Rousseau

Damn it. That's twice on the trot I've underestimated our scoring ability...

4-0, Lafferty  

Kent off, Lafferty on.

Ah, screw it; I want Six!

We're playing some lovely stuff.

Dorrans comes on for Coulibaly.

This is some lovely stuff.

Ejaria comes on for Tavernier. 

McCrorie shuttles across to RB.

I'm a wee bit worried now; this could be anything, but I've only gone with a 3-0 prediction.

3-0.

Another great move. 

There's your triangle!

What a move that was!

We've been comfortable without getting out of 1st gear. 

ALLLLFFFRRREEEDDDOOOO!

2-0. 

Wonderful goal. Slipped through, dummies the defender by cutting inside, and slots it home.

Tavernier off the bar from another Free-kick.

1-0, Tavernier Free-kick. 

Piece of p*sh.

1 hour ago, DMAA said:

But it's an assumption that it is all he can do. He's only been given cameos so far and it seems clear he's been asked to do this.

 

But from the evidence of youth games he's a much more rounded and talented player. Last night's through ball was no surprise to me, he's not just a new Gregg Wylde. Clips of him playing for Scotland youth and Norwich youth shows him deployed on the right and able to cut inside as well as having a fantastic shot (both right and left foot).

 

Defensive discipline is something he may be weak with, but I just don't buy the idea that we need someone starting on the left who will run inside and pass back to the defence (which Kent does constantly). Middleton is the kind of winger you want centre mids coming towards and playing a one-two down the line with allowing him to get where we want our winger, in behind the full backs. Man City were doing this constantly last season with Sane and Sterling. We need our wingers in the cut-back position in behind, which is where we got both our goals last night.

 

 

I'm not sure what we're debating?

He probably deserves a start. He is a good young player; refreshing and exciting. 

I still think he's raw, almost one-dimensional, from what I've seen thus far. That is partly due to the fact he's only had cameos, but I can only base my opinion on what I've seen. 

I think we tend to jump the gun somewhat with our youngsters. He's done well, very well, when he's come on, but that doesn't mean he's ready to be a regular starter. He needs to get better at the link-up, knowing when and not to take on his man, covering and tracking back, and positioning and runs off and with the ball etc. To be fair, he'll need starts to develop that; late cameos don't help him in that regard.  

14 minutes ago, DMAA said:

By the way, we've discussed modern styles vs tradtional styles before and I think Chris Burke would struggle to break through today because people don't fancy an out and out winger these days. For me the game hasn't changed as much as people say it has and fast wingers who'll beat a full back and get to the by-line will always be a full back's worst nightmare and create lots of goals.

It's certainly a huge threat, but it's not enough if that's all he does. That muppet James McClean comes to mind, unfortunately; all he does is run at defenders, but it's easy enough to deal with; it only really works towards the end of games.  

It's a really good weapon to have, but players need more nowadays, IMO.

1 minute ago, DMAA said:

Ah but you can't call him raw because he always takes on his man yet at the same time say that's what he's been tasked to do. I wouldn't say we have any reason to believe he is raw because he has been consistently effective at beating his man and creating chances for us. If he was like Sadiq and it was only coming off occasionally for him I would saw "raw" would be warranted.

 

It's true that he has an advantage coming on late, but for me the point is he is a totally different style of player and I think it's both the different style combined with his ability that has been the difference in how many chances he's created from the left wing compared to Kent.

 

In any case we're agreed he deserves a start in a home game where we are expected to be on the front foot. Those are the games where he can make his claim for a starting berth. He reminds me of Chris Burke. Chris Burke was a huge player for creating goals against your St Johnstone's and your Dundee's. Those are the games that we often didn't take 3 points from last season due to a lack of penetration and it ultimately cost us.

True, but he can still be raw if that's all he can do; which is why that's when he comes on. 

I wouldn't say he's different per se, -- maybe different from what we have, or is that what you meant? -- more old fashioned. He basically always wants to take on his man; It's exciting, and it has come off, but for me, it's naive. (I felt he contributed to the capitulation at Motherwell, because he couldn't keep the ball and couldn't defend.) I'd like to see how he can keep possession, pass the ball, take up defensive positions etc.

To be fair, his cameo last night impressed me most because of that exquisite through ball.

He certainly deserves a start. I'd just like to temper the expectations; we need more than a player that can only take on a player, as exciting and refreshing as that is. 

3 minutes ago, DMAA said:

I thought my banging on about Middleton was vindicated last night. Changed the game. You could almost smell the fear in their full back when he came on. He is so much more of a threat than Kent as a left winger it is just frustrating for me he keeps being benched because of his age.

 

Anyway last night he's proved his doubters wrong again and surely he's going to get his first start of the season soon. Middleton and Barisic is a parternership on the left that would bring a lot of goals this season.

He probably deserves a start, but coming on for the last 10 minutes in games when the opponents are tired and he's tasked with taking on his Full-back is quite different from the work he'll need to put in from the start. 

He's still very raw, for me; he always takes on his man, which is good, but it either comes off or he loses us possession; that's fine at the death but throughout the game, perhaps he still needs to learn. 

I do think a start against St Johnstone would be warranted, and a decent opponent to test that side of his game. 

I thought Worral was good. He looks a solid unit, but was also very comfortable on the ball.

Is he left-footed?

I wonder if our CB pairing could have been Katic (right-footed?) and Worral (left)? 

However, I think Goldson is the leader in defence so he'll be first choice. 

Anyone notice we changed from a 4-2-3-1 to a 4-3-3 in the second half? 

We were all complaining that we weren't doing anything with the ball, which this switch helped to change; we then had options further up the field.

It helped defensively too: I thought Halliday and Coulibaly were slow to press -- simply because they were playing a wee bit deeper -- and Arfield was kind of on his own, outnumbered pressing and receiving the ball. Halliday sat, with Arfield and Coulibaly playing slightly more advanced. 

We were quite open early in the 2nd, but grew into it. 

McGregor was at fault for the first goal for me, but then makes a wonderful save low to his right which looked goal-bound; that's the difference a top 'keeper makes. 

Fantastic result!

I feel like this is where their quality shines through.

It's a somewhat fortunate goal for them, but McGregor should be doing better. It may be a little mix up with Goldson and Worrall too. 

But, it's frustrating because they've not been great, and we've contrived to miss-place even the simplest of passes. If we could string more than two passes together we could actually create some decent openings. 

They're retreating into a mid-block, almost letting us pass through that first press, but then we're panicking and going backwards or sideways. If we were braver in passing through, to get Candeias and Kent on the ball, then I think we could create chances. 

I never expected much, but I did expect us to do better than we're doing. 

It's frustrating because we are much better than this. 

1 minute ago, Waltersgotstyle said:

Sandaza also went on to have a decent career though mate .

 

It wasn't talent that Sandaza lacked - he just wasn't interested.

 

Kerkar looked like he had never seen a ball before.

You may have a point.

What a debate; 'My player's worse than yours'...