear of getting exposed in attack, or do you try to finish them? I fear we lose 2-0, having sat back and been punished cos DM shat it. Then again, as I posted on the Hamilton thread, our style of play this season has been drastically different to the last few years, I wonder if our approach to Celtic will differ too. I totally believe Cormack has spoken to DM about the product on the park. He also must have clearly heard fan discontent, curious to see if that has an impact on Sunday.

Given someone has clearly said something to McInnes about our style of play, hence the drastic change this season, I wonder if that same someone has said something about games against the old firm and having more of a go. The fans were right on McInnes' back and rightly so with the shite he'd served up in recent years, and things have drastically improved now. Can we expect a similar outlook this weekend with a refreshingly different approach? If he wants to win the game Wright has to start and we take the game to a very average Celtic.

Losing Hayes would be a blow, hope Kennedy is available, unused sub today. Would we see Greg Leigh make his first appearance back against Celtic at left wing back?? Thought tonight's subs were a little odd. If players are not fit to play they shouldn't be subs. At 4-0/4-1, Kennedy should have replaced Hayes, and you even sub Kennedy later if you want to be extra cautious. Good chance to give him some match fitness. Obviously Sam replaces Edmundson too. No clue why Ojo played tonight, Ferguson and McCrorie will be our center mids against Celtic, and McGeough the back up. Straight swap McCrorie for McGeough would have been the simple option. Thought the subs contributed to our weakened second half. On a positive, was nice to see Wright given close to 90 mins.

Reminds me of Darren Mackie. More pace than he can control, but less goals.

Sorry but I don't rate McLennan. Getting praised by Dodds but there's so little final product.

I'd only say wobbly at the back because at 4-0 our mentality changes and we think it's going to be 7 or 8. Please don't have McInnes demand we don't lose a goal in the second half and we sit back and finish 4-1, it should be 7 or 8 if we come out with the same intensity but defensively committed too.

Well, I predicted 4-1 but I don't se the scoring done! 7-3 anyone???

HA. What do I know. Edmonson's second. 4-0.

Offt. Three. This could be the doing we predicted.

Wright definitely growing on me at #10, exactly what we've lacked in recent years, an attacking central player who is good on the ball and can beat people. Loves how he roams and stretches defenders too. We're a better team with him and he's a big reason we keep it on the deck. Don't feel Edmunson gives much, he's a central defender moved up top in recent years for those who didn't see his interview, Sam up top with Kennedy in for Watkins, keen to see that. Lovely second from Ferguson!

Interesting line up, McCrorie on the bench and mcgeough starts, I assume it’s for rest, but Edmonson also starts for McLennan. I’d assume that means Watkins wide, but more curious to see if this changes our style of play, and a possible indication what it may look like when Sam is back in? Sam on the bench too, expect him to get minutes for fitness.

We are due to give someone a pasting. We’ve created a bunch of chances in recent games but have been wasteful, maybe this is the game we take a few. 4-1 us. Watkins , Ferguson, Wright, hedges. Disappointed to draw with United but my eyes no longer bleed watching us play. I like Watkins effort and he’s a skilled guy, but keen to see what we do when Cosgrove is fit. I expect him to come in and if we stick to this current style of play he’ll certainly get scoring chances. Without doubt he’s more of a striker and goal scorer than Watkins (who from day one we were told was not a natural striker and goal scorer.) Will Sam make the bench this game or still too early??

I think Clarke has brought some stability, and focused on us being organized defensively, for sure. Credit as well due considering the withdrawals, we had Hanlon and Considine playing at the end today, never expected either in a Scotland jersey and neither let us down. I thought McTom was ok these past few games but I’m not really a fan of him at the back. And I agree, happy he’s giving Scottish players a chance, Motherwell Killie hibs, and us obviously ahead of some barely Scottish championship unknown. I think our back 3 from today plus McKenna and cooper are our central defenders moving forward. I think we’ll see cooper-Gallagher-McKenna next month if fit. Not sure who I see as our starting right wing back, I suppose either ODonnell or Palmer? Obviously it’s Robertson on the left. McTom will move back to holding mid alongside McGinn, and probably Christie. Fraser and dykes certainly seem a partnership up top. Not a bad lineup and confidence is high! Interestingly Clarke referred to Aberdeen’s 3 at the back as a factor in calling up considine. Wonder if Matty Kennedy would consider Scotland and right wing back, would rather have him in before O’Donnell. He was capped at Scottish youth level, has he played for Northern Ireland??

Let’s not kid ourselves, we could easily have lost 3 or 4-1 tonight and I don’t think that would have been unfair. It was backs against the wall for more or less the entire second half, and we even sat back in the first half. Talk about DM game management, it was a tough watch. They missed a bunch of good chances including two I consider sitters! Still, great win and 6 out of 8. And a shutout. Think Gallagher and Considine have played their way into future squadS and no reason why big Andy can’t compete with McKenna for the left central spot.

No clue how we won that ? and yes, I like Gallagher too.

I'll comment on that at the end of the game! Think HT came at a good time, while we have had a couple of chances we're given them too much possession and I feel a czech goal was/is coming. Not overly impressed with our three in midfield, don't think the smallish Jack, McGinn, and McGregor are mobile or strong enough, plus getting bullied. I seriously think McCrorie would help with his physicality and size.

A bit fortunate to be up at the half, could easily be 2-2. Big Andy a bit fortunate not to give away a penalty, seen that easily given before.

Good game, but still the czech's have too much of the ball. Fraser should have had his second. I do like Dykes, strong in the air and decent touch.

Pretty much the expected and I'm good with that for continuity, Jack for the injured Fleck and Taylor for the suspended Robertson. Bias obviously, but would have rather seen McCrorie instead of Jack but I guess the head goes with experience. And why is big Andy not captain since Robertson is suspended!!??