Rousseau

What's the lineup?

Only going by the short video evidence. Positive he always looks available. Negative, I don't think I saw many forward passes. A poor man's Zelalem?

In the video I saw he made quite a few forward passes -- Carrick-esque (I'm not comparing them) -- but it's difficult to gauge a player from a short video clip. For what it's worth, I think he's similar to Zelalem, but is more defensively sound.

I'd prefer they lose in the final!

Fair enough ON the park.you never adressed the wages or the sell on value(none).

IMO,the mental thing will still be there-----he just needs a platform to expose it.(which he would get in spades up here)

Wage and sell-on value are self-evident. Again, I agree it is highly unlikely, bordering on impossible. I just made the point that he fits the profile.

That's a good point, regarding the platform to expose it. A bit of aggression is not a bad thing. I think he's mellowed: he was hounded in the Burnley game I saw and never rose to it; doesn't mean to say he won't but it's not a bad thing IMO. The goldfish bowl that is Glasgow may pose another problem entirely!

Ok,someone had to ask.how does he fit the profile(baring in mind hell be on £30,000 a week,oh and hes borderline insane).?

I agree it's unlikely, and If we omit the fact he is "borderline insane", he fits the profile because: a) he has a great work ethic, b) ball carrying ability, c) ability to recycle and retain possession, d) excellent passer, with a good range (he's got a high pass completion rate) and e) he's got, erm... character.

Again, I highly doubt he's a realistic option, but I think he fits the profile and would be an excellent addition. He was in the Championship team of the year, for a team that have pretty much strolled the league. Moreover, the 'insanity' you mention has subsided over the last few years. He still has that aggression, but what good footballer doesn't? Souness was full of it too (I'm not comparing the two -- except in aggression).

Am I the only one that finds it difficult to get excited about trying to sign a 19yo with 1 first team game under his belt that couldn't get more game time in a Liverpool side that has struggled badly most of the year. Klopp clearly doesn't rate him and he is a very good manager. I don't mind taking a punt on a young player but I don't for one second believe this guy will be a first team regular for us, or is what we need for next season.

 

One for the future perhaps but at 19 he should be forcing his way into first team action if he is all that.

I'm excited about him, because he's a great prospect and fits the profile perfectly. However, I agree, I'm not sure whether he's ready for the physicality of the league; I doubt whether he'll be a first-team regular. Who knows? He may be ready.

Oh, come on! Barton vs 'Broon'? Sell out.

Highly unlikely, but I see the logic in it. I think he does fit the profile, and would be a good addition; he's been superb for Burnley. However, I highly doubt it's likely.

Do these so-called journalists know anything? Fans are susceptible to over-the-top excitement around a transfer target, but there's a line; We know the difference between a realistic target and a complete fantasy. You do wonder how they're picking these names? And, indeed, why?

Next Up: Messi's angling for a move because Warburton met him once while scouting the Barcelona academy...

Rossiter is a tidy player, with good technical and passing ability, but very lightweight (in the mould of Crawford and Zelalem). He fits the bill, but I'm not sure how ready he is for the rough and tumble of the Premiership? The proof is in the fact that Rodgers liked him, for certain meaningless games, and thought he had promise, but Klopp has not used him once because I don't think he has the physicality needed to play for a Klopp side.

Hanley is a big, old-fashioned centre-back; strength and no-nonsense. I don't see him fitting in with Warburton's passing philosophy. Hanley is a strange one; I highly doubt he's a target. (I think he's rubbish.)

Here we were espousing the benefits of them having a grueling run of games before the Cup final, and they're not even going to get past the first round! As much as want them to stay down, I don't think anyone wants them out at this stage!

It's puzzling: we were beaten by Livingston, and they got humped by Stranraer! Hibs will get gubbed by Raith at the first play-off stage and still beat us in the final!

It's not an issue who he supports. If he wants to pull on the blue jersey, that's all that matters. Another non-story.

Sack Warburton and bring back McCoist! And if he's still doing that betting advert with Kammy, make a move for Neilson!

I presume it goes up to (and includes) the St Mirren game? The first three are interesting. McCoist and Neilson look to be complete extremes, with Warburton the middle way.

I'm surprised. Who's left?

In a Palace environment where they play a 4 - 2 - 3 - 1 formation, you can have the creative DM and the ball winning DM. MW has made it clear that his formation is 4 - 3 - 3. This really doesn't leave much room for two DM players, particularly when we are playing in Scotland. Europe would be a different situation and I do wonder if MW will be a bit more pragmatic if or when we get there?

Agreed. McArthur could occupy a central bearth, but wouldn't offer much offensively (unlike Holt and Halliday -- when he plays further forward) and would more likely be a support player. The 4-3-3 is flexible, so when we have Halliday and Ball, it sort of becomes a double pivot (2 DM's), but Halliday is fairly offensive anyway. A McArthur in there would create a double pivot, providing more strength and steel in the midfield. It's all about getting the right mix. I think McArthur would be a good, but unlikely, addition.

McArthur sits deep, but I'm not sure he's a DM per se. He's more of a box-to-box midfielder that works for the team: bursts a gut to get forward and back, to win the ball back etc., but then offloads it to a better player. He always plays alongside a DM; Cabaye in CP's case, who is a more of a regista, creative DM. Even at Hamilton he would play beside a proper DM in McCarthy. He'd be an excellent addition to the squad, but I'm not sure if he fits with what Warburton wants. However, I think MW would prefer a creative DM -- still able to protect the back four and organise -- rather than a defensive DM, so a box-to-box midfielder may be a good support?

I went for McKay: integral to the team and consistently excellent all season.

Dorrans does not excite me. He's got a good left foot, but I'm not sure what else he has? Just having a good foot does not mean he's good enough.

MOH's pace is difficult to utilise when there's no space to run into! I think he's not quite settled into the system yet. He tries, but it's not worked thus far. I hope a full pre-season will see him settle.

Unbelievable achievement.

Do you think we're taking too much pleasure in the troubles of another club?

Naahhh!!

Tavernier the next Bale...??

Are we still interested in/linked with Tom Bradshaw? He's playing for Walsall on Sky Sports, scoring a nice goal; he looks like an aggressive, pacey forward in the mold of Waghorn.

The tricky wide player, Romaine Sawyers, looks very tidy and creative on the ball. It looks like there are decent players at this level. Despite not being the most well-known or prestigious of targets, these guys look, on the surface at least, like they'd fit into what Warburton is trying to create.

I actually thought Miller's overall game was poor on Sunday, but there he is grabbing a goal again. He has several flaws, and although unfortunately I'd rather not see us need to depend on him next year, his contribution this year has been excellent and he deserves praise.

Zelalem has been bright the last few games. His flaws are self-evident, but I'm not sure I agree there is no 'killer pass'. For me, he's looking for that 'killer pass' every time, but has rarely been given an option by a teammates. I think it was Waghorn (maybe Holt?) that made a good forward run and Zelalem found him with a nice through-ball. It's difficult when these guys are already on the shoulder rather than being a few yards further back, for a player to notice the run; if they're already on the shoulder, any hint of movement and they're offside.

I think we're missing someone to hold the ball up with a defender to his back, so a Holt, Zelalem etc. can push a ball into him and move to receive the one-two. Too often on Sunday a player receives the ball, back to goal, and then runs away from goal; it undo's the forward momentum. Miller's not really brought that, but I felt Clark gave us that quality in another game. Ironically, Clark didn't do it on Sunday but did provide the pass into that player (not sure who it was?) to set up Holt's goal. It was a nice goal; something we need to do more.

Superb. It's hard to look past them.

If it wasn't for the Chelsea/Spurs game, I would watch the Dundee Derby. I never like to see any side do badly, but this will be sweet.