#19 - 06/12/08 - Queen of the South (h)

[Al C]

We should never have got rid of Dobbie/Tosh/McQuilken/Weatherston (delete as applicable).

Or David Bingham for that matter.

[SaintSam1884]

A home game so went 4-3-3, very positive.

Or as my friend Kyle says, very negative...

The inclusion of the third striker at the expense of a midfielder only served to descend the midfield into a complete disfunctional mess that was neither capable of going forward nor protecting the defence. Irvine and Craig were left exposed and their allowance to attack drastically reduced because they knew they'd have to bolt back almost as quickly as they'd moved forward. Usually - on the right especially - Irvine and Millar will overlap and support one another in both directions. That happened on neither side today. It was an absolute shambles.

The formation was the reason the team was unable to put together any sort of coherent performance today. Playing with three men up front doesn't always equate to positive play and lots of goals. It's no coincidence that today was the first time we'd failed to score in a game since Partick Thistle demolished us 4-0 at Firhill in August! It's also no coincidence that today was about as bad as we've played since that game.

You don't always need to include a third striker to be more attacking. We could've played Millar on the right and Swankie on the left of a four man midfield with Hardie in a more suitable central role and Morris plodding about in there too. I'd be willing to bet that Millar and Swankie playing down either side with Irvine and Craig in support would make us a million times more threatening that we were today with the uninspired inclusion of that 'positive' third striker.

[The ghost of Jim Morton]

Shit game, poor display, shite ref, wrong formation, wrong starting 11. Far too many below par perfomances.1 point gained though and 5 points clear.Lets move on to Greenock Morton Can someone in the know tell Del to get a player at the front post when we have a corner please.Then when a corner is not hit well enough that player can flick it on.This works, honestly I have seen it done.. It aint fecking rocket science..

The End....

[SaintSam1884]

A word on Queens. They simply struck me as a side who were trying not to lose. Negative, certainly but in light of their recent poor form and some heavy defeats, that's exactly what they need to do. They need to shut teams out and once they have learnt to do that, only then can they work on getting back to winning ways. They will view this as a good point and rightly so.

[THE REBEL SAINT]

A word on Queens. They simply struck me as a side who were trying not to lose. Negative, certainly but in light of their recent poor form and some heavy defeats, that's exactly what they need to do. They need to shut teams out and once they have learnt to do that, only then can they work on getting back to winning ways. They will view this as a good point and rightly so.

they always play like that away from home

[CynicalSaintee]

Palmerstone is usually a fortress, so they must be relying on winning their home games and eking out results away from home. That would certainly explain today's result.

[GeorgetheSaint]

Look, the team didn't play at their best today, but we still should've won with a few very good chances, and Savo's legitimate goal. The main problem about today, was the sudden change of formation after going so long without defeat. I think most people would agree that Holmes, Savo combination has bee very productive for us, and Savo has obviously been scoring alot of goals. So why oh why has he been told to play deeper behind another two strikers. It doesnt suit him at all, he plays off the shoulder of defenders and has great movement, which cant be used in that position. Is Del just trying to accomodate Sammy in the team??

[CynicalSaintee]

I wouldn't blame him. He's got to use all his more expensive players as much as he can to justify their purchase, Sammy in particular. Although after today's display, you'd be a fool to question his selection.

[Cagey]

Bit pish the day t.b.h, but still if we play poor and we are still five points clear i won't complain.

B.T.W where is the MOTM poll, is it just me or is it still not there>

Think Radders usually sets it up but he must still be in the pub as I haven`t noticed him posting on here or P & B tonight.

[Mike180279]

thought Sammy was good today. would like to see him and Savo. Swankie on the left.

[Al C]

I think the intention in playing 4-3-3 was positive but completely agree that you can still play 4-4-2 and be positive. However I think we played decently enough in the second half and had we got the goals we deserved then the formation would have been fine. I also don't think the performance was any worse than the Thistle or Airdrie home games, both of which were won.

Or as my friend Kyle says, very negative...

The inclusion of the third striker at the expense of a midfielder only served to descend the midfield into a complete disfunctional mess that was neither capable of going forward nor protecting the defence. Irvine and Craig were left exposed and their allowance to attack drastically reduced because they knew they'd have to bolt back almost as quickly as they'd moved forward. Usually - on the right especially - Irvine and Millar will overlap and support one another in both directions. That happened on neither side today. It was an absolute shambles.

The formation was the reason the team was unable to put together any sort of coherent performance today. Playing with three men up front doesn't always equate to positive play and lots of goals. It's no coincidence that today was the first time we'd failed to score in a game since Partick Thistle demolished us 4-0 at Firhill in August! It's also no coincidence that today was about as bad as we've played since that game.

You don't always need to include a third striker to be more attacking. We could've played Millar on the right and Swankie on the left of a four man midfield with Hardie in a more suitable central role and Morris plodding about in there too. I'd be willing to bet that Millar and Swankie playing down either side with Irvine and Craig in support would make us a million times more threatening that we were today with the uninspired inclusion of that 'positive' third striker.

[slf]

Think Radders usually sets it up but he must still be in the pub as I haven`t noticed him posting on here or P & B tonight.

hally feckin lu yah

[GeorgetheSaint]

Dont get me wrong, i didn't mean i dont rate sammy, or that he didnt play well today, i thought he was ok. But what i meant was that is it justified to change a system to accomodate one player?? especially when we're on such a good unbeaten run. IMH Personnel, yes(although i wouldnt change the front two at all), system, no. Even play him wide, thats actually where he's more effective anyway.

[SaintSam1884]

Al - I agree that the intention was positive but the reality was not. McInnes cannot necessarily be criticised for not being a psychic as few of us are but it was clear throughout the match that it wasn't working and he chose to implement like for like substitutions rather than changing things. For that he deserves some criticism. Through it all though, we remain unbeaten. Credit where it's due for that.

[SlickDT]

Or as my friend Kyle says, very negative...

The inclusion of the third striker at the expense of a midfielder only served to descend the midfield into a complete disfunctional mess that was neither capable of going forward nor protecting the defence. Irvine and Craig were left exposed and their allowance to attack drastically reduced because they knew they'd have to bolt back almost as quickly as they'd moved forward. Usually - on the right especially - Irvine and Millar will overlap and support one another in both directions. That happened on neither side today. It was an absolute shambles.

The formation was the reason the team was unable to put together any sort of coherent performance today. Playing with three men up front doesn't always equate to positive play and lots of goals. It's no coincidence that today was the first time we'd failed to score in a game since Partick Thistle demolished us 4-0 at Firhill in August! It's also no coincidence that today was about as bad as we've played since that game.

You don't always need to include a third striker to be more attacking. We could've played Millar on the right and Swankie on the left of a four man midfield with Hardie in a more suitable central role and Morris plodding about in there too. I'd be willing to bet that Millar and Swankie playing down either side with Irvine and Craig in support would make us a million times more threatening that we were today with the uninspired inclusion of that 'positive' third striker.

Couldn't agree more, this may sound a bit strange but I suggested to my friends a few times that bringing on a midfileder for a striker could be a more creative sub, than another striker.

I would have brought on Sheerin for Holmes at first to make it-

Millar-Hardie-Morris-Sherin

Sammy-Savo

[ancientsaint]

We didnt lose and are ahead of the chasing pack.......long way to go - but we seem to get a nose bleed when we are top.

Surprised Savo's goal didnt stand and ref has made one excuse to justify his decision-he bottled it.

[Carse of Gowrie Saint]

Next weeks game will be the same as todays with Morton happy to leave with a draw. We have to go back to a 4 4 2 with Sheerin coming into the left side of midfield at the expense of one of the forwards.

We must beat Morton on Saturday, 3 points from the last 3 games is not good enough !

[R.B.B:- Adz]

We should never have got rid of Dobbie/Tosh/McQuilken/Weatherston (delete as applicable).

Or David Bingham for that matter.

Crazy post! with the exception of McQuilken for the simple fact that we dont own a leftback, who out of that list would you propose would get near our first team??? Even then i'd probably still prefer Liam or Ando at left back.

[SlickDT]

Crazy post! with the exception of McQuilken for the simple fact that we dont own a leftback, who out of that list would you propose would get near our first team??? Even then i'd probably still prefer Liam or Ando at left back.

Think the post was a joke mate.

[Tranmere Saintee]

Apologies Cynical; that comment was made for someone elses benefit in relation to a pre season topic on here. Another poster made the claim Del did not rate Savo and would get rid of him.

Al, can you give us 101 reasons for this comment:D

[SaintSam1884]

Crazy post! with the exception of McQuilken for the simple fact that we dont own a leftback, who out of that list would you propose would get near our first team??? Even then i'd probably still prefer Liam or Ando at left back.

Although he was joking, Stephen Dobbie is undeniably good.

[Broon]

It seems the ref was correct with the savo incident. If a goalie bounces the ball he is still in possession and anyone interfering is fouling the goalie.

[SaintSam1884]

Savo is in one of todays papers saying otherwise, and that he's scored a number of similar goals in the past - albeit at reserve level - and they have stood. Either way, it only serves to show how poor we were yesterday.

[Kevin]

It seems the ref was correct with the savo incident. If a goalie bounces the ball he is still in possession and anyone interfering is fouling the goalie.

I thought Bell had started to roll the ball out to ground kick it, if that is the case the Savo was in the right to try and score and can understand how upset he was!

I remember George Best hooking a ball out the air into Gordon Bank's net during the home internationals in 1973. Referee stopped tha gema and consulted with his linesmen, shrugged and gave a free kick for a high boot from Best. I do not think there is anything in the rules about this but am happy for the Mad Referee or Chopper to put me right.

[Radford 72]

I've not read the rest of thread yet but will do in due course. Just want to put my thoughts down before doing so.

I think it's important not to start panicking because of the result yesterday but it is vital that the manager learns from what IMO was another mistake. He said in the build up this week that he doesn't follow the suggestion that you keep a winning team together but whilst the odd change is acceptable, his wholesale shuffling of the pack caused us problems, as it did in August. It's not hard to understand his reasons as he clearly wanted to include Samuel in the side as his pace would cause them problems but we haven't played 4-3-3 since that disasterous day at Firhill and it showed yesterday.

I can't really fault any individual performances, certainly in terms of effort, but it just didn't work as a unit and I hope he realises that now. He's been criticised for not changing things but that's another problem of the 4-3-3, you can't be seen to take a striker off for a midfielder when you're chasing the game. I suspect he's trying to keep all the players happy as well but the simple fact is that you can't keep 20 players happy as if the guys not involved are content then there's something wrong with them. At the same time, they have to appreciate we've been on a good run and need to be patient.

So, unfortunately the main negatives fall at the feet of the manager but the other problem was the lack of composure at key times. We got ourselves into good areas yesterday but I struggle to recall anyone showing a cool head when required. Not sure why as the players shouldn't feel under that much pressure. He's been very good this season but Chris Millar needs to start showing a bit more in front of goal. He's had very good chances to open his account in the past couple of home matches but has just swung his foot at the ball. For a guy that looks so relaxed in possession in the centre of the park, it's strange that he goes to pieces in the box. Another complaint would be the defence still fannying about on occasion, like last week, instead of just clearing their lines.

Positives to be taken to though. Another clean sheet for that defensive unit (we've only conceded 3 goals in the 7 matches they've started together) and Morris' performance was up a notch from last week. I thought it would take him ages to get going but at this rate, it's not going to be too long. He constantly made himself available for the pass and as the anchorman in the midfield, pushed right up to make sure the midfield were supporting the strikers. Don't think he wasted a pass all afternoon. Samuel too showed that he's the sort of player that can make the difference in matches.

Of the incidents, it was PK for me. The ball travelled a long distance after leaving Moon's boot and Aitken was trying to block the ball with his body. I didn't actually see Savo's "goal" as I was looking at the scoreboard since played had stopped. Don't think I've ever seen one of those allowed to stand though. Whilst I don't think he should have been sent off, for me Aitken's challenge is the sort that we should be penalising more heavily. Just took the man out as he broke towards the area. Generally the ref wasn't the worst though, although Derek Holmes must be doing something I can't see as he gets nothing every week.

Queens will be happy with their point and clean sheet. They set up as they have on their last couple of visits but this time got some reward.