PDA

View Full Version : 4.4.2



RossScott1991
18-11-2017, 07:44 PM
Simply doesn't work with the players we have, we always seem to play worse with Stokes and Murray both on the park IMO. Thought there was a real imbalance in the midfield today.

Libby Hibby
18-11-2017, 07:56 PM
Time for a spell of 3-5-2 and play Porteous as a CB alingside Efe and Hanlon.

Billy Whizz
18-11-2017, 07:59 PM
Time for a spell of 3-5-2 and play Porteous as a CB alingside Efe and Hanlon.

We lost both our goals with 352

tamig
18-11-2017, 08:04 PM
4-3-3 has been working a treat. Why change that?

Nicho87
18-11-2017, 08:16 PM
I would have hooked Murray and put Boyle up front

GoalsMcGinley
18-11-2017, 09:00 PM
4-3-3 has been working a treat. Why change that?

To accommodate Stokes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Blaster
18-11-2017, 09:01 PM
Time for a spell of 3-5-2 and play Porteous as a CB alingside Efe and Hanlon.

Porteous who cost us the winner today?

Brads Laing
18-11-2017, 09:02 PM
To accommodate Stokes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Didn't seem to be a problem accommodating stokes when he won us the game against Dundee

Thegreenside
18-11-2017, 09:04 PM
Porteous who cost us the winner today?

Also saved us a certain goal soon after he came on

Blaster
18-11-2017, 09:06 PM
Also saved us a certain goal soon after he came on

I really like Porteous but he cost us a point today. Hopefully he learns from it but my point is he’s not ready to start in a back 3

wookie70
18-11-2017, 09:08 PM
I really like Porteous but he cost us a point today. Hopefully he learns from it but my point is he’s not ready to start in a back 3

He has been excellent in pretty much every game he has played. He wasn't great today but it is hard for a defender coming on and to be fair he he was in good company being poor today

Smartie
18-11-2017, 09:10 PM
I really like Porteous but he cost us a point today. Hopefully he learns from it but my point is he’s not ready to start in a back 3

I think he is ready.

Yes, he made mistakes, and today they were costly.

He's played enough first team football for us so far that he was overdue making a costly mistake.

He also made some invaluable contributions.

All of his more experienced senior colleagues have flogged goals - players shouldn't be dropped as soon as they make a mistake.

Blaster
18-11-2017, 09:19 PM
I think he is ready.

Yes, he made mistakes, and today they were costly.

He's played enough first team football for us so far that he was overdue making a costly mistake.

He also made some invaluable contributions.

All of his more experienced senior colleagues have flogged goals - players shouldn't be dropped as soon as they make a mistake.

I’m not saying he should be dropped. I like him

He’s not currently in our best 11 though and someone above suggested he should be.

Tyler Durden
18-11-2017, 09:22 PM
Simply doesn't work with the players we have, we always seem to play worse with Stokes and Murray both on the park IMO. Thought there was a real imbalance in the midfield today.

There's short memories and then there's ignoring our previous game when Stokes and Murray linked up to win us the match.

After the Dundee game there were threads suggesting Stokes must start every game. Now today it's all his fault that we lost.

Smartie
18-11-2017, 09:22 PM
I’m not saying he should be dropped. I like him

He’s not currently in our best 11 though and someone above suggested he should be.

He's not far away.

The biggest issue for us today was being without Dylan. He makes us tick.

With Dylan out of the team, I think a very strong case can be made for playing 3 at the back and having Porteous in the team.

I certainly don't think Stokes made anything like a case for playing in that type of role regularly, as good a player as he is.

We weren't just unlucky today - if we played again tomorrow with that same team we'd probably get the same outcome.

Therefore a debate as to what we should do when Dylan is missing is fair enough, and I think the suggestion of playing Porteous in a back 3 is just about as good as any other, if for no other reason than it allows us to play both Murray and Stokes in positions in which they are comfortable.

tamig
18-11-2017, 09:24 PM
To accommodate Stokes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know that. My response was relating to the 3-5-2 suggestion.

Blaster
18-11-2017, 09:27 PM
He's not far away.

The biggest issue for us today was being without Dylan. He makes us tick.

With Dylan out of the team, I think a very strong case can be made for playing 3 at the back and having Porteous in the team.

I certainly don't think Stokes made anything like a case for playing in that type of role regularly, as good a player as he is.

We weren't just unlucky today - if we played again tomorrow with that same team we'd probably get the same outcome.

Therefore a debate as to what we should do when Dylan is missing is fair enough, and I think the suggestion of playing Porteous in a back 3 is just about as good as any other.

Dylan should have started today. If fit enough for the bench fit enough to start

I don’t think Porteous is far away either and of course younger players will make mistakes. I accept that. I still don’t believe our strongest 11 at the moment should include him

But it will do in time I believe that

J-C
18-11-2017, 10:26 PM
4-3-3 has been working a treat. Why change that?


This, if McGeouch wasn't starting surely Slivka was his natural replacement and not Stokes, you cannot ask a lazy type player to play in midfield when there's a natural one sitting on the bench, Lennon got it all wrong today.

lyonhibs
19-11-2017, 10:25 AM
I really like Porteous but he cost us a point today. Hopefully he learns from it but my point is he’s not ready to start in a back 3

I've not seen the highlights and my view at the game wasn't the best (also I was starting to wonder how many toes I was going to lose to frostbite at that stage) so can't comment on how at fault Porteous was but what's sure is that in the middle of the park, Liam Craig (who IIRC made the pass out to the right) should have been put into orbit long before he got the chance to play the pass.

A bit of savvy gamesmanship there and we get a point IMO.

SChibs
19-11-2017, 11:13 AM
I've not seen the highlights and my view at the game wasn't the best (also I was starting to wonder how many toes I was going to lose to frostbite at that stage) so can't comment on how at fault Porteous was but what's sure is that in the middle of the park, Liam Craig (who IIRC made the pass out to the right) should have been put into orbit long before he got the chance to play the pass.

A bit of savvy gamesmanship there and we get a point IMO.

I Agree but Mcginn had picked up a needless booking by barging into Davidson earlier on so he couldn't 'take one for the teams on Craig. Not saying it's mcginns fault that we lost but he needs to cut out needless bookings as he could have stopped that goal from happening at the half way line.

GoalsMcGinley
23-11-2017, 12:05 PM
Didn't seem to be a problem accommodating stokes when he won us the game against Dundee


I didn’t say it was a problem I simply stated a fact. We changed the formation to accommodate him. Pure and simple.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lyonhibs
23-11-2017, 12:20 PM
I Agree but Mcginn had picked up a needless booking by barging into Davidson earlier on so he couldn't 'take one for the teams on Craig. Not saying it's mcginns fault that we lost but he needs to cut out needless bookings as he could have stopped that goal from happening at the half way line.

There was about 30 seconds to go. Compared to what happened in reality, I'd have fancied our chances of getting a point when down to 10 men.