Dundee V Aberdeen

[Tyrant]

I was talking about our youth players in general. They're nae good enough was my point. Whether you have an agenda against McInnes or not you can't argue that he knows more about our squad than the fans do and that he's more qualified than us to make the call on whether players are ready to be first team starters or not.

 

I'm nae fussed about showing signs of weakness pal.  Couldn't possibly give less of a shit. I've been wrong countless times and will be countless times again. But on this occasion it was you who missed the point. I forgive you though. 

[rocket_scientist]

I was talking about our youth players in general. They're nae good enough was my point. Whether you have an agenda against McInnes or not you can't argue that he knows more about our squad than the fans do and that he's more qualified than us to make the call on whether players are ready to be first team starters or not.

 

Our youth players are not good enough? McKenna proved otherwise. We would never have known until Motherwell thrashed us 3-0 and his hand was forced to make changes. And he was hardly a kid when he made his debut less than a year ago. He was already a man.

 

How can you say that Wright isn't good enough? He's been totally mismanaged. Same with Frank Ross. Anderson has only had 2 x subs appearances and you don't think he's good enough either? That's insane.

 

You are happy to trust McInnes and anyone who dares to criticise him "has an agenda"? That's nuts too.

 

I watched Whiplash last night with my youngest, a film that had been recommended to her. It was excellent and there were two major themes that are transferable to football. The extreme methods of the "coach" were brilliantly articulated in a speech at the end, the EXACT philosophy that SAF always employed in his managerial career. The other truth highlighted in the film was the value of practise and work ethic. To become the best, you have to want it and work at it.

 

Most lose, a few win. In the SPL, one team will win and 11 lose. In golf each week, 1 will win and 155 will lose. It's a tough business, winning and I've always said that it's DESIRE that separates the best from the rest, the desire to work harder, the desire to work smarter. McInnes is not a winner and neither are his footballers. But you can't include teenagers who never got managed properly, who never got a reasonable chance. They are the only hope AFC had.

[RicoS321]

Our youth players are not good enough? McKenna proved otherwise. We would never have known until Motherwell thrashed us 3-0 and his hand was forced to make changes. And he was hardly a kid when he made his debut less than a year ago. He was already a man.

 

How can you say that Wright isn't good enough? He's been totally mismanaged. Same with Frank Ross. Anderson has only had 2 x subs appearances and you don't think he's good enough either? That's insane.

 

You are happy to trust McInnes and anyone who dares to criticise him "has an agenda"? That's nuts too.

 

I watched Whiplash last night with my youngest, a film that had been recommended to her. It was excellent and there were two major themes that are transferable to football. The extreme methods of the "coach" were brilliantly articulated in a speech at the end, the EXACT philosophy that SAF always employed in his managerial career. The other truth highlighted in the film was the value of practise and work ethic. To become the best, you have to want it and work at it.

 

Most lose, a few win. In the SPL, one team will win and 11 lose. In golf each week, 1 will win and 155 will lose. It's a tough business, winning and I've always said that it's DESIRE that separates the best from the rest, the desire to work harder, the desire to work smarter. McInnes is not a winner and neither are his footballers. But you can't include teenagers who never got managed properly, who never got a reasonable chance. They are the only hope AFC had.

 

I think the point is that we don't know as we don't see the young players' attitudes in training. It's useless using Alex Ferguson or some other acclaimed fictional/non-fictional coach as an example. Managers are no different to players, and very capable ones are not remotely within our budget. We should be looking at other managers in our division and the promotion of youth within their ranks and the success of that as a barometer of McInnes' performance. We have absolutely no how he chooses to talk to the youngsters, and it could very well be the case that they are not responding to the challenge set because of their own unwillingness to put in the extra effort. Certainly McKenna hold McInnes in high regard and has benefitted from his coaching to the extent he signed a new deal.

 

Hamilton would probably be the best example. That is somewhere where the entire club is setup as a mechanism through which to promote from within. That's their philosophy and their cost base. We could do that, but we'd sacrifice second place obviously. Are there any clubs with a derivative of that model that are producing more than 1-2 players for every batch of youngsters? I noticed Cochrane playing for Hearts colts v County last night for example, a player that they thought would be amazing since Levein gave him his first start. Are there any players at any team in the SPL that have had similar success stories like McKenna recently? Are any of the top 6 playing their youngsters every week (more than two let's say)?

 

My criticism of McInnes is that there are minutes where he could have played a youngster and he hasn't. That's usually because we've had a squad that required that other (shite) senior players were given priority to keep the entire squad happy or to keep their hand in whilst not playing every week so they're ready when needed. I think that the club needs to enforce that strategy though if that's what our target is. Make sure that there are no fillers. For example, I thought that Dean Campbell looks like a better player so far than Gleeson (I know, I know, I'm just using him as an example). If it turns out that Gleeson isn't going to make it here after a decent run of opportunities, will he continue to be given minutes at Campbell's expense? I think he would, and I think that is where McInnes falls down (May at Anderson's expense will be another). The wasted minutes on Maynard were a huge frustration when he should have been ditched (I'd have re-sold him before the window closed cause he was so obviously fucking shite). We're wasting time on a player that we know wouldn't improve. The approach on Frank Ross, to me, was the correct one. He wasn't ready and 6 months of playing at a decent level makes him more ready. The only thing I'd add is that the same should have been afforded to Wright; 22 minutes from January was scandalous. However, he may have been being a dick or something that we're not party to; that's the difficulty of judging. 

 

I think the club needs a strategy and a set of targets. Something that they can hold McInnes to account for. His strategy is to make sure nothing gets in the way of a 1-0 victory, so no risks will be taken, because he'll lose his job if results don't go. The club needs to force the issue if it sees youth development as a function of our club.

[Guest jinkyjoe]

According to our official website Gleeson has played 33 minutes against Burnley, 52 minutes v Huns and 74 minutes v Dundee. He has just come into a new league with new team mates and had an injury issue in pre season. 

 

Can't we give the man a chance or are we just writing players off after 159 minutes now?

 

 

 

[Ramperbamper]

I was talking about our youth players in general. They're nae good enough was my point. Whether you have an agenda against McInnes or not you can't argue that he knows more about our squad than the fans do and that he's more qualified than us to make the call on whether players are ready to be first team starters or not.

 

McInnes suggested at a recent Q&A that Wright wasn't doing enough in training to justify first team game time, which tends to back up what you're saying.

[RicoS321]

According to our official website Gleeson has played 33 minutes against Burnley, 52 minutes v Huns and 74 minutes v Dundee. He has just come into a new league with new team mates and had an injury issue in pre season. 

 

Can't we give the man a chance or are we just writing players off after 159 minutes now?

 

Did you not read the part where I said: "I know, I know, I'm just using him as an example"?

 

I'm the only person that's put forward my negative opinion on Gleeson, and on every single occasion I've caveated the comment with something along the lines of "obviously it's very early days".

 

Nobody has written Gleeson off on this forum.

 

Can people read through comments first before putting up arguments against things that have not happened?

[Guest jinkyjoe]

I think that not having had much game time is more of a worry. He's had the entire pre-season like anyone else. The reason he's not had much game time is that he's seen as being either not good enough, or we didn't require him for a particular game. I could understand us not needing him in the Burnley games, and perhaps even the hun game and I suppose we were trying out a front 2 to, logically, his detriment at the weekend so maybe there's some strength in that argument. My first impressions were that he was a lightweight fanny who didn't track back enough to make him worthwhile - a shite Ryan Christie. As for Gleeson, I'm not even sure what he's supposed to do? He can't perform the sitting role that Ball/Hoban did effectively against Burnley and in the "bigger" games. He doesn't have the passing range and coverage of Ferguson to provide even part of the McLean role. He doesn't have the engine and drive of Shinnie. He doesn't seem to be a number 10. He seems to have a serious case of chrisclarkitis or, at best, robmilsomsyndrome. Again, he got a decent (if slightly hampered with injury) pre-season, so I don't know what we're waiting for. He needs to get his finger out his hoop, because it's the basics of "running about" that he's not doing.

 

Really?

[Ten Caat]

Ok I'll put my hand up....I'm writing him off already as not good enough. He is slow, looks overweight and not much of a tackler. And I'll suggest that is why DM went and brought Dom Ball back....we had signed 3 midfielders in Gleeson, Forrester and Ferguson, we obviously needed a new striker as priority yet he felt compelled to go and bring in another defensive midfielder covering exactly the same position as Gleeson was meant to.

 

It has been mentioned elsewhere about McInnes being reluctant to blood youth. Well fingers crossed he starts giving Dean Campbell some game time soon. I predict that Ball and Shinnie will be our preferred defensive midfield pairing for the first half of the season. Hopefully by Feb/March with some decent game time behind him, Campbell will be filling Ball's position and Gleeson will be offski to some club in English League 2 on a free next summer.

 

Just my opinion like

[rocket_scientist]

Nobody has written Gleeson off on this forum.

 

Can people read through comments first before putting up arguments against things that have not happened?

 

You know how it works. People with the balls to express an opinion, who have the courage of their convictions, who stick their head above the parapet are resented by the silent majority, the bairns of Jock Tamson and their sad little lives.

[KennyFuckinPowers]

FFS Rico  Even though I thoroughly disagree with your Gleeson assessment as early as it is into his AFC career, you're fairly proving popular for having the audacity to have an opinion.

 

In any case, I will maintain my initial thoughts on him, in that he's doing what he's supposed to do in regards to collecting the ball and keeping it moving, I never saw the tackle he's allegedly shat out of, however, I have now seen more than you saying he did, so must have been something in it.

 

What I will say, is after a couple of games, I have noticed that he lets his man go quite easily, fails to track them all the way into the Box, he did it vs Rangers, watch the throw in they get the penalty from, he let the player go by him and failed to track him and he also done it against Dundee once or twice.

 

I feel he needs to settle, perhaps he's unhappy off the pitch at the moment, completely new environment for him, I stick to my guns though, I feel he'll become a key player eventually, it's still ridiculously early to judge him. 

[RicoS321]

Really?

 

If you go down five posts from the one you quoted you'll see the clarification. Although I expect you know that and were just trying to catch me out. Otherwise you'd have written the response on the actual thread. Or at least quoted me on this thread instead of replying as if it was more than just me who had been making negative comments.

 

As I said, nobody is writing anyone off because it's far too early for that. Just making opinions on performance to date.

 

In terms of the quote you just put up, it's a genuine question not really about his ability but his role. If you can enlighten us with your opinion rather than telling folk not to have one, then that'd be a start.

[rocket_scientist]

My criticism of McInnes is that there are minutes where he could have played a youngster and he hasn't.

 

Many of us can see that McInnes has an appalling record of playing youth which is why it is madness to think that our young players aren't good enough and simply just take his word for it and have faith in his judgements. They've not had enough game time to know either way and his judgements haven't been great over the years, his excuse being budget but the reality being his inability to get footballers performing anywhere near their best.

 

 

It has been mentioned elsewhere about McInnes being reluctant to blood youth. Well fingers crossed he starts giving Dean Campbell some game time soon.

 

Another one I had completely forgotten about, again by reason of so few minutes game time.

[Ten Caat]

As I said, nobody is writing anyone off because it's far too early for that.

 

I am!

[RicoS321]

I am!

 

Did you put it in writing before jinkjoe mentioned it though? Otherwise it doesn't count.

[wee toon red]

I think the point is that we don't know as we don't see the young players' attitudes in training. It's useless using Alex Ferguson or some other acclaimed fictional/non-fictional coach as an example. Managers are no different to players, and very capable ones are not remotely within our budget. We should be looking at other managers in our division and the promotion of youth within their ranks and the success of that as a barometer of McInnes' performance. We have absolutely no how he chooses to talk to the youngsters, and it could very well be the case that they are not responding to the challenge set because of their own unwillingness to put in the extra effort. Certainly McKenna hold McInnes in high regard and has benefitted from his coaching to the extent he signed a new deal.

 

Hamilton would probably be the best example. That is somewhere where the entire club is setup as a mechanism through which to promote from within. That's their philosophy and their cost base. We could do that, but we'd sacrifice second place obviously. Are there any clubs with a derivative of that model that are producing more than 1-2 players for every batch of youngsters? I noticed Cochrane playing for Hearts colts v County last night for example, a player that they thought would be amazing since Levein gave him his first start. Are there any players at any team in the SPL that have had similar success stories like McKenna recently? Are any of the top 6 playing their youngsters every week (more than two let's say)?

 

My criticism of McInnes is that there are minutes where he could have played a youngster and he hasn't. That's usually because we've had a squad that required that other (shite) senior players were given priority to keep the entire squad happy or to keep their hand in whilst not playing every week so they're ready when needed. I think that the club needs to enforce that strategy though if that's what our target is. Make sure that there are no fillers. For example, I thought that Dean Campbell looks like a better player so far than Gleeson (I know, I know, I'm just using him as an example). If it turns out that Gleeson isn't going to make it here after a decent run of opportunities, will he continue to be given minutes at Campbell's expense? I think he would, and I think that is where McInnes falls down (May at Anderson's expense will be another). The wasted minutes on Maynard were a huge frustration when he should have been ditched (I'd have re-sold him before the window closed cause he was so obviously fucking shite). We're wasting time on a player that we know wouldn't improve. The approach on Frank Ross, to me, was the correct one. He wasn't ready and 6 months of playing at a decent level makes him more ready. The only thing I'd add is that the same should have been afforded to Wright; 22 minutes from January was scandalous. However, he may have been being a dick or something that we're not party to; that's the difficulty of judging. 

 

I think the club needs a strategy and a set of targets. Something that they can hold McInnes to account for. His strategy is to make sure nothing gets in the way of a 1-0 victory, so no risks will be taken, because he'll lose his job if results don't go. The club needs to force the issue if it sees youth development as a function of our club.

 

A very good post with some very good points. If the club does see youth development as key, then McInnes needs to know that he will be afforded some latitude by the board if, by running a squad where youth is the majority of the backup, he doesn't get us to second or we go on a bad run. Whether the majority of the support would be happy with that is another question entirely, even if the board were ok with it.

[rocket_scientist]

I think the point is that we don't know as we don't see the young players' attitudes in training. It's useless using Alex Ferguson or some other acclaimed fictional/non-fictional coach as an example.

 

I just saw a film last night. It contained truths about achievement, truths that are invisible to most because most - even within professional sport - are losers, not winners. The parallels between the ruthless methods of coaching adopted by SAF and this musical teacher (albeit extremely illustrated for fictional purposes) were very relevant to the point I was making.

[rocket_scientist]

The wasted minutes on Maynard were a huge frustration when he should have been ditched (I'd have re-sold him before the window closed cause he was so obviously fucking shite). We're wasting time on a player that we know wouldn't improve.

 

Couldn't agree more. This much was obvious to anyone... APART from to McInnes.

 

Within 5 minutes of Zola's debut I turned to my mate and said that this cunt can't play fitba. This is another George Weah's cousin. Did you read about that cunt from South America somewhere who got paid for THIRTEEN YEARS in the professional ranks despite never being able to play (because he fixed everyone up with girls so he was "good to have around the place").

 

 

The approach on Frank Ross, to me, was the correct one. He wasn't ready and 6 months of playing at a decent level makes him more ready. The only thing I'd add is that the same should have been afforded to Wright; 22 minutes from January was scandalous. However, he may have been being a dick or something that we're not party to; that's the difficulty of judging. 

 

If he was a dick in training, who could blame him? Wouldn't you get pissed off starting only FOUR games in his first FOUR years under McInnes.

 

How could he be properly motivated, being treated so appallingly that donkey journeymen keep on getting starts ahead of him? He was an exciting prospect once upon a time. The killer for me was Rangers at home, the second of the double-header when Kris Commons was already pronouncing that McInnes was destined for Ibrox. He started Wright for the first time in ages and Scott had a shocker, as did every single one of them, the worst two consecutive matches I have ever seen in over 50 years watching. He's never started him again. Whatever promise he once had may well have been extinguished and if that is the case, it's 100% down to mismanagement. If he can't inspire and develop youth, he's not fit for the job.

 

 

I think the club needs a strategy and a set of targets. Something that they can hold McInnes to account for. His strategy is to make sure nothing gets in the way of a 1-0 victory, so no risks will be taken, because he'll lose his job if results don't go. The club needs to force the issue if it sees youth development as a function of our club.

 

I don't agree with strategies and targets when it comes to player selections. This is football, not a committee in the civil service. A manager should be judged by results but his losing mentality - like Calderwood not believing that he should have been sacked - reckons that coming second is proof of him doing a good job.

 

It's like he doesn't have to change his mediocrity to keep his job. And whilst I agree with you that his failure to give youth a chance is a major failing, I reckon this season is where it will all cave in. We are the weakest we have ever been under McInnes and getting second spot is NOT going to happen, not by a significant margin. We have been up against even worse teams, very poorly managed in previous years. That's not the case for 2018/19. McInnes MUST change - by recruiting properly, getting more out of his journeymen and giving youth a reasonable crack - and as he is incapable of change (due to his major defects in personality), it WILL go tits up this season.

[rocket_scientist]

Certainly McKenna hold McInnes in high regard and has benefitted from his coaching to the extent he signed a new deal.

 

McKenna isn't a brain surgeon. He's a young impressionable loon with a LOT to learn. His signing a new deal with AFC is no barrier to anyone wanting to come in for him. The wages we pay are peanuts compared to the levels some reckon he's capable of.

 

Has he benefitted from McInnes's coaching? Do you know this? We see the same failing in McKenna almost every week and he's not doing anything to improve it.

 

I said at the time that Sone Aluko would never be good enough to play in the EPL and I got that wrong because he did (for Hull if I recall right) but my point was he would never be good enough to be a consistent performer in the EPL. For all the plaudits that we all give to McKenna - undoubtedly our most "valuable" footballer - let me be the first to say that he will never be a consistent starter in the EPL because unlike the other young Scots Robertson and Fraser - he's not good enough. I personally think that McKenna's fatal flaw is something that may not be possible to coach out of him. It would help if our manager can even see it though, and of that I'd be surprised if he can.

[RicoS321]

If he was a dick in training, who could blame him? Wouldn't you get pissed off starting only FOUR games in his first FOUR years under McInnes.

 

How could he be properly motivated, being treated so appallingly that donkey journeymen keep on getting starts ahead of him? He was an exciting prospect once upon a time. The killer for me was Rangers at home, the second of the double-header when Kris Commons was already pronouncing that McInnes was destined for Ibrox. He started Wright for the first time in ages and Scott had a shocker, as did every single one of them, the worst two consecutive matches I have ever seen in over 50 years watching. He's never started him again. Whatever promise he once had may well have been extinguished and if that is the case, it's 100% down to mismanagement. If he can't inspire and develop youth, he's not fit for the job.

 

I don't agree with strategies and targets when it comes to player selections. This is football, not a committee in the civil service.

 

Donkey journeymen aren't getting a start ahead of him though. They're coming off the bench instead of him and that's where I have the issue. Our starting two of McGinn and GMS are currently better than Wright and he shouldn't be starting the majority of games (it doesn't really matter if others think otherwise for the purposes of the point). I am not suggesting strategies and targets when it comes to player selections, I'm suggesting strategies and targets when it comes to squad building. There's a good argument to say that we've over-signed by one in midfield which will prevent Campbell getting game time unless he goes out on loan (which is absolutely fine, but we should do one or the other not keep him just in case). Last year we over-signed in the wide areas with McGinn returning and so Wright should have gone out on loan. McInnes is cautious and prefers experience over youth, so by restricting him at a strategic level he is forced to face that caution head on.

 

It's like he doesn't have to change his mediocrity to keep his job. And whilst I agree with you that his failure to give youth a chance is a major failing, I reckon this season is where it will all cave in. We are the weakest we have ever been under McInnes and getting second spot is NOT going to happen, not by a significant margin. We have been up against even worse teams, very poorly managed in previous years. That's not the case for 2018/19. McInnes MUST change - by recruiting properly, getting more out of his journeymen and giving youth a reasonable crack - and as he is incapable of change (due to his major defects in personality), it WILL go tits up this season.

 

Yep, I think you might be right. As I said above, if he faces that cautious approach then we can judge him on his abilites. Over the last few years (perhaps not last season) we've bought a succesful team. We've had enough depth on those purchases that we've afforded our way into second place each year. McInnes hasn't had to use youth so he hasn't done it. In a game we're he's judged on results that's no surprise as the most pragmatic and safe approach - that has returned second place each year - has proved effective. I've not seen him in a situation like the one we face this season so I don't know how he'll approach it. It's not as easy to beat all the other teams anymore, so he's really going to have to shake things up. The way we finished last season was a positive start with reasonably risky moves such as throwing in Ball and Cosgrove showing great success. Second place would be a phenomenal achievement this season (it was impressive last season) as ~£8M of spending by the hun doesn't buy you nothing. It's a whole different league of spending to us and we simply cannot afford to buy a manager who could reverse those odds. It's now where McInnes has to give the fans more because when we miss out on second place something needs to replace it. I think that the succesful introduction of youth would be a great start.

 

 

[LA-Don]

Scott Wright needs to go out on loan or leave. The new Peter Pawlett.

[tlg1903]

He needs game time but I would much rather it was with us.  DM is far to hesitant to drop the likes of McGinn and GMS if they have a shit game and give SW a chance.  Would keep those two on their toes if they knew they were a bit more droppable if rhey didn't perform. 

[Guest jinkyjoe]

If you go down five posts from the one you quoted you'll see the clarification. Although I expect you know that and were just trying to catch me out. Otherwise you'd have written the response on the actual thread. Or at least quoted me on this thread instead of replying as if it was more than just me who had been making negative comments.

 

As I said, nobody is writing anyone off because it's far too early for that. Just making opinions on performance to date.

 

In terms of the quote you just put up, it's a genuine question not really about his ability but his role. If you can enlighten us with your opinion rather than telling folk not to have one, then that'd be a start.

 

There are a lot of keyboard warriors out there who seem to take issue with anyone who does not share their point of view.  It was never my intention to "catch you out", got better things to do with my time.  I know some people post controversial things on here to create a storm but that is not my style.  It was a genuine comment that surely we should be waiting until half way through the season before being able to say whether someone is good or bad rather than a game and a half into their AFC career.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[rocket_scientist]

surely we should be waiting until half way through the season before being able to say whether someone is good or bad rather than a game and a half into their AFC career.

 

It doesn't take two dozen games to see that a footballer is pish. Half a season is nonsense.

 

For the record, my jury is out on Gleeson by virtue that he hasn't showed enough either way. But I do love the fact that Rico and TC have jumped in early with their initial impressions. I also think that they're going to be proved right, or at least as a betting man and if forced to stake I would be in the nay camp. He's just not dynamic. He looks pedestrian. Wouldn't be surprised if he's yet another loser journeyman that McInnes has recruited, like so many he's introduced to AFC.

[RicoS321]

There are a lot of keyboard warriors out there who seem to take issue with anyone who does not share their point of view.  It was never my intention to "catch you out", got better things to do with my time.  I know some people post controversial things on here to create a storm but that is not my style.

 

Fair doos

 

It was a genuine comment that surely we should be waiting until half way through the season before being able to say whether someone is good or bad rather than a game and a half into their AFC career.

 

But why? Surely it's a forum and the debate over whether a new signing is good enough, what our first impressions are and how they fit into the team (or not) is exactly what we should be doing? I'm not saying he's a dick who we should start booing. I shouldn't even have to caveat with the fact that it's early on and far too early to judge the guy because that should be blatantly obvious to anyone with half a brain, Moreover, my thoughts on that are utterly irrelevant because it's a simple fact that its far too early to judge him regardless of what I say - isn't that obvious?

 

The problem is that you quoted my post and yet you still haven't addressed its central point of "where do you see him fitting in and in what formation?". You're basically saying that I shouldn't begin to form an opinion, is that correct? You're suggesting that there are "keyboard warriors out there who seem to take issue with anyone who does not share their point of view" but you don't back that up with anything. You're not "not sharing my point of view" you're telling me not to have one, you must notice the important difference here? If you said: "I think you're wrong about Gleeson, he put in an excellent through ball for Ferguson against the hun (he did) and I think that we could see more of that if we had Shinnie in there to give him more time on the ball", I'd have seen your point. Why not share your thoughts on Gleeson and tell us where you think his strengths are and how you think he'll fit into a McInnes eleven? You'd get far more support on here for putting forward the positives than I would putting across the negatives, so you'd be winning the argument instead of not even having one.

 

For balance, I'm still all for May getting a regular game because I think that we might still be able to turn his career around (and I wasn't that please by his signing either). I'm not trying to be a dick by arguing with you on this, it's just I get a bit fed up of being told to "get behind the team" (I've had a season ticket for over 20 years and I don't remember ever booing) or other such nonsense on a forum. This is the place for discussion and disagreement, that's its purpose. I'll be very much behind Gleeson at the weekend.

[BobbyBiscuit]

I'm not trying to be a dick by arguing with you on this, it's just I get a bit fed up of being told to "get behind the team" (I've had a season ticket for over 20 years and I don't remember ever booing) or other such nonsense on a forum. This is the place for discussion and disagreement, that's its purpose. I'll be very much behind Gleeson at the weekend.

 

Completely agree. Too many people now just don't want anything bordering on the negative said about the manager, team or club as a whole on an internet forum.  I've not been overly impressed with Gleeson, to continue this example, I thought he looked like a poor Ryan Jack; he has to be braver in possession at times because due to the position he plays he will see a lot of the ball and we need him to be able to do more with it. 

 

I'm only saying that here, I'm not going to the matches and booing the guy. Will support him all the way.  This continual jumping on people for having an opinion - particularly one which can be articulated, and clearly isn't "just because I want to moan about the club" is grim.  Almost as grim as the "Twitter wars" after the weekend, which is along exactly the same lines, but worse.