DMAA

St Mirren have been leaking goals like it’s nobody’s business this season. This is humiliating. 

Another of the same from Goldson, good chance from a header and just not making contact. It’s not good enough. 

I’m only listening on the radio but they were saying that Goldson had a great opportunity but got a really poor connection on the header. A bit of a worry because it was exactly the same against Kilmarnock. Our big guys really need to practice their heading, though into might be something you can’t teach they lack. 

Great to see Grezda given a chance to start. I like Candeias but we need to get Grezda up to speed. 

The return of Ejaria and Arfield brings a much more attack minded and creative centre mid too, and Halliday should help us in an attacking sense too with the balance a left footed player brings to our play. 

St Mirren should be a win every time but they gave Celtic a very tough game the last time

they played. 

Sounds promising. Great to see further investment in scouting. Clever investment in scouting should reap rewards for sides like us who look to make money be selling players on. 

15 minutes ago, DMAA said:

Well if you're going to mock, I could say it's hilarious that you dismiss playing 4-4-2 against Scottish sides when we won 9 in a row playing 4-4-2, and most (if not all) our titles since.

Have we ever even won the league not playing primarily 4-4-2?

2 hours ago, Frankie said:

We did actually create several chances (our crossing and set-pieces were noticeably better) but a combination of bad luck, poor finishing and good goalkeeping stopped us winning the game comfortably.

You're right that we were the only team who wanted to win the game, but the highlights tell the story.

We had about 5 highlights in the whole game;

• Morelos one on one with defenders in a counter attack, gets a lucky deflection for the goal
• Goldson free header in a great position from a corner, makes a very poor connection on it and it doesn't threaten the goal
• Tavernier has a good shot from outside the box which clips the bar
• Kent long shot which the keeper saves quite easily
• A scramble in the box ends with Arfield poking it wide

Two long shots, a header from a corner which should have been scored but ultimately didn't really threaten, and a scramble in the box which could have been a clear cut chance but didn't really turn into one and ended with a hopeful poke. 

I might have missed something but really the only chance in the highlights is Goldson's header and he bottled it. We can't blame luck or good goalkeeping at all. There were no other real chances where we could expect the player to finish and he didn't.

2 hours ago, Rousseau said:

I think it's hilarious that after results like this we all seem to know, without doubt, what we need to improve. It's always a formation change. The latest was a change to a 4-2-3-1 and/or play 2 up top. Well, we changed to a 4-2-3-1 and it was still poor; and when Lafferty came on we went 2 up top, and it was still poor -- the latter was almost worse! (4-4-2 doesn't suit us playing Scottish sides: it's too easy to man-mark. 2 up top could be a good option, but it'd need to go down the 3-at-the-back route.)

 

I thought we were/are on to a good thing with the 4-3-3; it just needs tweaking, better/more coaching. I don't think we should be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. 

Well if you're going to mock, I could say it's hilarious that you dismiss playing 4-4-2 against Scottish sides when we won 9 in a row playing 4-4-2, and most (if not all) our titles since.

It's easy to mark if you're rubbish. There's nothing inherently wrong with it at all, you're sacrificing a little bit of possession in exchange for giving yourself two strikers instead of one to play one-twos with and help get your midfield forward with the ball. The way things have been recently, sacrificing a bit of possession would be no bad thing.

I'm not saying a formation change is the silver bullet for one minute, but I did point out that we've created almost nothing when we meet some resistance time after time using the status quo and formation changes were options. However if we're not drilled in it (which we don't seem to be) we'll struggle. And swapping to it for brief period certainly won't give it a chance.

12 minutes ago, StuGers said:

Kent could do with a rest too.

Please. I’m getting more and more concerned that Gerrard won’t drop him for anything. 

By the way despite the much hyped defensive revamp in pre-season, in our 11 domestic games so far we've only managed 3 clean sheets, all at Ibrox and they came against the bottom two and Ayr. And the bottom two (St Mirren and Dundee) can hardly hit a barn door this season with 5 goals in 10 games each. It's pretty concerning stuff because so far there has been no improvement on last season defensively in domestic competition.

Just now, BlackSocksRedTops said:

Fair points DMAA but I can't see SG playing the 2 up top. 

Unfortunately it's not looking promising. It severely limits your options in turning around a game imo when you can't switch to it. Especially in games like our last few when we can't get players forward to do anything like threaten the opposition goal.

6 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

With regards to point 1, does anyone else think Lafferty and Moreles aren't suited as a front 2? I just can't see SG playing the 2 of them together. Would prefer to see Morelos with a creative player with an eye for goal just off him (hopefully Grezda).

I don't see why not. I think it is a great thing for any team to be able to switch between 1 up front and 2 up front comfortably depending on your opposition or as an in-game change in response to how things are going. We're not there yet because we've only tried 2 up front for part of the Motherwell game I think. I think 1 striker with 3 attacking midfielders not far behind can and should work too but we need to start giving Middleton and Grezda game time, there hasn't been anywhere near enough rotation.

Well if one thing's for sure it's that Gerrard can't complain of a lack of options to mix things up for Killie, and most of us will be demanding he does.

1. Go with 2 up front with Lafferty coming in and Coulibaly dropping out
2. Replace Coulibaly with Arfield and switch to a 4-2-3-1. Arfield increases our goal threat significantly when played in front of the midfield two.
3. Start Middleton ahead of Kent and maybe Grezda ahead of Candeias. Grezda hasn't proved himself yet but he certainly looked a player with real end product in his Wyscout video. Middleton for me is a far better shooter and is more likely to play a killer pass or put something on plate for Alfie or Lafferty.

Plenty of options. Gerrard better use at least one of them and not go with the same tactics and style because we've toiled to create anything in the past few games.

2 hours ago, craig said:

There are plenty on Twitter calling for his head.  Muppets, the lot of them.

Crazy. But to be a real success he needs to show he can learn from these repeated mistakes, and above all make some more very smart acquisitions in the transfer market.

49 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

Just saw a still from their goal ... methinks Worrall was penalized earlier for laying his hands on their defender at one of our corners:

He's got the palm of his hand on Goldson's head and presumably his other hand on his shoulder. That solves the mystery of why he didn't jump then!

27 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

Sidenote ... people should keep the excuse - club in the locker. It creates a negativity that needs not to be there. If someone says Beaton got a few decisions wrong, Grezda was unlucky on Wednesday at the end, or the like, it states variables, opinions and at times facts. Stuff that belong to the objective picture and are usually not meant to "excuse" a defeat or draw. More often than not, those utilizing the excuse - club are frustrated and are no ecxactly looking for reasoned debate - which is understandable ... but should not set the tone.

I was mainly referring to the blame for the loss primarily being put on the striker situation in some comments. Our performance in the final 3rd was very similar to a number of our games this season and individual variables of this game weren't the cause of our failure to create chances and some comments did imply they were.

As you said earlier in your post, Gerrard needs to take the blame because our set-up hasn't worked in these kind of games and he's still not changing it or even making in-game changes until the last few minutes.

1 hour ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

If we made tons of chances and Sadiq couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo you could point fingers at him but we created next to nothing

Exactly. A lot of excuses are being made on here but yet again our lack of flair and attacking quality has been exposed. We've been woeful in the final third a number of times this season and for some reason we've stuck with the same losing formula, a 4-5-1 with Kent, Candeias and Ejaria/Arfield tasked with breaking teams down.

We desperately need to try something different or it's going to keep happening. Those guys aren't good enough to be given that responsibility.

Edit: Ejaria is good enough but he'd be far more effective in a more attacking system with better players

12 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

NB: Noted that someone threw Windass into the fray. Windass, who played 73 games for us, earning himself 19 goals and 13 assists. The bulk of which came last season, where he could do no wrong for some fans and certain managers, playing 41 games, scoring 18 times and assisting 8 goals. Deduct the numbers from the total and you wonder what he did in those other 32 games? His current standing is 17 games, 2 goals, 1 assist.

 

His replacements are Murphy (this season: 8 games, 1 goal, 3 assists), Middleton (13, 3 goals, 1 assist), and Kent (19, 3 goals and 1 assist). And all of them usually contribute far more in each game that Windass ever did, for he relied far too much on others doing the donkey work.

You're not being very fair in your assessment. For a start my view on Windass on this forum have been clear, I was glad to see him go.

All I said was that our starting line-up yesterday had less goals in it and actually looked more defensive because his "second striker" position has been replaced with a central midfield position. The three players you mention as replacements are not his replacements, they all play in the left wing position. Windass's position was replaced with a central midfielder yesterday; Ejaria or Coulibaly.

The numbers you quoted also do not give a fair overview of Windass's goal threat because they include his first season under Warburton when he was playing on the wing. He become a goal threat last season as a second stiker, which is the position my post was referencing.

And by the way, I wasn’t a Windass fan but there’s no doubt that we haven’t replaced his goals. And he’s actually been replaced by a central midfielder which has made us more defensive and less threatening. 

You look at our starting lines-up lately and you wonder where the goals are going to come from. Kent and Candeias are not goalscorers, when are we going to face up to the fact we aren’t playing a 4-3-3 we are playing a 4-5-1! And that against dire opposition. 

Time to try out;

        Morelos Lafferty

Middleton Jack  Ejaria  Grezda

Barisic  Worrall  Goldson  Tav

Obviously some of those guys weren’t available yesterday but the point is our 4-5-1 leaves us so blunt it’s unreal, that team in a 4-4-2 looks like it would actually create some chances. And yeh make a change with half an hour to go if it’s not working rather than half a minute to go!

1 hour ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

Do you know the length of the current rights contract DMAA? ?

Another 2 years I think. 

Some people still aren’t grasping the importance of the fact that the BBC have exclusive radio rights. How many times does that have to be repeated on this thread?

32 minutes ago, Big Jaws said:

No its not only press privilege! 

I meant it is only re-insisting press privileges that would end the stand off and resume radio coverage of our games. 

I think @alexscottislegend, like me, is angry at Rangers as well as the BBC because both are allowing the current situation to go on with no end in sight which denies Rangers fans a service with Celtic being the primary beneficiary in terms of air time.

Enough is enough. It's only press privileges for crying out loud, the price ordinary fans are paying for the pride of some people in the club is too high.